What do you think?
Rate this book
Sparta: The Rise and Fall of an Ancient Superpower
Sparta - its legendary warriors and steadfast resilience are famous throughout the world as a model for toughness, justice and masculinity. The Spartans' reputation as fighters is matched only by their mythic code of honour. Their torch has been carried by footballers and politicians, video games and philosophers alike.
But who really were the Spartans? And what was the driving force behind the rise - and dramatic fall - of Sparta?
Sparta traces the story of Ancient Greece's most iconic city-state, from its humble beginnings as a hamlet in the Peloponnese to its meteoric rise as the foremost military superpower of the Classical world. Andrew Bayliss uncovers the eclectic quirks that set Sparta above its its famous double monarchy, the harsh methods for raising children as soldiers and the unique role of women in Spartan life.
Sparta was the world's first superpower and its legacy is still shaping popular culture and politics today. This is the story of its rise and fall.
But who really were the Spartans? And what was the driving force behind the rise - and dramatic fall - of Sparta?
Sparta traces the story of Ancient Greece's most iconic city-state, from its humble beginnings as a hamlet in the Peloponnese to its meteoric rise as the foremost military superpower of the Classical world. Andrew Bayliss uncovers the eclectic quirks that set Sparta above its its famous double monarchy, the harsh methods for raising children as soldiers and the unique role of women in Spartan life.
Sparta was the world's first superpower and its legacy is still shaping popular culture and politics today. This is the story of its rise and fall.
384 pages, Unknown Binding
First published September 18, 2025
About the author
Andrew J. Bayliss
4 books6 followersAndrew J. Bayliss is Associate Professor in Greek History in the Institute of Archaeology and Antiquity at the University of Birmingham.
Bayliss studied Ancient History at Macquarie University in Australia and stayed on there for his PhD. He has taught and studied in Australia, Greece (British School) and the UK (Department of Classics at Nottingham). He has published extensively on Sparta and Ancient Greece.
Bayliss studied Ancient History at Macquarie University in Australia and stayed on there for his PhD. He has taught and studied in Australia, Greece (British School) and the UK (Department of Classics at Nottingham). He has published extensively on Sparta and Ancient Greece.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews
September 7, 2025
Great book on Sparta! Perfect if you are a big Sparta fan or don’t know anything about Sparta. Andrew was a lecturer of mine at University so it was inspiring reading his book.
Thank you Profile Books for sending me a copy :)
Thank you Profile Books for sending me a copy :)
February 17, 2026
For many years, the accepted authority on Sparta has been Paul Cartledge who retired from a chair in Greek culture at Cambridge in 2014, having taken out an Oxford doctorate with his thesis on Spartan archaeology. His The Spartans: an Epic History was published in 2002 and remains in print and popular in 2026. I do not see any need to re-assess Cartledge’s pre-eminence after reading Sparta: The Rise and Fall of an Ancient Superpower a 2025 work by Andrew Bayliss (Associate Professor in Greek History at the University of Birmingham).
Having said that, I was also impressed by Bayliss’s book which is comprehensive. In one sense, both these books might be regarded as a form of encyclopaedia. This is because the topic is so replete: there are so many men’s names, so many alliances, so many battles and wars, that the books become reference sources more than cohering histories. The problem for Bayliss is that he necessarily uses the same sources as his predecessor used; there is not much radically new archaeology or learning to revise the story after twenty-plus years. There are slightly differently nuanced explanations of motivations or of reasons for actions, but the essential story remains the same. I just preferred Cartledge’s more scholarly tone. On the other hand, Bayliss’s index is far superior to Cartledge’s miserable specimen.
The difference in tone can be demonstrated by their differing accounts of the Spartans’ battle against the Argives at Hysiae. Bayliss uses it to begin his book: “As the light faded, his energy ebbing with it, the Spartan soldier Othryadas felt his opponent’s shield drop under the pressure of his own. His gaze, scarcely visible beneath the heavy bronze helmet that covered all but his eyes and mouth, met his adversary’s. Disciplined for warfare by his city’s rigorous upbringing – the world’s first compulsory state-run education system – Othryadas knew exactly what to do./ Grunting with exertion, he plunged his short stabbing sword into the exposed flesh between the base of his opponent’s helmet and the top of his bronze breastplate. As the fighter from the neighbouring city of Argos slumped to the ground his soul bound for the underworld, Othryadas realised, to his horror, that he was the only Spartan still standing. After hours of fighting, 299 of Othryadas’ fellow citizens had fallen, leaving him to face alone the two surviving Argive champions, Alcenor and Chromius.…Othryadas planted his feet firmly on the ground, readying himself either to win a glorious victory against the odds, or to join his opponents in what the Spartans called a ‘beautiful death’ in combat. War poems written many decades before by the seventh-century BCE Spartan elegist Tyrtaeus had taught generation after generation of Spartans that ‘it is a beautiful thing for a good man to die, falling in the front ranks fighting for his fatherland’. But the Argives differed. Rather than face Othryadas head-on, Alcenor and Chromius simply declared themselves the winners and ran home to Argos to celebrate their ‘victory’”. One sees why Bayliss enthusiastically recommends Gates of Fire , the fictional account of Thermopylae by Stephen Pressfield.
Cartledge, by contrast, is far more concise and factual: “Rather than committing their full hoplite musters, the Spartans and the Argives agreed to a battle of 300 selected champions on either side, a sort of epic trial of strength. This resulted in an equally striking outcome. After a particularly violent encounter, or series of encounters, just three fighters were left alive on the field: two Argives, one Spartan. The Argives, who were so to speak instinctively egalitarian and democratic, judged that this very superiority of numbers was tantamount to victory – and returned home to Argos to report and celebrate as much. However, the one surviving Spartan, who was clearly neither a democrat nor an egalitarian, refused to concede; on the contrary he claimed the victory for Sparta, on the grounds that he alone had stayed ‘at his post’, on the battlefield, as the true hoplite should, and he set up a victory trophy accordingly in the name of Sparta.”
I think both accounts are nicely written and it is really a matter of personal taste which the reader prefers. I would, however, suggest that Bayliss’s inclusion of such anachronistic details as the box-office takings of films about Thermopylae, as well as a catalogue of entities which have sought to appropriate part of a Spartan legend, is superfluous.
For anyone who has read Cartledge, there is probably not much to be gained by reading Bayliss. For anyone who has not read Cartledge, Bayliss is a very worthy introduction to the history of an important part of classical Greece. And for someone with a lot of time on their hands, scrutinising both, side-by-side, with side-by-side files open on the computer, would be an interesting exercise.
Having said that, I was also impressed by Bayliss’s book which is comprehensive. In one sense, both these books might be regarded as a form of encyclopaedia. This is because the topic is so replete: there are so many men’s names, so many alliances, so many battles and wars, that the books become reference sources more than cohering histories. The problem for Bayliss is that he necessarily uses the same sources as his predecessor used; there is not much radically new archaeology or learning to revise the story after twenty-plus years. There are slightly differently nuanced explanations of motivations or of reasons for actions, but the essential story remains the same. I just preferred Cartledge’s more scholarly tone. On the other hand, Bayliss’s index is far superior to Cartledge’s miserable specimen.
The difference in tone can be demonstrated by their differing accounts of the Spartans’ battle against the Argives at Hysiae. Bayliss uses it to begin his book: “As the light faded, his energy ebbing with it, the Spartan soldier Othryadas felt his opponent’s shield drop under the pressure of his own. His gaze, scarcely visible beneath the heavy bronze helmet that covered all but his eyes and mouth, met his adversary’s. Disciplined for warfare by his city’s rigorous upbringing – the world’s first compulsory state-run education system – Othryadas knew exactly what to do./ Grunting with exertion, he plunged his short stabbing sword into the exposed flesh between the base of his opponent’s helmet and the top of his bronze breastplate. As the fighter from the neighbouring city of Argos slumped to the ground his soul bound for the underworld, Othryadas realised, to his horror, that he was the only Spartan still standing. After hours of fighting, 299 of Othryadas’ fellow citizens had fallen, leaving him to face alone the two surviving Argive champions, Alcenor and Chromius.…Othryadas planted his feet firmly on the ground, readying himself either to win a glorious victory against the odds, or to join his opponents in what the Spartans called a ‘beautiful death’ in combat. War poems written many decades before by the seventh-century BCE Spartan elegist Tyrtaeus had taught generation after generation of Spartans that ‘it is a beautiful thing for a good man to die, falling in the front ranks fighting for his fatherland’. But the Argives differed. Rather than face Othryadas head-on, Alcenor and Chromius simply declared themselves the winners and ran home to Argos to celebrate their ‘victory’”. One sees why Bayliss enthusiastically recommends Gates of Fire , the fictional account of Thermopylae by Stephen Pressfield.
Cartledge, by contrast, is far more concise and factual: “Rather than committing their full hoplite musters, the Spartans and the Argives agreed to a battle of 300 selected champions on either side, a sort of epic trial of strength. This resulted in an equally striking outcome. After a particularly violent encounter, or series of encounters, just three fighters were left alive on the field: two Argives, one Spartan. The Argives, who were so to speak instinctively egalitarian and democratic, judged that this very superiority of numbers was tantamount to victory – and returned home to Argos to report and celebrate as much. However, the one surviving Spartan, who was clearly neither a democrat nor an egalitarian, refused to concede; on the contrary he claimed the victory for Sparta, on the grounds that he alone had stayed ‘at his post’, on the battlefield, as the true hoplite should, and he set up a victory trophy accordingly in the name of Sparta.”
I think both accounts are nicely written and it is really a matter of personal taste which the reader prefers. I would, however, suggest that Bayliss’s inclusion of such anachronistic details as the box-office takings of films about Thermopylae, as well as a catalogue of entities which have sought to appropriate part of a Spartan legend, is superfluous.
For anyone who has read Cartledge, there is probably not much to be gained by reading Bayliss. For anyone who has not read Cartledge, Bayliss is a very worthy introduction to the history of an important part of classical Greece. And for someone with a lot of time on their hands, scrutinising both, side-by-side, with side-by-side files open on the computer, would be an interesting exercise.
November 13, 2025
The most important thing to remember when considering the history of the ancient Greek city of Sparta is the almost complete absence of contemporary source material. Virtually everything we have was written by non-Spartans, and often enemies, and was not contemporary with the events being described.
What is certain is that Sparta was different to the other Greek city states. For a while these differences made them the preeminent power in Greece, after which brief moment in the sun, they slip back into obscurity.
The popular film and graphic novel 300 by Frank Miller has probably done the most to recreate the myth of Spartan austerity and invincibility. We have a glimpse into their way of life, the military discipline and the upbringing of boys in particular. Much of what we see in the film is based on ancient sources, and although some of the speeches were verbatim words they were in fact spoken by other Spartan generals at different battles.
One of the things that made Sparta unique was the way that the state was structured. While Athens prided itself on democracy, the Spartans had two kings from separate royal families. Not a monarchy but a dyarchy if we want to play with words which have their origins in Greek. In fact, Sparta was so democratic that a king could be fined, exiled or deposed. Kings were primarily military commanders. The other major part of the government was a council of elders called the Gerousia (from which we get the word geriatric). They were twenty-eight Spartan citizens over the age of 60. They served in the position for life. Then five ephors were elected each year to oversee the constitution. There was also a Spartan citizen assembly that could vote on laws put forward by the elders. This was done by shouting, not placing a vote with pebbles like the Athenians. Spartan life had a lot of checks and balances to prevent anyone becoming too powerful. But in the end these restrictions might have also led to Sparta’s downfall.
It was the Spartan military elite that produced the most admiration. The small band of citizens were full-time fighters and the rest of the time they trained and kept themselves fit. This in part accounts for the Spartan success at the Olympic games, where they dominated running and wrestling events for more than a century. To be a Spartan hoplite soldier you had to be a landowner able to furnish the communal barracks in which you lived with a monthly haul of 45kgs of barley, 3kgs if cheese, 1.5kgs of figs, some pork, and 37 litres of wine. This was produced on your estates by your workers or slaves, enabling you to spend all your time fighting, or training in preparation to fight. You also had to be able to afford your own arms and armour.
Below the citizen class were a couple of layers of people – the freed men and the slaves. The slave population, called helots, had probably the most precarious status in all Greece. They were hunted and killed by boys and young men of the citizen class as part of their military training. The idea was to remove the most dangerous of the slaves who might foment rebellion. In this way the small elite band of citizen warriors was able to maintain control over a freed and slave population that was many times larger. However, as you read the book it becomes very obvious how preoccupied the ever dwindling number of citizens were about the threat from the ever growing non-citizen population.
Andrew Bayliss’ book progresses chronologically, with chapters covering a narrow slot between 481 and 479 BCE when the Persians invaded Greece and King Leonidas fought at Thermopylae, a long period of Spartan isolation from 479 to 431 BCE, a ten year period of tit for tat and then a period of wars between 421 and 404 BCE when Sparta appeared to have the upper hand for a change. From 404 to 386 BCE it really did appear that the Spartans were making their own empire at last, but in the final dated chapter, covering 386 to 371 BCE we have reached what Bayliss describes as decline and fall. Their dominance was short lived. He contrasts the Spartans with the much later Roman empire and considers where the Spartans failed to adapt. For the Romans it was simple, they integrated the countries they conquered into their empire and made them part of an ever growing whole. The Spartans clung to their ideal of a small citizen band and never expanded the membership. As their numbers dwindled after two centuries of fighting, they were no longer able to maintain the dominance they once had, and even failed to make strong lasting alliances. In the end their arrogance was their downfall – a need to “treat anyone they thought beneath them as they pleased.”
Having studied some of the period covered by this book at school, and been forced to read Thucydides’ The Peloponnesian War, I was familiar with a long period of wars in which Athens seemed to have the upper hand. Thucydides was after all an Athenian general and historian. It is good to now see more of the Spartan perspective, but also to see exactly how much backwards and forwards took place in just over a century. Battles won on both sides, fleets captured and then lost, walls built and then demolished. All this was punctuated with various truces which lasted anywhere from four months to five years, or even thirty years although in that time there were plenty of truce breaking skirmishes. The wish not to pit, and potentially lose, your whole army or fleet in a single battle meant there was plenty of negotiation and diplomacy. I was very surprised to read that numerous generals on both sides had a very precarious position. Hero after one victorious battle, villain after a loss. Some were put on trial and exiled, only to come back into favour and be recalled. One or two generals swapped sides not once but multiple times.
Also back and forth were city state alliances between Sparta, Athens, Thebes, Argos and Corinth, plus a host of smaller locations. All seemed to frequently change sides and allegiance. At one point the Spartans even allied themselves with the Persians when they saw the opportunity of great gain. All this makes for fascinating history in which it is good to remember that there are other names for the Spartans, one of which is Lacedaemonians. It refers to the region from which they came, and has gifted us the modern word laconic. Meaning brief of speech there are plenty of amusing examples in the book of Spartans criticising the use of too many words when one or two would be sufficient.
What is certain is that Sparta was different to the other Greek city states. For a while these differences made them the preeminent power in Greece, after which brief moment in the sun, they slip back into obscurity.
The popular film and graphic novel 300 by Frank Miller has probably done the most to recreate the myth of Spartan austerity and invincibility. We have a glimpse into their way of life, the military discipline and the upbringing of boys in particular. Much of what we see in the film is based on ancient sources, and although some of the speeches were verbatim words they were in fact spoken by other Spartan generals at different battles.
One of the things that made Sparta unique was the way that the state was structured. While Athens prided itself on democracy, the Spartans had two kings from separate royal families. Not a monarchy but a dyarchy if we want to play with words which have their origins in Greek. In fact, Sparta was so democratic that a king could be fined, exiled or deposed. Kings were primarily military commanders. The other major part of the government was a council of elders called the Gerousia (from which we get the word geriatric). They were twenty-eight Spartan citizens over the age of 60. They served in the position for life. Then five ephors were elected each year to oversee the constitution. There was also a Spartan citizen assembly that could vote on laws put forward by the elders. This was done by shouting, not placing a vote with pebbles like the Athenians. Spartan life had a lot of checks and balances to prevent anyone becoming too powerful. But in the end these restrictions might have also led to Sparta’s downfall.
It was the Spartan military elite that produced the most admiration. The small band of citizens were full-time fighters and the rest of the time they trained and kept themselves fit. This in part accounts for the Spartan success at the Olympic games, where they dominated running and wrestling events for more than a century. To be a Spartan hoplite soldier you had to be a landowner able to furnish the communal barracks in which you lived with a monthly haul of 45kgs of barley, 3kgs if cheese, 1.5kgs of figs, some pork, and 37 litres of wine. This was produced on your estates by your workers or slaves, enabling you to spend all your time fighting, or training in preparation to fight. You also had to be able to afford your own arms and armour.
Below the citizen class were a couple of layers of people – the freed men and the slaves. The slave population, called helots, had probably the most precarious status in all Greece. They were hunted and killed by boys and young men of the citizen class as part of their military training. The idea was to remove the most dangerous of the slaves who might foment rebellion. In this way the small elite band of citizen warriors was able to maintain control over a freed and slave population that was many times larger. However, as you read the book it becomes very obvious how preoccupied the ever dwindling number of citizens were about the threat from the ever growing non-citizen population.
Andrew Bayliss’ book progresses chronologically, with chapters covering a narrow slot between 481 and 479 BCE when the Persians invaded Greece and King Leonidas fought at Thermopylae, a long period of Spartan isolation from 479 to 431 BCE, a ten year period of tit for tat and then a period of wars between 421 and 404 BCE when Sparta appeared to have the upper hand for a change. From 404 to 386 BCE it really did appear that the Spartans were making their own empire at last, but in the final dated chapter, covering 386 to 371 BCE we have reached what Bayliss describes as decline and fall. Their dominance was short lived. He contrasts the Spartans with the much later Roman empire and considers where the Spartans failed to adapt. For the Romans it was simple, they integrated the countries they conquered into their empire and made them part of an ever growing whole. The Spartans clung to their ideal of a small citizen band and never expanded the membership. As their numbers dwindled after two centuries of fighting, they were no longer able to maintain the dominance they once had, and even failed to make strong lasting alliances. In the end their arrogance was their downfall – a need to “treat anyone they thought beneath them as they pleased.”
Having studied some of the period covered by this book at school, and been forced to read Thucydides’ The Peloponnesian War, I was familiar with a long period of wars in which Athens seemed to have the upper hand. Thucydides was after all an Athenian general and historian. It is good to now see more of the Spartan perspective, but also to see exactly how much backwards and forwards took place in just over a century. Battles won on both sides, fleets captured and then lost, walls built and then demolished. All this was punctuated with various truces which lasted anywhere from four months to five years, or even thirty years although in that time there were plenty of truce breaking skirmishes. The wish not to pit, and potentially lose, your whole army or fleet in a single battle meant there was plenty of negotiation and diplomacy. I was very surprised to read that numerous generals on both sides had a very precarious position. Hero after one victorious battle, villain after a loss. Some were put on trial and exiled, only to come back into favour and be recalled. One or two generals swapped sides not once but multiple times.
Also back and forth were city state alliances between Sparta, Athens, Thebes, Argos and Corinth, plus a host of smaller locations. All seemed to frequently change sides and allegiance. At one point the Spartans even allied themselves with the Persians when they saw the opportunity of great gain. All this makes for fascinating history in which it is good to remember that there are other names for the Spartans, one of which is Lacedaemonians. It refers to the region from which they came, and has gifted us the modern word laconic. Meaning brief of speech there are plenty of amusing examples in the book of Spartans criticising the use of too many words when one or two would be sufficient.
Read
October 31, 2025DNF.
November 14, 2025
This was really interesting to read, as you do often get a Spartan central viewpoint of Greece. Especially a spartan viewpoint that isn't during the persian or peloponesian wars.
The structure was easy to read and made me not want to put it down at times.
However, the one downside i would say is I feel in a way it somewhat ends abruptly. We get mentions of the kings during the Hellenistic age, but we never get to it. It ends after the Theban invasion, which is a good ending point in a way, but I would have enjoyed seeing sparta through the Hellenistic age and up to the Roman conquest.
Otherwise, I really enjoyed this book, and would definitely recommend it.
5/5
The structure was easy to read and made me not want to put it down at times.
However, the one downside i would say is I feel in a way it somewhat ends abruptly. We get mentions of the kings during the Hellenistic age, but we never get to it. It ends after the Theban invasion, which is a good ending point in a way, but I would have enjoyed seeing sparta through the Hellenistic age and up to the Roman conquest.
Otherwise, I really enjoyed this book, and would definitely recommend it.
5/5
February 23, 2026
Andrew Bayliss’s Sparta strips back the glamourised image we have of the Spartans and instead presents them in a more grounded reality.
As someone whose introduction to the Spartans has been through films such as The Spartans and Assassin’s Creed Odyssey, my view of them was one-sided. This book successfully redefined my view of them, exploring how they achieved such legendary status whilst building their reputations on a darker reality. From the use of slaves, the disproportionate wealth and the brutal training of their children, Bayliss shows a powerful but often flawed society, whose own ambition led to its downfall.
This is a comprehensive book, meticulous in laying down the facts and intimately revealing the people and the places of their ancient world. This is less of a narrative non-fiction and more of a comprehensive, fact-based read. There can be a lot of information to take in, and at times it can feel dense, but it encourages the reader to slow down and absorb the wealth of knowledge and clear expertise of the author.
Overall, this was a comprehensive, well-argued read that redefined my view of the Spartans.
Thank you to Icon Books for the review copy.
As someone whose introduction to the Spartans has been through films such as The Spartans and Assassin’s Creed Odyssey, my view of them was one-sided. This book successfully redefined my view of them, exploring how they achieved such legendary status whilst building their reputations on a darker reality. From the use of slaves, the disproportionate wealth and the brutal training of their children, Bayliss shows a powerful but often flawed society, whose own ambition led to its downfall.
This is a comprehensive book, meticulous in laying down the facts and intimately revealing the people and the places of their ancient world. This is less of a narrative non-fiction and more of a comprehensive, fact-based read. There can be a lot of information to take in, and at times it can feel dense, but it encourages the reader to slow down and absorb the wealth of knowledge and clear expertise of the author.
Overall, this was a comprehensive, well-argued read that redefined my view of the Spartans.
Thank you to Icon Books for the review copy.
February 11, 2026
Saddled with one of the most Herculian tasks for any historian - a book on The Spartans - Bayliss should be admired for achieving what he does with the limited sources. The Spartan's were notoriously secretive, but through other famous works, some contemporary, others years later, he paints as vivid picture as any one can.
Having to use his own insight and judgement, sometimes Bayliss comes across as bias to his own opinion, (ironically) an issue he takes great pains to untangle from the biases of the sources to whom the book is dependant.
If the rollicking storytelling of Tom Holland, deft hand of Adrian Goldsworthy or emotional spark of Helen Castor is abscent from Bayliss' writing, he still manages to provide an illuminating read and uncomfortable truths about a society who are in modern times hero worshipped without a full understansing of what the Spartan's stood for.
In the end "Sparta" is still a fascinating study on a complex breed of Greek's, whose triumphs and failures both deserve to be be known by the wider public so we can hopefully learn from them as much as we do from the other great Greek states.
Having to use his own insight and judgement, sometimes Bayliss comes across as bias to his own opinion, (ironically) an issue he takes great pains to untangle from the biases of the sources to whom the book is dependant.
If the rollicking storytelling of Tom Holland, deft hand of Adrian Goldsworthy or emotional spark of Helen Castor is abscent from Bayliss' writing, he still manages to provide an illuminating read and uncomfortable truths about a society who are in modern times hero worshipped without a full understansing of what the Spartan's stood for.
In the end "Sparta" is still a fascinating study on a complex breed of Greek's, whose triumphs and failures both deserve to be be known by the wider public so we can hopefully learn from them as much as we do from the other great Greek states.
March 15, 2026
3.5
This is a fairly comprehensive history of Sparta that I enjoyed reading but I think it might feel a bit intimidating to a casual reader whose only knowledge of Sparta is 300.
Even as someone who has a strong background in Ancient Greece, it took me a while to get through this because I kept cross referencing what the author was saying with other sources to get a better understanding of the events Bayliss was conveying. He went back and forth a little bit with events and didn’t do a great job of providing the overall context for the two main wars Sparta took part in. The sections on the Peloponnesian War in particular would be tough for a reader who does have any understanding of the Delian League or the big cultural difference between Athens and Sparta.
I think any updated version of this novel in the future would benefit from a timeline as a reference, as well as a Principal Figures section or Glossary.
Overall though, because I do have a background in this area, I really enjoyed a deeper look at Sparta and its culture and its impact on both other civilizations at the time, and our modern day.
This is a fairly comprehensive history of Sparta that I enjoyed reading but I think it might feel a bit intimidating to a casual reader whose only knowledge of Sparta is 300.
Even as someone who has a strong background in Ancient Greece, it took me a while to get through this because I kept cross referencing what the author was saying with other sources to get a better understanding of the events Bayliss was conveying. He went back and forth a little bit with events and didn’t do a great job of providing the overall context for the two main wars Sparta took part in. The sections on the Peloponnesian War in particular would be tough for a reader who does have any understanding of the Delian League or the big cultural difference between Athens and Sparta.
I think any updated version of this novel in the future would benefit from a timeline as a reference, as well as a Principal Figures section or Glossary.
Overall though, because I do have a background in this area, I really enjoyed a deeper look at Sparta and its culture and its impact on both other civilizations at the time, and our modern day.
September 22, 2025
Thank you to Profile Books for sending me a finished copy of this book, it hasn’t affected my honest review.
As a classics student, I’ve studied a lot about Athens and their impact on Greek history, but not as much on Sparta. This book takes the reader deep into the history of Sparta from its very beginning, through its prime and then into its rapid decline from being a superpower. One aspect of this book that I really enjoyed is how easy it is to read, and the anecdotes about different people made it feel even more real. You don’t need to know a lot about Greek history to enjoy this, which makes it accessible for all kinds of readers.
As a classics student, I’ve studied a lot about Athens and their impact on Greek history, but not as much on Sparta. This book takes the reader deep into the history of Sparta from its very beginning, through its prime and then into its rapid decline from being a superpower. One aspect of this book that I really enjoyed is how easy it is to read, and the anecdotes about different people made it feel even more real. You don’t need to know a lot about Greek history to enjoy this, which makes it accessible for all kinds of readers.
March 24, 2026
A fascinating and highly readable examination of the Spartans which deftly combines scholarship with an entertaining sometimes even irreverent style. Whilst the Spartans are given their deserved respect for their unique culture and achievements, Baylis also gives respect to the legendary status they have received , referencing popular culture and legend. The reality of the Spartans may reveal a highly flawed state but one cannot argue with the reputation that have always held. Wish Andrew Bayliss had been my prof all those years ago when I read Ancient and Medieval History at Birmingham Uni where he is now based!!!
Did Not Finish
April 9, 2026I really enjoyed this, even though I didn't finish it, hence I didn't give it a rating, I figured not fair.
I wasn't expecting SO MUCH detail, and hey, that's on me, not the author.
The analysis of how Sparta is used by many people, past and present, as a paragon of society, ouch. I didn't realise about the slaves. Awful. So many civilisations, across the world 'improved' their own lives by using others.
I would have liked a glossary of the Greek terms used, as I did forget from time to time what they meant (tally understand why they were used, and that's fine, I just couldn't find the original definition in the text).
I wasn't expecting SO MUCH detail, and hey, that's on me, not the author.
The analysis of how Sparta is used by many people, past and present, as a paragon of society, ouch. I didn't realise about the slaves. Awful. So many civilisations, across the world 'improved' their own lives by using others.
I would have liked a glossary of the Greek terms used, as I did forget from time to time what they meant (tally understand why they were used, and that's fine, I just couldn't find the original definition in the text).
September 23, 2025
✨ I really do love Greek mythology so when I seen this book I had to read it. It’s written by an associate professor in Greek mythology at the university of Birmingham Andrew Bayliss. Set in Athens it really takes us into the history of Sparta from beginning to end. It’s not overtly complicated and I like that it’s easy to read you don’t have to be a mastermind or know much about it to get through the book. It was really well written and interesting I highly recommend if this is a topic that sparks your interest✨ thank you to profile books for the ARC
December 7, 2025
Fascinating read about Sparta. It does a good job talking about the little moments that changed the course of history, like when a young boyfriend saves the life of a Spartan general, leading to the final downfall of Spartan power. It also gave the best explanation that I've ever read of the organization of the Spartan state, and how Sparta's foreign policy was constantly at risk due to the small numbers of "spartiates" (full Spartan citizens) and the high numbers of subjugated peoples under their control.
January 30, 2026
it's always hard to write about this era as the sources are few and almost always from decades if not centuries later. It's managed well here though, with a compelling story from myth into history, charting the long rise and sudden fall of Sparta, while showing both the positives and negatives of the Spartan way of life.
February 8, 2026
It was great learning more about the rise and fall of Sparta. Having only lived on hear say, the movie 300, and Assassins Creed Odyssey I only knew about the high points but never the low points. This is a good book for any who wish to expand their knowledge of what it was to be Spartan.
November 7, 2025
3.5 stars
February 5, 2026
Cracking read :) did not glorify the Spartans and told their history warts and all.
I prefer history books to be brutally honest and this book has impressed me.
I prefer history books to be brutally honest and this book has impressed me.
February 22, 2026
A great introduction that is pretty approachable for casual history fans.
April 2, 2026
Great book looking at Sparta from rise to fall in a non-biased perspective. My only criticism is that the Spartans' ending felt rushed. Then again, I think it only took 3 months for the collapse.
March 4, 2026
Non-fiction history books aren't my favourite, but this one was quite easy to read. I think it has just the right amount of detail for a wide audience to enjoy it. I like how it includes references to 300 and other popular culture, because that's probably where a lot of people first learn about Sparta. I learned lots of interesting facts from this book. I would probably not give it 5 stars compared to other genres that I prefer reading, but it seems unfair to downvote a good history book just because I don't generally like reading non-fiction history books. And the author did a good job of making it easy to read for non-historians so 5 stars it is.
December 22, 2025
A really interesting read and timeline of events about the rise and fall of Sparta, the battles fought, the wins and loses, as well as the culture and other factors that contributed towards it rise and fall.
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews