Were the Spartans really that muscular?
Were the Spartans really that muscular?
Author
Discussion

Nickthebassist

Original Poster:

1,159 posts

232 months

Thursday 24th January 2008
quotequote all
Over on the bodybuilding forum I'm on, we've just had a request for very muscular men to act as Spartan warriors as part of some film or something. What I was thinking is, were the Spartans really that muscular, or was it an exaggeration?
This is a serious question and I'd rather have piss takers leave it alone, thanks.

Muntu

7,662 posts

215 months

Thursday 24th January 2008
quotequote all
Natural selection would suggest that they were

dickymint

27,334 posts

274 months

Thursday 24th January 2008
quotequote all
ok!

sleep envy

62,260 posts

265 months

Thursday 24th January 2008
quotequote all
will they supply the baby oil and loin cloths or can you take your own?

Strawman

6,463 posts

223 months

Thursday 24th January 2008
quotequote all
<-- Piss taker, yeah Conan The Barbarian was an actual filmed documentary yes

Nickthebassist

Original Poster:

1,159 posts

232 months

Thursday 24th January 2008
quotequote all
Muntu said:
Natural selection would suggest that they were
I suppose this would help, but the breast plates I have seen of the time (the ones with the rippling muscles on the armour) are much more muscular than someone could just naturally be. It'd take some serious shifting of weights of some kind to get them in that shape. Would they have known to eat vast quantities of meat, and lift weights in those days? We're talking around 3000 years ago.......

eldar

24,121 posts

212 months

Thursday 24th January 2008
quotequote all
"After the Roman conquest of Greece, Spartans continued their way of life and the city became a tourist attraction for the Roman elite who came to observe the "unusual" Spartan customs."

What sort of film is it?

stackmonkey

5,081 posts

265 months

Thursday 24th January 2008
quotequote all
Considering the sheer weight of the armour and the weapons they used, they'd have to be pretty big, muscular and fit to be able to fight with some skill for the duration of a battle.
Overly styled armour is, well, nothing new. Nothing wrong in making the enemy think that your army is ALL built like that.

Maxymillion

489 posts

240 months

Thursday 24th January 2008
quotequote all
Highly unlikely. Like medieval knights, the only reason they were bigger was due to their standing in society and wealth, therefore could afford to eat more meat.

e28

43 posts

213 months

Thursday 24th January 2008
quotequote all
Would they actually have access to 4000+ calories a day?

Muntu

7,662 posts

215 months

Thursday 24th January 2008
quotequote all
Nickthebassist said:
Muntu said:
Natural selection would suggest that they were
I suppose this would help, but the breast plates I have seen of the time (the ones with the rippling muscles on the armour) are much more muscular than someone could just naturally be. It'd take some serious shifting of weights of some kind to get them in that shape. Would they have known to eat vast quantities of meat, and lift weights in those days? We're talking around 3000 years ago.......
Well they probably wouldnt be doing the weights, but equally they wouldnt spend their days sitting on their arses tapping crap onto a computer screen, as do most people in the 21st century smile I would guess that they were all meat eaters, the lentil eating flip flop wearing pansies probably stayed at home during the hostile events, unless they were used as 'cannon fodder' so to speak. I must admit, this bit of history isn't my strong point

scotal

8,751 posts

295 months

Thursday 24th January 2008
quotequote all
Nickthebassist said:
Muntu said:
Natural selection would suggest that they were
I suppose this would help, but the breast plates I have seen of the time (the ones with the rippling muscles on the armour) are much more muscular than someone could just naturally be. It'd take some serious shifting of weights of some kind to get them in that shape. Would they have known to eat vast quantities of meat, and lift weights in those days? We're talking around 3000 years ago.......
How about you go to that fantastically well stocked library of yours and read up on the Spartans. Their way of life from birth, through a pretty gruelling childhood to adulthood. How the men were basically subject to a pretty testing time right up until they were old enough to serve in Sparta's army, and how they would use all caputered prisoners (including IIRc the entire population of a neighbouring state) as slaves so that rather than spendig their lives in toil they spent it preparing for military conquest.

They were, to put it mildly, fit as .

The breast plates would of course have been exagerated to put the fear of several anciant gods into the opposition. Think of it as projecting an image......

Nickthebassist

Original Poster:

1,159 posts

232 months

Thursday 24th January 2008
quotequote all
scotal said:
Nickthebassist said:
Muntu said:
Natural selection would suggest that they were
I suppose this would help, but the breast plates I have seen of the time (the ones with the rippling muscles on the armour) are much more muscular than someone could just naturally be. It'd take some serious shifting of weights of some kind to get them in that shape. Would they have known to eat vast quantities of meat, and lift weights in those days? We're talking around 3000 years ago.......
How about you go to that fantastically well stocked library of yours and read up on the Spartans. Their way of life from birth, through a pretty gruelling childhood to adulthood. How the men were basically subject to a pretty testing time right up until they were old enough to serve in Sparta's army, and how they would use all caputered prisoners (including IIRc the entire population of a neighbouring state) as slaves so that rather than spendig their lives in toil they spent it preparing for military conquest.

They were, to put it mildly, fit as .

The breast plates would of course have been exagerated to put the fear of several anciant gods into the opposition. Think of it as projecting an image......
I never denied they were hard as nails, I've read about them before. Bunch of homos too. Encouraged courage on the battlefield apparently.....
I just didn't know if they'd be the rugged image of male muscularity that they are always depicted as.

rich1231

17,339 posts

276 months

Thursday 24th January 2008
quotequote all
Nickthebassist said:
Muntu said:
Natural selection would suggest that they were
I suppose this would help, but the breast plates I have seen of the time (the ones with the rippling muscles on the armour) are much more muscular than someone could just naturally be. It'd take some serious shifting of weights of some kind to get them in that shape. Would they have known to eat vast quantities of meat, and lift weights in those days? We're talking around 3000 years ago.......
dicktard, the breastplates were not meant to be molded on a warriors muscles they were meant to be both decorative and threatening.

They were not 300 esque in their muscle structure.

Go read some books rather than pontificating bollox on here.

Xenophon's the 10000 is a good start and there are huge numbers of books on Hoplite's during the period.

Search for a bloke named Peter Green.

RobDickinson

31,343 posts

270 months

Thursday 24th January 2008
quotequote all
They were full time proffesional sodiers , they'd be fit, trim and strong.

Not sure if they'd visualy measure up to todays bodybuilders because they wouldnt need the low body fat for definition as such.

splitter / judas

4,330 posts

225 months

dickymint

27,334 posts

274 months

Thursday 24th January 2008
quotequote all
rich1231 said:
Search for a bloke named Peter Green.
You wont find him. He's a recluse with 6 inch fingernails. Albatross was good though hehe

Talksteer

5,317 posts

249 months

Friday 25th January 2008
quotequote all
The spartans would have probably looked pretty much similar to the various "warrior" tribes that still exist. Though they would probably be a little different due to racial and environmental factors.

Plains africans tend to be tall and thin with very deffined muscles as they are "self mobile" over large distances and so burn off any excess fat. Where as jungle and island based warrior peoples tend to have much larger muscles but carry more fat, either way compared to most of us desk sitting girlie men they are nails..

The closest equivilent to the spartans are likely to be todays elite infantry soldiers who spend a great deal of their time on physical fitness and base a lot of their training on long marches and runs. The physique of these sorts of bloke tends to be muscled but lean, certainly very few soldiers carry around large heavy body builder muscles for the simple reason that their endurance wouldn't be particulary good. Any spartan who started weight training would probably be left standing on the long marches.

However in the wake of 300, troy and other gay soft porns I suspect the expectation is that accient warriors must now look like the gladiators of ITV rather than the gladiators of 50BC smile

trumpet600

3,527 posts

247 months

Friday 25th January 2008
quotequote all
Strawman said:
<-- Piss taker, yeah Conan The Barbarian was an actual filmed documentary yes
Did Dafrug/Rafdug?? play the lead role?

dr.sickman

5,006 posts

238 months

Friday 25th January 2008
quotequote all
There is evidence they ate monkey's testicles. These contain high amounts of testosterone. Anabolic steroid abuse, which may also explain why the models in Greek sculpture have small willies- shrinkage due to exogenous hormone use.