Several theories exist regarding the origin of the name "helots." According to Hellanicus, the word relates to the village of Helos, in the south of Sparta.[6] Pausanias thus states, "Its inhabitants became the first slaves of the Lacedaemonian state, and were the first to be called helots".[7] This explanation is however not very plausible in etymological terms.[8]
Linguists have associated the word with the root (linguistics) ϝελ / wel, as in ἁλίσκομαι / halískomai, "to be captured, to be made prisoner." In fact, some ancient authors did not consider the term ethnic, but rather an indication of servitude: Antiochus of Syracuse writes: "those of the Lacedaemonians who did not take part in the expedition were adjudged slaves and were named helots",[9] while Theopompus (fragment 122), cited by Athenaeus (VI, 416c), states, "...and the one nation called their slaves helots and the others called them penestae...." [10]
"In all of these texts, the christening of the group as helots is the central and symbolic moment of their reduction to serfhood. By this name they are thus institutionally distinguished from the anonymous douloi (slaves).[11]"
It is certain that one aspect of helotism was the element of conquest; thus Messenians, who were conquered in the Messenian Wars of the 8th century BC, become synonymous in Herodotus with helots.
The situation is less clear in the case of the earliest helots, who, according to Theopompus, were descended from the initial Achaeans, who had been conquered by the Dorians. But then not all Achaeans were reduced to helotism: the village of Amykles, home of the Hyacinthia festival, enjoyed special status, as did others.
Contemporary authors propose alternative theories: according to Antiochus of Syracuse, helots were the Lacedaemonians who did not participate in the Messenian Wars; for Ephorus of Cyme, they were the perioeci ("dwellers in surrounding communities") from Helos, reduced to slavery after a failed revolt. Modern historiography favours the hypothesis of Antiochus of Syracuse.
Helots were assigned to citizens to carry out domestic work or to work on their klēroi. Various sources mention such servants accompanying this or that Spartan. Plutarch has Timaia, the wife of King Agis II, "being herself forward enough to whisper among her helot maid-servants" that the child she was expecting had been fathered by Alcibiades, and not her husband, indicating a certain level of trust.[12] According to some authors, in the fourth century BC, citizens also used chattel-slaves for domestic purposes. However, this is disputed by others. Some helots were also servants to young Spartans during their agoge, the Spartan education; these were the μόθωνες / móthōnes (see below). Finally, helots, like slaves, could be artisans or tradesmen.[13]
They were required to hand over a predetermined portion of their harvest (ἀποφορά / apophorá), with the helots keeping the surplus. According to Plutarch, this portion was 70 medimnoi of barley for a man, 12 for a woman, as well as a quantity of oil and wine corresponding to an amount reasonable for the needs of a warrior and his family, or a widow, respectively.[14] The existence of the apophorá is contested by Tyrtaeus: "Secondly, though no fixed tribute was imposed on them, they used to bring the half of all the produce of their fields to Sparta.... Like asses worn by their great burdens, bringing of dire necessity to their masters the half of all the fruits the corn-land bears."[15] Pausanias is describing the period immediately after the first Messenian War, when conditions were probably more severe.[16]
Having paid their tribute, the helots could often live rather well; the lands of Laconia and Messenia were very fertile, and often permitted two crops per year.[17] It seems they could enjoy some private property[18]: in 425 BC, some helots had their own boats.[19] A certain amount of wealth was achievable: in 223 BC, 6,000 helots purchased their freedom for 500 drachmas each, a considerable sum at the time.[20]
Helots lived in family units and could, at least de facto, contract unions among themselves.[21] Since helots were much less susceptible than other slaves in Greek antiquity to having their family units dispersed, they could reproduce themselves, or at least maintain their number.[18] Probably not insignificant to begin with, increased in spite of the crypteia, other massacres of helots (see below), and losses in war. Simultaneously, the population of citizens declined.
The absence of a formal census prevents an accurate assessment of the helot population, but estimates are possible. According to Herodotus, helots were seven times as numerous as Spartans during the Battle of Plataea in 479 BC.[22] At the time of the conspiracy of Cinadon, the beginning of the fourth century BC, only forty Peers, or citizens, could be counted in a crowd of 4000 at the agora (Xenophon, Hellenica, III, 3, 5). The total population of helots at that time, including women, is estimated as 170,000 – 224,000.[23]
Given that the helot population could not grow by means of purchase or capture in war, it had to rely on natural growth. Helots were encouraged by the Spartans to impose a eugenics similar to that which they, themselves, practiced. Thus would, according to Greek beliefs of the period, not only genetic but also acquired characteristics be passed along to successive generations. During the crypteia, the strongest and fittest helots were the primary targets of the kryptes; to select soft targets would be interpreted as a sign of weakness.
What is more, the Spartans used helot women to satisfy the state's human resource needs: the 'bastards' (nothoi) born of Spartan fathers and helot women held an intermediary rank in Lacedaemonian society (cf. mothakes and mothones below) and swelled the ranks of the citizen army. It is difficult to determine whether these births were the results of voluntary liaisons (at least on the part of the father) or part of a formal state program. Girls born of such unions, serving no military purpose, were likely abandoned at birth and left to die. [24]
According to Myron of Priene, cited by Athenaeus,[25] the emancipation of helots was "common" (πολλάκις / pollákis). The text suggests that this is normally associated with completion of military service. The first explicit reference to this practice in regards the helots occurs in Thucydides (IV, 26, 5). This is on the occasion of the events at Sphacteria, when Sparta had to relieve their hoplites, who were besieged on the island by the Athenians:
"The fact was, that the Lacedaemonians had made advertisement for volunteers to carry into the island ground corn, wine, cheese, and any other food useful in a siege; high prices being offered, and freedom promised to any of the helots who should succeed in doing so".[26]
Thucydides reports that the request met with some success, and the helots got supplies through to the besieged island. He does not mention whether or not the Spartans kept their word; it is possible that some of the helots later executed were part of the Sphacterian volunteers.
The second such call came during the Theban invasion of Laconia. Xenophon in Hellenica (VI, 5, 28) states that the authorities agreed to emancipate all the helots who volunteered. He then estimates that 6,000 heeded the call, leading to some embarrassment for the Spartans
All the same, in 424 BC, the 700 helots who served Brasidas in Chalcidice were emancipated, and they were henceforth known as the "Brasidians". It was also possible to purchase freedom, or achieve it by undergoing the traditional Spartan education. Generally, emancipated helots were referred to as "neodamodes" (νεοδαμώδεις / neodamōdeis): those who rejoined the δῆμος / dễmos (Deme) of the Perioeci.
Moses Finley underscores that the fact helots could serve as hoplites constituted a grave flaw in the system. In effect, the hoplite system was a strict method of training to ensure that discipline was maintained in the phalanx. The Spartans gained considerable reputation as hoplites, due to tactical capabilities developed through constant training. In addition to this military aspect, to be a hoplite was a key characteristic of Greek citizenship. To introduce helots to this system thus led to inevitable social conflict.
Phylarchus mentions a class of men that were at the same time free and non-citizens: the μόθακες / mothakes, who had undergone the 'agoge, the Spartan educational system.[27] Classical historiography recognizes that the helots comprised a large portion of these mothakes. Nevertheless, this category poses a number of problems, firstly that of vocabulary.
The classical authors used a number of terms which appear to evoke similar concepts:
The situation is somewhat complicated by a gloss of Hesychios of Alexandria which attests that mothakes were slave children (δοῦλοι / doũloi) raised at the same time as the children of citizens. Philologists resolve this quandary in two ways:
In any case, the conclusion needs to be treated carefully:
At least from the classical era, the number of Spartans was very small compared to that of the Helots. In a celebrated passage, Thucydides stresses that "most Spartan institutions have always been designed with a view to security against the Helots".[28] Aristotle compares them to "an enemy constantly sitting in wait of the disaster of the Spartans".[29] Thus, fear seems to be an important factor governing the relations between Spartans and Helots. According to tradition, the Equals always carried their spears, undid the straps of their bucklers only when at home lest the Helots seize them, and locked themselves in their homes.[30] They also took active measures, subjecting them to what Theopompus describes as "an altogether cruel and bitter condition".[31]
According to Myron of Priene, an anti-Spartan historian[32] of the middle 3rd century BC:
"They assign to the Helots every shameful task leading to disgrace. For they ordained that each one of them must wear a dogskin cap (κυνῆ / kunễ) and wrap himself in skins (διφθέρα / diphthéra) and receive a stipulated number of beatings every year regardless of any wrongdoing, so that they would never forget they were slaves. Moreover, if any exceeded the vigour proper to a slave's condition, they made death the penalty; and they allotted a punishment to those controlling them is they failed to rebuke those who were growing fat".[33]
Plutarch also states that Spartans treated the Helots "harshly and cruelly": they compelled them to drink pure wine (which was considered dangerous - wine usually being cut with water) "…and to lead them in that condition into their public halls, that the children might see what a sight a drunken man is; they made them to dance low dances, and sing ridiculous songs…" during syssitia (obligatory banquets)[34] However, he notes that this rough treatment was inflicted only relatively late, after the 465 BC earthquake.
Some modern scholars advocate a reevaluation of ancient evidence about Helots. It has been argued that the kunē was not actually made of dogskin,[35] and that the dipthera (literally, "leather") was the general attire of the poor peasant class.[36] The obligation of masters to prevent fatness amongst their helots is deemed implausible: as the Homoioi lived separately, dietary intake could not be rigorously controlled[37]; as manual labour was an important function of the Helots (for example, being used to carry their master's arms and armour on campaign), it would make sense to keep them well nourished[37]. Besides, the rations mentioned by Thucydides[38] for the Helots on Sphacteria are close to normal.[39] Myron's evidence is interpreted as an extrapolation from actions performed on symbolic representatives.[40] In short, Grote writes that "the various anecdotes which are told respecting [Helot] treatment at Sparta betoken less of cruelty than of ostentatious scorn".[41] He has been followed recently by J. Ducat (1974 and 1990),[42] who describes Spartan treatment of the Helots as a kind of ideological warfare, designed to condition the Helots to think of themselves as inferiors. This strategy seems to have been successful at least for Laconian Helots:[43] when the Thebans ordered a group of Laconian helot prisoners to recite the verses of Alcman and Terpander (national poets of Thebes), they refused on the grounds that it would displease their masters.[44]