Sparta had a limited democracy. Sparta had two kings who ruled the city-state. They also had a 28 member council which could limit the power of the kings.
Athens had a limited democracy.
Sparta was a good example of limited democracy, Athens of radical democracy.
Âthens
The citizens - Sparta was a limited democracy.
A democracy limited to the Spartan warrior class.
Sparta had direct democracy
Athens had a democracy; Sparta, an oligarchy.
Sparta because they did not have as much freedom as Athens.
In historical times they were a limited democracy - they had to be of course - if they weren't given a vote, it would be difficult to get them to fight for the decisions of oligarchs.
Athens changed to increasing forms of democracy from 508 BCE, becoming a radical democracy 50 years later. Sparta was always a limited democracy - a state which relied on its citizen body to form its army had to give them the option of directing the state, or they either wouldn't fight, or would fight to overturn the government.
Sparta had a limited democracy - they had to as the citizens would not fight if the citizens didn"t have a say on both war and the important issues of government. Athens developed from a limited democracy to a radical one as the citizens were sick of the rule and exploitation by the aristocratic oligarchs. After an initial limited democracy under Cleisthenes, and the return of the oligarchs during and after the Persian invasion, Ephialtes restored democracy, was murdered for it, and his deputy Pericles took over, developing it into a radical democracy where the citizens in fortnightly assembly made the decisions and the council implemented them.
Sparta was not an oligarchy, it was a limited democracy. The council put major problems to the assembly of citizens. This was unavoidable as the army was comprised of the ordinary citizens, and they had to be consulted to keep them on-side.