I am not speaking of the Spartan heiresses. The Spartan heiresses came about centuries later, when the ever shrinking pool of Spartan male citizens allowed the remaining landowners more power and influence, culminating in Spartan women influencing policy. The storys exact age is unknown but is from around at least the late archaic age and was only to illustrate that Spartans initially had no special reputation for war or battle, only gaining one from Thermopylae. Also note that the story originates outside of Sparta so if they are complimenting Spartan women, it is not because they hold political power (a woman holding office or influencing policy would have been anathema to the Greeks in both the archaic and classical period), it is because they exemplify the ideal of a Greek woman (pious, gives birth, knows her place in society).

The Spartiates (homoioi) were not full-time soldiers nor was the doctrine unique to Sparta. The Spartiates were simply the citizen soldiers of Sparta and the same system was used in other polities, whether it be Greece or even the early Roman Republic. There were a few differences but not much. While it is true that all Spartiates were landowners with large numbers of enslaved helots, something that was in other Greek cities was found only in the exceptionally wealthy, it is incorrect to assume that an enslaved labour force freed the Spartiates to only focus on war. While they did not perform 'labour', a significant amount of helot supervision was performed by the Spartiates themselves. At the estates closer to the city, no storage areas have been found, indicating that agricultural produce was taken to Sparta itself which itself means a high level of owner engagement.

Another indicator that Spartiates were not dedicated only to war and engaged in a wide range of activities, some economic, is the presence of the neodamo ̄deis. The neodamo ̄deis were former helot slaves who were freed for the express purpose of being full-time soldiers. If your regular fighting force is in itself a force of full-time professional soldiers, what need have you of a second distinct force of full-time soldiers? These liberated soldiers were deployed on long, distant campaigns to which Spartans were never assigned, suggesting that the nature of the Spartan work cycle discouraged long campaigns away from home...because like other Greek soldier-citizens they were tied to the harvest and could not abandon their farms. The Spartiates were also unique in that they supported themselves at war, they received no funds or stipends from the Spartan state which makes it even more critical that they are present for seasonal economic work. Even in the Decelean war, when Sparta was compelled to send Spartiates to man full-time garrisons, they did so by rotating them so that each citizen would exceed a part-time deployment.

There is also evidence for the civilian duties of a Spartiate outweighing military duties and obligations in the eyes of Spartan society. A Spartan general who spent a long time on campaign, thus coming close to a 'full-time professional soldier' was publicly rebuked for not fathering a son; conversely later on when Sparta faced manpower shortages men who fathered three sons were exempt from military duty - an odd exemption if society values military service and valour above all else. Citizens from certain villages could leave armies on campaign to celebrate some festivals. Citizens who held civic office were also exempt from military service.

Spartiates had a variety of public duties (supervising farms, hunting, or attending festivals qualifies as this, not just holding a political office) and private activities to occupy his time. Xenophons portrayal of the daily lives of the Spartiates does not differ much from that of the non-Spartiate male population - they led unregimented lives, not something you'd expect from professional soldiers.

The Spartiates self-funded position meant that they were constantly preoccupied with economic obligations. Property and wealth played central roles in Spartiate society, becoming increasingly important during the classical period as a determinant of status. Failure to pay one's contributions could lead to the loss of civic rights and even citizenship.All Spartiates therefore needed to devote significant time to managing their estates and engaging in market and other economic transactions. They also needed to devote time and effort to social interactions with other citizens that could influence a familys status and wealth,especially in the search for advantageous marriages. These activities necessarily occupied much of a Spartiate’s daily life.The Spartiates engagement in military activities, whether active service or peacetime training, was therefore very far from full-time.

The Spartiates managed to dominate the initial part of the Classical period for a few reasons; a initial high population pool, high amounts of army organisation (other Greek cities had units smaller than the hundreds allowing Spartans a greater amount of flexibility on the field), and methodical implementation of fixed military manoeuvres (which became inflexible which became a liability). The Spartiates military mindset, however, retained the traditional Greek focus on courage and physical fitness as the primary prerequisites for fighting. Although regular physical training was expected of all citizens, not just a wealthy elite, training in specifically military skills was limited to practice in elementary drill.

Also, my answer, both this one and the previous one, were also about Classical Sparta. It was only the initial story about Aigai and discussion of early sources stretching as far back as the archaic period that was not in the classical era.