§ 1. The Gerusia of Sparta, a council of elders. § 2. The Spartan
Gerontes were irresponsible. § 3. Functions of the Spartan
Gerusia. § 4. Gerusia of Crete and of Elis. § 5. Character of the
Spartan royalty. § 6. Honours paid to the Spartan kings, and the
mode of their succession. § 7. Powers of the Spartan kings in
domestic; § 8. and in foreign affairs. 9. Revenues of the Spartan
kings. § 10. Heraclide princes in Doric states other than Sparta.
1. This result was chiefly brought about by the aristocratical
counterpoise to the popular assembly, the gerusia, which was never wanting
in a genuine Doric state, the “council of elders,” as the name
signifies.(376) In this respect it is opposed to the senate (βουλὴ), which
represented the people; although the latter name, as being the more
general term, is sometimes used for the council, but never the converse.
Thus in the Persian war a senate assembled at Argos, which had full powers
to decide concerning peace and war;(377) this was therefore of an
aristocratic character, since the government of Argos had not then become
democratical. The Homeric assembly, which was of a purely aristocratical
form, is called βουλὴ γερόντων or γερουσία;(378) it consisted of the older
men of the ruling families, and decided both public business and judicial
causes conjointly with the kings, properly so called,(379) frequently,
however, in connexion with an ἀγορά. In this assembly lay, but as yet
undeveloped, the political elements of the Doric gerusia. At Sparta the
name was taken in the strictest sense, as the national opinion laid the
greatest importance upon age in the management of public affairs; the
young men were appointed for war;(380) and accordingly none but men of
sixty or more years of age had admission to this council.(381) The office
of a councillor was, however, according to the expression both of
Aristotle and Demosthenes,(382) the prize of virtue, and attended with
general honour;(383) none but men of distinguished families, blameless
lives, and eminent station, could occupy it.(384) Being an office which
was held for life,(385) it never could happen that more than one
individual was elected at a time, and the eyes of the whole state were
directed towards the choice of this one person. Distinguished men,
therefore, bordering upon old age, probably always from the oba to which
the person whose place was vacated had belonged,(386) offered themselves
upon their own judgment(387) before the tribunal of the public voice.
Their advanced age enabled the electors to consider and examine a long
public life, and ensured to the state the greatest prudence and experience
in the elected. To provide against the weakness of age, which Aristotle
considers as a defect attendant on this mode of election, was unnecessary
for a time and a state whose inhabitants enjoyed the highest bodily
health. The aristocratic tendency of the office required that the
candidates should be nominated by vote, not by lot, but yet by the whole
people;(388) and that they themselves should meet with the good-will of
every person; which was particularly required for this dignity.
2. When they had passed through this ordeal they were for ever relieved
from all further scrutiny, and were trusted to their own conscience.(389)
They were subject to no responsibility, since it was thought that the near
prospect of death would give them more moderation,(390) than the fear of
incurring at the cessation of their office the displeasure of the
community; to whom in other states the power of calling the highest
officers to account was intrusted. The spirit of this aristocratic
institution was, that the councillors were morally perfect, and hence it
gave them a complete exemption from all fear as to the consequences of
their actions. To later politicians it appeared still more dangerous that
the councillors of Sparta acted upon their own judgment, and not according
to written laws; but only because they did not take into account the power
of custom and of ancient habit (the ἄγραφα νόμιμα, πάτριοι νόμοι),(391)
which have an absolute sway, so long as the internal unity of a people is
not separated and destroyed. Upon unwritten laws, which were fixed in the
hearts of the citizens, and were there implanted by education, the whole
public and legal transactions of the Spartans depended; and these were
doubtless most correctly delivered through the mouths of the experienced
old men, whom the community had voluntarily selected as its best citizens.
Thousands of written laws always leave open a door for the entrance of
arbitrary decision, if they have not by their mutual connexion a complete
power of supplying what is deficient; this power is, however, alone
possessed by the law, connate with the people, which, in the ancient
simple times, when national habits are preserved in perfect purity, is
better maintained by custom fixed under the inspection of the best men,
than by any writing.
To me, therefore, the gerusia appears to be a splendid monument of early
Grecian customs: and, by its noble openness, simple greatness, and pure
confidence, shows that it was safe to build upon the moral excellence and
paternal wisdom of those who had experienced a long life, and to whom in
this instance the people intrusted its safety and welfare.
3. The functions of the gerusia were double, it having at the same time an
administrative and a judicial authority. In the first capacity it debated
with the kings upon all important affairs, preparing them for the decision
of the public assembly, and passed a decree in its first stage by a
majority of voices,(392) the influence of which was doubtless far greater
than at Athens: in the latter capacity it had the supreme decision in all
criminal cases, and could punish with infamy and death.(393) Since,
however, in both these directions the power of the council gradually came
in conflict with that of the ephors, we must first enter into an
investigation concerning these officers, before it will be possible to
speak of the extent of the functions of the council at different periods.
Another circumstance also, which renders a separate inquiry into the
nature of the ephoralty requisite, is the inspection which it exercised
over the manners of the citizens,(394) in which it manifests a great
similarity with the ancient Athenian court of the Areopagus. As every old
man had the right of severely censuring the habits of any youth, so every
citizen was a youth in comparison with these aged fathers of the state.
Hence the awe and veneration with which they were commonly regarded at
Sparta. That, however, to an Athenian orator of the democratic times, the
gerusia should appear possessed of despotic authority, is not surprising;
for it is so far true, that this institution, if transplanted to Athens,
would necessarily have caused a tyrannical dominion. In Sparta, however,
so little was known of any despotic measure of the gerontes, that, on the
contrary, the constitution was impaired when their antagonist office, the
ephors, gained the ascendency in influence and power. The institution of
the gerusia was in fact, in its main features, once established at Athens,
when Lysander nominated the Thirty, who were to be a legislative body, and
at the same time the supreme court of justice; with how little success is
well known; so true is it, that every institution can only flourish in the
soil in which it is first planted.(395)
4. In early times every Doric state must have had a gerusia; but CRETE is
the only place of whose council accounts have been preserved, and these
represent it in precisely the same light as that of Sparta. It was, we are
informed, armed with large political and legislative powers, and laid its
decrees in a matured state before the general assembly, for its approval
or rejection.(396) It decided, without appeal to written laws, upon its
own judgment, and was responsible to no one.(397) The members were chosen
from those persons who had before filled the supreme magistracy (the
cosmi), not, however, until after a fresh examination of their
fitness.(398) The office lasted for life, as at Sparta.(399) The _princeps
senatus_ was styled βουλῆς πρείγιστος.(400)
In ELIS, also, whose government resembled that of Sparta, a gerusia was a
very important part of the constitution. It consisted of ninety members,
who were chosen for their lifetime from oligarchical families;(401) but in
other respects the election was the same as at Sparta, and therefore they
were chosen by the whole people. Yet there was also a larger council of
600,(402) which may have been an aristocratical committee selected from
the popular assembly. Thus much at least is clear, that the power of the
people was very limited; and that, as Aristotle says, there was one
oligarchy within another.(403)
5. To the consideration of the gerusia may be joined the inquiry
concerning the kingly office in Sparta and other Doric states, as being a
cognate element of the constitution. The Doric royalty was a continuation
of the heroic or Homeric; and neither in the one nor in the other are we
to look for that despotic power, with which the Greeks were not acquainted
until they had seen it in foreign countries. In those early times the
king, together with his council, was supreme ruler and judge, but not
without it; he was also chief commander in war, and as such possessed a
large executive authority, as circumstances required. On the whole,
however, his station with regard to the nobles was that of an equal; and
his office, although for the most part hereditary, could yet be
transferred to another family of the aristocracy. He ruled over the common
people either in an arbitrary manner, as the suitors in Ithaca, or as a
mild father, like Ulysses.(404) His office on the whole bore an analogy to
the power of Zeus; and it received a religious confirmation from the
circumstance of his presiding at and performing the great public
sacrifices with the assistance of soothsayers.
6. These are the principal features of the kingly office at Sparta, where,
according to Aristotle, as well as among the Molossi in Epirus, it
acquired firmness by the limitation of its power; it also derived an
additional strength from the mythical notion that the conquest of the
country had originated from the royal family.(405) The main support of the
dignity of the kings was doubtless the honour paid to the Heraclidæ, which
extended throughout the whole of Greece, and was the theme of many fables;
even the claim of the Spartans to the command of the allied Grecian armies
was in part founded upon it. These princes, deriving their origin from the
first of the heroes of Greece, were in many respects themselves considered
as heroes,(406) and enjoyed a certain religious respect. Hence also we may
account for their funeral ceremonies, so splendid, when compared with the
simplicity of Doric customs; for the general mourning of ten days,(407) to
which a fixed number of Spartans, Periœci and Helots came, together with
their wives, from all parts of the country into the city, where they
covered their heads with dust or ashes with great lamentation, and on each
occasion praised the dead king as the best of all princes;(408) as well as
for the exposure of those kings who had fallen in battle, whose images
were laid upon a state-couch:(409) usages which approximate very closely
to the worship of an hero (τιμαὶ ἡρωϊκαί). The royal dignity was also
guarded by the sanction of the sacerdotal office: for the kings were
priests of Zeus Uranius and Zeus Lacedæmon, and offered public sacrifices
to Apollo on every new moon and seventh day (Νεομήνιος and
Ἑβδομαγέτας);(410) they also received the skins of all sacrificed animals
as a part of their income. From this circumstance, added to the fact that
in war they had a right to the back of every victim, and had liberty to
sacrifice as much as they wished,(411) it follows that they presided over
the entire worship of the army, being both priests and princes, like the
Agamemnon of Homer.(412) Their power, however, most directly required that
they should maintain a constant intercourse between the state and the
Delphian oracle; hence they nominated the Pythians, and, together with
these officers, read and preserved the oracles.(413) As then it appears
from these facts that the dignity of the kings was founded on a religious
notion, so it was also limited by religion; although the account we have
is rather of an ancient custom, which was retained when its meaning had
been lost, than an institution of real influence. Once in every eight
years (δι᾽ ἐτῶν ἐννέα) the ephors chose a calm and moonless night, and
placed themselves in the most profound silence to observe the heavens: if
there was any appearance of a shooting star, it was believed that the
kings had in some manner offended the Deity, and they were suspended until
an oracle from Delphi, or the priests at Olympia, absolved them from the
guilt.(414) If this custom (doubtless of great antiquity) is compared with
the frequent occurrence of this period of nine years in early times, and
especially with the tradition preserved in a verse of Homer, “of Minos,
who reigned for periods of nine years, holding intercourse with
Zeus,”(415) it is easy to perceive that the dominion of the ancient Doric
princes determined, as it were, at the period of every eight years, and
required a fresh religious ratification. So intimate in early times was
the connexion between civil government and religion.
It is clear, from what has been said, that the Dorians considered the
kingly office as proceeding from the Deity, and not as originating from
the people; which would, I believe, have seemed to them in no-wise more
natural, than that the liberty of the people should be dependent on the
king. But they were well aware that the elements of the constitution had
not been formed by a people consisting, like the American colonists after
their defection from the mother-country, of individuals possessed of equal
rights: but they had existed at the beginning, and grown with the growth
of the nation. For this reason the people were not empowered to nominate
the king (from which disputes concerning the rightful succession to the
throne should be carefully distinguished;)(416) but the royal dignity
passed in a regular succession to the eldest son, with this exception,
that the sons born during the reign of the father had the precedence of
their elder brothers: if the eldest son died, the throne passed to his
next male descendant; and on failure of his line, to the younger brothers
in succession; if there was no male issue of the king, the office went to
his brother(417) (who also, during the minority of the son of the late
king, was his natural guardian),(418) and his heirs; or, lastly, if the
whole line was extinct, to the next of kin.(419) The anxiety of the
Spartans for the legitimacy of their kings, also serves to prove the high
importance which was attached to the genuineness of their birth.
Notwithstanding these large privileges, the people believed its liberty to
be secured by the oath which was taken every month by the kings, that they
would reign according to the laws; a custom also in force among the
Molossi;(420) in return for which, the state engaged through the ephors to
preserve the dominion of the kings unshaken (ἀστυφέλικτος), if they
adhered to their oath.(421)
7. The constitutional powers of the kings of Sparta were inconsiderable,
as compared with their dignity and honours. In the first place, the two
kings were members of the gerusia, and their presence was requisite to
make a full council; but as such they only had single votes,(422) which in
their absence were held by the councillor who was most nearly related to
them, and therefore a Heraclide.(423) If they were present, they presided
at the council, and accordingly, in the ancient rhetra above mentioned,
they are styled _princes_ (ἀρχαγέται) in reference to the council; it was
also their especial office to speak and to propose measures in the public
assembly. When the council sat as a court of justice, the kings of course
presided in it; besides which, they had a distinct tribunal of their
own,(424) for in Sparta all magistrates had a jurisdiction in cases which
belonged to the branch of the administration with which they were
intrusted: the only remnant of which custom, spared by the democracy at
Athens, was, that the public officers always _introduced_ such suits into
the courts. This coincidence of administrative and judicial authority also
existed at Sparta in the person of their kings. They held a court in cases
concerning the repair and security of the public roads, probably in their
capacity of generals, and as superintendents of the intercourse with
foreign nations. It is remarkable that they gave judgment in all cases of
heiresses, and that all adoptions were made in their presence.(425) Both
these duties regarded the maintenance of families, the basis of the
ancient Greek states, the care for which was therefore intrusted to the
kings. Thus in Athens also, the same duty had been transferred from the
ancient kings to the archon eponymus, who accordingly had the
superintendence, and a species of guardianship over all heiresses and
orphans.(426)
8. The greater part of the king’s prerogative was his power in foreign
affairs. The kings of Sparta were the commanders of the Peloponnesian
confederacy. They also went out as ambassadors; although at times of
mistrust companions were assigned, who were known to be disinclined and
hostile to them.(427) By the same power the kings also nominated citizens
as proxeni, who entertained ambassadors and citizens of foreign states in
their houses,(428) and otherwise provided for them; it appears that the
kings themselves were in fact the proxeni for foreign countries, and that
those persons whom they nominated are only to be considered as their
deputies.
As soon as the king had assumed the command of the army, and had crossed
the boundaries, he became, according to ancient custom, general with
unlimited power (στρατηγὸς αὐτοκράτωρ).(429) He had authority to despatch
and assemble armies, to collect money in foreign countries, and to lead
and encamp the army according to his own judgment. Any person who dared to
impede him, or to resist his authority, was outlawed.(430) He had power of
life and death, and could execute without trial (ἐν χειρὸς νόμῳ);
although, from the well-known subordination of the Spartans, such cases
were probably of rare occurrence. But it is manifest that the king, upon
his return, was always responsible and liable to punishment, as well for
an imprudent, as for a tyrannical use of his powers. His political was
separated with sufficient accuracy from his military authority, and the
king was not permitted to conclude treaties, or to decide the fate of
cities, without communication with and permission from the state.(431) His
military power was, however, thought dangerous and excessive, and was from
time to time curtailed. This limitation was not indeed effected by the
arrangement which originated from the dissension between Demaratus and
Cleomenes, viz., that only one king should be with the army at the same
time(432) (for this regulation rather increased the power of the one king
who was sent out); but chiefly by the law, that the king should not go
into the field without ten councillors (a rule which owed its origin to
the over-hasty armistice of Agis),(433) and by the compulsory attendance
of the ephors.(434)
9. The investigation concerning the revenue of the kings is not in itself
so important as it is rendered interesting by the parallel with the same
office in the Homeric age. In Homer the kings are represented as having
three sorts of revenues; first, the produce of their lands (τεμένη),(435)
which often contained tillage ground, pastures, and plantations; secondly,
the fees for judicial decisions (δῶρα); and, thirdly, the public banquets,
which were provided at the expense of the community.(436) To these were
added extraordinary gifts, shares of the booty, and other honorary
presents. The case was nearly the same at Sparta, except that they
received no fees for judicial decisions. But in the first place, the king
in this country had his landed property, which was situated in the
territory of several cities belonging to the Periœci,(437) and the royal
tribute (βασιλικὸς φόρος) was probably derived from the same source.(438)
This was the foundation of the private wealth of the kings, which
frequently amounted to a considerable sum; otherwise, how could it have
been proposed to fine king Agis a hundred thousand drachmas,(439) that is,
doubtless, Æginetan drachmas, and therefore about 5800_l._ of our money?
Also the younger Agis, the son of Eudamidas, was possessed of six hundred
talents in coin;(440) and in a dialogue attributed to Plato, the king of
Sparta is declared to be richer than any private individual at
Athens.(441) But besides these revenues, the king received a large sum
from the public property; a double portion at the public banquets,(442) an
animal without blemish for sacrifice, a medimnus of wheat, and a
Lacedæmonian quart of wine on the first and seventh days of each
month;(443) the share in the sacrifices above mentioned, &c. It was,
moreover, customary for private individuals who gave entertainments, to
invite the kings, as was the practice in the Homeric times;(444) on these
occasions a double portion was set before them, and when a public
sacrifice took place, the kings had the same rights and preferences.(445)
In war, also, the king received a large portion of the plunder; thus the
share of Pausanias, after the battle of Platæa, was ten women, horses,
camels, and talents:(446) in later times it appears that a third of the
booty fell to the lot of the king.(447) Lastly, it is proper to mention
the official residence of the two kings of Sparta, built, according to
tradition, by Aristodemus the ancestor of the two royal families.(448) In
addition to this dwelling, they had frequently private houses of their
own,(449) and a tent was always built for them without the city, at the
public expense.(450)
In taking a review of all these statements, it appears to me that the
political sagacity was almost past belief, with which the ancient
constitution of Sparta protected the power, the dignity, and welfare of
the office of king, yet without suffering it to grow into a despotism, or
without placing the king in any one point either above or without the law.
Without endangering the liberty of the state, a royal race was maintained,
which, blending the pride of their own family with the national feelings,
produced, for a long succession of years, princes of a noble and patriotic
disposition. Thus it was in fact with the two Heraclide families, to which
Theopompus, Leonidas, Archidamus II., Agesilaus, Cleomenes III., and Agis
III. belonged; and the greater number of the later kings retained, up to
the last period, a genuine Spartan disposition, which we find expressed in
many nervous and pithy apophthegms.
10. It may be inferred that it was the case in all, as we know it to have
been in many Dorian states, with the exception of later colonies, that
they were governed by princes of the Heraclide family. In Argos, the
descendants of Temenus reigned until after the time of Phidon, and the
kingly office did not expire till after the Persian war;(451) in Corinth,
the successors of Aletes, and afterwards of Bacchis, reigned until about
the 8th Olympiad. How long the Ctesippidæ reigned in Epidaurus and
Cleonæ,(452) we are not informed. In Megara we find the name, but the name
only, of a king at a very late period.(453) In Messenia the Æpytidæ ruled
as kings until the subjugation of the country; and when Aristomenes was
compelled to quit it, he took refuge with Damagetus, the king of Ialysus,
in the island of Rhodes, of the Heraclide family of the Eratidæ.(454) Also
the Hippotadæ at Cnidos and Lipara,(455) the Bacchiadæ at Syracuse and
Corcyra,(456) the Phalantidæ at Tarentum,(457) probably had in early times
ruled as sovereign princes, as well as the Heraclidæ at Cos, who derived
their origin from Phidippus and Antiphus.(458) In Crete we find but little
mention of the Heraclidæ, the only exceptions being Althæmenes of Argos,
and Phæstus of Sicyon.(459) In this island the family of Teutamas had
reigned from a remote period: with regard to the time during which kings
existed in this country, it can only be conjectured from the circumstance
that a king named Etearchus reigned at Oaxus not long before the building
of Cyrene.(460) Cyrene, as has been already shown, was under the dominion
of a Minyean, its mother-city Thera, under that of an Ægide family.(461)
Delphi was also at an early period under the rule of kings.(462) Of the
aristocratic offices, which were substituted in the place of the royal
authority, we shall presently speak, when treating of the power of the
cosmi.