168 Notes to Pages 47–49
F56, and see Hdt. 6.56. Tax receipts and flow of gold and silver from abroad: Pl. Alc. I 123a–b with
Strabo 8.5.4.
35.Royal capacity to work harm: Arist. Pol. 1272b38–1273a2.
- The literature on this subject is considerable. See, most recently, Nicolas Richer, Les
Éphores: Études sur l’histoire et sur l’image de Sparte (VIIIe–IIIe siècles avant JésusChrist (Paris:
Publications de la Sorbonne, 1998), 153–521, and Stefan Sommer, Das Ephorat: Garant des spar
tanischen Kosmos (St. Katharinen: Scripta Mercaturae Verlag, 2001), 16–78. Note Andreas Luther,
Könige und Ephoren: Untersuchungen zur spartanischen Verfassungsgeschichte (Frankfurt am Main:
Antike Verlag, 2004). - Ephors like Roman tribunes: Cic. Rep. 2.33.57–58, Leg. 3.7.15–16; and Rousseau, Du
Contrat social 4.5, in Œuvres complètes de Rousseau, III 454. - Iteration unknown, presumably forbidden: H. D. Westlake, “Reelection to the Ephor-
ate?” GRBS 17 (1976): 343–52, and Richer, Les Éphores, 304–9. Office for only a year: cf. Xen. Ages.
1.36, Arist. Pol. 1272a6–7, Paus. 3.11.2, and Plut. Ages. 4.3 with Xen. Hell. 2.3.9–10. Majority vote,
power almost unchecked: 2.3.34, 4.29. Note Arist. F611.10 (Rose) = Tit. 143.1.2.10 (Gigon) ap.
Heraclid. Lemb. 373.10 (Dilts). Eúthuna: Plut. Agis 12.1. Cf. Arist. Rh. 1419a31 with Pol. 1271a6–8.
Whether the retiring ephors were jailed while their conduct was under review, as seems to have
been the case with the basıleîs at Cumae, is unknown: Plut. Mor. 291f–292a. For the procedures
followed in Athens, see Arist. Ath. Pol. 4.2, 48.3–5, 54.2, with Rhodes, CAAP, 114–15, 155, 313,
316–18, 547–48, 560–64, 597–99. - Ephors summon little assembly: Xen. Hell. 3.3.8. Gerousía juxtaposed with “common
assembly”: Diod. 11.50. The context leaves little doubt that we should identify Xenophon’s “little
assembly” with the ephors and gerousía. His point is that the ephors, instead of summoning the
gerousía proper, unobtrusively consulted those of the gérontes who happened to be nearby. If they
had called a formal meeting of the gerousía, they might have tipped off Cinadon’s conspirators that
something was afoot. See also Hdt. 5.40. Some scholars believe that the Spartans held a great as-
sembly once a year and argue that “the little assembly” was the regular monthly meeting of the
ekklēsía mentioned by Schol. Thuc. 1.67.3: cf. W. G. G. Forrest, CR 83 (1969): 197 n. 1, and Walter
Burkert, “Apellai und Apollon,” RhM 118 (1975): 1–21 (esp. 8–10). On the basis of Ephorus FGrH
70 F149 (ap. Strabo 10.4.18) and the analysis attributed to Archytas of Tarentum in Stob. Flor.
4.1.138 (Hense), a number of scholars conclude that the hıppeîs constituted “the little assembly”:
cf. Henri Jeanmaire, Couroi et courètes: Essai sur l’éducation spartiate et sur les rites d’adolescence
dans l’antiquité hellénique (Lille: Bibliothèque Universitaire, 1939), 544–45; Marcel Détienne, “La
Phalange: Problèmes et controverses,” in Problèmes de la guerre en Grèce ancienne, ed. Jean-Pierre
Vernant (Paris: Seuil, 1968), 119–42 (at 135–40); and Geneviève Hoffmann, “Les Choisis: Un
Ordre dans la cité grecque?” Droit et cultures 9–10 (1985): 15–26 (at 21).
40.Summoning of common assembly: Xen. Hell. 2.2.19, Plut. Agis 9.1, read in light of Diod.
11.50. Introduction of laws, decrees, and declarations of war and peace through gerousía: Xen.
Hell. 2.2.19, 5.2.11–24; Plut. Agis 5.3–4, 8.1–9.1. Regular monthly meetings of common assembly:
Schol. Thuc. 1.67.3 with Plut. Lyc. 6.1–4, Hdt. 6.57.2. In this connection, one should consider
Burkert, “Apellai und Apollon,” 1–21. For the role played by the gerousía, see Diod. 11.50, Plut. Lyc. - See Henry Theodore Wade-Gery, “The Spartan Rhetra in Plutarch Lycurgus VI: A. Plutarch’s
Text,” CQ 37:1/2 (January–April 1943): 62–72, reprinted in Wade-Gery, EGH, 37–54. A. H. M.
Jones provides a useful discussion of the issues in “The Lycurgan Rhetra,” in ASI, 165–75. To the
secondary literature he cites, one should add W. G. Forrest, “Legislation in Sparta,” Phoenix 21:1
(Spring 1967): 11–19; Edmond Lévy, “La Grande Rhètra,” Ktèma 2 (1977): 86–103, and Françoise
Ruzé, “Le Conseil et l’assemblée dans la grande Rhètra de Sparte,” REG 104 (1991): 15–30. I am
not persuaded by Richer’s recent attempt, Les Éphores, 93–115, to find mention of the ephors in
the Great Rhetra’s account of the procedures governing the operations of the Spartan assembly.
Ephor presides, chooses proposal presenter: Plut. Mor. 214b, 801b–c. Puts question, rules which
side has majority: Thuc. 1.87.1–2. Decisions by “ephors and assembly”: Xen. Hell. 2.4.38, 3.2.23,
4.6.3. See Andrewes, “The Government of Classical Sparta,” 13–14, and Jones, “The Lycurgan
Rhetra,” 165–75. See also Hdt. 5.40. Kúrıos within regime: Arist. Pol. 1322b12–16. - Ephors regulate foreign visitation and citizen sojourns abroad: Thuc. 1.144.2, 6.88.9,
8.12.1–3; Xen. Lac. Pol. 14.4; Plut. Lyc. 27.6–9, Agis 10.3–8 should be read in light of Hdt. 3.148.2;