GEROUSIA.

a simple and antiquated character, and, so far as they go, prove that the Spartan sovereignty was a continuation of the heroic or Homeric. The distinctions and privileges granted to the king as commander of the forces in war, lead to the same conclusion. These were greater than he enjoyed at home. He was guarded by a body of 100 chosen men, and his table was maintained at the public expense he might sacrifice in his sacerdotal capacity as many victims as he chose, the skins and backs of which were his perquisites; and he was assisted by so many subordinate officers, that he had nothing else to do except to act as priest and strategus.1

The accession and demise of the Spartan kings were marked by observances of an Oriental character. The former event was signalized by a remission of all debts due from private individuals to the state or the king; and on the death of a king, the funeral solemnities were celebrated by the whole community. There was a general mourning for ten days, during which all public business was suspended: horsemen went round the country to carry the tidings, and a fixed number of the perioeci, or provincials, was obliged to come from all parts of the country to the city, where, with the Spartans and Helots, and their wives, to the number of many thousands, they made loud lamentations, and proclaimed the virtues of the deceased king as superior to those of all his predecessors.3

2

GEROUSIA.

watched over the proceedings of the army. Moreover, there can be no doubt that the kings were, on their return home, accountable for their conduct as generals, and more especially after the increase of the ephoral authority. Their military power, also, was not connected with any political functions, for the kings were not allowed to conclude treaties or to decide the fate of cities without communicating with the authorities at home. In former times the two kings had a joint command; this, however, led to inconveniences, and a law was in consequence passed, that for the future one only of the two kings should have the command of the army on foreign expeditions.*

II. The yepovola, or Assembly of Elders. This body was the aristocratic element of the Spartan polity, and not peculiar to Sparta only, but found in other Dorian states, just as a Bovλý, or democratical council was an element of most Ionian constitutions.

The γερουσία or γερωνία at Sparta included the two kings, its presidents, and consisted of thirty members: a number which seems connected with the divisions of the Spartan people. Every Dorian state, in fact, was divided into three tribes: the Hylleis, the Dymanes, and the Pamphyli, whence the Dorians are called тpixȧikɛs, or thrice divided." The tribes at Sparta were again subdivided into ὠδαί, also called φρατριαί, a word which signifies a union of families, whether founded upon ties of re

spective of any such connexion. The oba were, like the yépovTES, thirty in number, so that each oba was represented by its councillor : an inference which leads to the conclusion that two obæ at least of the Hyllean tribe must have belonged to the royal house of the Heracleids. No one was eligible to the council till he was sixty years of age,' and the additional qualifications were strictly of an aristocratic nature. We are told, for instance, that the office of a councillor was the reward and prize of virtue, and that it was confined to men of distinguished character and station (kahoì kúyaboí).

8

In comparison with their dignity and honours, the constitutional powers of the kings were very limit-lationship, or formed for political purposes, irreed. In fact, they can scarcely be said to have possessed any; for, though they presided over the council of yépovre as doxayéral, or principes senatus, and the king of the elder house probably had a casting vote (a supposition which Dr. Thirlwall thinks may perhaps reconcile the difference between Herodotus, vi., 57, and Thucydides, i., 20), still the voice of each counted for no more than that of any other senator: when absent, their place was supplied and their proxies tendered by the councillors who were most nearly related to them, and therefore of a Heracleid family. Still the kings had some important prerogatives; thus they had, in common The election was determined by vote, and the with other magistrates, the right of addressing the mode of conducting it was remarkable for its oldpublic assembly; besides this, they sat in a separate fashioned simplicity. The competitors presented court of their own, where they gave judgment in themselves one after another to the assembly of all cases of heiresses claimed by different parties: electors; the latter testified their esteem by aca function formerly exercised by the kings at Athens, clamations, which varied in intensity according to but afterward transferred to the archon eponymus. the popularity of the candidates for whom they were They also appointed the four "Pythians," whose given. These manifestations of esteem were noted duty it was to go as messengers to consult the god by persons in an adjoining building, who could judge at Delphi. Adoptions also took place in their pres- of the shouting, but could not tell in whose favour ence, and they held a court in all cases connected it was given. The person whom these judges with the maintenance of the public roads; probably thought to have been most applauded was declared in their capacity of generals, and as superintendents the successful candidate. The different competiof the intercourse with foreign nations. In foreign tors for a vacant place offered themselves upon their affairs, indeed, their prerogatives were considera- own judgment,10 probably always from the bú, to ble thus they were the commanders of the Spar- which the councillor whose place was vacant had tan forces, and had the privilege of nominating from belonged; and as the office was for life, and thereamong the citizens persons to act as "proxeni," or fore only one vacancy could (in ordinary cases) happrotectors and entertainers of foreigners visiting pen at a time, the attention of the whole state would Sparta. But their chief power was in war; for be fixed on the choice of the electors. The office after they had once crossed the borders of Laconia of a councillor, however, was not only for life, but in command of troops, their authority became un- also irresponsible,11 as if a previous reputation and limited. They could send out and assemble armies, the near approach of death were considered a sufdespatch ambassadors to collect money, and refer ficient guarantee for integrity and moderation. But those who applied to themselves for justice to the the councillors did not always prove so, for Aristoproper officers appointed for that purpose. Two tle12 tells us that the members of the yepovoía reephors, indeed, accompanied the kings on their ex-ceived bribes, and frequently showed partiality in peditions, but those magistrates had no authority their decisions. to interfere with the kings' operations: they simply

1. (Xen., De Rep. Lac., 14, 15.-Herod., vi., 55.)-2. (Herod., vi., 58.)-3. (Herod., 1. c.)-4. (Herod., vi., 57.)-5. (Müller, Dor., 11., 6, 7.)-6. (Xen., De Rep. Lac., 13.-Thucyd, v., 60. -Id., viii., 5.)

1. (Xen., 1. c.)-2. (Thuryd., v., 63.)-3. (Xen., Hell., ii., 2. 12.-Id. ib., v., 3, 24.)-4. (Herod., v., 57.)-5. (Od., xix.. 174.) 6. (Müller, Dor., iii., 5, 3.)-7. (Plut., Lycurg., 26.)-8 (Aristot., Polit., ii., 6, 15.-Demosth., c. Lept., p. 489.)-9 (Plut., Lycurg., 26.)-10. (Aristot., Polit., ii., 6, ◊ 18.)—11 (Aristot., Polit., ii., 6)- 12. (1. c.)

115

The functions of the councillors were partly de- | ers of the assembly, decrees of the whole people liberative, partly judicial, and partly executive. In are often spoken of as the decision of the authorithe discharge of the first they prepared measures ties only, especially in matters relating to foreign and passed preliminary decrees,' which were to be affairs. The intimate connexion of the ephors with laid before the popular assembly, so that the impor- the assembly is shown by a phrase of very frequent tant privilege of initiating all changes in the govern- occurrence in decrees (dose Tois éḍópolç Kaì Tŋ ¿Kment or laws was vested in them. As a criminal κλnoia). The method of voting was by acclamacourt they could punish with death and civil degra- tion; the place of meeting between the brook dation (arquía), and that, too, without being restrain- Knakion and the bridge Babyca, to the west of the ed by any code of written laws, for which national city, and enclosed. The regular assemblies were feeling and recognised usages would form a suffi- held every full moon; and on occasions of emercient substitute. They also appear to have exercised, gency, extraordinary meetings were convened." like the Areiopagus at Athens, a general superintendence and inspection over the lives and manners of the citizens (arbitri et magistri discipline publica), and probably were allowed "a kind of patriarchal authority to enforce the observance of ancient usage and discipline." It is not, however, easy to define with exactness the original extent of their functions, especially as respects the last-mentioned duty, since the ephors not only encroached upon the prerogatives of the king and council, but also possessed, in very early times, a censorial power, and were not likely to permit any diminution of its extent. III. The ikkλŋoia, or Assembly of Spartan Freemen. This assembly possessed, in theory at least, the supreme authority in all matters affecting the general interests of the state. Its original position at Sparta is shortly explained by a rhetra or ordinance of Lycurgus, which, in the form of an oracle, exhibits the principal features of the Spartan polity: "Build a temple," says the Pythian god, "to Hellanian Zeus and Hellanian Athena; divide the tribes, and institute thirty obas; appoint a council with its princes; call an assembly (áñɛλhúšεw) between Babyca and Knakion, then make a motion and depart; and let there be a right of decision and power to the people” (δάμῳ δε κυριὰν ἡμεν καὶ κράτος).

By this ordinance full power was given to the people to adopt or reject whatever was proposed to them by the king and other magistrates. It was, however, found necessary to define this power more exactly, and the following clause, ascribed to the kings Theopompus and Polydorus, was added to the original rhetra: "but if the people should follow a crooked opinion, the elders and the princes shall withdraw” (τοὺς πρεσβυγενέας καὶ ἀρχαγέτας άлоστаτйраç йμεv). Plutarch' interprets these words to mean, "That in case the people do not either reject or approve in toto a measure proposed to them, the kings and councillors should dissolve the assembly, and declare the proposed decree to be invalid." According to this interpretation, which is confirmed by some verses in the Eunomia of Tyrtæus, the assembly was not competent to originate any measures, but only to pass or reject, without modification, the laws and decrees proposed by the proper authorities: a limitation of its power, which almost determined the character of the Spartan constitution, and justifies the words of Demosthenes, who observed, that the yɛpovoía at Sparta was in many respects supreme: Aɛoñótηs koti tüν πоλλ☎v. All citizens above the age of thirty, who were not labouring under any loss of franchise, were admissible to the general assembly, or unɛλλa, as it was called in the old Spartan dialect; but no one except public magistrates, and chiefly the ephors and kings, addressed the people without being specially called upon.10 The same public functionaries also put the question to the vote. Hence, as the magistrates only (Tù Téλn or apxai) were the leaders and speak1. (Plut., Agis, 11.)-2. (Xen., De Rep. Lac., 10, 2.-Arist.,

Polit., in., 1.-3. (Arist., Polit., ii., 6.)-4. (Aul. Gell., xviii., 3.)-5. (Thirlwall, Hist. of Greece, i., p. 318.)-6. (Plut., Lycyrg., 6.-Müller, Dor., iii., 5, § 8.)—7. (1. c.)—8. (c. Lept., p. 459, 20.)-9. (Plut., Lycurg., 25.)-10. (Müller, Dor., iii., 4, 11.) -11. (Thucyd., i., 80, 87.)

The whole people alone could proclaim "a war, conclude a peace, enter into an armistice for any length of time; and all negotiations with foreign states, though conducted by the kings and ephors, could be ratified by the same authority only." With regard to domestic affairs, the highest offices, such as magistracies and priesthoods, were filled" by the votes of the people; a disputed succession to the throne was decided upon by them; changes in the constitution were proposed and explained, and all new laws, after a previous decree in the senate, were confirmed by them." It appears, therefore, to use the words of Muller, that the popular assembly really possessed the supreme political and legislative authority at Sparta, but it was so hampered and checked by the spirit of the constitution, that it could only exert its authority within certain prescribed limits, so that the government of the state is often spoken of as an aristocracy.

Besides the EKKλnoia which we have just described, we read in later times of another, called the small assembly, which appears to have been convened on occasions of emergency, or which were not of sufficient importance to require the decision of the entire body of citizens. This more select assembly was probably composed of the ouotot, or superior citizens, or of some class enjoying a similar precedence, together with some of the magistrates of the state (vid. ECCLETOI); and if, as appears to have been the case, it was convened more frequently than the greater assembly, it is evident that an additional restraint was thus laid upon the power of the latter," the functions of which must have often been superseded by it."

The preceding remarks will enable us to decide a question which has been raised, What was the real nature of the constitution of Sparta? From the expressions of Greek writers, every one would at once answer that it was aristocratic; but it has been asserted that the aristocracy at Sparta was an aristocracy of conquest, in which the conquering people, or Dorians, stood towards the conquered, or Achaians, in the relation of nobles to commons, and that it was principally in this sense that the constitution of Sparta was so completely anti-popular or oligarchical. Now this, indeed, is true; but it seems no less true that the Spartan government would have been equally called an oligarchy or aristocracy even if there had been no subject class at all, on account of the disposition and administration of the sovereign power within the Spartan body alone. The fact is, that, in theory at least, the Spartan constitution, as settled by Lycurgus, was a decided democracy, with two hereditary officers, the generals of the commonwealth, at its head; but in practice (at least before the encroachment of the ephors) it was a limited aristocracy; that is, it worked as if the supreme authority was settled in the hands of a minority. The principal circumstances which justify us in considering it as such are briefly "the

1. (Plut., Lycurg., 6.)-2. (Herod., vii., 134.) — 3. (Müller, Dor., 4, 9.)-4. (Xen., Hell., ., 3, 18.)-5. (Philol. Museum, ii., p. 65.)-6. (Wachsmuth, Hellen. Alterthumsk., II., i., p. 212.)-7. (Arnold, Thucyd., Append. ii.)

1. (Billerbeck, Flora Classica, p. 142.)-2. (Quint., Declam., 302.)-3. (Tertull., De Spectac., 12.-Serv. ad Virg., Æn., x., 519.)-4. (Capitol., M. Anton. Philos., 23.-Flor., iii., 20.16.)-6. (Suet., Jul., 26. - Spart., Hadr., 9.)-7. (Sen., De Cic. ad Att., ii., 19, § 3.)-5. (Val. Max., ii., 4, ◊ 7.-Liv., Epit., Brev. Vit., 20.)-8. (Athen., iv., p. 153.-Sil. Ital., xi., 51.)—9. (Cic., Pro Mur., 18.-Id., De Off., ii., 16.)—10. (Dion Cass., Iviii., 15.)-11. (Vopisc., Prob., 19.)-12. (Suet., Vitell., 12.)13. (Ulpian, Collat. Mos. et Rom. Leg., tit. ii., s. 7, ◊ 4.)-14. (Quint., 1. c.-Hor., Sat., II., vii., 58.)-15. (Suet., Tib., 7.Liv., xliv., 31.)-16. (c. 117.)-17. (Compare Senec., Epist., 7.) -18. (Liv., xxviii., 21.)-19. (Dion Cass., li., 22.-Id., lvi., 25. 1. (Leg., iv., p. 713,)-2. (Polit., iv., 8.)-3. (Polit., ii., 6.)--Suet., Jul., 39.-Id., Octav., 43.-Id., Ner., 12.)-20. (Tacit., 4. (Theophrast., H. P., i., 4.-Adams, Append., s. v.)-5. (Plin., H. N., xxvi., 7.-Billerbeck, Flora Classica, p. 136.)-6. (Dioscor., 11., 166.-Adams, Append., s. v.)-7. (Aristot., H. A., i., 6. -Adams, Append., s. v.)

3

2

but at other times belonged to citizens, who kept them for the purpose of exhibition, and engaged lanistæ to instruct them. Thus we read of the ludus Æmilius at Rome,1 and of Cæsar's ludus at Capua. The superintendence of the ludi, which belonged to the emperors, was intrusted to a person of high rank, called curator or procurator. The gladiators fought in these ludi with wooden swords, called rudes. Great attention was paid to their diet, in order to increase the strength of their bodies, whence Cicero' speaks of "gladiatoria totius corporis firmitas." They were fed with nourishing food, called gladiatoria sagina. A great number of gladiators were trained at Ravenna, on account of the salubrity of the place."

Gladiators were sometimes exhibited at the funeral pyre, and sometimes in the Forum, but more frequently in the amphitheatre. (Vid. AMPHITHEATRUM.) The person who was to exhibit a show of gladiators published, some days before the exhibition, bills (libelli) containing the number and sometimes the names of those who were to fight. When the day came, they were led along the arena in procession, and matched by pairs; and their swords were examined by the editor to see if they were sufficiently sharp.10 At first there was a kind of sham battle, called prælusio, in which they fought with wooden swords or the like," and afterward, at the sound of the trumpet, the real battle began. When a gladiator was wounded, the people called out habet or hoc habet; and the one who was vanquished lowered his arms in token of submission. His fate, however, depended upon the people, who pressed down their thumbs if they wished him to be saved, but turned them up if they wished him to be killed, and ordered him to receive the sword (ferrum recipere), which gladiators usually did with the greatest firmness. If the life of a vanquished glad iator was spared, he obtained his discharge for that day, which was called missio;1 and hence, in an exhibition of gladiators sine missione,15 the lives of the conquered were never spared. This kind of exhibition, however, was forbidden by Augustus.16

12

Shows of gladiators were abolished by Constantine,' but appear, notwithstanding, to have been generally exhibited till the time of Honorius, by whom they were finally suppressed."

Gladiators were divided into different classes, according to their arms and different mode of fighting, or other circumstances. The name of the most important of these classes is given in alphabetical order:

Andabata wore helmets without any aperture for the eyes, so that they were obliged to fight blindfold, and thus excite the mirth of the spectators. Some modern writers say that they fought on horseback, but this is denied by Orelli.

Catervarii was the name given to gladiators when they did not fight in pairs, but when several fought together."

Dimacheri appear to have been so called, because they fought with two swords.

Equites were those who fought on horseback." Essedarii fought from chariots like the Gauls and Britons. (Vid. ESSEDA.) They are frequently mentioned in inscriptions.

Fiscales were those, under the Empire, who were trained and supported from the fiscus.9

10

Hoplomachi appear to have been those who fought in a complete suit of armour." Lipsius considers them to have been the same with the Samnites, and that this name was disused under the emperors, and hoplomachi substituted for it.

Laqueatores were those who used a noose to catch their adversaries.11

Meridiani were those who fought in the middle of the day, after combats with wild beasts had taken place in the morning. These gladiators were very slightly armed.12

Mirmillones are said to have been so called from their having the image of a fish (mormyr, μopμúpos) on their helmets 13 Their arms were like those of the Gauls, whence we find that they were also called Galli. They were usually matched with the retiarii or Thracians.1

Ordinarii was the name applied to all the regular gladiators, who fought in pairs, in the ordinary way."

15

Postulaticii were such as were demanded by the people from the editor, in addition to those who were exhibited. 16

name. They are mentioned in inscriptions. 1s The рobokúтwp mentioned by Artemidorus1 appears to be the same as the provocator.

Palms were usually given to the victorious gladiators; and hence a gladiator who had frequently conquered is called " · plurimarum palmarum gladiator money also was sometimes given. Old gladiators, and sometimes those who had only fought for a short time, were discharged from the service Provocatores fought with the Samnites," but we by the editor at the request of the people, who pre-do not know anything respecting them except their sented each of them with a rudis or wooden sword, whence those who were discharged were called Rudiarii. If a person was free before he entered the ludus, he became, on his discharge, free again; Retiarii carried only a three-pointed lance, called and if he had been a slave, he returned to the same tridens or fuscina (vid. FUSCINA), and a net (retc), condition again. A man, however, who had been which they endeavoured to throw over their advera gladiator, was always considered to have dis-saries, and then to attack them with the fuscina graced himself, and, consequently, it appears that while they were entangled. The retiarius was dresshe could not obtain the equestrian rank if he after-ed in a short tunic, and wore nothing on his head. ward acquired sufficient property to entitle him to If he missed his aim in throwing the net, he betook it; and a slave who had been sent into a ludus, himself to flight, and endeavoured to prepare his and there manumitted either by his then owner or net for a second cast, while his adversary followed another owner, merely acquired the status of a per-round the arena in order to kill him before he could egrinus dediticius. 22 (Vid. DEDITICII.)

make a second attempt. His adversary was usually a secutor or a mirmillo.20 In the following

1. (Hor., de Art. Poet., 32.)-2. (Cæs., Bell. Civ., i., 14.)-3. (Tacit., Ann., xi., 35.-Id. ib., xiii., 22.- Suet., Cal., 27.-Gruter, Inscript., p. 489.) 4. (Suet., Cal.. 32, 54.) 5. (Phil., 1. (Cod. 11, tit. 43 )-2. (Theodoret, Hist. Eccles., v., 20.)ii., 25)-6. (Tacit., Hist., ., 88.)-7. (Strabo, v., p. 213.)-8.3. (Cic. ad Fam., vii., 10.) 4. (Inser., 2577.)-5. (Suet., Oc(Cic. ad Fam., ii., 8.-Suet., Jul., 26.)-9. (Hor., Sat., I., vii., tav., 45.-" Gregatim dimicantes:" Cal., 30.)-6. (Artemidor., 20.)-10. (Dion Cass., Ixvii., 3.-Suet., Tit., 9. Lipsius, Ex- ii., 32.-Orelli, Inser., 2564.)-7. (Orelli, 2577, 2569.)-8. (Orelcurs. ad Tac., Ann., iii., 37.)-11. (Cic., De Orat., 11., 78, 80.-li, 2566, 2584, &c.) 9. (Capitol., Gord., 11., 33.) — 10. (Snet., Ovid, A. A., ii, 515.-Senec., Epist., 117.)-12. (Hor., Epist., Cal., 35. Martial, viii., 74. - Orelli, 2566.) — 11. (Is d., xvii)., 1., xviii., 66.-Juv., iii., 36.)-13. (Cic., Tusc., 11., 17.-Id., Pro 56.)-12. (Senec., Epist., 7.-Suet., Claud., 34.- Orelli, 2587.) Sext., 37.-Id., Pro Mil., 34.) 14. (Mart., XII., xxix., 7.)—15. - 13. (Festus, s. v. Retiario.)-14. (Cic., Phil., ., 12.-Id. ib., (Liv., xli., 20.)-16. (Suet., Octav., 45.) 17. (Suet., Cal., 32.) vii., 6.-Juv., vini., 200.-Suet., Cal., 32.-Orelli, 2566, 2580.)--18. (Cic., Pro Rosc. Amer., 6.) 19. (Juv., vii., 243.-Suet., 15. (Senec., Epist., 7.-Suet., Octav., 45. Id., Cal., 26.) — 16. Claud., 21.)-20. (Cic., Phil., ii., 29. Hor., Epist., I., i., 2.- (Senec., 1. c.)-17. (Cic., Pro Sext., 64.) — 18. (Orelli, 2566.)—Suet., Tib., 7.- Quint., 1. c.)—21. (Quint., 1. c.)-22. (Gaius, 19. (ii., 32.)-20. (Juv.. Sat., ., 143.—Id. ib., viii., 203.—Suet., i., 13.) Cal., 30.-Id., Claud., 34.-Orelli, 2578.)

sword or dagger (sica"), which is called falx supina the latter is defeated.

In the next woodcut two combats are represent- | ed. In the first a Samnite has been conquered