doubtless a source of importance, but it imposed troublesome labor,
gave no pay, and entailed a certain degree of peril upon any archon
who might have given offence to powerful men, when he came to pass
through the trial of accountability which followed immediately upon
his year of office. There was little to make the office acceptable
either to very poor men, or to very rich and ambitious men; and
between the middling persons who gave in their names, any one might
be taken without great practical mischief, always assuming the two
guarantees of the dokimasy before, and accountability after, office.
This was the conclusion—in my opinion a mistaken conclusion, and such
as would find no favor at present—to which the democrats of Athens
were conducted by their strenuous desire to equalize the chances of
office for rich and poor. But their sentiment seems to have been
satisfied by a partial enforcement of the lot to the choice of some
offices,—especially the archons, as the primitive chief magistrates
of the state,—without applying it to all, or to the most responsible
and difficult. Nor would they have applied it to the archons, if it
had been indispensably necessary that these magistrates should retain
their original very serious duty of judging disputes and condemning
offenders.
[260] Aristotle puts these two together; election of magistrates
by the mass of the citizens, but only out of persons possessing
a high pecuniary qualification; this he ranks as the least
democratical democracy, if one may use the phrase (Politic.
iii, 6-11), or a mean between democracy and oligarchy,—an
ἀριστοκρατία, or πολιτεῖα, in his sense of the word (iv, 7, 3).
He puts the employment of the lot as a symptom of decisive and
extreme democracy, such as would never tolerate a pecuniary
qualification of eligibility.
So again Plato (Legg. iii, p. 692), after remarking that the
legislator of Sparta first provided the senate, next the ephors,
as a bridle upon the kings, says of the ephors that they were
“something nearly approaching to an authority emanating from the
lot,”—οἷον ψάλιον ἐνέβαλεν αὐτῇ τὴν τῶν ἐφόρων δύναμιν, ἐγγὺς τῆς
κληρωτῆς ἀγαγὼν δυνάμεως.
Upon which passage there are some good remarks in Schömann’s
edition of Plutarch’s Lives of Agis and Kleomenês (Comment. ad
Ag. c. 8, p. 119). It is to be recollected that the actual mode
in which the Spartan ephors were chosen, as I have already stated
in my first volume, cannot be clearly made out, and has been much
debated by critics:—
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account