“When a child was born, the father was not entitled to maintain it (τρέφειν), but he took and carried it to a place called ‘lesche,’ where the _elders of his tribesmen_ were sitting, who, if they found the child pretty well grown and healthy, ordered its maintenance (τρέφειν), allotting to it one of the 9,000 kleroi (κλήρων αὐτῷ τῶν ἐνακισχιλίων προσνείμαντες).”(328) Elsewhere in Greece at the introduction of the new-born child to the relations and friends a few days after its birth, symbolical gifts of food were made as the child was carried round the hearth.(329) (M152) The important part of this ceremony at Sparta, described by Plutarch, seems to be the introduction of the infant to the elders of the tribe, and the recognition by them of its right to maintenance, if it appeared to them physically worthy of admission to the tribe. It cannot be supposed that Plutarch believed that vacant κλῆροι escheated, so to speak, to the community, because he elsewhere describes the lamentable tendency of estates to get into few hands, which the community would in that case surely have been able somewhat to prevent. Nor is it likely that a κλῆρος was actually set apart for the maintenance of each infant, who was apparently still nourished in its father’s house until seven years old, when its education and occupations were regulated by the State. Reading this passage with the other in the _Life of Agis_, a natural inference is, that the child’s right to succeed to the property of his father only was thereby assured to him by the elders, _i.e._ the right on his attaining manhood to enjoy the possession of land. This is the view taken by M. de Coulanges;(330) but surely there is more underlying the account of the ceremony. What actually took place with regard to the allotment of a κλῆρος to the infant member of the tribe, cannot be decided here. The State at Sparta undertook to educate all her sons after a certain age, and gave the parent no further rights over the child. Is there in this ceremony a transfer of the claim for maintenance from against the head of the household to the larger unit represented by the elders of the tribe, irrespective of the inheritance of the son from his father? It would be necessary for the adult Spartan citizen, of the class of ὁμοιοι at any rate, to have a right to the produce of some land, as otherwise it is difficult to see how he could contribute the necessary provisions that formed his share of maintenance at the joint table of his _syssition_; unless indeed he drew his allowance from his father’s estate. (M153) In any case the idea of the dependence of a member of the tribe for sustenance upon his right to a κλῆρος is striking; and at the same time the evidence goes to show that his maintenance was a claim upon a group of kinsmen at Sparta, comprising more than the nearest relations, and was recognised as such by them.