EPHORL This name, which exactly corresponds with the Greek episkopos, meaning bishop or overseer, was given to certain magistrates in many Dorian cities of ancient Greece. But the most prominent are the ephors of Sparta, who, whatever may have been their origin, appear during the times for which we have historical knowledge as the supreme power in the state, controlling alike its civil and military administration. When in the 3d century b.c. the complete humiliation of Sparta led the kings Agis III. and Cleomenes III. to resolve on restoring what they supposed to be the ancient constitution, theiF first blow was directed at the ephors, whom they charged with deliberate usurpation. According to their version (Plut., Cleom. 10) the ephors owed their existence to the Messenian wars, which rendered necessary the prolonged absence of the kings, who accordingly delegated to them their judicial functions; and the subordinate powers thus given were gradually extended until they became virtually absolute. Another tradition ascribed the institution of the ephors to Lycurgus himself. But if of Lycurgus we cannot be said to know anything, the lays of Tyrtaeus, which alone give us any trustworthy information about the Messenian wars, say nothing as to the origin of the ephoralty. We can, therefore do no more than trace the development of their powers during the ages for which we have genuine historical narratives....
Holding the country strictly as an army of occupation, the whole body of Spartans was formed internally into a close oligarchy, all the members of which had the same privileges and were subjected to the same discipline, with the exception of the kings and the ephors. But the two Heraclid kings, as representing the two rival sons of Aristodemus, generally held each the other in check, and thuβ added to the influence of the ephors. That the latter were originally subordinate is made plain by the statement of Xenophon {De Rep. Lac., 15), that there was still in his time a monthly interchange of oaths, by which the kings pledged themselves to govern according to the laws, while the ephors on this condition undertook to maintain their authority. The ceremony had in Xenophon’s days lost its meaning; but it pointed clearly to a time when the kings had been predominant. It further shows that from the first the ephors represented the whole body of the citizens; and the mode of electing them, which Aristotle ridicules as childish, attests their popular character. The general assembly might choose any one for the office, without any qualification of age or property, and without scrutiny. The restriction of their number to five had reference to the polis or city of Sparta, and the four hamlets which with it formed the stronghold of the Spartan oligarchy.
In their relations with the kings we find the ephors gradually acquiring greater weight, and exercising their power more decisively. Herodotus (vi. 56) speaks of the kings as still possessing the power of declaring war at their own will. But in the wars of which we have historical knowledge, not only is the decision given by the ephors, who may or may not have taken counsel with the senate and the assembly, but two of their number accompany the kings, who thus become simply leaders of the army, acting under the control of civil magistrates, until, after the unsuccessful expedition of King Agis against Argos in 417 b.c., a law was passed appointing teu commissioners to attend the kings in all their campaigns. The ephors were still further distinguished from all other citizens by the privilege of exemption from the public discipline. They also kept their seats on the approach of the kings, while custom required the latter to rise if the ephors passed by. In the relations of Sparta with foreign states generally we find the public business carried on not by the kings but by the ephors, who treat with ambassadors, determine the number of troops to be levied, decide on their destination, and conclude treaties.
Of the five ephors, the first in rank, probably as being the first elected, gave his name to the year, like the Archon Eponymus at Athens. The whole college met in the Archeion, which answered to the Athenian Prytaneion. They exercised jurisdiction in all important civil suits, criminal cases and capital offences being carried before the senate. With this jurisdiction they combined a large censorial power, which extended even to minute details in the life of the citizens. Their right of scrutiny into the conduct of magistrates they could exercise even during their term of office. Not only could they depose such as they found unworthy, but they might summon the kings before their tribunal, or bring a capital charge against them before the Spartan assembly. With the gradual slackening of the system of public discipline, and with the increasing licence which their position enabled them to assume, their power became an intolerable burden, at least to the kings; and Cleomenes cut the knot by massacring the whole college, and abolishing the office.
[842 words — estimated reading time: 5 minutes]