Spartan Assembly

Not to be confused with Apellai.

The Spartan Assembly, was the assembly of full citizens in the ancient Greek city-state of Sparta. Its principal role was to ratify the proposals brought to it by the gerousia and the ephors. Unlike its more famous counterpart the Assembly of ancient Athens, the Spartan Assembly had more limited powers. It voted by acclamation, and whether it debated is unclear. Its official name is generally considered to have been 'the Ekklesia',^[1] rather than 'the Apella' as once commonly thought.

Description

The Spartan Assembly, one of the three institutions involved with decision-making at Sparta,^[2] consisted of the entire adult male citizenry, the Spartiates.^[3] Its principal function was to ratify the proposals of the other two decision-making bodies, the gerousia (the council of elders, including the two Spartan kings), and the ephors.^[4] In contrast to its Athenian counterpart, very little is known for certain about the Spartan Assembly. It could not, unlike the Athenian assembly, introduce legislation; it could only vote on legislation brought before it by the gerousia or ephors. Whether ordinary members of the Assembly had the right to speak is unclear.^[5]

History

Archaic period

The Spartan Assembly probably existed, as an official Spartan institution, at least by the seventh century BC, and at first presumably met only when summoned. The earliest source for the Spartan Assembly is the Great Rhetra (c. 700 BC?), quoted by the first-century historian Plutarch, and attributed to the legendary lawgiver Lycurgus.^[6] The Rhetra documents the decision-making procedures at Sparta, during the Archaic period.^[7] It describes decision-making as being divided among the archagetai ('kings'), the gerousia ('elders'), and the damos^[8] ('people', i.e. the Assembly), that the Assembly had regular meetings, at a fixed place, during which the two kings and the gerousia could put proposals for approval before the Assembly, and finally, that the kings and gerousia could veto any enactment passed by the Assembly.^[9]

The procedure set forth in the Rhetra, was probouleutic, a practice common in Ancient Greece, by which proposals were first discussed in a council, and then voted on by a general assembly. Thus such an assembly was sovereign, in the sense that the assembly's consent was required before public action could be taken.^[10] In Sparta's case, according to the Rhetra, the Assembly could also pass proposals of its own, subject to the possibility of their being vetoed by the geruosia.^[11]

A fragment of the mid-seventh-century BC Spartan poet Tyrtaeus—using the terms "men of the people" (dēmotes andras) and "mass of the people" (dēmou plēthei)—seems also to refer to the Spartan Assembly during the Archaic period, saying that, after the kings and elders, then:

the men of the people, responding with straight utterances, are to speak fair words, act justly in everything, and not give the city (crooked) counsel. Victory and power are to accompany the mass of the people.^[12]

As reported by Herodotus, in the mid-sixth century BC, the Assembly had enough power such that the threat of action by it could force the Spartan king Anaxandridas II to give in to the demands of the ephors and geruosia and take a second wife.^[13]

Classical period

Other than the Great Rhetra and the Tyrtaeus fragment, no general statements concerning the Spartan Assembly are found until the fourth century BC, in book two of Aristotle's Politics, where Aristotle seems to dismiss the Assembly as weak. Although, as noted above, the Rhetra implies that the Assembly could, at least during the Archaic period, pass proposals of its own, albeit subject to veto, Aristotle descries the Spartan Assembly as having "no powers except the function of confirming by vote the resolutions already formed by the Elders [gerousia]".^[14] In a following passage Aristotle says that, unlike "in the Carthaginian system", where "anybody who wishes may speak against the proposals introduced", at Sparta (and Crete), the "people" must "merely ... sit and listen to the decisions that have been taken by their rulers".^[15]

However, Aristotle's view of the Spartan Assembly as powerless, seems not only to conflict with the evidence concerning the Assembly from the Archaic period, but also with other reports from the fifth century, through the time Aristotle is writing the Politics, in the fourth.^[16] According to Diodorus Siculus, a debate was held in the Assembly, in the early fifth century BC, concerning the issue of whether Sparta should go to War with Athens for control of the sea, during which "the younger men and the majority of the others were [at first] eager" to do so. Thucydides describes the debate in the Assembly in 432 BC in which "the opinions of the majority all led to the same conclusion; the Athenians were open aggressors", and ended with the Assembly voting, by division, to declare war on Athens.^[17] There are several other meetings of the Assembly during this period where matters "of major importance" were decided after "considerable debate".^[18]

Meetings

Although prior to the Great Rhetra the Assembly had presumably met only when summoned (by the kings or gerousia?), the Rhetra established (as Plutarch apparently believed) regular meetings of the Assembly at a fixed time and place.^[19] However exactly when and where these regular meetings took place is unknown.^[20]

According to the Rhetra, the Spartans shall apellazein (ἀπελλάζειν), horas ex horas (ὥρας ἐξ ὥρας). Plutarch explains apellazein as meaning the same as ekklesiazein (ἐκκλησιάζειν) 'to conduct an assembly', and is thought to be a denominal verb deriving from the noun Apellai, the name of an annual festival celebrated at Delphi.^[21] The phrase horas ex horas is a vague expression implying continual repetition of some specific time period,^[22] which could be used to mean 'every year', 'every month', 'every day' (or the like),^[23] or, more vaguely still, 'from time to time'.^[24] Although the festival of the Apellai is only attested for Delphi, based upon the widespread presence of the related month name Apellaios in Doric calendars, it was apparently a common festival among the Dorians,^[25] and from the use of word apellazein, it has been concluded that the meetings of the Assembly, as specified in the Rhetra, were to be held at the same time as the Spartan festival of the Apellai was celebrated.^[26] However, while the Delphic Apellai was celebrated yearly, the meetings of the Spartan Assembly were probably held monthly.^[27]

As quoted by Plutarch the Rhetra specified that the meetings were to be held "between Babyca and Cnakion".^[28] Plutarch goes on to explain that: "The Babyca is now called Cheimarrus, and the Cnacion Oenus; but Aristotle says that Cnacion is a river, and Babyca a bridge. Between these they held their assemblies, having neither halls nor any other kind of building for the purpose."^[29] However these names are otherwise unknown, and where Babyca and Cnakion "actually were is a complete mystery".^[30] According to the second-century AD geographer Pausanias, the Spartan Assembly met "even at the present day" in a structure called the Scias ('Canopy')^[31] located on a road leading from Sparta's market-place, and built by Theodorus of Samos (fl. c. 540 BC).^[32]

Name

The official name for the popular assembly at Sparta—either 'the Ekklesia' or 'the Apella'—is disputed.^[33] Scholarly consensus had thought that its official name was 'the Apella'. As recently as 1972, Ste Croix could declare that the "Spartan Assembly is still commonly referred to as 'the Apella'".^[34] However following Wade-Gery 1958, Andrewes 1970, and Ste. Croix 1972, consensus shifted in favor of 'Ekklesia'.^[35] More recently, Welwei 1997, 2000, and 2004 has revived the dispute, advocating in favor of 'Apella'.^[36] Nevertheless, according to Nafissi 2010, current consensus "based on ancient evidence" still favors 'Ekklesia'.^[37]