Divided Power and Eunomia: Deliberative Procedures in Ancient Sparta

This article offers a new reconstruction of the deliberative decision-making in Sparta. The essay analyses the relationship between the key institutions in Spartan deliberation and their relevant powers within the theoretical framework of the New Historical Institutionalism. Several scholars have stressed the informality of Spartan decision-making or the prominence of a single institution in the decision-making. The close reading of the literary evidence (Diod. Sic. 11.50.2–7; Plut. Agis 8.1–11.1) shows that the powers of probouleusis and nomophylakia were ‘divided’ between the Gerousia and the ephors. I argue that the deliberative procedure could unfold in two ways: 1) if there was unanimity within the Gerousia, a bill was submitted by the ephors to the Assembly for final ratification. 2) Yet, when there was no unanimity in the Council of Elders, the ephors could put the bill to a vote of the Assembly anyway. However, the gerontes could veto legislation a posteriori with a majority vote. Thus, the gerontes acted as nomophylakes by checking the Assembly’s enactments.