The opinion of the General Ephor was relayed back to the Ministry of the Interior where either a final decision was reached or the procedure started again.
In the majority of cases, the General Ephor of Antiquities presented a more or less detailed analysis of the reasons that led him to accept, reject or propose a particular name or emblem and, as a result, his responses also served a didactic purpose.
Although the General Ephor corrected this misconception, he concurred with the change on the grounds that Tamynae had been more influential in antiquity than Distos.
However, the General Ephor, was adamant in his rejection of the name, since ancient Phyle was actually located far from the village in question.
The General Ephor, however, disagreed with their choice on the grounds that the temple did not contain a statue `from the years of the peak of Greek art' but rather a xoanon, a wooden (perhaps even aniconic?
During the period in question (1885-1909), the General Ephor was Panagiotis Kavadias, a classical archaeologist who is credited with a whole-scale reorganization of the Archaeological Service, the increase of excavation and restoration activity throughout Greece, and the first concentrated and coordinated efforts to establish museums.
So far as the renaming process is concerned, the Ephor interprets his role as the safeguarding of ancient topography.
The General Ephor of Antiquities acted in an advisory capacity and was not ultimately responsible for the final decision on names and emblems, which rested with the Ministry of the Interior.