CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME OF THE SAGE ENDOWMENT FUND GIVEN IN 1891 BY HENRY WILLIAMS SAGE

Cornell University Library

Cornell University

The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library.

There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text.

https://archive.org/details/cu31924011162892

ARISTOTLE'S

CONSTITUTION OF ATHENS

- (2) ()

(4) (5)

(6) yHdoc TeTpYTTHMENH (7) YHooc TAHpHe (col. 35, 2729)

ZKEYH AIKASTIKA

(See description on p. lxxvi)

APIZTOTEAOY2 AOHNAIQN TIOAITEIA

ARISTOTLE’S CONSTITUTION OF ATHENS

A REVISED TEXT WITH AN INTRODUCTION CRITICAL AND EXPLANATORY NOTES TESTIMONIA AND INDICES

BY

JOHN EDWIN SANDYS, Lirt.D.,

FELLOW AND TUTOR OF ST JOHN’S COLLEGE, AND PUBLIC ORATOR IN THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE ;

HON. LITT.D. DUBLIN.

Tetradrachm of Athens, C. §90—525 B.C. (See note on page 39.)

London: MACMILLAN AND CO. AND NEW YORK.

1893

[All Rights reserved.|

PREFACE.

HE preparation of the present volume was planned not long after

the memorable publication of Mr Kenyon’s editio princeps on Friday, the thirtieth of January, 1891. In that important work much was happily done by its able editor to facilitate the study of the newly discovered treatise by a skilful decipherment of the papyrus, by a careful comparison of the text with that of the existing fragments, by a judicious restoration of a large number of passages imperfectly pre- served in the manuscript, and by an eminently readable commentary on many interesting points of constitutional history. The editio princeps was also the edttoris primitiae ; and, considering the brief limits of time within which it was prepared, and notwithstanding certain super- ficial blemishes which have since been removed, it was undoubtedly a remarkable achievement.

In the opinion, however, of competent critics there appeared to be room, by the side of Mr Kenyon’s work, for an edition in which closer attention might fitly be paid to matters of scholarship and verbal criticism, together with a more minute comparison of the fresh evidence with that already familiar to us in two closely allied departments of Classical learning, (1) the Constitutional History, and (2) the Legal Antiquities of Athens. There was also at that time an acknowledged need of an Judex Graecitatis; and lastly there was a call for a fuller and clearer statement of the evidence on the text so far as it could be derived from quotations in later Greek literature. It has been the aim of the present writer to endeavour to supply such an edition.

viii PREFACE

The Jxtroduction begins with a slight sketch of the political literature of Greece before the time of Aristotle, so far as it was directly concerned with theories of government. This is followed by a brief notice of the Politics of Aristotle and of the lost political works ascribed to the same author. The external evidence as to the authorship of the IoArreiae is next reviewed in chronological order, showing that, according to testi- mony extending over fifteen centuries from the age immediately suc- ceeding that of Aristotle, the work, as a whole, was ascribed to Aristotle and to none beside. A brief account of the later literature of the subject is succeeded by a description of the Berlin Fragments, and the British Museum papyrus, of the "A@yvatwy wodrefa. The date of the treatise is placed between 328 and 325 B.c., which corresponds to the latter part of Aristotle’s life; and, after a discussion of its relation to the olitics, and an examination of its style and language, it is accepted as being substantially the work of Aristotle himself; due regard is, however, paid to the considerations that have been urged on the other side by several eminent scholars. The discussion of the authorship is followed by an indication of the authorities either certainly or probably used by the writer. This is succeeded by an abstract of the contents, which (excepting a few dates added for the sake of clearness, with one or two items supplementary to the lost beginning of the treatise), is strictly confined to the author’s own statements, any extraneous matter being carefully distinguished as such. The rest of the Introduction is mainly devoted to a conspectus of the Bibliography of the treatise, showing that, apart from editions and translations and separate works, the number of writers of signed contributions to the literature of the subject, in the department of periodical publications alone, already exceeds one hundred and thirty. Many of. these papers were not published until after the present edition was already in type, the Com- mentary on the first forty-one chapters and the first draft of the Critical Notes and Testimonia having been written during the Long Vacation of 1891, while the greater part of the Introduction was prepared for delivery in the form of College Lectures in the autumn of the same year. An abstract of the contents of some of the more recent literature is included in the conspectus, wherever it seemed to be desirable. Professor Bruno Keil’s important volume of nearly 250 pages on the sSolonian Constitution as described in the ’A@yvaiwy wohurefa, with many interesting criticisms on the treatise in general, did not appear until the present edition was nearly ready for publica-

PREFACE viii?

tion ; but it has been found possible to include a few references to it in the Addenda and in the English Index.

In settling the Zex¢ I have constantly used the facsimile published by the Trustees of the British Museum; and, on nearly all points of special difficulty, I have also endeavoured to form an opinion of my own by consulting the sapyrus itself. In the case of passages im- perfectly preserved in the ms, I have considered it safer to accept Mr Kenyon’s testimony as to the exact number of letters still visible, than that of other editors who, without having had the advantage of inspecting the ms, much less of having constant access to it, have not unfrequently indicated letters as actually visible which (at the best) are represented only by the faintest traces in the facsimile: on which their texts are confessedly founded. Where the reading is uncertain, or the ms defective, I have freely admitted conjectures that commended them- selves to my judgment as sound restorations of the text. My own conjectures, so far as they are here put forward for the first time, are always distinguished by an asterisk whenever they are included in the text; but even of these, several must be regarded as merely provisional and tentative restorations. Others are only suggested in the notes. References to all of them may be readily found in the English Index, under the heading ‘ Conjectures.’

In the Critical Notes the readings of the ms are for convenience recorded in a distinctive type. No one, however, who is familiar with the facsimile as a whole, or with the specimen published in Mr Kenyon’s Translation, will regard these ‘small uncials’ as intended to represent the actual characters used by any one of the four copyists employed on the work. I have also indicated the readings or conjectures adopted in the principal critical editions that have already appeared; the Dutch edition, by van Herwerden and van Leeuwen; the two German editions, ‘by Kaibel and von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, and by Blass respectively ; and the third (and carefully revised) edition by Mr Kenyon. Where Mr Kenyon has himself withdrawn the reading proposed in his first edition, I have not thought it desirable to record the reading so withdrawn, unless it helped to explain some of the earlier conjectures which in themselves appeared. deserving of mention. I have therefore said nothing about such purely provisional readings as xapdig Kai Kou] inc. 40 1.17, It was clear that xapdiq could not be right, and more than one scholar (for example, Professor Blass, Professor Mayor, and Mr Bywater) saw at once that xat id/q cal xowj was a necessary correction ;

S.A. b

viii? PREFACE

but, now that it is admitted that this is virtually the reading of the papyrus, in which KAIAIA is corrected into KAJIAIA, it is no longer necessary to record the text of the first edition. At the time, however, when the above suggestion was made, it had every right to be described as an ‘emendation’; and it may be interesting to add that, as such, it attracted the notice of the late Mr Freeman, who observes in the pre- face to the third volume of his History of Sicily :—‘ such an emendation as this is not conjecture at all; it is the keen instinct of the true expert seeing his way straight to the right thing.’ Again, it has not been deemed desirable to record a// the conjectures that have been proposed since the publication of the edztio princeps, many of them, however attractive at first sight, being excluded by our present knowledge of the actual readings of the papyrus, or by other considerations.

The Zestimonia, printed immediately below the critical notes, con- tain further evidence on the text, in the form of quotations in Greek Lexicographers, Scholiasts, and others. Many, but by no means all, of these, had already been recorded in the various editions of the Frag- ments. In the present volume, a good deal of pains has been spent on the endeavour to trace in the Scholiasts, and in authors such as Ari- stides, tacit quotations or paraphrases of our text, which had hitherto escaped detection owing to their source having been unacknowledged. In the case of these quotations, it has been thought best not to temain content with giving references. alone, but (as a general rule) to print the passages in full. It is only thus that their exact value in rela- tion to the text can be readily seen.

In the Explanatory Notes considerable space has naturally been assigned to the quotation of parallel passages, especially from the Po/i- dics ; and on every point an endeavour has been made to compare the new evidence with the old. In the historical notes to the first part (c. 1-41) much had already been accomplished by Mr Kenyon; but the second part (c. 42 to the end) was comparatively new ground. Throughout the work special attention has been given to the evidence of Greek Inscriptions.

The Greek Index gives a complete list of the vocabulary, with full citations of the phraseology of the treatise, including that of the passages quoted from the poems of Solon and the decrees of Athens, which are duly distinguished from citations from the body of the work. Words not recorded in the /udex Aristotelicus, and words hitherto unknown, are indicated by distinctive marks. In checking the items in this Index,

PREFACE viii®

much help has been derived from the two Greek Indices, the Jdex Dictionis and the /ndex Nominum et Rerum, of the Dutch edition; but in the present work it has been thought best to have only one Greek Index, and to adopt a more convenient mode of reference. The pre- paration of this Index has been a laborious task and has considerably delayed the publication of the volume.

The Archaeological [llustrations in the frontispiece are borrowed from Daremberg and Saglio’s Dictionnaire des Antiquités (Hachette, Paris): the Aeginetan and Attic coins on p. 39, from Baumeister’s Denkmiiler des Klassischen Alterthums (Oldenbourg, Munich). To the publishers of both of these important works, the best thanks are due for the readiness with which they have accorded the use of these illus- trations.

Among those who in other ways have aided me in preparing the present work, I gladly mention in the first place Mr Kenyon, who, with his able colleagues in the department of mss at the British Museum, has afforded me every facility for studying the papyrus; and, at times when my daily duties in Cambridge made it impossible for me to visit the Museum, has readily given me the fullest information on any point on which I had occasion to consult him. It is a pleasure to add that for a large number of valuable notes and references I am indebted to the kindness of two whose names have long been eminent in the world of scholars:—Mr W. L. Newman, Fellow of Balliol College, Oxford, and editor of Aristotle’s Politics; and the Rev. John Eyton Bickersteth Mayor, Senior Fellow of St John’s, and Professor of Latin in the University of Cambridge. I am similarly indebted in no less degree to a scholar of more recent reputation, Mr W. Wyse, late Fellow of Trinity, and now Professor of Greek in University College, London, whose felicitous emendations of the text, founded mainly on a minute acquaintance with the Attic Orators, and proposed at a time when he was resident in his College rooms in Cambridge, are one more proof that the spirit of Dobree still happily dwells in its ancient home. Lastly, in response to a request conveyed by Mr George Macmillan, Secretary of the Hellenic Society and a member of the firm by which this volume is published, his Excellency the Minister for Greece, whose recent departure from England is regretted by all lovers of Hellenic learning, was good enough to lend me his own copy of the admirable emendations proposed by his brother, Anastasios Gennadios, in the columns of an Athenian newspaper taking its name from the Acropolis.

b2

viii* PREFACE

He also kindly allowed me the use of a number of a Greek philological magazine, *A@nva, containing valuable articles on the textual criticism of the treatise by G. A. Papabasileios, and K.S. Kontos. This magazine was not to be found in the Library of the British Museum, and is prac- tically inaccessible in England except to its annual subscribers. While engaged in exploring the scattered literature of such a subject as the present, one feels in such a case, no less than in that of the Sztzungs- berichte of the Berlin Academy, the full force of the complaint made not long ago by the late Mr Freeman. ‘No man can undertake to find out every pamphlet and every article. And, when one has found what is wanted, it is sometimes forbidden to buy the number that one wants, unless one chooses to buy a whole volume that one does not want.’ I can only add that I shall be grateful to writers of similar articles for any separate copies of their papers that happen to be available; and, if in this way I become possessed of any duplicates, I propose to present the duplicate to a Library where it will be readily accessible to many who are interested in the subject.

I owe much besides to the principal editions of the treatise, espe- cially to Mr Kenyon’s third edition, more particularly for details con- nected with the readings in the papyrus. The study of the ms and of the facsimile alike has been considerably facilitated by the convenient plan adopted in the Dutch edition of Professors Van Herwerden and Van Leeuwen, in which the contents of the ms are indicated, not merely column by column, but also line by line. The edition of the text by Professors Kaibel and von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff has been of much use in revising the text and the zestimonia, and in dealing with the fragments. In this last particular, as in some others, a still further advance has been made in the very useful Teubner text recently edited by Professor Blass, the results of whose subsequent examination of the papyrus have, by his own kindness, reached me in time to be included in the Addenda.

My obligations to other published works are acknowledged as they arise, and are also expressed in general terms at the close of the biblio- graphical part of the Introduction. It may here be noticed that several of the most important of the books of reference to which I am thus indebted, are already attesting in their new editions the value of the evidence on the Constitutional History and the Public Antiquities of Athens which is contained in the treatise that, little more than two

PREFACE viii®

years ago, was so unexpectedly restored to us from the tombs of Egypt.

Up to the time of that fortunate event, the student was compelled to satisfy his curiosity with the scattered fragments that, in successive generations, first in Italy and France, and afterwards in Holland and Germany, had been diligently sought by the industry of scholars, and collected into one by those ‘friends of Truth,’ who (in Milton’s phrase) ‘imitating the carefull search that Isis made for the mangl’d body of Osiris, went up and down gathering limb by limb still as they could find them.’ Even now, when in place of these dstecta membra, the actual body of the work has been happily recovered in an approximately complete condition, the ‘friends of Truth’ have made much ado over many minor details of the great discovery. After all that has been found, the quest continues still ; but it is no longer limited, as it was two years ago, to the enterprise of a single scholar, enjoying all the privileges, and, at the same time, encountering not a few of the perils of a solitary pioneer. On the contrary, it is shared by a goodly number of eager investigators in many lands ; and the very number of those who are joining in the quest is almost a source of embarrassment to any one of them who attempts to gather up the main results of their research and to combine them with his own. The last two years have led to many points con- nected with the new treatise being viewed in a more sober light and with a more fitting sense of proportion: the exaggerated expectations that were at first aroused have been followed by a natural reaction, which is now succeeded in its turn by the prevalence of an intermediate state of settled contentment. Meanwhile, the excitement of that earlier time is over ; and those who are still engaged on the quest must be content to continue their patient toil unstimulated and unrewarded by any such general and public interest as that which justly awaited the first announce- ment of an event which has enabled men of letters to realise in the present day some of the joyous surprises of the age of the Renaissance. In the , feeling language lately used in Cambridge by a learned prelate belonging to both of the two oldest Universities of the United Kingdom, ‘the dignity and nobility of a scholar’s life lie in this, that it claims no recog- nition, and asks for no reward. It seldom admits of excitement ; it has no prospect of great encouragement; it looks forward to no definite achievement.’ There are times, however, when a student, while at- tempting to restore and explain some imperfectly recorded remnant of

viiis PREFACE

the past, may take a quiet pleasure in obeying the precept of George Herbert :— ‘If studious, copie fair what Time hath blurr’d’.

And at last there is a moment when, in the spirit of thankfulness that comes with the completion of an arduous undertaking, he may, as at present, offer to the kindly criticism and to the use of others a work which, however long delayed by lack of leisure, and however inadequate in itself, has at least been the result of the most unsparing labour and the most strenuous endeavour.

December 27, 1892.

CONTENTS.

INTRODUCTION §1. The political literature of Greece before the time of Aristotle § 2. Political works ascribed to Aristotle F § 3. Evidence of ancient authorities on the authorship of the

Tlodcrefau i tee. : 3 ? . § 4. The later literature of the Toneretau - . . §5. Zhe Berlin Fragments of the’ A@nvalwv ere ‘ . §6. The British Museum Papyrus - j . ‘ . § 7. Date and Authorship of the treatise .

§ 8. Authorities followed in it . ‘ 7 . ‘ . 2 § 9. Abstract ofits contents . . . . . . . § 10. Conspectus of the Literature of the subject 3 7 A

§ 11. List of Abbreviations used in the critical notes . . § 12. Lest of Llustrations . . 7 F . CORRIGENDA . . i : . . . . . ‘ .

ADDENDA. : . ‘ . . e . . TEXT AND Norss, including ‘ Fragmenta ex papyri paginis ultimis’

(237—249) * 5 : ‘ 7 7 . HERACLIDIS EPITOMA ‘ : . Je . F . :

FRAGMENTA ex prima libri parte 251—3}; dubia 2534; aliena 254—5 FRAGMENTORUM IN PAPYRO LONDINENSI INVENTORUM INDEX . GREEK INDEX ‘ : ‘ : 7 ‘ < 7 3 ENGLISH INDEX . 3 ‘ ‘ ‘ $ ‘ : ‘i é

PAGES

ix—xii xii—xix

xix—xxix xxix—xxxi xxxI—xxxili Xxxiv—xxxix

xxxix—liv liv—Iviii lix—Ixvii Ixvii—Ixxv Ixxvi

Ixxvi

Ixxvi

lxxvii—Ixxx

I—249 250 251—5 256 257—296

297—302

INTRODUCTION.

§ 1. The political literature of Greece before the time of Aristotle.

In a brief preliminary survey of the political literature of Greece’, it is unnecessary to dwell on the names of representatives of the pre-Socratic schools of philosophy, such as Pythagoras of Samos and Protagoras of Abdera, although the former is said to have written a qodutixoy ovyypappa (Diog. Laert. viii 6), and the latter a treatise wept moduretas (db. ix 55). The work ascribed to Pythagoras was undoubtedly spurious; like that of Protagoras, it has been lost to posterity.

The earliest extant specimen of this branch of literature is the treatise preserved among the works of Xenophon under the title of *A@nvatwy woArteia. Among modern scholars Cobet stands almost alone in being content to accept it as Xenophon’s (Vou. Lect. p. 706). Its authorship is in fact uncertain: it has been attributed to Alcibiades’, and also to Critias?, who is known to have written on the zoAcreta: of Sparta, Thessaly and Athens. It may fairly be regarded as emanating from the oligarchical party at Athens, and as primarily intended for the perusal of readers at Sparta who sympathised with their aims. It was probably written between B.c. 426 and 413. It is in any case the earliest Greek political treatise that has come down to us. More than this, it is the ‘oldest extant specimen of literary Attic prose*’; it is also ‘the oldest extant specimen of a political pasquinade’. The real or imputed abuses of the Athenian Democracy are attacked in a tone of bitter sarcasm or insidious irony, relieved by acute remarks on interesting points of national economy, such as the relations of Athens to her subjects and rivals, and the comparative strength and weakness of her naval and military establishments’.

The AaxeSaysoviwy woXsrefa, though regarded as spurious by Deme-

1Cf. Henkel, Studien zur Geschichte Athens, 1 v, vol. i p. 390 Frankel.

der Griechischen Lehre vom Staat, esp. 4 Jebb, Primer of Gk. Lit., p. 114. pp. 1—1t7, die politischen Schriften der 5 Col. Mure’s Literature of Greece, v Philosophen. 422—5. See also A. Kirchhoff, in the

2 W. Helbig, Rhein. Mus., xvi gut ff. Adbhandlungen of the Berlin Academy 3 ¢g, by Boeckh, Public Economy of for 1874.

x THE POLITICAL LITERATURE OF GREE CE

trius of Magnesia (Diog. Laert. ii 57), is accepted as the work of Xenophon by Plutarch (Zyc. 1) and others in ancient times, and among the moderns by Cobet (Mov. Lect. p. 705—724) and many others. Its date is possibly later than the battle of Leuctra (371); but is more probably between 403 and gor. It is a work inspired throughout by admiration of Spartan institutions. The Kvpov watdeia is later than the death of Socrates (Cyvop. 111 i 38—40), and was probably written after Xenophon’s return from exile, or about 369. While professing to describe the education of the founder of the Persian empire, it is really a historical and political romance, an idealised biography with a didactic purpose, being practically an encomium on Socratic principles and Spartan practice. It is prompted by the author’s experience of Hellenic political and social life, especially the instability and vicissitudes of various forms of government’.

The pamphlet entitled zdpox [7 rept tpooddwy] was probably not the work of Xenophon, but was written about 346 B.c. as a manifesto of the party who held that the commercial prosperity of Athens depended on peace with Philip. It suggests several expedients for enlarging the revenue, especially by means of taxes levied on resident aliens, as well as profits derived from the labour of 10,000 public slaves who were to be employed in the mines of Laurium.

Passing from ‘Xenophon’ to Plato, we have in the Republic the most memorable of all delineations of an Ideal State. In the first four books the description of the State is in harmony with Hellenic notions of religion and morality; in the remainder, the Hellenic State is transformed into an ideal kingdom of philosophy, of which all other governments are perversions’. In the eighth book? all conceivable forms of constitutions are reduced to five classes, represented by aristocracy, timocracy, oligarchy, democracy and despotism or tyranny, corresponding to five leading types of individual character. In the por- traits of the typical ‘timocrat’, tyrant, and democrat, and in the account of the successive changes which they represent, we have a sequence of transformations that is not entirely in accordance with historical facts, but nevertheless supplies us with something of the nature of a philosophy of history. The author is clearly no lover of democracy, or indeed of any of the existing varieties of government. His gaze is fixed on some- thing above and beyond the horizon of his time. In his view, as expressed in the closing words of the ninth book, the man of under- standing is little likely to be a politician in the land of his birth, though he will certainly be a politician in an ideal city which is all his own :

1 Introduction to Holden’s ed. 3 p. 544, compared with Iv w/t. 2 Jowett, /ztrod. to the Republic, p. 3.

BEFORE THE TIME OF ARISTOTLE XI

a city whose pattern is laid up in heaven, and he who desires may look on that pattern and in the vision find indeed his home. But whether there really is, or ever will be, such a city, is of no concern to him ; for he will do all things in obedience to the laws of that city and of no other.

The Republic is almost always called the Todrreéa, but sometimes bears the plural name, Toduretat. Thus Themistius (ii 32 c) associates with the name of Plato, MWodureiad re af kAewal Kai of Oeoréoror Nopor. The dialogue on the Zaws was composed after the Republic (Ar. Pol. ii 3, 1), and was published after the author’s death (Diog. Laert. iii 37). It sets forth in minutest fulness the details of an Ideal Code; and, in the absence of any actual code of the institutions of Athens, the indications of the existing laws therein contained are often of special value’. The lofty conception of the ‘rule of Philosophers’ is here abandoned, and the state described is the best which is practically possible under the existing limitations of Greek life. In the third book the author reviews the constitutions of Sparta, Persia and Athens, noting the causes of the success and failure of each; and then proceeds to develop his own constitution. In the Platonic dialogue, entitled the IloActexes, or an inquiry into the definition of a Ruler, there is much affinity with the Zaws of Plato and the Polstics of Aristotle. In con- trast to the doubtless earlier scheme in the Republic, with its five types of constitution, we here find a series of seven, in which, apart from the ideal and only perfect type, we have six existing forms of government. These six are obtained by dividing the rule of the One (ovapyéa), of the Few (9 vmod taév odltywv dSuvacreia), and of the Many (8ymoxparia) into two varieties each, (1) into kingship and tyranny, and (2) into aris- tocracy and oligarchy, while the two varieties of democracy (‘consti- tutional government’ and ‘simple democracy’) are undistinguished by any differences of name. The distinction in each of these three pairs turns upon the question whether Law is observed or not*. In its poli- tical views, and probably in its date, this dialogue occupies an interme- diate position between the Republic and the Laws; and its classification of typical forms of government reappears, with slight differences of terminology, in the Z¢hics and Politics of Aristotle’. Of the other poli- tical dialogues bearing Plato’s name, the Epimomis is an appendix to the Zaws, and is mainly concerned with Education; the Afinos dis-

1 See esp. K. F. Hermann, De vestigiis 8 Eth. viii 10; Pol. iii 7 and vi (iv) 2. institutorum veterum, imprimis Atti- Cf. Newman’s Politics, i 430—433, and corum, per Platonis de Legibus libros Prof. Sidgwick in Class, Rev. vi 141 indagandis, 1836. —4.

2 Politicus, pp. 291, 302.

xii ' POLITICAL WORKS ASCRIBED

cusses the definition of Law; but neither of these can be reckoned among the genuine works of Plato.

The above summary has been purposely confined to writings strictly concerned with politics, to the exclusion of historical works in which political discussion only plays a subordinate part. Otherwise, we might have recalled the debate on the relative merits of monarchy, oligarchy and democracy, which is ascribed to the Persian grandees in the pages of Herodotus (iii 802—82); and the reflexions on the effects of party spirit in Grecian politics, to which Thucydides is prompted by the nar- rative of the vengeance of the victorious demos on the oligarchs of Corcyra (iii 82 f). As it is, in the limited field of purely political litera- ture, we have noted the rise of the polemical pamphlet, and the histo- rical romance, while in Plato’s delineation of an Ideal State and an Ideal Code, we have seen the prototype of writings such as Sir Thomas More’s Uvopia and Bacon’s Mew Atlantis. The setting forth of such ideals became a favourite medium for the expression of political criti- cism; but it is characteristic of Aristotle that, while following this fashion, he succeeded in bringing the political speculations of philo- sophy into closer relation with the facts of history. In the language of one of the foremost authorities on the political writings of Aristotle, “political science ‘begins’ for Aristotle ‘in History’, no less than in Ethics”’. ‘The vision of an ideal State did not make Aristotle indiffer- ent to the problems and difficulties of the actual State. The age which dreams of ideal States is often on the point of losing its interest in politics ; but this was far from being the case with Aristotle’.

§ 2. Lolitical works ascribed to Aristotle.

Among the political writings ascribed to Aristotle by far the most important is, of course, the Politics. The imperfect form in which it has come down to us has been variously explained. The earlier view, supported by Spengel’, was that the work of Aristotle was originally completed by himself, and that important portions of it were afterwards lost. The later view, which is more probable in itself, and is accepted by almost all Aristotelian scholars in modern times, regards the Politics as a work that was left unfinished. This view is corroborated by the fact that in later writers we have no reference to the Politics which cannot be traced to the existing work. The latest event mentioned in it is the death of Philip, B.c. 336 (viii (v) 8, 10, p. 1311 5 2). As to

1 Mr W. L. Newman’s Politics, vol. i 2 ab, p. 89. p- 15. 3 Ueber die Pol. des Ar., pp. 44 ff.

‘TO ARISTOTLE ; xiii the order of the books, it can hardly be doubted that, owing to the nature of their contents, books vii and viii should come immediately after iii, while it is not quite certain that books v and vi should be transposed. The order adopted by Susemihl is as follows: i, ii, ili, vii, viii, iv, vi, v. Thus books iv—viii of the new order correspond to vii, viii, iv, vi, v, of the old’. In the Politics Aristotle discusses the origin of the household, the village and the state, and examines the nature of property, and in particular of property in slaves (Bk. 1). The citizen is defined as one who shares in the judicial or deliberative administration of a state. In the next book, Aristotle criticises the Repudiic and the Laws of Plato, the constitutions framed by Phaleas and Hippodamus, and the actual forms of government prevailing in Sparta, Crete and Carthage, closing with some (possibly interpolated) criticisms on Solon and Pericles (11). The various types of government are thereupon ‘described in turn, Monarchy, Aristocracy and a mixed constitutional system called roA:reia, together with the three forms into which they respectively degenerate, Tyranny, Oligarchy and Democracy (111). The author next delineates his Ideal State, and deals with the subject of Marriage and of Education, Bk 1v (v1). The latter should be national and also liberal; its two main branches are ‘music’ and ‘gymnastic’, Bk v (vu). The types of government are then discussed in detail. Of the three perversions, Tyranny, the perversion of Monarchy, which is itself the best and most divine, is necessarily the worst. Oligarchy, the perversion of Aristocracy, is not so bad as Tyranny; the last, and the least bad, is Democracy. The different kinds of government are then further discriminated, with the forms assumed by the deliberative and the executive power in each, Bk vi (Iv). The basis of democracy is defined to be liberty, which includes the principle that ‘all should rule and be ruled in turn’. The characteristics of democracy are then described :—all officers of state are appointed ‘by all, and out of all’; all rule over each, and each in turn rules over all; the appointment is by lot, except in cases where special knowledge is required ; there is little or no qualification ; office is held for a short time only, and rarely (if ever) twice, except in the case of military offices ; all men, or at least persons selected out of all, sit in judgment in all causes, or at any rate on the most important; the public Assembly is supreme, not the officers of state; when the citizens are paid, even the Council loses its

’ In the present work, whenever the books of the Politics are specified, the number in the new order is given first, followed (in parenthesis) by that of the old order. As a general rule, however, the references are solely to the pages and

lines of the Berlin ed.Among the most recent discussions of the order of the books may be mentioned Shute’s History of the Aristotelian Writings, pp. 164— 176; and Newman’s Politics, vol. i 292, vol. ii pp. xxi—xxiv.

xiv POLITICAL WORKS ASCRIBED

power, as the Assembly and the Lawcourts take all the business to themselves. Then follow the various kinds of oligarchies; and the consideration of the due coordination of offices in the state, Bk vii (v1). The author's design is now nearly completed. He has still to speak of the motives, objects and occasions.of revolutions in states. Revolutions begin in trifling matters but involve important issues. They are brought about either by force or by fraud, The author next considers how, revolutions may be avoided, and tyrannies and monarchies preserved ; he describes a despot of a virtuous and beneficent type; and adds some reflexions on the short duration of tyrannies and oligarchies. Lastly, he attacks the views put forward in the Republic as to the cycle through which states are described as passing in the course of their decline. Thus the work ends (as it began) with a criticism on Plato.

Among the lost writings of Aristotle was one entitled IoAcriuds, a dialogue in two books, expressly mentioned by Diogenes Laertius (v 22), and vaguely noticed by Cicero’, The anonymous list of his works, now ascribed to Hesychius, includes the zepi pyropos 7 wroAutuxod. That of Diogenes Laertius, a work entitled epi Bacudeias, said to have been addressed to Alexander*; and a dialogue on colonisation under the name of ’AAéfav8pos 7 vrép arouxv a'* In closer connexion with contemporary history, the dixawpara adédewv ascribed to Aristotle are said to have contained the formal pleas on the points of difference submitted by the Greek states to the arbitration of Philip*; A work of far wider scope was that known as the vopipa, or voutpa BapBapixd, of Aristotle. This was a comprehensive account of the institutions of various non-hellenic peoples, including the Etruscans, under the head of vopypo. Tuppyvdy. An abstract of this existed at one time under the name of vopivev BapBaptxdy ovvaywyn *.

Lastly, there was the work entitled the ToAcreto, or sketches of the constitutional history of a large number of Hellenic states. Consti- tutional history, however, was far from forming the sole subject of this extensive work. The numerous fragments that have survived give abundant proof that local legends, national proverbs, and even anec-

dotes of social life found a place in its pages®.

1 De Fin. Vv 4, 11, ‘cumque uterque eorum (Aristoteles et Theophrastus) do- cuisset, qualem in republica principem esse conveniret’—; ad Quintum fratrem, iii 5, 1, ‘Aristotelem, quae de republica et praestante viro scribat, ipsum loqui.’ Cf. Bernays, die Dialoge des Ar. pp. 53, 153 * Cf. Bernays, /. ¢., pp. 53, 1543 pub- lished by Lippert (1891) from an Arabic translation.

It is generally supposed

3 Bernays, 2. c., pp. 56, 156.

* Rose, Aristotelis gui ferebantur li- brorum fragmenta, (Teubner) 1886, frag. 612—614.

° ib. frag. 604—610. Diels (Berlin Academy, 30 July, 1891) suggests that pap. ix p. 29 of the Flinders Petrie

Papyrt is an excerpt from the véuima

BapBapixd. * Rose, Aristoteles Pseudepigraphus, p. 3953 Fragmenta, 381—603, ed. 1886,

TO ARISTOTLE xV

that the great collection of facts comprised in the MoA:refa: formed the materials for the composition of the Politics. It will be shewn at a later point that the “A@nvaiwy qodureia in particular was not completed until about nine years after the latest date recorded in the Politics; but this fact is not inconsistent with the materials collected for the IoArreia being used in the Politics even before they had themselves been reduced into their present form. As regards the comparative value of the two works, the general character of the fragments of the Iodureia: shews that it would be going too far to say that we could wish that the Tod vélat were ‘preserved, even at the expense of the extant book on the theory of politics’, especially when we reflect that, in the words of the writer just quoted, ‘the Politics are confessed on all hands to be the ripest and fullest outcome of Greek political experience’!.

The treatise known as the "A@yvaiwy woXtrea formed part of the vast collection of TWoAuretas which the unanimous voice of antiquity ascribed to the pen of Aristotle. In tracing the literary history of the [oArretoe we must necessarily begin with the well-known story of the fate of Aristotle’s library, which is told in full by Strabo (p. 608—9), and more briefly touched upon by Plutarch (Sw//a, 26). On the death of Aristotle, in 322 B.c., his library passed into the possession of his pupil, Theo- phrastus, who presided over the Peripatetic school at Athens until his death in 287. The library of Theophrastus, including that of Aristotle, was bequeathed to a pupil of both, named Neleus, who removed it to Scépsis, an inland town of Asia Minor, in the S.E. of the Troad. From Neleus it passed to his descendants, who were men of neither literary accomplishments nor philosophic tastes. They are described by Strabo as iSwirat. They were, however, sufficiently conscious of the value of the manuscripts to prevent their being appropriated by the kings of Pergamos, who began to form their famous library about thirty or forty years after the death of Theophrastus. The manuscripts were accord- ingly concealed in a cellar, where they were exposed to injury from the effects of damp and the depredations of worms. It was probably after the death of the last of the Pergamene Kings in B.c. 133, that they were sold to Apellicon of Teds, a wealthy adherent of the Peripatetic school at Athens. On examination they were found to contain many compo- sitions which were unknown to the successors of Theophrastus at the head of the Lyceum. Their owner caused them to be copied; but, as he was ‘more of a Jdzbliophile than a philosopher’, the transcripts published under his care proved to be far from accurate. In 86 B.c. Athens was captured by Sulla, and the library of Apellicon was taken to Rome. It was there placed under the charge of a librarian, by whose

1 Mahaffy’s Hist. of Classical Gk, Literature, ii 414.

xvi POLITICAL WORKS ASCRIBED

permission it was properly arranged by a learned Greek, a friend of Cicero and a preceptor of Strabo (p. 548), named Tyrannion. Copies were obtained from Tyrannion by Andronicus of Rhodes, who classified the works according to subjects’, published them, and drew up the lists which were current in the time of Plutarch’.

On the strength of this last statement it has been supposed that all the extant lists of Aristotelian writings are to be ultimately traced to Andronicus*% But, even before his time, the successors of Theo- phrastus possessed copies of a few at least of the works of Aristotle, chiefly of the exoteric or popular class*. As examples of these, the list suggested by Grote® includes the dialogues; the legendary and historical collections; and the constitutional histories of various Hellenic cities. Thus, the ToAtreiat may have been known to the successors of Theophrastus even before the library of Aristotle was for a time restored to Athens more than two centuries after the owner’s death. But, to show that the fate of Aristotle’s writings did not entirely depend on the fortunes of the library buried in the vault at Scépsis, we have abundant proof of some of them being familiar to the philosophic world during the interval in which his library itself was lost to view®; and it is probable that many of them, including those of more general interest, were at an early date transcribed at Athens and thence transmitted to the great library at Alexandria.

In the case of Theophrastus, we know for certain that lists of his works were drawn up, not only by Andronicus of Rhodes, but also by Hermippus of Smyrna, who lived till about the end of the third century B.c. and was a pupil of Callimachus, the chief librarian of the Alex- andrian Museum’. Such a list is preserved by Diogenes Laertius®, with the titles arranged in alphabetical order. The corresponding list of the writings of Aristotle is not in the order of the alphabet, but is arranged with a certain degree of method under 146 titles as follows. ‘First we have the dialogues and other exoteric works, then two or three early abstracts of Platonic lectures or writings, then we come to a part of the list in which logical works seem to predominate; ethical, political and

1 Porphyry, lafe of Plotinus, c. 24, p. 117 Didot.

* Plut. Sulla, 26; cf. Grote’s Aristotle, ipp. s0—54, and Shute’s History of the Aristotelian Writings, p. 29—39.

3 Rose, Ar. Pseud., p. 8; Frag. (1886)

p. I.

4 Strabo, p. 609, owéBy dé rots éx ray TepiTarwy Trois wey mddae Tois werd Oed- ppacroy obk Exovow édws Ta BiBla rh éNywv, kal padiora Tay éfwrepiKkwy.

5 Aristotle, p. 55.

“ayvootcw.

8 Zeller, Phil. d. Griechen, 11 ii p. 145—153°,

* Schol. in Theophr. Jet. rofro ro BiBXlov ’Avdpbvixos ev Kat “Epuurmos ovde yap prelay adrod ddws werolnvrat év ty dvaypapy tuv Oco- gpdorov. Heitz, die Verlorenen Schriften des Ar, p. 47. Susemihl, Ar. uber die Dichthunst, 1865, p. 173 and Gr. Litt. in der Alexandrinerseit, i 492, 494 note Ir.

8 v 21—2%,

TO ARISTOTLE xvii

rhetorical works predominate towards the middle; then come physical and zoological works; last in order we have works designed in all probability for Aristotle’s own use (‘hypomnematic works’), letters and poems’”. The arrangement seems hardly sufficiently precise to be that of Andronicus, who is said to have introduced the plan of grouping the writings according to their subject-matter*; and this is not the only reason for regarding it as independent of Andronicus*. It has in fact been conjecturally ascribed to Hermippus, and has been generally supposed to be founded on the catalogue of Aristotle’s works in some great library like that of Alexandria. In a subsequent passage (v 34) Diogenes observes that the books enumerated were nearly 400 in number. He even adds that their genuineness was not contested by any one*.

There is a second list, ascribed to Hesychius and containing only 127 titles, 27 of those in Diogenes being here omitted and 8 added in their place®.

A third list, ascribed to ‘Ptolemy the philosopher,’ is found in an Arabic translation only. This includes gz titles. It is certainly later than the time of Andronicus, as one of the titles relates to certain treatises found in the library of Almikun (Ablikun or Atlikun), the Arabic form of Apellicon.

In all three lists the Hod:refat are included. In 1 they appear as the 143rd item :—zroXrreiat wédewy Svoiv Seovocaw pé (sc. 158), <xowal> kai idiot, Snoxpatixal, dAvyapyiKal, apioToKpaTixal, TupavviKai.

In 11 135 the title is qwoAurefas moAcw idwrikdy Kat Sypoxpatixav Kai OALyapxiKGy <kal> dpioToKpatiKkGy Kai TupavviKav pvy (158).

In 11 81 the Arabic description is translated as follows: ‘liber quem inscripsit de regimine civitatum et nominatur dz/itia, et est liber in quo commemoravit regimen populorum et civitatum plurium e civitatibus Graecorum et aliorum earumque relationem (originem ? cognationem ?); numerus vero populorum et civitatum quarum meminit [in eo] crxxr [civitates magnae]”’.

In 11 the number of the zodrreiae is given as 171; whereas 1 and il agree in making it 158. The ancient Latin Version of the life of Aristotle states the number as 250; while, among the early expositors of Aristotle, Elias twice gives the same number, and Ammonius has

2 Mr W. L. Newman’s ed. of Ar. Pol. Rose in two Mss in the Ambrosian

vol. i p. vi. library at Milan (4. P. p. 709). All 2 Porphyry, ref. on p. xvi, note 1. the lists are given by Rose in the Berlin 3 Zeller, 11 ii, 51 f. Ar., vol. v 1463—1473, and in the 4 Grote’s Az. i 40. Teubner text of the Fragmenta, pp. 3— 5 First published by Ménage on Diog. 22. .

vol. ii 201. The same list-was found by 8 Rose, Frag. pp. 8, 16, 21°.

S. A. c

xviii POLITICAL WORKS ASCRIBED

250. The higher estimate is either a mere mistake, or has arisen from including among the zod:reiau certain of the vouina BapBapiucd. The latter view is confirmed by the fact that one of our authorities for the larger number’ mentions it in immediate connexion with the statement that Aristotle accompanied Alexander on his expedition to the East, even as far as ‘the land of the Brahmins,’ where (according to this imaginative commentator) he actually compiled ‘the 255 modcreton’; while the estimates of Elias are in both cases given in a similar connexion. We may therefore discard the larger number, and accept 158 as resting on better authority?.

The total number of woAcretox included in modern collections of their fragments is 99. In 51 of these the name of Aristotle and the title of the zoAureia are expressly mentioned, generally thus: “ApiororéAys év TH —wv vodureia. In 16 others, Aristotle is cited, but the name of the state is not given, though it can be inferred from the contents of the passage. Lastly, out of the total number of 80 states mentioned in the Folitics, there are 32 that are not named in the fragments already enumerated, but which may fairly be assumed to have been included in the original work. Thus we have a list of 51 +16-+ 32, or gg states, more than half of which (51) are represented by fragments in which the title of the work, as well as the name of Aristotle, is mentioned, while in more than two-thirds (67 out of 99) the name of Aristotle occurs. The three classes are as follows :

T (51) II (16) III (32) *AOnvaiwy “Ipepalwy Mydcdwy *Avraviplwy |’ Audirodirav §=Kapyndovlur Alywnrav Kelwv Naélwy *Arpapurnvav |’ Avriccalwy Karavalwy Alrwrdv Kepxupatww Neomrodr&v |’ Eridavplwv "Amo\\wiarav Kragopevlov *Akapydvey = Kiavadv ’Orovrvtiwy =| OnBalwv *"Atod\wriarav Kyidlwv "Axpayavrivwy Koropuviwy ’Opxopeviwy |’lacéwv & Ilévry Kawy "AuBpaxwwrav Kopi blwy Tlaplwy Kpynrév *Apudny dv Aapuooatwy "Apyelwy Kuéviwy TledAnvéwy | Kporwriardv |’ Aduratwv Acovtivwy *Apkddwy Kupalwy Zaplwy Kv6nplov Bufartlwy Mayrirev *Axaay Kurplov Zapolpdxwy | Myrlwv "Erdaprlwy = =Mavrwelwv Borrialwy Kupynvalwy = Luxvwvlwy Manelwv *Hiperpiéwy Mondoacdy Tedgwy Aaxedatpovluy Zwwréwy ‘Pyylvwy "Epv0patwy Muriaqvalwy Achar Aevaadluy Zvpaxoclwy | ‘Podtwy ‘Eortaréwy ‘Podluy AnMwv . Aoxpadv Tapayriywy | Doddwr Zaykraiwy PapoaNlwy "Hyelwy Avkluy Teyearav ZuBaprrav ‘Hparéwy Kadkrdéwy *"Hrepwrdy Maccadwrav Tevedluy Tyvlev “Hpaxrewrav = Xlwy Oerraddv “Meyapéwv Tporgnvlwv Karkydovlwy. | Onpatwy ’Operrav. "Teaxnolay = Medwralwy Swxaéwy. "lorpidwy

) Vita Ar. vulg., Rose, Frag. p. 258%. plied by Simplicius, in Ar. Categ. p. 27 7 A division of the modreia into a 43 Brandis, év rais ywyolus abrod aoNt- genuine and spurious seems to be im- refais. But it has been proposed either

TO ARISTOTLE xix

The zoAcreta: are said to have been arranged in the order of the alphabet’. Some have seen indications of this in the reading preserved in a single ms of Harpocration, s.v. ecpobérar:—’Apiororédyns ev TH & "A@nvaiwv wodurefg, and also in the phrase in Photius, s.v. oxurddy :—

a

as “Apurrorékys év ti “IOaxyoiwy odire(a PB. Here the rodrrefa of Ithaca appears to be described as 42nd in the series. If we test this by taking the 99 extant titles of zoAureias as the basis of our calculation, Ithaca, which is 37th in the list of 99, would have been 58th in the complete list of 158; if, again, we take the 67 titles in which Aristotle is named, Ithaca, which is 21st of the 67, would have been soth in the complete list; if the 51 in which the name of the particular zodureéa is specified, Ithaca, which is 17th of the 51, would have been 52nd, not 42nd. This calculation, of course, assumes that in the longer list, the names in alphabetical order are distributed in the same proportion as

in the shorter lists. But it is highly probable that »8 is a corruption of either wéuvyro: or (as proposed by Bergk) paprypel. If so, we cannot rely on this phrase as proof of an alphabetical order. Besides, if the order was alphabetical, it was unnecessary to specify the number of any particular treatise. Such an arrangement, however, although not attested with any certainty, is natural in itself, and the constitution of Athens would in any case have occupied the first place.

§ 3. On the evidence of ancient authorities as to the authorship of the Wodrreta.

We may now proceed to review in chronological order the successive quotations from the Tod:reias which are preserved in ancient authorities.

Firstly, there is reason to believe that the historian PHILOcHORUS, writing before 306 zB.c., or less than 20 years after the composition of the ’A@nvatwy woAsreia, quoted that work as Aristotle’s. The grounds which have been suggested for this belief are as follows :—

(1) The Scholium on Arist. Vesf. 1223 includes a quotation from’A@. mod. 13, ll. 16—20; the latter part of that Scholium coincides with one on Zys. 58 which ‘is proved by Strabo, p. 392 c, to come from Philochorus. Hence it is possible that the whole of the Schol. on Vesp. 1223 really comes from Philochorus, and that Philochorus is our real authority for the citation from the ’A@. woA. (2) In the term dropy- gicOfvar 7d dxOos (frag. 57), Philochorus appears to be correcting or explaining the phrase 7d dxOos darocelcacGat,—probably a reminiscence of drrocetsduevor 7d Bdpos in’A@. wok. 6 §1. (3) In Plutarch’s Life of Themistocles, 10, Aristotle is cited as

to alter wodcrelats into éwierodais (Ideler, Ar. p. 223 a.

in Ar. Meteor. 1 xiin. 40), or (with greater 1 xara orotxeia, Elias, ap. Rose, Frag. probability) to regard yvyolasasacorrup- _p. 258%, 1. 29.

tion of the number pv7 (158); Heitz, Frag,

c2

XX EVIDENCE OF ANCIENT AUTHORITIES

authority for a statement respecting the action of the Areopagus immediately before the battle of Salamis (’A@. mod. 23 § 1). Cleidemus, the author of an ’Aréls, is next quoted as asserting that this action was due to the wiles of Themistocles. Then follows the story of the dog of Xanthippus which, in Aelian, de Natura Animalium, xii 35, is attributed to ‘Aristotle and Phz/ochorus.’ It has been plausibly suggested that Aelian had read an extract, ultimately derived from Philochorus, on the events immediately preceding the battle of Salamis, in which the name of Aristotle may have occurred in connexion with the account of the action of the Areopagus, and in which the story of the dog of Xanthippus was also related. This may have lead Aelian to make the mistake of quoting Aristotle, as well as Philochorus, as authorities for the story about the dog. If, as is not improbable, the whole of the narrative in Plutarch comes from Philochorus, then Philochorus, and not Plutarch, is our authority for attributing to Aristotle the quotations from the ’A@. mro\. respecting the action of the Areopagus. This implies that ‘a careful historical student and critic, who lived and wrote at Athens in the generation immediately following Aristotle’s,’ accepted the AOnvalwy modtrela as the work of Aristotle himself}.

An early notice of the ToA:retas may also be traced in the attack made by Timazvus on Aristotle’s account of the origin of the Greek colony of Locri Epizephyrii. Timaeus was born about 352 B.c. (or 30 years before the.death of Aristotle), was banished from Tauromenium in 310, and from about that time resided in Athens for more than 50 years, dying about 256 B.c. The evidence for this attack on the part of Timaeus is to be found in Polybius, who rejects the view of Timaeus, and emphatically supports the account given by Aristotle’. From a subsequent passage it appears that the attack of Timaeus was directed against Theophrastus as well. We are not told in which of Aristotle’s works the description of the origin of Locri was to be found, but it is reasonable to suppose that it was the [oAcreia. The only other possible work would have been the ’AAétavSpos wept dzrocxudv, which is now represented by its title only. Now Timaeus was in Athens for 23 out of the 35 years during which Theophrastus presided over the Lyceum as the successor of Aristotle. He had thus exceptional op- portunities for becoming acquainted with Aristotle’s writings, and with the traditional knowledge of them preserved by the Peripatetic School ; and he may fairly be quoted to prove that within 66 years of the death of Aristotle, one of the ToAcretac was attributed to that author.

The TWoAtreta: appear to have been also quoted by PHILOSTEPHANUS of Cyrene, the author of works entitled mept eipmudrwy and sept vATwv, who lived under Ptolemy Philopator (z.c. 222—206). ‘ Aristotle’ and Philostephanus are quoted by Varro (apud Servium ad Verg. Georg. i 19) and by Pliny (Vv. H. vii 57); and it has been conjectured

1 Abridged from Prof. J. H. Wright’s * Polyb. Excerpta libri xii 5—8, and

article in the American Journ. of Philo’ 11; Rose, Frag. 5473; cf. Heitz, Verl.’ logy, xii 3, 310—318. Schr, p. 243, and Shute, 2. G5 p. 39: ie

ON AUTHORSHIP OF THE (IOAITEIAI Xxi

that Varro and Pliny took their quotations of Aristotle at second-hand from Philostephanus’.

It was probably in the middle of the second century B.c. that excerpts from the TMoAcreta. were made by HERACLEIDES LEMBOS, who appears to have followed his original, with an almost slavish fidelity. We have only fragments of these excerpts under the title é« rav *“HpaxdeiSou rept rodrreav’.

Cicero refers as follows to the Todtretas and vouipa BapBapixe of Aristotle, as well as to the work of Theophrastus wept vopwv :—omnium Jere civitatum non Graeciae solum sed etiam barbariae ab Aristotele mores instituta disciplinas ; a Theophrasto leges etiam cognovimus (de Fin. v 4 § 11); but there is no proof of any direct acquaintance with the text of the HoAiretan®. In the de Officits, ii 18, he quotes, as from Theophrastus, the account of the liberality of Cimon which we find in c. 27 of the *AOnvaiwy wodureta. In the de Senectute § 72 he tells an anecdote about Solon and Peisistratus without showing any knowledge of c. 14 of that treatise. Similarly, in de Officits,i75, he writes of Solon and Themis- tocles with reference to the Areopagus without betraying any close acquaintance with chapters 23 and 25. Whatever knowledge he pos- sessed as to the contents of those chapters was probably obtained second- hand from his authority, Panaetius, who, as we know from Cicero himself (de Fin. iv 28 § 79), constantly quoted from Plato, Aristotle, Xenocrates, Theophrastus and Dicaearchus. About Dicaearchus in par- ticular Cicero writes to Atticus in glowing terms :—in his Tusculan villa he has been reading with admiration that author’s account of the constitution of Pellene, while he fancies that his library at Rome contains a copy of the Constitutions of Corinth and of Athens*. These

1 Rose, A. P., pp. 410, 534; Suse-

ee Gr. Litt. in der Alexandrinerzeit, i 476. Z Heracleides Lembos, probably born at Kallatis in Pontus, was the author of an extensive compilation called ‘Ioropla.. He flourished under Ptolemy vi, Philo- metor (181—146). Cf. Susemihl, w. s., i 503—s. (Riihl even supposes that he was the editor of the ’AQ. oA. in its present form.)

The author of the excerpts is, how- ever, regarded by Rose (in his 4. P., p. 532) as far later in date, and as having borrowed his excerpts from Didymus (who was born B.C. 63). But the part played by Didymus in transmitting the knowledge of the Todcreta to a later time has been much exaggerated, and the form in which the excerpts from Heracleides have reached us is hardly worthy of the industrious and intelligent

critic from whom they are supposed to have been derived.—See also Prof. Wright in Harvard Studies, iii 15, and Holzinger in Philologus, vol. 50, p. 436. Infra, p. 250.

3 See also Shute, /.¢., p. 72.

4 Ad Att. ii 2, ‘IledAqvalwy in manibus tenebam et hercule magnum acervum Dicaearchi mihi ante pedes exstruxeram. O magnum hominem! et unde multo plura didiceris quam de Procilio. Kopw- Otwv et’ APnvalwy puto me Romae habere. Mihi crede, leges;...mirabilis vir est.’ Heitz, Verl. Schr., p. 244, considers that these may have formed part of the Blos ‘EAAdéos of Dicaearchus. Bergk, Rhein. Mus. 1881, p. 113 2. 2, suggests that the reference is to the TloAcrefac of Aristotle. He would alter Dicaearchi into Dicae- archiae (i.e. ‘at Puteoli’); but his sug- gestion (with the textual alteration which. it involves) seems very improbable.

xxii EVIDENCE OF ANCIENT AUTHORITIES

Constitutions may well have been written in imitation of the earlier work ascribed to Aristotle; and the imitation may have been suf- ficiently close to lead to the contents of the Iodurefas of Aristotle becoming known to later writers through the medium of Dicaearchus’.

It has been conjectured that many of the quotations from the Toduretae in later authors were taken second-hand from the works of Alexandrian scholars such as Didymus Chalcenterus, and his successor, Pamphilus*?. Didymus was born in 63 B.c. and compiled a Lexicon of Tragic and Comic Diction, while among the lexicographical works of Pamphilus, who flourished in 20 B.c., was one entitled “Arrixai déLas. The scholiast on Aristophanes, Aves 471, quotes Aristotle év 7H Zapiov woNreia, as well as the comic poet, Plato; and such a scholium may readily have been derived from Didymus*; but the indebtedness of later writers to this able and industrious compiler has been greatly overrated; and, now that we know of the actual existence of copies of the ’A@yvatwy woXtre‘a at a time when it was supposed to have been hopelessly lost, there is less reason for attributing to the interposition of Didymus a knowledge of the ToAcreia: which may easily have been derived from the work itself. It has further been supposed that some of the accounts of remarkable phenomena found in later collections, such as the @avyacia “Axo’cpara of various writers, may have been originally borrowed from the IloAireta. Thus, Antigonus of Carystus, who probably lived in the time of Ptolemy Philadelphus, in his ‘Ioro- pidv Tapaddéwv Svvaywyy (144), quotes from Callimachus a description by Aristotle of the two fountains of the Sun in the temple of Zeus Ammon. This description may have been derived from the HoArreia of Cyrene‘. ;

In the age of Augustus, the ToAcrefae are not quoted by Dionysius of Halicarnassus, who, however, refers to the Tuppyvav Népma, which formed part of the Népipa BapBapixe ascribed to Aristotle’.

StTRaBo (who belongs to the same age) refers in general terms to Aristotle in connexion with Elis (Rose, Frag. 493°), Argos (482), Epidaurus (491), Tenedos (594), and Chalcis (601. 603). In a single passage (on p. 321—2), after stating that the migrations of the Leleges are attested by ai "ApuororéAous wodureiat, he appeals to no less than four of them as his authorities, vzz. those of the Acarnanians, Opuntians, Megarians and Leucadians. When we remember that the story of the recovery of the lost library of Aristotle is told by Strabo (doubtless on

1 Heitz, Verl. Schr., p. 244. 4 Rose, Frag. 5312; A. P. p. 4873 2 Rose, A. P., p. 400; Heitz, Verl. Heitz, Verl. Schr. p- ages ili Schr. p. 244, and Ar. Frag. p. 219. 5 Rose, Frag. 6093.

3 Rose, 4. P., p. 521.

ON AUTHORSHIP OF THE MIOAITEIAI xxiii

the authority of his preceptor Tyrannion), we are not surprised at finding in his pages not a few traces of a first-hand acquaintance with the ILoAtreta. Nevertheless, the fact that only a comparatively small number of ‘the woduretae are noticed in Strabo has led to the suppo- sition that he had no direct knowledge of that work}.

Puiny the elder (23—79 a.D.) names Aristotle as his authority mainly on the geography of several of the Greek islands (Tenos, Delos, Melos and Samos), and also in connexion with Argos, Thebes and Chalcis. One of his references may be traced to the Népiua BapBa- pia. He also states that, according to Aristotle, the art of painting was introduced into Greece by Euchir, Daedali cognatus (Rose, Frag. 382°); but there is no sufficient warrant for referring this to a ‘lost passage of the *A@nvaiwy qoditeia. Pliny’s references to Aristotle may safely be regarded as taken at second hand* This has also been assumed, but with perhaps less justice, in the case of Plutarch (c. 46—120 A.D.).

PLUTARCH repeatedly mentions Aristotle as his authority:—five times in the life of Lycurgus*; once in that of Cleomenes*; and twice in that of Perécles*, in passages that may perhaps be traced to the Sayuiwv aoAtreia, In five instances Aristotle is named in connexion with Naxos, Tegea (twice), Troezen and Ithaca®; and in two others we may trace the reference to the Népipa BapBapixa’. The ’AOnvaiwy rodureia may fairly be regarded as the source of Plutarch’s references to Aristotle in the lives of Theseus", Solon*, Themistocles*, Cimon", Pericles” and Nicias™; as also of certain passages in which Aristotle is not actually named’. At this point it may be interesting to notice two good examples of tacit quotation from the ’A@yvaiwy wodireia in the pages of Plutarch. In c. 14 § 4 of the modurela we read that, with the aid of ®vy, Megacles " restored the exiled Peisistratus dpyaixds (or dpxaiws) xat Mov drAas: in Plutarch’s Solon (3 § 5) we find the phrase azAois...diav Kal apxaios. Again, in c. 5 § 2 of the wodurefa, we are told of Solon, eidovro xowg diadAaxrAy Kat dpxovra Ydrwva : ‘in the Amatorius of Plutarch (18 § 14), a passage that has not hitherto been noticed in this connexion, we find five consecutive words applied to Solon, which are identical with those

1 Heitz, Verl. Schr. p. 244. 8 c. 25 (Frag. 384). |

2 ¢.g, through Philostephanus of Cy- 9c, 25 (Frag. 390='A0. word. c. 7 § I, rene. é xupBets). i

3 cc. 1, 5 6, 28, 31; Rose, Frag’, 10 ¢. 10 (Frag. 398)- 533—538.- 1 ¢. 10 (Frag. 402).

4.9; Frag*. 539. 22 c.g, 10 (Frag. 403, 405).

5 cc. 26, 28; Frag?. 577—8. 13 c. 2 (Frag. 407).

8 Frag. 559, 592, 507, 597+ 14 Solon, c.20 (Frag. 391), c. 25 (Frag.

7 Camill. 22, and De Cohibenda Ira 416). ‘ 11; Frag’. 610, 608.

xxiv EVIDENCE OF ANCIENT AUTHORITIES just quoted,—rotrov efAovro Kowa SiadAakryy Kal apxovTa kal vopobéryv. In view of such instances it seems difficult to maintain the theory that/ Plutarch had only a second-hand knowledge of the “A@yvaiwy arn He has even been charged with the incredible carelessness of keeping words such as viv unchanged in copying from the intermediate authori- ties which he is supposed to have followed. Thus, in Solon, c. 25, his statement that fragments of the wooden tablets on which the laws of Solon were inscribed were still to be seen in his own day (ét xa “uas) in the Athenian zpuravefov, was regarded by Rose as a careless transcript from some such phrase in Polemon as diacwfovrar 8 ev 7g Ipvravet®.. Similarly, in Lycurgus, c. 28, éru kal viv was held to refer to the age of Plutarch’s authority Ephorus’., In the former case, at any rate, the statement of Plutarch is corroborated by the evidence of Pausanias (i 18 § 3) who, even at a later date, observes that in the mpuraveiov the laws of Solon cict yeypappévor. Other quotations in Plutarch are ascribed by Rose to the Zclogae and Collectanea of previous writers, such as Didymus; but this ascription is not supported by the context of the quotations themselves. Plutarch places the THoAcretar of Aristotle in the same category as the works of Herodotus, Xenophon, Eudoxus and Aristoxenus, implying that all these writers dealt with important and interesting events in a style that was at once vigorous

i

and graceful‘.

1 Prof. J. H. Wright, Zhe Date of Cylon, p. 25, observes: ‘Most of Plu- tarch’s statements on the affair of Cylon are traceable to Aristotle’s Respub. Ath. A comparison of Plutarch’s account of pre-Solonian affairs with that of Aris- totle shows, however, first, that this ‘dependance is not immediate, and, secondly, that there is much admixture of foreign matter’...In the note he refers to 38 passages in Plutarch’s So/on which bear resemblance to passages in Aristot. Respub. Ath., and are evidently traceable to the latter work. Only once, how- ever, is Aristotle here named (So/. 25 ad init.) ‘A minute comparison of the wording of these parallel passages, and a consideration of the order in which they occur in the two writers, as also of ex- traneous matter inserted and of important and illuminating facts omitted, show that Plutarch was certainly not intimately acquainted with the Respub. Ath. The resemblances, the dissimilarities, and the discrepancies alike are intelligible only on the supposition that Plutarch was transcribing from some work in which

Such is not the language of one whose knowledge of

an abridgment of these parts of the Respub. Ath. was embodied. In tran- scribing from this abridgment he inter- polates foreign matter, which is incon- sistent with the unabridged Aristotle. The abridgment omitted the main part of cc. 2—4, also c. 13 [§§ 2, 3], as well as many minor statements. The poetical quotations of Plutarch are from a dif- ferent collection; such as coincide are ina different order... Plutarch’s otherwise un- accountable omission. in his 7hem. of the characteristic anecdote of Themistocles, Ephialtes, and the Areopagus (Respud. Ath. c- 25) may be explained on the hypothesis that the copy of Aristotle’s work used by Plutarch did not contain this story. In Pericles, Aristotle is cited, but immediately there follow statements as to Pericles which directly contradict Aristotle (cf. Ad. Bauer, Forschungen, p. 77, who believes, however, in a first- hand use of Respub, Ath. by Plutarch).’

2 Preller on Polemon, p. 87.

3 Rose, A. P., pp. 413, 491:

4 Non posse suaviter vivi sec. LEpicurum, c. 10, drav dé pndev Exovoa Avanpdy 7

ON AUTHORSHIP OF THE MOAITEIAI XXV

the ToAtreta: was mainly or solely derived from second-hand sources of information.

ZENOBIUS, who flourished in the time of Hadrian (117138 a.D.), refers to c. 28 of the “A@yvaiwy qodcrefa, and: mentions the woduretar of Corcyra, Samos, Delphi and Methone (Frag.* 513, 576, 487, 552). He also names Aristotle as his authority for facts relating to Cythnus and Thebes (#rag.* 523, 502).

AuLus GELLIUS (115—180 a.D.) names Aristotle in connexion with Solon’s law against neutrality. The law is found in ’A@. qod. c. 8 § 5.

ARISTIDES, one of the most celebrated rhetoricians of the 2nd century (117 or 129—180 A.D.) never mentions the “A@yvaiwv woduretu, but the only poems of Solon which he quotes are extracted from those preserved in that treatise; he also paraphrases other passages from those poems and from the text of Aristotle’.

DiocEnes Lagrtius (towards the close of the 2nd century 4.D.) twice appeals to Aristotle for facts connected with Corinth (Frag. 516, 517). In the first of these passages he couples him with Ephorus. In a third passage he refers to Aristotle év 77 AyAtwv rodtteia (Frag.® 489) ; but, as the vague plural daciv occurs in the previous context, there is no certain proof of first-hand acquaintance with the work in question. In this author, however, we have several parallels to the account of Solon given in the ’A@yvatwy roditeta’,

Potiux of Naucratis (77. 180—238 a.p.), who dedicated his *Ovo- paorixev to Commodus (Emp. 180—192), quotes largely from the TloAureta, especially from that of Athens. The latter is his main authority on all points of Athenian law and antiquities? Many consecutive lines are either transcribed or paraphrased from its pages, ég. the epigram about Diphilus and a large part of its context in c. 7 § 4. But his debt to the "A@yvaiwy woX:refa, though vast, is invariably unacknowledged, while the only passage in which he mentions the name of Aristotle in connexion with a term of Attic law, is not

BdraBepdv loropla cat diupynors, él mpdéece Kadais kal peyddats rpoohaBy Ao-yov éxovra Siva Kal xdpw, ws tov ‘Hpodérov ra ‘EAAyuekd, kal Ilepouxa roo Revoparros, daa dé “Ounpos é0éomie Oéoxeda eldts, 7 Tas mepibdous Bvdokos, 7 xrices Kal moAt- telas Aptororédys, 4 Blous dvdpdv’ Apioré- Eevos éypapev, od pdvoy péya Kai todd 7d edgpatvov, GANG Kal KaGapdy Kal dpuera- peAnrév dori. _

‘1 Cf. Aristides ii 360, 361 Dind., with "AO. wor. 5 § 2, 11 § 2, 12 § 5; also p. 535—538 with ’AQ@. od. c. 12; and lastly i p. 765, (ZédAwva) pace THs modsrelas karadvéelons AaBdvra domlda Kal dépy Kad-

FjoOar wpd Tis olklas, BonOetv uev ovx Exovra, olua, evdexvimevov dé ws exer yrwpuns, with AQ. mod. c. 14 § 2.

2 Diog. Laert. i §§ 45, 50, 58.

3 Even before the discovery of the "AO. mod. this fact had been partially ascertained by comparing the language of Pollux with that quoted from the Ad. mod. in the lexicographers. -Cf. Sto- jentin, De Luliz Pollucis in publicis Atheniensium antigquitatibus enarrandis auctoritate, (Breslau) 1875; and Stoewer, in quibus nitantur auctoribus Lulit Pol- lucts verum iudicialium enarrationes, (Miinster) 1888.

xxvi EVIDENCE OF ANCIENT AUTHORITIES

found in that treatise, so far as it has been preserved’. Several of the other vrodtreiat are, however, expressly mentioned, viz. that of Acragas (twice in Frag.* 476), Himera (twice in 510), Tarentum (590), Orcho- menus (566), and Sicyon (580). In other passages, where Aristotle is named, the information may have been ultimately derived from the Constitutions of Cyprus (527), Rhegium (568), Syracuse (585, 589), Cyrene (529) and Argos (481), or from the Tuppifvwv vopspa (608).

ATHENAEUS, who, like Pollux, was a native of Naucratis (72. ¢. 200 A.D.) expressly mentions the wodcreiae of Aegina (Frag.* 472), Delos (490), Naxos (558), Troezen (596), Thessaly (499), Methone (551), Colophon (515), Massalia (549), Croton (583), Sybaris (584) and Syracuse (588). The name of Aristotle is also mentioned in connexion with Miletus (557); and that of Timaeus with reference to Aristotle’s account of Locri (547), which has already been noticed’. Aristotle év Tuppyvev vopipors is also quoted (607). It has been conjectured that these quotations may have been taken second-hand from lexicographical works, such as the lexicon to the Comic poets compiled by Pamphilus from that of his predecessor Didymus. This is supported by the fact that on p. 499 Athenaeus twice quotes the comic poet Diphilus; and, between the two quotations, inserts a reference to Aristotle év rq @ettadadv wodreig. to prove that the Thessalians used a feminine form 7 Adyvvos*®. But a native of a country, in which, as we now know, copies of the ’A@nvaiwy wodtreéa were actually in existence at the time, may well have derived much of his information from the original work. Apart from the British Museum papyrus and the fragments of the Berlin papyrus, both of which came from Egypt, we know of a third copy, which is mentioned in the catalogue of an Egyptian library of the third century A.D. 4,

HarpocraTion of Alexandria, the ‘nee of the Attic ‘Orators, who is doubtfully ascribed either to the second, or (less probably) to the fourth century of our era, expressly quotes ’ApuororéAns év "A@nvaiwy wohtre’a in no less than 50 places. A lost passage in the same treatise is less precisely cited with the phrase ws “ApiororéAns pyoi (381). There are nine other woAcreiat which he mentions by name, those of Arcadia,. Elis, Thessaly, Cythnus, Cyprus, Sparta, Massalia, Opus and Pellene. The quotations from the ’A@yvaiwy rwodurea are so numerous and so precise, that it may fairly be assumed that they were taken at first-hand from the treatise itself.

CLEMENT of Alexandria (0d. 220 a.D.) quotes the zodsrefar of

1 Pollux viii 62, mapa Borov (Frag8 * Rose, A. P., p. 471, Frag. 4993. 456); cf. iii 17, Tprromdrwp (Frag.3 415). 4 Ziindel in Rhein. Mus. 1866 ae 432+ 2p. xx.

ON AUTHORSHIP OF THE MOAITEIAI xxvii

Phocaea and Locri, and refers in more general terms to that of Sparta (Frag. 599, 548, 535); while AELIAN (7. 250 A.D.) tells the story of the usurpation of Peisistratus in language almost identical with that of c. 14 of the ’A@yvaiwv woAureia. *

Hesycuius of Alexandria, who belongs to the end of the fourth century, or (more probably) to the fifth, is a compiler from earlier authorities, the best of whom is Diogenianus of Heraclea (of the time of Hadrian). The lexicon of Hesychius expressly quotes the Constitution of the Opuntians (Frag.” 563), and names Aristotle as the authority for statements respecting Cyrene (528), Corcyra (513) and Sparta (541). The second of these items may, however, be traced back to Zenobius. Not a few articles are ultimately founded on the ’A@yvaiwv qodtreia, though neither the work is named, nor its author. Such are the articles on aduvaror (AO. rod. 49 § 4), dae oupBdrwyv Sixalay (59 § 6), Bovliyyns (Frag. 386), Bovrdetoews eyxAnua (AO. wor. 57 § 3), SHuapxor (21 § 5), Stapenerpyyervyv nuepay (col. 35, 3), tmmds (7 § 4), and trou tpoxes (49 § 1). To the same source may be traced the articles on Avovicou ydos and *EAvxetov (3 § 5), and also on gpat Bovdys (30 § 4), and xaAxotv muvdxiov (63 § 4).

Puotius, the patriarch of Constantinople (815—891i a.D.), states that excerpts from the oAcreta: of Aristotle, viz. from those of Thessaly, Achaia, Paros, Lycia and Ceos, were included in the twelfth book of the historical selections of Sopater (sixth cent.)’, In his Lexicon, the *"AOnvaiwv woAureta is mentioned in the articles on vavkpapia (AQ. oA. 8 § 3), and wrép ra KaAAtkparous (28 § 3): the latter may, however, be traced back to Zenobius. The odA:refac of Sparta, Samos and Ithaca are expressly cited (frag? 586, 575, 509); and Aristotle is named in several articles*, including one on qeAdrat (AO. rod. 2 § 2). During the embassy ‘to the Assyrians’ the patriarch perused and epitomised no less than: 280 volumes, many of which are now lost; but there is nothing to prove that the ’A@ynvaiwy woArreia was included among them.

Tzetzes of Constantinople (born c. 1120 a.D.) refers to the mode reiat of Orchomenus (/vag.*® 505) and Ithaca (504 and 508). Of the last two references the former is also found in the Ltymologicum Magnum; so that possibly all three may have been borrowed from earlier sources. The lexicon last named, 5.v. ieporovoi, expressly quotes Aristotle év rH "A@nvaiwy wodireig (c. 54 § 6), and has a short article as Sarnrys (Frag. 422) which may be traced to Harpocration (c. 56 § 6). It also names Aristotle in connexion with Cumae (frag. 525), and we know that this article comes ultimately from the ToAuretac.

1 Phot. Bib/. Cod. 161, p. 104 5 38, quoted by Rose, A. P. p. 401, Frag.® p. 258. 2 Frags 496, 541; 593» 554-

xxvili EVIDENCE OF ANCIENT AUTHORITIES

Eusratutus of Constantinople, archbishop of Thessalonica (who died c. 1198) refers to the woAuretas of Sparta (545) and Ithaca (506), and names Aristotle in a passage which comes from the modrrefa of Thessaly (437). But there is no proof of direct acquaintance with any of the modireia. His only notice of the "A@yvaiwy modurefa (c. 44 § 1) is borrowed from Telephus of Pergamos who lived under Hadrian and (among other works) wrote on the Laws and Customs, and on the Lawcourts of Athens.

Thus far we have surveyed in chronological order the writers who, either at first or second hand, quote from the Iodureias of Aristotle. We have still to notice a few anonymous citations.

(z) The unknown author of the irdGeors to the Aveopagiticus of Isocrates, a Christian writer of perhaps the sixth century, is the only person who quotes the anecdote in c. 25 respecting the part ascribed to Themistocles in the overthrow of the Areopagus’.

(2) The Scholfia to Aristophanes refer to the *A@. woA. in no less than thirteen places*, They also expressly quote the zodcreiar of Sparta and Samos, and name Aristotle in connexion with Orchomenos, Corcyra and Cyrene. Many of the Scholia on Aristophanes are de- rived from Aristophanes of Byzantium and his pupils Callistratus, Aristarchus and Didymus; as well as from the Pergamene scholars, Herodicus and Asclepiades. The earlier Scholia were drawn up in the 3rd century a.p.; while the later Scholia go down as far as the age of Thomas Magister and Triclinius (end of 13th cent.).

The Scholia on Sophocles cite Aristotle for a fact mentioned in °A6, mod, 60 § 2; those on Euripides quote from the wodcrefax of Sparta (Frag. 544) and Thessaly (498), and name Aristotle in connexion with terms relating to the wodureia of Cumae (5245). Those on Homer give us evidence as to the moArreiae of Iasos and Samos (503 and 571); those on Pindar cite the wod:reiax of Sparta, Syracuse and Gela (Frag. 532, 587, 486), and name Aristotle in connexion with Aegina, Rhodes, Crete, Acarnania, Opus and Locri. Those on Plato quote Aristotle for facts which may be traced to the woAureiae of Athens (385) and Thessaly (498). Those on Apollonius Rhodius refer to the wodureia. of Samos and Samothrace, Sinope and Tegea, Corcyra and Kios in Mysia; those of Theocritus refer to Croton, Ceos and Crete. The Svholia on

1150). In four of these places (marked

1 Rose, A. P., p. 423, nO. 359; Frag. : . with an asterisk) the title is given in full:

4042

4°. 2°AO, mod. 7 § 1 (*Av. 1354); 15 §3 (*Ach. 234); 19 § 3 (*Lys. 665), § 4 (Zys. 1153), § 6 (Vesp. 502); 21 § 5 Wub. 37); c. 28 § 3? (Vesp. 684); 34 § 1 Ran. 1532), § 3 (Vesp. 157); 34 ult. (Vesp. 157); 54 § 2 (Vesp. 691) col. 32, 8—15 (*Plut. 278); col. 36, 3—9 (Zz.

"Ap. év’AQ. Tod. ; in two (Vesp. 157, 684) the form is Ap. év modcrelats.

3 In the Schol. on Theocr. iv 7 we are told that the Olympic crown é« rijs kaddiorods yf Kaddorepdvou édalas yevd- Hevos dora, Fris dméxer cradlwy éxra ds dagw (sic) "ApioréreAns. This is less

ON AUTHORSHIP OF THE MTOAITEIAI Xxix

Aeschines contain no express mention of Aristotle, but they include several items of information ultimately derived from the *A@nvalwv modtreia',

It will be observed that the references to the TMoArrefat, which have now been enumerated, extend over a period of no less than fifteen cen- turies, and attest different degrees of acquaintance with the work in many parts of the ancient world, chiefly in great centres of learning, such as Alexandria and Constantinople. In the case of the “A@nvaiwv moAcreia, the exact degree to which the text of the treatise was known to those who refer to it, may in general be traced in the Zes¢imonia which are printed below the critical notes in. the present edition. All the external evidence is in favour of ascribing the ToAcretas to Aristotle.

§ 4. Zhe later literature of the Wodureta

After the revival of learning in Italy it was Francesco Patrizzi who, in the course of a calumnious attack on the personal character and philosophical authority of Aristotle, unconsciously did some little service to the cause which he impugned by investigating the earlier sources of information as to the lost works of Aristotle. In his Déscusszones Feripateticae, published in 1571 at Venice, and reprinted ten years later at Basel, he made the first attempt to ‘collect their fragmentary remains’. Patrizzi’s collection was included in Casaubon’s Aristotle (1590), and in 1593 a more comprehensive edition was promised by Casaubon him- self?. The lost woAcretas are also mentioned by the learned Selden‘, but meanwhile Casaubon’s promise remained unfulfilled. The im- portance of the fragments was noticed by Niebuhr® and others.

It was not until 1827 that C. F. Neumann, then living at Munich, published his Aristotelis Rerumpublicarum Religuiae, including fragments from 50 of the woAcrefau, the number traced to the “A@nvaiwy roAirefa being 59 in all. In 1843 a similar collection was published by H. A. Van Dyck at Utrecht. These were superseded by Carl Miiller’s edition in the Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum, Paris (Didot), 1848, in which the editor says of Neumann’s work: guz guidem libellus nullius nobis usus esse potuit: tam supina est auctoris negligentia. The total number of qoA:retae in this new collection is 95, and the fragments of the *AOnvaiwy wodureia, have now risen in number to 74.

This collection served as the foundation for a still more extensive

likely to have been derived from the @av- 1854; Heitz, Verl. Schr., p. 1.

pao dxovowara than from the rodirela 3 Note on Diog. Laert. p. 76, ed. 1615. of Elis. 4 De jurenaturali bc., Operari74—5. 1°AG. mod. 28 § 3, 57 § 3) 59 §§ I, 2. 5 Fist. Rom. i 20, p. 12 of 3rd Eng.

2 Hallam, Lit. of Europe, ii 6; ed. ed.

XXX LATER LITERATURE

work by Valentine Rose. In his Avistoteles Pseudepigraphus (1863), we have 213 fragments, 89 of which are assigned to the “AO. rod. Rose’s second edition of these fragments was included in Vol. v of the Berlin edition of Aristotle (1870), with three new fragments (445, 470, 511) from the wodtreta. of Delphi, Corcyra and Methone published by a French scholar from a ms of Zenobius discovered on Mount Athos’. Lastly, in 1886 Rose’s third edition was published by Teubner; the number of fragments is now 223, and of these gi are traced to the °A8. moX., the two new fragments being no. 413 and 429 (corresponding to c. 3 §5 and 52 § 1).

Meanwhile, in 1869, the fragments had been edited by Emil Heitz, the able author of Dze Verlorenen Schriften des Aristoteles (1865). This edition was practically simultaneous with the second edition by Rose which, although printed in 1867, was not published uritil 1870.

In the case of the more important woAcretar and especially in that of Athens, the substance of these fragments has been not unfrequently set forth by modern scholars in various degrees of fulness. Thus Carl Miller (FHG ii 104) supplies an epitome of the Fragments on Athens ; and Rose, a brief digest in the form of a table of contents’. But the most successful endeavour to give life to these fragmentary remains is to be found in the Appendix to the important work of Oncken on the political teaching of Aristotle*. The fragments are there discussed in their historical bearing, and the scattered facts contained in them presented in a consecutive order and in an interesting form. The introduction to the analysis of the fragments closes with some valuable criticisms to the following effect :—

The method of dealing with the history of Athens which was pursued by Aristotle and his pupils must be regarded as marking the beginning of a new epoch. Without in any way undervaluing the influence of the contemporary school of Isocrates, as represented by Ephorus, Theopompus and Androtion, we may say without exaggera- tion that the picture, not only of the political life of Athens down to the overthrow of her freedom, but also of most of her statesmen, which became permanent in the literary tradition of later ages, was in its leading traits first delineated by the school of Aristotle and his followers.

The analysis concludes with the following remarks on the second part of the “A@yvaiwy moXreia :—-

Even a hasty glance at all these details gives one an impression of the extra- ordinarily valuable store of authentic facts here gathered by the industry of Aristotle. He has presented us with a description of the very subjects which the Athenians them- selves did not deem worth the trouble of describing, since the knowledge of these de-

‘E, Miller, Mélanges de littérature 3 Die Staatslehre des Aristoteles in grecque, Paris, 1868; p. 369. Historisch-Politischen Umrissen, vol. ii 2A. P., p. 402. (1875), pp. 410—528.

OF THE TIOAITEIAI XXXi

tails of every-day life was for themselves the merest matter of course. In Aristotle the scientific instinct of the genuine investigator was blended with the natural curiosity of the foreigner; and this double interest served to add a fresh keenness to his perception of what posterity would deem to be best worth knowing. For later generations his woh:rela became a veritable treasure-house of accumulated learning. Things that are only incidentally noticed by the orators and poets of the time, as being perfectly familiar to every one, are here narrated, described and elucidated by Aristotle for the benefit of all of those to whom this information was unknown. It was an important and an imperishable service. It was also one which was the natural result of his peculiar method as an investigator. To display the various members of the living body of definite fact, to separate all the complex framework into its com- ponent parts, to trace the sequence of a series of results as they came into being, to describe for after ages what was regarded by contemporaries as no less obvious than their daily meat and drink,—to do all this was thoroughly characteristic of Aristotle. It is more than enough to prove the truth of the opinion that Aristotle is above all others the scientific investigator of the Hellenic idea of political life.

Thus far we have dealt with laborious collections of the merest fragments of the odcreio, and with one vivid commentary upon the most important of the series. Meanwhile, the original work was deemed to have vanished as completely as the lost decads of Livy. Neumann, in the Prolegomena to his edition of the fragments, laments the loss in the following terms: eheu amissum est in sempiternum prae- clarum opus, nisi e palimpsestis quibusdam fortasse eruatur. In the Bibliotheque Orientale of Herbelot (p. 971), mention is made of an Arabic translation of the work, but the hope inspired by this statement remained unfulfilled’. To cherish such a hope, even for a moment, was in 1865 denounced as folly’.

§ 5. Zhe Berlin Fragments of the *A@yvaiuv rodreic.

In the year 1880 the interest of scholars was aroused by the announce- ment that, among the fragments of papyrus found in the Fayoom near the ancient Arsinoe, and acquired for the Egyptian Museum at Berlin, there were two small pages with writing on both sides. They were skilfully deciphered by Blass, and a comparison with other papyzi led

1 The title of the alleged translation is Ketab Stassat Almoden (the book of the government of States). Herbelot’s au- thority is Haji Khalfa, who died in 1658. In Fluegel’s ed., vol. v p. 97, no. 10, 203, Haji Khalfa says that, in the book on ‘the Government of States,’ Aristotle mentions 171 great States. He dis- tinguishes this book from the Politics, and says that the latter was translated into Arabic, which perhaps implies that the ‘Government of States’ was not. Part of this statement is doubtless de- rived from the list of Aristotle’s writings

in Ibn Abi Useibia, which includes ‘a book about the Government of States and the number of the nations, in which he mentions 151 great States’ (ed. Miiller, 1884, p. 68). As this list is confessedly taken from a Greek catalogue by Ptolemy (see supra p. xvii), we have no right to assume that the Arabs possessed the book. It is not at all the kind of book that was likely to interest them. For the substance of this note I am indebted to Prof. W. Robertson Smith.

2 Heitz, Verl. Schr., p. 230.

XXxii THE BERLIN FRAGMENTS

to their being provisionally assigned to the second century a.p. The first fragment contained on one side (I a) the long passage in Iambic verse quoted by Aristides from the poems of Solon; on the other (I 4), a passage in prose on the archonship of Damasias. The second fragment had on one side (II 2) an account of the reforms of Cleis- thenes ; and on the other (II 2), a passage on the ostracism of Megacles and Xanthippus, with some mention of the mines at Maroneia. So imperfect were the indications given by the context that Blass identified Damasias as the archon of 639—8, instead of the archon of 582—1 and 581—o. The institution of the nine archons seemed to be mentioned after the extract from Solon. It thus appeared impossible to attribute the fragments to a historical work written in chronological order, such as that of Ephorus or one of the writers of “Ar@iSes. But Theopompus was known to have closed the tenth book of his PAz/ippica with an ex- cursus on the demagogues of Athens. This (as Blass thought) might well have begun with some account of Dracon and Solon, followed by a digression on the early history of the archonship and by notices of various statesmen such as Megacles, together with some observations on the institution of Ostracism and the reforms of Cleisthenes. It was accordingly conjectured that the newly discovered fragments belonged to Theopompus.

Here the matter rested for a very short time. The article by Blass was published in Hermes in October, 1880. The very next number of the Rheinisches Museum contained a brilliant contribution by the veteran scholar Bergk, who was then in his 69th year and had just completed the fourth edition of his Poetae Lyrici Graeci, and whose attention was perhaps mainly drawn to the fragments because they included fresh evidence on the poems of Solon. Bergk pointed out that the passage on Cleisthenes corresponded with a scholium on Aristophanes, /Vubes, 37. The papyrus as deciphered by Blass had the following letters:

— — — dOHNAIOIC — — XO°++ ekek - AHMol — — STIQMENTFANT » ©» [ya

— Toc AHMOYCANA * * WN

With the help of the Schodium Bergk restored the second and fol- lowing lines thus: kar |éo[ryo]e 8 x(a] Sypap- Xovs THY abryy cere] erivedcav z[ot|s mplo- TEPOV vaukpapots KQt irot|s Sypous avr]t TOV vavkpapiay éoince]

THE BERLIN FRAGMENTS Xxxili

This Scholium, although introduced by the words ’Apirorédys 8% aept KXeucOévous dyoi, had not found its way into either of Rose’s previous editions of the fragments, its place having been taken by a less accurate transcript in the lexicon of Harpocration (Rose, 359°); but it is duly cited in the edition! by Heitz (no. 19 = 388).

In addition to the proof supplied by this citation, the internal evidence of the style of these scanty fragments was enough to con- vince Bergk that the prose portions could not have come from any other work than the lost woAurefas of Aristotle’. But Bergk could not believe that so long a passage of poetry as the fragment of Solon could have been cited in the “A@yvaiwy wodireia. He accordingly suggested two alternative solutions: either the poem was an interpolation in- serted in a complete copy of the “A@yvaiwy wodurefa by a copyist who desired to illustrate the reforms of Solon by transcribing the poem, or the work consisted of selections from various writers on the constitution of Athens.

The Berlin fragments were further discussed by Landwehr, who pub- lished a transcript and a restoration of the text in 1883; which he afterwards revised and corrected in the Phiologus (Suppl. Bd. v 195). They were also the subject of an able paper by Diels in 1885”. Ac- cording to his view the fragments are simply two loose pages of papyrus filled with transcripts from the "A@nvatwy modirefa by some schoolboy of Arsinoe. Damasias is rightly identified as Damasias II, and many other points are discussed in a masterly manner. It is also maintained for the first time that all the four pages belong to the same work, and that the "AQ. vod. of Aristotle. The paper in- cludes a convenient reprint of the various restorations of the fragments, and also a lithographed facsimile.

1 p. go, ‘Wohl aber erinnert die Be- handlungsweise an Aristoteles: selbst ein blédes Auge wird erkennen, dass der Verfasser vollkommen mit seinem Gegen- stande vertraut ist, dass er zwischen We- sentlichem und Unwichtigem sehr wohl zu scheiden weiss, dass hiet nicht ein buch- gelehrter Grammatiker zu uns spricht, sondern ein erfahrener Mann, der mit scharfen Blicke das politische Leben zu betrachten gewohnt war, der sein histo-

rischer Sinn vor jeder Befangenheit des Urtheils bewahrte. Nicht minder erinnert die schlichte und schmucklose, nur auf die Sache gerichtete Darstellung an die Weise des Begriinders der Staatswissen- schaft. Auf mich wenigstens machten diese Bruchstiicke sofort den Eindruck, als hatte ich Reste der Aristotelischen Politie der Athener vor mir.’

2 Philos. u. Hist. Abhandlungen, Berlin Acad., 1886, ii pp. I—57.

XXXiv THE BRITISH MUSEUM PAPYRUS

§ 6. Zhe British Museum papyrus.

Thus far the student of Aristotle’s ToAvreta: had to found his con- clusions as to the character of the work solely on meagre fragments laboriously collected from many sources, and on two barely legible and most imperfect scraps of Zapyrus in the Museum at Berlin, when suddenly, on the morning of Monday, Jan. 19, 1891, the readers of The Times were startled by the announcement that a Ms containing the greater portion of Aristotle’s Constitution of Athens had been acquired by the British Museum as part of a collection of papyrus rolls from a place in Egypt which, for adequate reasons, it was not expedient to specify more particularly. It was not until the rolls had been examined at the British Museum that it was found that three of them contained what was identified as the text of the “A@nvaiwy TmoXTELa.,

The secret of the discovery had been well kept: and by its first public announcement the interest of scholars at home and abroad was roused to a high pitch of expectation. Only eleven days later, on Friday, Jan. 30th, the printed text appeared under the editorship of Mr F. G. Kenyon, Fellow of Magdalen College, Oxford, Assistant in the Department of Mss, British Museum. It was soon discovered that, although the text was described in the preface to the editio princeps as ‘in good condition’ and requiring ‘little emendation’, there was a still deeper truth in the editor’s fuller statement on a later page :—‘ There remain not a few passages which still require emendation by conjecture, in some of which the reading of the ms is completely lost, while in others a few faint traces of letters remain, which will serve as tests of the accuracy of any proposed emendation’. A vast number of con- jectures of very various degrees of merit were accordingly proposed by English scholars in the pages of the Athenaeum, and the Academy, and the substance of these, together with the criticisms of continental scholars, were reprinted, with many other suggestions, in successive numbers of the Classical Review (March to July, 1891). Many further contributions to the criticism and elucidation of the treatise have since appeared. A conspectus of the literature of the subject is reserved for a later section (§ 10).

Early in March the Trustees of the British Museum published a Facsimile of the papyrus. The immediate, and indeed the permanent, result of this publication was a widely expressed recognition of the remarkable skill with which Mr Kenyon had accomplished the task of deciphering the ms. In those portions of the Ms which are most easily read in the original, the facsimile is an adequate substitute for the

THE BRITISH MUSEUM PAPYRUS XXXV papyrus. Jt is mainly, though by no means exclusively, in the places where the papyrus is rubbed, and the remains of the letters only faintly visible, that it is absolutely necessary to resort to the original.

The ms consists of four separate rolls with the letters A, B, I, written at the beginning of the first three:

I 7 feet, 24 inches, in length, by about 11 inches in height, including Columns 1—11

Ils » 54 » ” ” ” ” 12—24

Ill 30» ” ”» ” ” ” 25—30

IV about 3 feet (originally) in length, by about ro inches in height, including remains of Columns

Total length about 18 feet, 8 inches’.

31—37

The ms is written in four hands: (1) extends over Columns 1—12, and is described as ‘a small semi-cursive hand, employing a large ynumber of abbreviations of common syllables.’

(2) begins with Col. 13 and ends in the middle of Col. 20. This is described as an ‘uncial of fair size,’ plain but not ornamental, em- ploying no contractions, and making a large number of blunders in matters of spelling.

(3) is a ‘straggling’ and often ill-formed semi-cursive hand, of larger size than the first. This extends from the middle of Col. 20 to the end of Col. 24; and also includes the mutilated remains of Cols, 31—37.

(4) closely resembles (1), and ‘employs many of the same ab- breviations,’ but is generally finer and more upright, and possesses some distinctive forms of letters. This extends over Cols. 2530”.

Abbreviations are not used uniformly by all the four hands. They are chiefly confined to hands (1) and (4), while they are very sparingly used by (3), and not at all by (2). Hence it is obvious that, in restoring the text, it is solely in Cols. 1—12, and 25—30, that we can assume the existence of abbreviations. They can only be admitted within very narrow limits in Cols. 2o—24, and 31—37; while they cannot be admitted at all in Cols. 13—20.

(1) and (4) have many abbreviations in common; but at the same time each of the two has some that are characteristic of itself alone. This will be made clear by the following classified list®.

1 According to Pliny (4. ZH. xiii § 78) the two best kinds of papyrus were thirteen digits in height (13 x°72821= 10°4653 inches), rather less tall than rolls 1—111, but rather taller than Iv.

2 Mr Kenyon’s Jntroduction, p. xi. The proposal to identify hands (1) ‘and (4), and hands (2) and (3), made by Kaibel and Wilamowitz on pp. v—vi of

their preface, is refuted by Mr Kenyon (ed. 3 p. xii) whose opinion is justly con- firmed by Blass (Praef. iv—vii).

3 Mr Kenyon has already given a gene- ral list on the last page of his Zztrod. I have endeavoured to classify this list, and to represent approximately the shapes of the letters used in the Zapyrus.

a2

hands (1) and (4)

XXxvi

ft = -ydp

& = dé and -de- A = dia and é1a- \= elvat

a= éorl

K = cal and -Kat- w' = wév and -pev-

A= Tapdé and mapa- n = trepl

é = oy and ow- the = -ra

t = ri and -rnv P= ris and -rys

7 = Tov and -Twv

THE BRITISH MUSEUM PAPYRUS

hand (1) only ° = -01, -ov, -ov, ots, -ous N= ep C8 = -obae £ = xpévos, -0v, -Ov, -wy, -oLs

os -EWS

hand (4) only

u\= pera and (in 1) wera- © = -wv a= ava- ° = -os 2a=edldal 6 = ofp and -ouv- CO = -cba Y* = bré and bro- hand (3) only hands (3) and (4) only Y= brép k =-xal- and in (3) cal

Hands (1) and (4) have not only certain distinctive abbreviations, but they also use with different degrees of frequency the abbreviations that are common to both. Thus the symbol for efva: is found fourteen times in (1), and only five times in (4); that for éoré four times in (1), and twenty-eight times in (4); that for ovy- seventy times in (1), and six times in (4); that for -ovv- three times in (1), and sixteen times in (4); that for -ra. twenty-four times in (1), and fifty-seven times in (4); and that for -os is far more frequent in (1) than in (4)'. These considera- tions prevent us from identifying the two hands. There are also certain distinctive differences in the shapes of the letters used by each; and the same remark applies to hands (2) and (3)’.

Final syllables are often omitted in (1) and (4). Thus dv* is found in both hands for dvAys and pvAyy, and Bov* is used for all the cases of BovAy in the singular. Hand (3) has xwp for xwpav (col. 22, 2); tp for tpémov (2b, 11) and ozoypa for droypadds (2d. 35). An abbreviation for av is exceptionally used for avr#y (in col. 9, 8); and a symbol for dpaxyy, found in cols. 21, 35 and 26, 54, is common to hands (2) and (4). Numerals are denoted by the ordinary symbols in all hands alike’.

1 For the details of these statistics, see van Leeuwen’s Observationes Palacogra- Phicae in the Dutch edition, pp. 170o—7,

2 See the alphabets reproduced in Class. Rev. v 183.

3 The use of the above abbreviations, and their distribution over the several hands, may be illustrated by the follow- ing examples. For convenience, ordi- nary type is here used, and the words are separated from one another.

Abbreviations in (1), also found in (4): —¢eBn (col. 1, 3); Txwpnoavt (1, 20); Ta fo m Tao apxac (1,35); 7 7 xpewy aro- komna (2,31); arysov \ K 7° more (3, 32)5

ka et ov + overOar Butov \ (4, 6); menvyTh | a aur’ (4,15); 2 7 Ovemeo® F -ynv (4, 21) HT 1 vouwy Geaw (5, 23); ov > evdexer (7, 2); Marepmojion (7, 14); apuodr? (7, 25)3 omavra o’ oo (8, 21); oka fir To aaTu (9, 4) 3 KT duaxe (10, 12)3 \ K diK'oo (11, 1), \ Tox mde (rt, 27); emer & wr ev oixed yevou'nv Sdopay (11, 46); T ypayewdarnyuvTy, i.e. cvyypdyew & av hyavrat (12, 3).

In (4), also found in (1) :— KBadrerd (25, 25); Spaxme (27, 1); apxovr? (275 23) 3 W atperrat (29, 18); dre noe (29, 23)3 BT Bovd (29, 50); m'riBevrar (30, 41).

In (r) alone :—°=ov in rg places, e.g.

y

THE BRITISH MUSEUM PAPYRUS XXXVil

Lota adscriptum is hardly ever omitted in (1); hardly ever inserted in (2); (3) and (4) do not follow any fixed rule‘.

«and « are frequently interchanged, especially in (2) ; some of these mistakes are however corrected by hand (1). But even in (1) we some- times have « for e, ¢.g. muovetparos in three places (Col. 5, 28, 33, 37); besides four other instances. In (2) there are as many as 41, ag. adiAdov for ddetdov (Col. 16, 4); in (3) and (4) there are only four and five respectively. Conversely we have « for cin all the four hands, the number of instances being 14, 11, 15 and 2 respectively. Both of these mistakes are combined in voAetiav (Col. 13, 3) and qoAerias (14, 1; 16, 26)”.

There is nothing resembling a mark of punctuation, except the short horizontal line in the margin (Cols. 1, 403; 2, 43 7, 15, 393 IT, 5, 31; 13,15). In some cases this may be a true zapaypady, as in Col. 1, 40 and 8, 21 f, where it coincides with the natural end of a chapter; in others (as suggested by Blass*) it may denote a corruption; at any rate this appears more probable than van Leeuwen’s* opinion that it draws attention to an important or striking statement.

There are no breathings or accents, except in exuaptupay (Col. 3, 9), vopopuraxety (3, 26), Sypov? (4, 29), a (12, 3) 7yGvrae (13, 11) and avrov (29, 46). In some of these cases they are apparently added to prevent ambiguity of meaning’.

Blunders made by hand (2) are occasionally corrected, apparently by hand (1), or possibly (4). It has been suggested that the transcript was begun by some one who desired a copy for his own use, and, after writing out the first twelve columns, entrusted to others the task of copying the remainder, being content to revise their work and to correct their misspellings and their other mistakes*. The editors of the first German edition, Kaibel and von Wilamowitz’, hold that all the correc- tions are due to hand (1) which they identify with (4). To account for the fact that many blunders are left uncorrected, they assume that the

23,223) =-Kat- in avaryxboy (23, 14). xwp =xdpav (22, 2); rp=Tpdrov (22, 11); amoypa=amroypagds 22, 35. Final v a- bove last letter of word, seven times, cf.

Pp. I5T, 72.6. xb also=-kau- in (4), 27,17:

ape mary, (2, 9); =ov in 44 places, e.g. Onrix®, (3,3); =ot in 8 places, e.g. duoxu- NO (10, 17)3 ots once, add® (2, 33) 5 =-ous in 16 places, e.g. KAewOev, (12, 8); Km (8, 9).

In (4) alone :—//=elot (in 20 places, eg. twice in 27, 11 and 28, 41); v=d7d (26, 19, 303 27, 20; 28, 24); 00’ =-cOau in 16 places, e.g. duvacd’ (26, 9); U=v76 in 26, 19 and 303; 27, 20; 28, 24; also =tro- in dévywwy (26, 52); a=dva- in 13 places, ¢. 2. aByvat 30, 3.

In (3) alone : Y= dp twice 21, 24 and

23, 22 (cf. 22, 44). (3) xo = Kak (22, 13 bes ;

1 Van Leeuwen, /. ¢. p. 165.

2 Van Leeuwen, /. ¢. p. 166.

8 Pracf. p. xi.

4 1c. p. 166.

5 Mr Kenyon’s Jwtrod. last page; and van Leeuwen, /.¢. p. 167.

6 Mr Kenyon’s /utroduction, p. xi.

7 Praef. p. vii.

XXXviii THE BRITISH MUSEUM PAPYRUS

text depends on two earlier mss, one of them much more accurate than the other!. Blass however, holds, with apparently greater probability, that there are several correctors: all the four hands correct some of their own mistakes; and one or more of them correct the work of the rest, not to mention the possibility of a revision independent of all the four. The same critic divides the ‘corrections’ into five groups, the most important of which he prefers to regard as variae lectiones which were recorded as such in the ms from which our papyrus was copied’.

The process by which the papyrus plant was made into material for writing was as follows: the tall stem had its rind stripped off and the pith cut with a sharp instrument into broad slices of extreme thinness and considerable length. These were laid in long strips on a flat board; across these were placed in the opposite direction and touching one another, a number of short strips corresponding in length to the proposed height of the roll. The upper and lower surfaces were made to adhere to one another by means of the slightly glutinous sap of the pith. or (failing that) by means of paste. The long scroll thus formed was thereupon smoothed down with an ivory instrument or a shell®. The proper side for writing is that on which the horizontal strips allow of the pen running freely without traversing the frequent joinings of the successive parallel strips of papyrus. Thus, the British Museum papyrus of the first three speeches of Hyperides is written entirely on what may be called the ‘horizontal’ side, ze. that on which the strips of papyrus run in a horizontal direction. If any writing is added on the back, it may be described as written on the ‘vertical’ side, that on which the strips run vertically and overlap one another at their edges. After the front of a scroll has been filled, the back is not unfrequently used for some other writing on a totally different subject. For example, the British Museum papyrus of the Funeral Oration of Hyperides has a Greek horoscope on one side, and that the ‘horizontal,’ or right side; while the speech of Hyperides is written on the ‘vertical,’ or wrong side. Similarly the A@yvaiwv woAureéa is written on the vertical, or wrong side, technically called verso (or ‘reverse’) as opposed to recto. It may be inferred that the text of any author so inscribed on the back of the scroll is not only later in date than that on the other side; but also that it has been copied solely for the private use of the owner, and not for publication or for preservation in a public library *.

On the horizontal side of the papyrus of the ’A@yvatwy odureéa are

1 Praef. p. ix. currit harundo via.’ Cf. Bliimner’s Zech-

2 Blass, Praef. pp. viii—xi. nologie, i 308—325.

3 Martial xv 209, ‘Levis ab aequorea 4U. Wilcken, Hermes 1887, p. 487— cortex Mareotica concha Fiat: inoffensa 492, Recto oder Verso.

AUTHORSHIP OF THE A®HNAION TIOAITEIA xxxix

the accounts of receipt and expenditure drawn up by a bailiff on a private estate in the eleventh year of Vespasian (from Aug. 78 to June 79 a.D.)’. After (but probably not very long after) the time when the accounts had ceased to be valuable, the other side was used to the extent of a column and a half for the transcription of an argument to the Midias of Demosthenes’; the latter was then struck out, the roll turned upside down and the “A@yvafwy woureia written on it, beginning at the other end of the roll. The ms has been assigned to ‘the end of the first century of our era or, at latest, the beginning of the second,’ and this opinion is confirmed by several dated documents of the first and second centuries which have come to light since the first publica- tion of the papyrus’.

§ 7. Date and Authorship of the “A@qvaiwy woditeia.

The date of the original composition of the treatise is determined by internal evidence. The system of electing Strateg? for special departments of military duty, which is recognised in c. 61 § 1, was introduced after B.c. 334. Hence the work was written later than that date. The latest date expressly quoted in it is the archonship of Cephisophon, B.c. 329—8 (c. 54 § 7). Again, since in c. 46 § 1 mention is made of triremes and quadriremes, and not of quinqueremes, it has been inferred that it was written before B.c. 325—4, the earliest date at which quinqueremes are named in connexion with the navy of Athens*. Further, it is clear that the treatise could not have been com- posed after 322 B.c.; because, in that case, we should certainly have had some account of the change in the constitution of Athens which was brought about by Antipater in that year®. Lastly, the treatise describes the Athenians as still sending officials to Samos (c. 62, 16); in the autumn of B.C. 322 that island ceased to be under the control of Athens, B.C. 322 is also the year of the death of Aristotle: hence, the evidence derived from the treatise itself shews that it was written while Aristotle was still alive; and the reasons above assigned enable us to place its date between B.C. 328 and 325.

We have already traced in chronological order the evidence of all

1 grous évdexdrou abroxpdropos Kaloapos 3 Mr Kenyon’s Jutrod. to ed. 3, p. Overracidvov LeBacrod dpyupixds Abyos xvi. *Emumdxouv loAvdedxovs Anuudrwv Kal 4 Mr Cecil Torr in Athenaeum, Feb. 7, dvarwpdrov rev dv éuod Acdduov’Aoma- 1891; Bruno Keil, Berl. Phil. Woch. ctov xetpitouévwy (in the original there 1891, p. 614; J. H. Lipsius, Verhand- are no accents). lungen der Sachs. Gesellschaft der Wissen- 2 Printed in the Dutch ed. of the’A@. schaften, 28 Feb. 1891, p. 45. See note woX., pp» 180—185; and in Mr Kenyon’s on 46§1. ; 3rd ed., pp. 215—~-219. 5 Bruno Keil, zw. s. p. 613.

xl AUTHORSHIP OF THE A®HNAION ILOAITEIA

the ancient authorities who quote the HoAuretax, We have seen that the work as a whole is assigned to Aristotle by the unanimous voice of antiquity; and it has just been shewn that the “A@yvo/wy qoAcreta was certainly completed while Aristotle was still alive. In such a case we must necessarily accept the work as Aristotle’s, unless internal evidence is conclusive on the other side. The consideration of that evidence turns partly on questions of style, partly on the relations subsisting between the “A@yvaiwy wodtrefa and the Politics. Let us consider the latter point first.

The latest event mentioned in the Poditics is the death of Philip in B.C. 336. Had the Politics been finished even as early as seven years after that date, it would have been completed before the *A@yvaiwy modtreia, But, according to the opinion now prevalent among Aristo- telian scholars, it was left incomplete by its author and was not given to the world in his lifetime. Books vii (iv) and viii (v) are more care- fully composed than the rest, being specially marked by the avoidance of Aiatus. It is possible that these two books represent the author’s finished style; it is also possible that they owe their polish to the skill of a pupil of the Peripatetic school’. But in either case they are not of the nature of a popular work, and there is nothing to prove that they were in general circulation during the author’s lifetime.

Probably the greater part of the Politics had already been written by the year 336. It has sometimes been supposed that the vast collection of facts relating to the woAcreia: of various Greek states was formed to serve as materials for the theoretical treatment of the subject in the Politics. The Politics, however, were never completed, whereas the “A@yvatwv wodutefa assumed a finished form more than three years before the death of Aristotle. But it is quite possible that the materials for the "A@yvaiwy qoArreda, and for the rest of the series, were collected before the larger part of the Politics was reduced to writing. The same materials would serve for both; but, in the case of the ToAcregau, they were embodied in a finished work for popular perusal; in the case of the folitics, they formed part of the preliminary studies for courses of lectures probably confined to the philosopher’s immediate circle. Now, as the olitics may have continued to supply the theme for such lectures in and after 334, while the "A@yvatwv qwodurefa was not ready for public perusal until 6 or 8 years later, we need not be surprised to find in the Politics no reference whatsoever to the Hodureta At a time when only fragments of the latter were known to scholars, this fact used to be quoted in proof of the spuriousness of the work. But now that

1 Shute’s History of the Aristotelian Writings, pp. 164—1 70.

AUTHORSHIP OF THE A@HNAION IIOAITEIA xli

nearly the whole of one of the ToAcrefa: has been recovered, and its date determined to be later than the latest event noticed in the Pofitics, no argument against its genuineness can be founded on the fact that the author of the unfinished work says nothing of a popular treatise that had not yet been published while the theoretical work was still in course of preparation.

The question arises whether the IoAurefat are ever mentioned in the undisputed works of Aristotle. At the close of the £¢thics, when about to state the theme of the ensuing discussion in the Politics, Aristotle speaks of ra@v woduredv af cvvaywyat and also of rév cuvnypévwv modtreav (x 9 §§ 21, 23). The sense of the context of the latter phrase may be expressed as follows: ‘First then let us endeavour to review whatever is to some extent valuable in the statements of our predecessors, and then to learn from the constitutions which have been collected (or put into juxtaposition with one another), the causes which are apt to preserve or to destroy states, and the causes which have this effect on the several constitutions.’ This promise is suffi- ciently fulfilled by the review of the various constitutions in Book n, their classification in Books i-v1’, and the discussion of the ways in which revolutions may be caused or prevented in Book viii (v).

Rose, however, in his Avistoteles Pseudepigraphus, while regarding the mode cuvaywyat as existing collections of facts forming materials for the Politics, insists at the same time that Aristotle had not himself written any such work or expressed any intention of writing it”. The Politics of Aristotle, he adds, were supplemented in due time by the works on vopobeata written by his pupil Theophrastus; but neither Aristotle nor Theophrastus, he contends, ever wrote any work on wodurefax. The Tlodureiat, attributed to Aristotle, are ascribed by Rose to some an- onymous Peripatetic who was less of a philosopher than a historian and philologist. Such was Demetrius Phalereus who wrote works epi THs “AOnvnoe vopobecias and wept trav "AOqvnoe wodtre@v. Such, again,

1 Cf. Newman, Ar. Pol. vol. i pp. 2, 214—220.

2 Rose, A. P. p. 396.

Camerarius and Victorius understood moNtreiat ouvnypevac as a reference to Aristotle’s historical work, a view sup- ported by Grant and Stahr, Ar. Pol. (1860) p. 66. Heitz, Verl. Schr. p. 232, quotes the paraphrase of Andronicus: elra owaryarydyres Tas TodiTelas OewpGpuer ev abrais & re pOelper cal d o@fer Tas odes, From the use of swarywyal in Pol. vii (vi) init., p. 1316 b 40, ert d€ Tas cuwaywyas airay rv elpnudvuv émioxerréoy mavTwv Trav tpdrwv, and cvvaxréoy els édlya in

1319 4 23, he infers that they are die unter eine gewisse Anzahl von Rubriken vertheilten, verschiedenen Verfassungs- jormen. But the meaning of cwaywyai in the former of these two passages is determined by Aristotle himself by the use of the word cuvévafdueva in the very next line, and cuvydvacyol in the subse- quent context. It refers to constitutions which exceptionally comdzne oligarchic and democratic elements; and this sense has nothing to do with the interpretation of the passage in the Ethics proposed by Heitz. Susemihl (followed by Mr J. A. Stewart) brackets Zz. x g §§ 22, 23.

xlii AUTHORSHIP OF THE A@OHNAION IIOAITEIA

was Dicaearchus, whose zoAcretat were known to Cicero. The author of the MWoArreiac was (according to Rose) inspired, like Dicaearchus, by the example of Aristotle who, in his Fo/i#ics, touches on the constitutions of a large number of states. Now that we know that the ‘A@yvaiwy moAute‘a was completed several years before the death of Aristotle, while the Foditics was still unfinished, the suggestion that the unknown author of the IoAcretae was inspired by the Polztics falls to the ground, unless indeed we are to assume that the author was one of the pupils of Aristotle who attended his course on the Fo/itics at some date after his return to Athens (334). If so, it is singular that the name of this remarkably prolific writer should not have been preserved. On the contrary, the name has completely vanished, and in its place we find everywhere the name of Aristotle and of none beside.

The only two that have been seriously suggested as authors of the "AOnvaiwy aoduteia are Demetrius Phalereus and Dicaearchus. The former is suggested by Rose in his Aristoteles Pseudepigraphus, p. 398. Two of the fragments seemed to imply a more aristocratic type of constitution than any that prevailed at Athens before about 317 B.c,; and, on the other hand, the work must have been composed before the number of the Attic tribes was increased from ten to twelve (B.c. 307). The fragments in question are those on Oecpoberdv dvdkpiors (414°) and orpareia év tois érwvdmors (469°). The inference drawn by Rose is not supported by the context in which we find those fragments in the present work (c.55 § 1 and c. 53 § 7); and we now know that the treatise was written not between 317 and 307, but between 328 and 325. Rose’s suggestion has been recently revived by Schvarez. If any de- tailed refutation of this view is necessary, it may be noticed that, of all the passages attributed to the work of Demetrius wept ris “AGyjvqor vouobecias (either by Harpocration, s.v. oxapyddpo, Zeds epxeos and mapacracts, or by Plutarch, So/. 23, or by the Scholiast on Arist. Vudes 37, or by other authorities mentioned in Miiller’s FHG), not one is to be found in the wodre‘a. Indeed, in the very first fragment of the work of Demetrius, the account of xupia éxxAnoia is described by Harpocration as less satisfactory than that of ‘ Aristotle’ which is found in c. 43 § 4. Similarly Harpocration, s.v. wapdoracis, prefixes to a quotation from Demetrius zepi vouobecias, a quotation from ‘Aristotle’ év 7H A@nvatev moAureia. which is found in c. 59 § 3; and the Scholiast on Arist. Wudes 37 quotes from both treatises, his quotation from ‘ Aristotle’ being found inc. 21 § 5. (From the other work, wept ray "AOyvnot mohereudy or wodurdv, named in Diog. Laert. v 80, not a single fragment has

1 Ar, und die’AQ. Tod., pp. ¢, ad.

AUTHORSHIP OF THE A@HNAION ITIOAITEIA — xliii

survived.) To meet these difficulties Schvarcz suggests that, at the time of writing the wept trav *AOyvyo. wodtredv, which he practically identifies with the "A@yvaiwy rodtre‘a, Demetrius was unacquainted with the facts which he afterwards ascertained by further study in the archives of Athens and embodied in his later work zept ris "AOyvyot vouobecias. And yet, strange to say, the account of xvpia éxxAyoia in this ‘later work’ is in the judgment of Harpocration inferior to that in the treatise which Schvarcz identifies with the ‘earlier work’ of Deme- trius.

It is equally impossible to assign it to Aristotle’s pupil, Dicaearchus, for not a single fragment attributed to him by ancient authorities is to be found in the "A@nvafwv rodirefo. Nothing is quoted from his wodtretos of Pellene and Corinth, or Sparta and Athens; and the few remains of his antiquarian works wepi povoikdy aydvwy, rept Atovvotaxay aydvey and I[ava@yvaixes, have nothing in common with the treatment of those topics in the treatise ascribed to Aristotle.

While in the Politics there is no allusion to the Todureto, there are many passages in the *A@. oA. which, either in thought or expression, are so closely parallel to the Politics, as to suggest a common author- ship. Such coincidences might of course be due to the retentive memory of a pupil attending the master’s lectures on his unfinished and unpublished work; but it seems more natural to ascribe them to acommon author. Let us first consider the more general coincidences of thought.

(1) The ’A@nvadwy roArteéa is the work of one who displays a certain predilection for an aristocratic form of government.

In the Politics there is no question as to the author’s general sympathies being on the side of an aristocratic government. Avistocracy is to Aristotle an dpiory woAtreio. It is marked by election for merit ; it is distinguished from the perfect state as being a government of men who are only good relatively to the constitution ; it is so called because the best rule, or because the best interests of the state are consulted ; it is analogous to royalty as a government of the best: it is even preferable to royalty, because under it the good are more than one. Oligarchy, the perverted form of Aristocracy, is inferior to constitutional government (oNre{a), and to its perverted form, Democracy.

Democracy is described in the Politics as the government of the many in their own interests; it is the perversion of constitutional government; it is akin to tyranny; in its extreme form it is peculiarly apt to pass into tyranny; it is, however, the only possible form of government in large states; and it is more stable than oligarchy. ‘ Liberty and equality’, as well as the ‘use of the lot’, are dispassionately

xliv AUTHORSHIP OF THE A@HNAION IIOAITEIA described as characteristic of democracy; and suggestions are pro- pounded for the improvement of this form of government’.

The author of the ’A@yvaiwy wodureia dwells on the importance of the services rendered by the Areopagus in the times of Dracon (c. 4) ' and Solon (c. 9), and in the sixteen years immediately succeeding the formation of the confederacy of Delos (c. 23). Cleon is regarded as a demagogue who corrupted the people (c. 28). Nicias, Thucydides (son of Melesias), and Theramenes, are counted among the best statesmen of Athens (c. 28). The writer shows the greatest interest in the constitutional measures proposed by the Four Hundred (c. 29—32) ; at the same time he does not disguise the atrocities committed by the Thirty (c. 35 end). The restoration of the democracy is described in dispassionate and unenthusiastic terms (c. 38). The defeat of a pro- posal to reward all who had aided in its restoration is mentioned in language implying that the author did not disapprove of the result.

On the other hand, the transfer of judicial functions from the BovA} to the ékxAyoia is commended on the ground that ‘small bodies are more open to corruption than large ones’ (c. 41, 1. 28); but this approval is expressed in the mildest terms and does not imply sympathy with democracy as such. It has been quoted’ as inconsistent with the Politics; but the reason given for the writer’s approval of the transfer is in perfect accord with a passage in the Politics (1286 a 30, quoted in note onc. 41 1. 28). There are two periods in which Athens enjoyed a good government :— (1) the 16 years during which the Areopagus was supreme; and (2) the time immediately after the Four Hundred. The only phrase that does not remind one of the writer of the Folitics is the reference to the ‘forgiving spirit’ of democracy in c. 22 § 4:—xpapevor TH ciwOvia. Tod Sypou mpgorntt. Iam not aware of anything like it in the Poditis, but I may observe that it recalls a notable passage in the Republic, and may possibly be a reminiscence of it®.

The attitude of the author of the woAcreéa. towards Peisistratus and Theramenes is in harmony with what we should expect from the author of the Politics. Both agree that Peisistratus rose to power by attacking the men of the Plain*; unless a certain passage in the Politics is inter- polated, both observe that he was summoned before the Areopagus,

1 For the reff. as to all these points, see Index to Jowett’s Potitics s. v. Aris- tocracy and Democracy.

* Cauer, Hat Ar. die Schrift vom Staate der Athener geschrieben? p. 49.

3 p. 558 B (of the ‘forgiving spirit’ of democracy), 7 cuyyv wp kal 00d’ drwc- tiobvy opixpodroyla atrys. The term

mpgérys happens to be used just before, but it is there applied to the ‘calmness’ with which condemned criminals go about the world like heroes under a democratical government:—f apgdrns évluv Tay Sixacbevrwy od Kouyh;

4 Pol. 1305 a 23.

AUTHORSHIP OF THE A@HNAION IIOAITEIA xlv

and that he was twice exiled from Athens’. When recommending ‘the constitution that gives predominance to the moderately wealthy class’ (1296 @ 38), Aristotle adds that ‘only one of those who had played a leading part in the affairs of Greece had encouraged the introduction of this form’. As to the person meant there is much diversity of opinion ; but whether (with Mr Newman) we identify him with Theramenes, or (as Dr Jowett prefers) with Solon, we have in either case a complete agreement with the “A@yvaiwy roAureia, though this does not exhaust the question. Again, the description of Ostracism and its object is ‘to a considerable extent in harmony with that given in the Po/itics’®, The account of the policy of Aristides is less favourable than we should expect (see c. 24), ‘inasmuch as he is said to have converted a citizen- body largely consisting of peasants into an urban citizen-body subsisting on pay and exercising a despotic authority over the subject states, and thus to have contributed to the establishment of an extreme democracy’. We are taught, however, in the Politics (1292 6 41—1293 @ 6) to ‘con- nect the establishment of a reAevraia Syuoxparia with a great increase in the size of the city and with the provision of pay’; and we also know that the opinion of Aristotle’s pupil, Theophrastus, on the policy of Aristides, ‘was not an altogether favourable one’ (Plut. Avzstid. c. 25)’.

While the two works are in general agreement on the points above mentioned, there are certain apparent discrepancies that must now be noticed. (1) The ‘Draconian Constitution’ of the odcreéa is in conflict with the passage in the Politics (1274 615) which states that Dracon ‘adapted his laws to a constitution that already existed’; but the ‘ Draconian Constitution’ has been vigorously attacked on its own merits, while the passage in the Politics is of doubtful genuineness. Again, the vod:reéa states that Peisistratus reigned for 19 years; the Politics (1315 6 31) makes his reign last for 17, but the whole of the context of the latter passage is bracketed by Susemihl in his 2nd and 3rd editions. In a disputed passage of the zodureia, Themistocles co-operates with Ephialtes for the curtailment of the power of the Areopagus: in a possibly interpolated chapter of the Politics (ii 12), the place of Themistocles is taken by Pericles, but not without protest on the part of critics, even before the discovery of the wodurefa. In the moAtreia. (c. 21 § 6) we are told that Cleisthenes ‘allowed every one to retain his yévos and ¢parpia and his (hereditary) priesthood according to his ancestral rights’; in a perfectly genuine passage of the Politics (1319 4 23) it is implied that Cleisthenes ‘increased the number of the. phratries’ and ‘converted a number of private worships into a few

1 Pol. 1315521, 31. ; 3 bid, 2 Mr Newman in Class. Rev. v 162 b,

xlvi AUTHORSHIP OF THE A@HNAION IOAITEIA

public ones’. But these passages may be readily reconciled with one another if we consider that the passage in the rodure‘a refers to those who were already citizens ; that in the Polztics to the veoroXtrat.

It has been pointed out by Mr Macan that ‘the ideas underlying the second part of the work are conspicuously Aristotelian. The distinction beween dpxew and dpyeoOar and its relation to the franchise ; the definition and essence of citizenship (1275 @ 22, and 4 22)...; the theory of citizenship in the Po/itics, especially in Bk 11 ad cnt. might seem to be presupposed in the treatment of the dpxat in the work under consideration’’.

The comparison we have endeavoured to draw between the ’A@nvaiwv modureta and the Politics cannot perhaps be better concluded than by a striking example of identity of thought and language in the two works, In °A@. wor. c. 16 we read of Peisistratus: rots dardpots mpocdaverle Xpyjuata mpos tas épyacias, wore SiatpéperOan yewpyodvras. rTodro 8 rote Svoiv xapuy, tva pyre év TO acre SuatpiBworyv adda dteoTwappévor Kata THY xwpay, Kal drws evropoivTes TOV peTpiwv Kal mpos Tois idios ovres pyr émiOvpdar pyte cxordlwortv ermpedcioba tdv xoway. In the Politics we are told that (even under a democracy) it is advisable to provide the poor (rots amépovs) with capital, and encourage them to work (rpérew én’ épyacias 1320 6 8); and that it is characteristic of an oligarchy and a tyranny to drive the people out of the city and disperse them (1311 @ 14). We learn elsewhere that the best material for a democracy is an agricultural population; for being poor they have no leisure (4oxoAos), and therefore seldom attend the assembly ; and, not having the necessaries of life, they are always at their work (apes rots gpyos StarpiBovort Kat rdv ddXorpiov ovK ériOvpodor, 1318 4 14); lastly, that while mechanics or traders or labourers are apt to frequent the city and find it easy to attend the assembly, the agricultural class (ot yewpyotvres) do not attend meetings, or equally feel the need of assembling together, because they are scattered over the country (Si 7d SveordpOar xara tiv xuWpav, 1319 @ 30). It would be difficult to imagine a more complete series of parallelisms in expression as well as thought.

Next, as to the /anguage and style of the treatise. The vocabulary includes nine words that are not found elsewhere: these fall into two groups, (1) technical expressions, viz. ém£ypiwors (45, 9, quoted from a law), errernpis (54, 29), erradxovs (col. 34, 32), tpodpomevw (49, 6), and mpoeSpuxds (59, 6); (2) words compounded with two prepositions, viz. éreoxadd and éeioAnros (30,22—23); mpooavatyta (29, 16); mpodtacmepw (14,23): The technical terms need no defence ; érerypis is exactly analogous to

1 FY. H. S. 1891, p. 21.

AUTHORSHIP OF THE A®HNAION TIOAITEIA — xlvii

tpterypis and wevrerypis, and érrdxous to dixous and éfdyous which occur elsewhere. Of the compound words the first three occur in quotations from public documents, and the last is supported by the analogy of mpodiaBarrcv, mpodiacipev and zpodiaxmpeiy in the undisputéd works. Double compounds are in fact characteristic of Aristotle ; in the Zudex Aristotelicus, out of nine words compounded with éew- one is found in Aristotle alone, and two others are first found in his pages; while, among the compounds with zpocava- and mpocamo-, two are found in Aristotle alone, and five are used by no earlier writer’.

Among words that are not found in the /udex Aristotelicus may be mentioned: kvapevew, avaxpalav, Bnya, avricracudtys, ouoppovycavres (14, 8), aynAaretv (20, 8). Of these dynAaretv is obviously quoted from Herodotus ; and opodpovycartes, which occurs four times in Herodotus (though not in the same historical connexion), comes immediately after a word borrowed from that historian. The rest are part of the necessary vocabulary of the subject, and their non-appearance in the undisputed works is merely accidental. Exception has been taken to cupBovAcvew (c. 30, 14) as non-Aristotelian, and rov'rwy xapw (29, 25) and évros tpiav pvav (49, 26) have been described as apparently un-Aristotelian*; but the last of these is cited from a law, and the other two are also in quotations ; so that here at any rate we have no right to demand adhe- rence to Aristotelian usage.

Among the compound verbs that are not found in any contemporary writer are xatagarilev, éridtavéwerv, éLarropeiv, cvvapéocxerOa and zapa- otparyynOyvat; and, among technical terms, Cevyicwov, dorpaxodopia, adécimos (nuépa), evonuia, Bodavos, eumyrys, erioTiduoy, ékOvpara. (?), and évayicpara. The word zpodaveifew, which has been quoted as only used by later writers, is actually found in contemporary decrees*; and Tptaxovtdpiov, which has been described as an ‘entirely new word’, is to be seen in contemporary inscriptions*. peuitoupia is not found in Aristotle, but he uses pepupiporpos.

Lists of ‘un-Aristotelian words and phrases’ have been collected by various scholars in the Classical Review *; and many of the items in such a list will call for notice in the course of the commentary. Attention has also been drawn to the absence of certain turns of expression charac- teristic of the undisputed writings of Aristotle: thus in the oA:reéo.

1 Gomperz, Axnzeiger der phil.-hist. 4 Besides the inscr. of B.c. 325/4 quoted Classe, Wien, 1891, no. xi. on 56, 20, we have one of 330/29 in which 2 Class. Rev, v 273. the word occurs twice :—cf. Boeckh’s See- 3 The decree of Stratocles preserved in urkunden, p. 393. [Plut.] 852 B; and another inscr. relating 5 v 123 (J. B. Mayor), 184 and 272 (H. to Lycurgus in CIA ii 162¢ 7 and g (cf. Richards); ‘rare words’, 2., 229 (E. J. Class. Rev. vi 255 a). Chinnock). See also Greek Jndex.

xlviii AUTHORSHIP OF THE A@HNAION IIOAITEIA

‘there is a good deal about democracy, but we miss the technical terms éoxatyn, voraty, teAevTaia, axparos, Sypoxparia, Nothing is dromov, and no person or thing is either ozovdaios or paddos’'. But, however acute such criticism may be, and undoubtedly is, much of its point is removed, and its edge appreciably blunted, by a frank recognition of the necessary distinction that separates the style of a popular manual like the zoArre/a from that of a philosophical investigation like the Politics.

~ To a similar cause we may ascribe the differences which may be noticed in the degree to which certain particles and conjunctions are used in the voAcrea as compared with the undisputed works already known tous. Of the particles, ye is not used at all, and consequently yoiv does not occur, rot occurs only once in pero. (28, 35) where its existence is solely due to a probable, but not perfectly certain, emen- dation. ep is found only in xa@dzwep, xairep, domep, Sooomrep and dorep. pay is only used in od pay followed by dAAa. 81} is rather rare, but is sometimes found after a demonstrative pronoun, once after a superlative (kéAAtora 8 40, 17); and in several instances where re is followed by kat 8% kat; éreidy is rare, while éreSay is common. Of the conjunctions, obv is never used except in pév odv (hence it cannot be accepted in c. 43, 15, where xa Hv obv xabile. has been conjecturally proposed). dpa, rofvuy, rofyap, and re ydp, are not found. Add occurs some thirty times, but always after a negative. «kat always follows 0, and nearly always follows dev, when used in the sense of 8.0; iva is found about ten times; d7ws seventeen times ; and dws dy twice’.

In the undisputed works, ye and otv and re yap are common; dpa is rare in the Politics ; roivuv, pévroe and xairou frequent in the MMeda- physics, Physics and Politics; yet, in the Rhetoric, wévrot is found only four times ; kairo. only five. jv is used not only after od (as in the modreia), but also after dANd; ot pny ddAd, though only found once (except in quotations) in the Rheforic (1361 @ 29), is not infrequent in the Politics (e.g. 1284 5 4, 1262 a, 1264 a, 1290 4) as in the oNureia, . The argumentative sense of 8) is common, but 5) is never found after a superlative (as once in the wodireia); as a variation on Kat 8) Kal (which also occurs in the modurefa) we have xat followed (but never immediately followed) by 8% ; 60ev is followed by xat in Pol. 1384 @ 11, dev SHAov dru ai; and &0 by cal in 1301 4 39. After final conjunctions, such as iva and ézws, whether the tense of the principal verb be present or not, the optative is hardly ever used, but almost invariably the subjunctive®. Now that wa ja) cuppuyetéy te has been withdrawn from

' Class. Rev. v 273 6 (H. Richards). 3 The exceptions are Pol. 1320 @ 35).

° Cf van Herwerden’s Index Dic- and Eth. 1117 69—12. SeeEucken, De tionis, s.v. ‘ Particulae. Farticularum usu, p. 83. This work

AUTHORSHIP OF THE A®HNAION IIOAITEIA — xlix

the text of c. 42, 35, the only exception to this rule in the rodrreda is in c. 18, 30, tva doeByoaev dua Kal yévowto doGeveis, which may possibly be a quotation, as suggested by the introductory phrase, ws of Syporexoé gacw. In the undisputed works dws dv generally has a relative sense, which it does not entirely lose even when the sense appears to be final’; in the wodireia, the only instances of d7ws dy are in quotations from decrees of the fifth century, in which éaws with the subjunctive is never found without av’; all the other instances of oxws in the oA teia are in strict accordance with Aristotle’s usage.

In the above statement such divergences as have been noticed may be fairly attributed to the different character of the works compared. There is clearly less scope for a multiplicity of particles, or of illative conjunctions (such as ovy and roévuy and dpa), in a consecutive exposition of constitutional history and antiquities, than in the course of a philo- sophic discussion.

In a review of the wod:reéa it has been well observed by the latest editor of the Folztics, that ‘the style differs much from the style of the recognised works of Aristotle. It is a clear and precise, though a rather bald style, a style which has not the pregnancy which we associate with the style of Aristotle, and is also comparatively free from the ambiguities and irregularities which beset it’. But ‘the work before us is a narrative and descriptive work addressed apparently...to the world at large, not to the pupils for whom the recognised works of Aristotle were probably designed, and it is not likely that it would be written in the same style’*. The treatise is in fact the sole representative of the more popular class of writings attributed to Aristotle, and it enables us for the first time to appreciate the justice of some of the ancient encomiums on Aristotle’s style, which have hitherto been hard to reconcile with that of his abstruser works. Thus Cicero speaks of his jflumen orationis aureum*, and his dicendi incredibilis copia and suavitas*; and similar phrases are found in Dionysius of Halicarnassus and Quintilian’. The encomium in Cicero’s Academica in particular may indeed owe its exaggerated form to a desire to point the contrast between the style of Aristotle and the style of the Stoics; but the general purport of these eulogies is enough to prove that, at a time when the abstruser writings of Aristotle were imperfectly known, his style enjoyed the reputation of being marked by a singular charm and

has also been used for other details in 4 Acad. Prior. ii 119. this paragraph. 5 Topicaiz. — 1 Eucken, p. 55. * Grote’s Av. i 43—47; the passages 2 Meisterhans, Gr. d. Att. Inschriften, are quoted at length in my note on the p. 212. Orator of Cic., § 62. 3 Mr Newman in Class. Rev. v 159-

S. A. é

l AUTHORSHIP OF THE A@®HNAION TIOAITEIA

richness and variety. This language has been generally explained as applicable to the lost dialogues of Aristotle; but there seems na sufficient reason for refusing to recognise it as holding good in the case of other popular works, ascribed to the same author. Such a work was the “A@yvaiwy woAirefa, and the style of that work may be fairly described as on the whole smooth and flowing, and severely graceful.

It is perhaps even more than this. It is observed by Blass that its composition is marked by a high degree of attention to laws of rhythm similar to those adopted by Isocrates, and generally approved in the third book of the Reforic. Within the compass of a single sentence we repeatedly find a series of five to twelve or more syllables imme- diately followed by another of identical, or nearly identical, rhythm. Many examples of this have been noticed’ but a single instance of an exceptionally striking character may perhaps suffice for the present purpose (c. 55 § 4):—

(émaddv) S€ mapdcyytas rods papTupas ér-epuwtG, ‘rovtov BovAerai ms Karyyopeiv;’ Kav pev 7 Tis KaTyHyopos KTA.

Here the first word is followed by a double series of nine syllables, passing off into a double series of eight; and, within each pair of sequences, the quantities of all the syllables correspond.

The general avoidance of Azatus in this treatise implies that it is a finished work prepared for popular perusal and not a mere series of memoranda (or Yrouvypara) for personal use. This point was observed by Blass even in the scanty remains preserved in the Berlin fragments, and also by Mr Newman in the case of the work as a whole. It has since been investigated more minutely by Mr J. W. Headlam in the Classical Review.

He shows (1) that a definite principle is observed throughout the greater part of the work. (a) as a general rule Aza¢ws occurs only after the article, after numerals, after cal, dia and wepl?, and after words in which the last vowel is readily elided e.g. 5é, Te, Twa. erecta, elra, dAAG, pnd, prjre, rdvTa, opPbdpa, uddora. Hiatus is avoided at a pause, as well as in the middle of a sentence. (8) In quoted documents the rule does not hold (contrast c. 28 with latter part of c. 29). Nor (y) in certain technical expressions, such as indications of dates, e.g. evOds d¢ 7G dorépw érex éml Tedeoivov dpxovros (22, 21); constitutional terms, e.g. ) Boudy 4 é& "Apelov md-you (4, 20); and legal phrases, e.g. mepl Tod Sodvar 7a eaurod @ dv e6éXp (35, 14) and pi) elvas édevOepov (42, 8). To these may be added # (or ¢) dvoua (14, 273 17, 13).

(2) The exceptions are very unevenly distributed. A list of all that occur in the first part (cc. 1—41) shows that, at the beginning, clear and undoubted exceptions are very rare: in cc. 1—14 § 3 (omitting c. 7, 2130), there are only five. In the second part, the first few pages are as free as any in the first part; then cases become more

1 Blass, Praef. xvi—xxv. ? Also after 4, ef and uh.

AUTHORSHIP OF THE A®HNAION TOAITEIA li

frequent, and at the end the rule is almost completely neglected. The author had to insert so many technical expressions that he gave up troubling about the matter. In the first part the more striking exceptions often occur directly after a quotation (c. 32 § 1). In the first part at least, no conjectural emendation should be accepted which violates hzatzus.

The rule is much laxer than that of the school of Isocrates. Hence the work was not written by any member of that school. On the other hand there is considerable evidence that it is from the hand of Aristotle himself, for the usage in this matter is very nearly the same as that of some of his best authenticated works}.

While it cannot have been written by any of the Isocratean school it exhibits the same familiarity with the works of Isocrates as that displayed by Aristotle himself*. A passage that reminds us of the Gorgias is introduced by the characteristic twes, which is Aristotle’s favourite way of referring to Plato in the Politics’.

Thus far I have endeavoured to state the internal evidence in favour of accepting the treatise as being substantially the work of Aristotle. It is impossible, however, to ignore the fact that not a few highly com- petent scholars at home and abroad hesitate to accept it as such*. Doubtless, in its manner of dealing with matters of history and par- ticularly of chronology, side by side with much minuteness of detail on the subject of dates, there is evidence of occasional carelessness. There is sometimes a certain lack of intellectual force and vigour. And, further, there is an absence of those long and tangled sentences in which Aristotle, as we have hitherto known him, reviews and discusses a rapid succession of difficulties, doubts, and contradictions amid frequent irregularities of construction and amid repeated violations of his own rule against the use of parenthesis (A/ev. ili 5 § 7).

Much, perhaps too much, has been made of such points, and in consequence some have been disposed to regard the treatise as simply a product of the Peripatetic School, the work of some pupil writing with or without the general guidance and direction of Aristotle. It must, however, be remembered that, even in the case of works which are without question accepted as Aristotle’s, it is extremely difficult to determine how far they were actually composed by him in the form in which they have reached us; how far they are merely notes of his oral teaching, not given to the world in his lifetime, but revised and edited after his death by the industry and devotion of his pupils and successors. Of the usually accepted works of Aristotle it is doubtful whether any one, as a whole, passed beyond the limits of the lecture-room during

1 Class. Rev. v 270—2. 4 ¢.g. the Dutch editors; also F. 2 See notes on 26 § 2 ult., and 35 §4 Cauer and F. Rithl; and in England

ult, and Newman in Class. Rev. v Mr H. Richards and several other con- 160—I. tributors to the Classical Review.

3 See note on 26, 23 xelpous yeréo Gat. é2

lii AUTHORSHIP OF THE A@HNAION TIOAITEIA

the life of its author. ‘Portions of the Metaphysics and de Caelo, some at least of the Parva Naturalis, the two books zept ¢uAias, now in- cluded in the Nicomachean £¢hics, and the two books on the ideal state, Politics vii (iv) and viii (v), may have first seen the light in some other form during the lifetime of Aristotle.'’ On the other hand, the Tlodireiat (like the Déalogues) ‘would have been very likely to see the light early, for they were on a subject of far greater general interest than most of Aristotle’s works...It could only be through his Déalogues and TloAcreiot that he could hope to be immediately known to a wide circle of non-philosophic readers. If he were during his lifetime something more than the revered teacher of a limited circle of pupils, we may safely assume that the publication took place. ”’

The above remarks are quoted from the work of an Aristotelian scholar of the highest promise, whose History of the Aristotelian Writings was published in 1888, after his own death, and several years before the discovery of the *"A@nvaiwy wodureia, The inference there drawn on grounds of @ priori probability, as regards the WoAcreta: in general, is conclusively confirmed by the internal evidence of the date of the "AOnvaiwy woXtreia in particular. It was certainly written, and probably published, before the death of Aristotle.

I may also appeal to the same unimpeachable testimony as to the exact degree of value to be attached to the evidence afforded by the avoidance of hiatus :-—

‘Wherever it occurs, we have a work, or a portion of a work, in exactly the state which was given to it by the author who threw it into its present form. As to whether this author was or was not Aristotle himself, a good deal may be said on either side.’

On the one hand, ‘the Aristotle whom we know shows the most absolute con- tempt for all matters of style,’ and seems little likely to have adopted the Isocratean rule of avoiding 4za¢us. On the other, there is ‘nothing wonderful or difficult im keeping one style for oral lectures and another for published books. Still less

wonderful would it be if there was a wide difference to be found between mere notes for such lectures and deliberately finished publications’, ’

Assuming, as we fairly may, that the “A@yvaiwv woAwrefa was a work of Aristotelian origin, it may still remain uncertain whether it was pre- pared for publication by the great teacher himself, or by some unknown and unnamed pupil who was skilled in certain graces of style that were. apt to win the popular ear. The latter hypothesis might help to account for certain divergencies from the diction of the generally accepted works of Aristotle. To the interposition of such an editor we might perhaps attribute the general smoothness of style that marks its composition.

1 Shute, History of the Aristotelian 2 Shute, p. 23. Writings, p. 23. 3 Shute, p. 165 f.

AUTHORSHIP OF THE A®HNAION TOAITEIA iii

To the same source we might possibly trace certain inaccuracies of historical statement that tend to impair the authority of the work. But even Aristotle himself may have been quite capable of making a mistake in matters of history. The “master of those who know’ was not neces- sarily omniscient.

It must also be admitted that works like the Todsreta:, owing to the miscellaneous character of their contents, were, in their transmission from age to age, peculiarly liable to interpolation. It has even been suggested that, like the Aistory of Animals and the ioropio generally, ‘they represent not any fixed work of Aristotle or of anyone else, but merely a continuously open note-book’’. The ’A@nvaiwy wodireia may have suffered to some extent from this cause of corruption.

The difficulties as to the authorship of the treatise appear to be fairly met by an eminent Transatlantic scholar who expresses his opinion as follows :

“We are compelled to believe, from many indications, that it was written mainly by Aristotle, with perhaps the help of a pupil who prepared certain of the less important passages, the padding as it were; the work was then revised, but not rewritten, by him. If we are ready to maintain—a proposition by no means self-evident—that the main body of the writings current as Aristotle’s are the genuine works of the master in their original form, and that, accordingly, they are the only norm by which every- thing else is to be tested, we may still account for the “non-Aristotelian” peculiarities of the language of the ’A@qvatwy rodcrela as due, in part, to the fact that the historical sources (epigraphic and literary) are often given in verbal quotations, or at least in paraphrases that retain original forms of expression; due in part, perhaps, to tne stylistic idiosyncrasies of an assistant whose work was incorporated with the master’s, and finally to the most significant fact that the work was intended not for the scientific inner circle, but for the general reader’...

‘The evidence, internal and external, of essentially Aristotelian authorship, as well as authority, seems so overwhelming, that, as between the two alternatives, one should prefer to modify his conceptions of Aristotle than reject this treatise. As Diels? has pointedly phrased it:—Dzese’A@nvalwy rodirela [2st] nicht nur echt aristo- telisch sondern aristotelischer als die meisten der uns erhaltenen Lehrbiicher an welcher sich jene Skeptiker halten’*,

If we now revert to the evidence of ancient writers who, either directly or indirectly, quote the "A@nvaiwy modireia as the work of Aristotle, we find that, out of 56 fragments in which the *A@yvaiwy zroMteéa is expressly mentioned, 53 are found in our ms; of the remain- ing three, one (F7ag*. 385) belongs to the lost beginning, one (463) to the mutilated end; the third (447) is an inaccurate transcript of c. 54 § 2. Of the 35 fragments in which Aristotle is named without any express mention of the work, 25 are found in the ms; of the remainder, three belong to the lost beginning (381, 384, and the new fragment on p. 253,

1 Shute, p. 72. 2 Archiv f. Gesch. a. Philos., iv, p- 479. 3 Prof. J. H. Wright, Zhe Date of Cylon, p. 22 f.

liv AUTHORITIES FOLLOWED

1. 50); seven probably do not come from this work at all (382, 386, 392, 399, 401, 415, and part of 394); one (456) may possibly have come from the mutilated end of the work; and one (396) is a misquota- tion of the text, which can readily be brought into harmony with it. Thus, of the total number of 93 fragments (of which 86 are probably genuine references to this work), 78 are found in the ms, and all the rest are satisfactorily accounted for’. More than 50 of the fragments of the wodrefa are preserved by Harpocration alone, and all of these are found in the Ms.

Lastly, the Berlin fragments are all here. These fragments cor- respond to the following passages in the text:

I @ begins before SovAevdvrwv and ends with avdpay, c. 12, 26—52. I 3 begins before dpxovra and ends with xpéa, c. 13, 4—22. II @ begins before *"A@yvaior and ends after pudzjs éxdorys, C. 21, 18—c. 22, 10. II 4 begins before “Imapxos and ends after tpujpets, c. 22, 19—37-

In Ia the long Iambic passage is written as consecutive prose, and I 4 is less complete than II a and 4. Hence it is difficult to found any calculation on leaf I. But the contents of leaf II are equivalent to 44 lines of print in the present edition. Hence one page is equivalent to about 22 (say 24) lines of print. The number of lines of print now lost between the bottom of leaf I and the top of leaf IT is 240 (4+ 30+ 26+444+18+38+39+23+18). Thus it is not improbable that the lost portion is equivalent to ro pages, and that the MS was made up of gatherings of 12 pages each. The number of lines in our printed text preceding I @ is 245, which would take up only ro pages. Hence the first two pages of the lost Ms to which the Berlin fragments belong, were either left blank, or they actually

contained the beginning of the treatise. If the latter, then the amount of the ’A@. ok. which is now lost is equivalent to about 44 to 48 lines of the present edition.

§ 8. Authorities followed in the ’*A@nvaiwy wodtteia.

The only authors actually named by the writer are Solon and Herodotus. From Soton he quotes a large number of verses, most of them already familiar to us through Aristides, who shows no proof of any acquaintance with the poems of Solon, beyond that which he de- rived from the present work. The writer’s debt to HERopotus is far larger than appears at first sight. He only mentions the historian once (c. 14), but he closely follows him in the account of Peisistratus and Cleisthenes (cc. 14, 15, 20), though not without interesting variations. He also borrows from Tuucypipes, while deliberately differing from him on several important points in the story of Harmodius and Aristo- geiton (c. 18). He coincides with the historian in many parts of his narrative of the revolution of the Four Hundred (cc. 29, 33); but the

1 The same facts have been duly stated by Mr Kenyon in his Jutroduction, p. xv}; revised in ed. 3, p. xvi.

IN THE A@HNAION IIOAITEIA lv

coincidence is not complete, and the writer quotes original documents which are not quoted by the historian. As regards XENOPHON, we find a close resemblance in the account of the speech of Theramenes (c. 36) and elsewhere; at the same time, the divergences are sufficiently numerous to suggest that the authority followed here was the same as that followed at a later date by Diodorus Siculus. This authority has sometimes been supposed to have been the He//enica of Theopompus’; it has also been suggested that the writer owes to another work of Theopompus, the tenth book of his PAzzppica, his list of the Athenian demagogues, and his portrait of Cleon. It is just possible that the exaggerated account of the generosity of Cimon, which appeared in that work, is tacitly corrected in c. 27 § 3. But there is reason to believe that Theopompus did not publish his work until 324, after Alexander’s departure from India; if so, it was later than the qwodrreio. The common source, followed by Diodorus as well as the writer, was more probably Epuorus, who is expressly mentioned by Diodorus”.

As regards the writer’s relation to the various writers of “Ar6ides, there is no trace of any indebtedness to Hellanicus, whose carelessness on points of chronology* would have been enough to prevent his being trusted by a writer who usually aims at being precise in matters of chronological detail. To CLEIDEMUS, the next in order of time, we may probably attribute the Ionism in c. 14 § 4, where the form zapac- Barovons appears to be an echo of wapoiBarjoacay in Cleidemus’ de- scription of the stately woman who assumed the garb of Athene and rode in the chariot of Peisistratus on the occasion of his first restoration to Athens. The account of the disciplinary powers entrusted to the Areopagus (c. § 6), bears some resemblance to a passage attributed to PHANODEMUs ; but a statement to the same effect is attributed to a writer of the next. generation to that of Aristotle, namely Philochorus, who may, however, have borrowed his phraseology from Phanodemus. In any case, the resemblance between the passage in the rodureda and that attributed to ‘Phanodemus and Philochorus’ is not sufficiently close to make it quite certain that the writer was following Phanodemus’*.

ANDROTION may be identified with the person attacked in the 22nd speech of Demosthenes; he may therefore be placed earlier than the age of Aristotle. If so, he is closely followed in the account of the ostracism of Hipparchus son of Charmus (22 § 3); and the statement as to the number of the ovyypadgeis in c. 29 § 2 is in accordance

1 Th. Reinach’s Zrans/.-of AQ. qod., 3 Thuc. i 97, Bpaxéws Te kat rots xpbvos p xxiv. ovK aKxpiBas.

2 xiv r1 and 22; Bauer, Forschungen, 4 See note on p. 12 4. p. 155. Theopompus, in Pollux, v 43.

lvi AUTHORITIES FOLLOWED

with that of Androtion. But the writer differs from Androtion as to the nature of Solon’s cewdxGea, without going out of his way to con- trovert it. Here, as sometimes elsewhere, he is only tacitly polemical.

The most famous of the writers of ’Ar@éSes, Philochorus, belongs to the age after that of Aristotle, and has several points in common with the writer of the zod:reéa, As has been shown by Professor Wright, it is not improbable that he actually quoted the latter and accepted it as the work of Aristotle’.

On the relations subsisting between the ’A@yvatwy wodire‘a and the Atthidographi, 1 may be allowed to quote some criticisms for which I am indebted to the kindness of Mr W. L. Newman.

It is remarkable that while, in the Po/ztics, there is little to remind us of the writings of the Atthidographi, in the wodreia there is much. This indeed holds good of the IWodtreta generally. No doubt it is not unnatural that the ‘Constitutions’ ascribed to Aristotle, containing as they do sketches of local history, should follow the model furnished by local histories like the A¢thides; still it is strange that, if Aristotle was the author of these ‘Constitutions,’ he should be so little influenced by the Atthides in the Politics, if indeed he is so at all. Readers of the rodurela, on the contrary, find it hard to avoid the suspicion that some A/thzs has been largely used by the writer, very possibly the A¢this of Androtion. We may note the following resemblances between the ‘A@. vod. and the other IoNreta ascribed to Aristotle on the one hand, and the writings of the Arthidographi on the other :—

(1) The’A@. mod, is up to the mark of the last new historical fashion in respect of chronological exactitude. No doubt the effort to be chronologically exact is traceable early in the development of Greek historical literature. Thucydides knows the date of the fall of Troy (i 12), and the approximate date of the founding of Melos (v 112). Still the passion for chronological exactitude increased during the fourth century B.C. and later; for instance, Ephorus (frag. 9 a) and Callisthenes knew that Troy was taken on the 23rd of Thargelion. As to Timaeus see Diod. v 1 and Polyb. xii 10, Nothing of this care for exactness in dates appears in the Po/itécs or in other recognised writings of Aristotle. The writer of the’A@. mod., again, often dates by archons, but Aristotle never does so in the Politics. This dating by archons was perhaps no new thing in historical writing; some think that Hellanicus reckoned by archons, but here again we have an Atthidographic feature. Androtion and Philochorus reckoned by archons (Busolt, Gr. Gesch. i 363, note 4); see also Philoch. Frag. 52 (where Philochorus knows in whose archonship at Athens Homer flourished) and Androt. Frag. 46. ©

(2) The ’A@. od. and other Constitutions ascribed to Aristotle resemble the Atthides in the interest they show in the origin of words and familiar phrases. See "AO. wor. cz, §3 6,12; 13, 25; 21,6 and 21; 45,7 &c.; and Aristotle’s Constitutions (Frag*. 477, 484, 488, 491, 495, 512, 514, 519, 536, 562, 580, 582, 595, 596); and compare Androtion, /vag. 28—29, 33: Phanodem. Frag. 1, 13, 14: Ister, Frag. 28, 32, 35) 39) 43, 52, 57: Philoch. Frag. 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 12, 16, 42, 48 and many others, The interest which the ’A@. vod. and the other Constitutions show in these matters is a good deal more marked than that which we trace in Aristotle’s ; recognised works, and the same may be said of :

1 American Journal of Philology, xii 310 f. 3 supra, p. xix f.

IN THE A®HNAION IIOAITEIA \ii

- (3) the interest which the ’A@. mod. and other Constitutions share with the Atthides in (A) the origin of institutions and the like, and (B) the explanation of proverbs.

As to (A), compare ’A@. mod. c. 8, 3 and passim, and Aristotle's Constitutions, Frag*. 475, 479, 501, 511, 519, with Philoch. Frag. 51, 56, 66, 189. — '

As to (B), see’A@. mod. c. 16, 18; 21, 6 &c., and Aristotle’s Constitutions, Arag.3 487, 505, 513) 523, 528, 545, 558, 559 571, 584, 591, 592 Demon, one of the Atthidographt, wrote a book about Proverbs (Miiller, FHG i 379).

In choosing his authorities and in deciding between them when they differ, the author is guided by the consideration of the compara- tive probability of the accounts before him. He repels the calumnies against Solon (6) and Theramenes (28); and, in the story of Har- modius and Aristogeiton, gives an adequate reason for not accepting an opinion sanctioned by Thucydides (18 § 4). On the other hand, he is himself far from infallible as a historian. There is much confusion in the chronology of the years between the archonship of Solon and that of Damasias II (p. 50); and in that of the times of. Peisistratus (p. 56). The presence of Themistocles in Athens in 462 seems im- possible to reconcile with the chronology of his later years suggested by the data in Thucydides (p. ror); and there are several grave in- accuracies in the brief allusion to the trial of the generals after the battle of Arginusae (p. 129).

Besides: relying on the testimony of Solon’s poems, the writer draws inferences from popular poetry such as the sco/um in honour of Cedon and that on the baffled heroes of Leipsydrium (cc. 19, 20). He quotes archaeological evidence derived from the xipBes of Solon’(7 § 1), from the prae-Solonian coinage (c. to), and from a relief and inscription on the Acropolis (7 § 4). He alludes to proverbial phrases, ywpiov dredés (16 § 6) and py pudoxpivelv (21 § 2). He also takes special pains in quoting official documents’.

The decrees proposed by Aristion (14 § 1) and Themistocles (22 § 7) are noticed in general terms; that proposed by Pericles in 451—o (26 ult.), is expressly quoted. The official documents cited 2” extenso are those connected with the revolution of the Four Hundred in 413; viz. the motion of Pythodorus for the appointment of 30 ovyypa¢eis, with the amendment by Cleitophon; the formal record of the preliminary

1 In these quotations we find a minute dy, and none of ézws with the subjunc-

tive.

but not uninteresting proof of his fidelity : in the whole work, out of 17 instances of érws with subjunctive or with future indicative, we have only two of dws dv with the subjunctive (29, 24, and 30, 20); both of these occur in decrees of the fifth century, and the inscriptions of that century give us 16 instances of dws

In view of this fact it is clear that in 29, 18 dws dkovoayres is only a copyist’s mistake for érws dv. This is noticed by Prof. Wright in Zhe Nation, i May, 1891, p. 383. It must not, how- ever, be inferred that dws c. fut. is not found in inscriptions: on the contrary it is very common (Meisterhans, note 17057).

lviii AUTHORITIES IN THE A@HNAION TOAITEIA

proposals and of the constitution drawn up by the ovyypadeis (c. 29); with the ultimate and the provisional constitutions drawn up by the hundred Commissioners (cc. 30, 31). We have also the terms of the reconciliation effected between the oligarchical and democratic parties in 403 (c. 39). These documents were presumably preserved among the archives of the State in the AJetvoon,; but they probably owed their publication not only to their historical importance, but also to their including typical forms of oligarchical constitutions which afforded suitable themes for discussion among students of the theory of politics. The writer’s evident interest in the detailed history of the period between B.c. 413 and 403 is one of the considerations in favour of identifying him with the author of the Politics. In the latter Aristotle selects the Revolution of the Four Hundred as a typical instance of a revolution effected by fraud on the part of those who, when the deception is over, still endeavour to retain the government by force (1304 4 12, quoted onc. 29, 8). Elsewhere, while discussing revolutions in oligarchies arising within the governing class, he mentions, as first of the two types of the oligarchical demagogue, ‘one who practises on the oligarchs themselves ; for, although the oligarchy are quite a small number, there may be a demagogue among them, as at Athens the party of Charicles predominated among the Thirty, that of Phrynichus in the Four Hundred’ (1305 6 24—27). It is, however, only fair to add that neither Phrynichus nor Charicles is mentioned in the zoAtreta.

In the absence of direct historical evidence, the writer’s favourite form of argument is that indicated by Mr Macan in an interesting con- tribution to the Journal of Hellenic Studies. ‘The author has a source of knowledge, or rather a method of reconstruction, to take the place of direct testimony, tradition or evidence: This method consists in a process of inference from the present to the past, from existing circum- stances to their presumable antecedents, from a given state of institu- — tions to a former condition of the same’! As instances in which the author mentions the employment of this method by others, we have (1) the oaths of the nine Archons (3 § 3); and (2) the property qualification of the iets (7 § 4). He uses it himself in cases such as the following : (1) the sacral marriage of the BactAwva (3 § 5); (2) the Solonian method of appointing officials (8 § 1); (3) the institution of the of xara, Sypous dixacraé by Peisistratus (16 § 5); and (4) the motive for the institution of ostracism by Cleisthenes (22 § 3)*.

1, A. S. 1891, p. 37. of this method,’ cf. note on 8 § 1, p. 30 2 2b. p. 38. For some of the ‘signals ev én Sromever. eae

ABSTRACT OF THE A®@HNAION DOAITEIA lix

§ 9. Abstract of the ’A@yvaiwy wodreia.

The work is divided into two parts, (1) a Sketch of the Consti- tutional History of Athens down to the Restoration of the Democracy in 403 B.C. (cc. 1—41); and (1) a detailed analysis of the machinery of the Constitution between 328 and 325 B.c. (c. 42 to the end). The first has been well described as a ‘ Primer of Constitutional History’ ; the second, as a ‘ Citizen’s Handbook.’?

Part 1, in its complete form, comprised an account of the ‘ original constitution’ of Athens, and of the eleven changes through which it successively passed (c. 41). Accordingly, in the following abstract, we have to deal with a series of twelve constitutions.

(1) The constitution in the time of Ion. The original constitution of Athens was an absolute monarchy. In process of time, owing to some of the hereditary line of kings being feeble in war, Ion, the son of Apollo by the daughter of an Attic king, was summoned to their aid, and invested with military command. Such was the origin of ‘the office of Polemarch, which was second to that of Baszleus in order of date (3 § 2). In the days of Ion, the people were divided into four tribes, with four @uhoBacthels or ‘tribal kings* (41, 6—g). To Apollo’s son, the first Polemarch, the Athenians owed the name of Ionians and the worship of Apollo warpqos (frag. 381°).

(2) The constitution in the time of Theseus. Under THESEUS, we are simply told that the constitution exhibited a slight divergence from absolute monarchy (41, 10; and frag. 3843).

[About 1088 B.c., on the death of Codrus, and the accession of his son Medon, the kingly power ceased to be hereditary. Henceforth the kings were elected for life from members of the royal house.]?_ By the side of the King, the Polemarch was already in existence as commander in the time of war; and in the reign either of Medon, or his son Acastus, a third office, that of Archon, came into being, and was endowed, with some of the royal prerogatives by the descendants of Codrus (3 § 3). In process of time the name of Archon was transferred from the third officer of State to the first [c. 753/2 B.c.]. The chief Archon was elected [from the royal house], but his term of office was limited to ten years (3 § 1 end), while the title of King, with the privilege of attending to certain religious duties, was assigned to another archon, called the Basilexs. It was not until the three primary offices of State, those of Archon, Polemarch and Basileus, had become annual [c. 683/2 8.c.], that their number was increased by the institution of the six Zhesmothetae, whose duty it was to record and preserve all legal decisions with a view to their being enforced against trans- gressors of the law (3 § 4). In the course of time the Archons were elected by the Council of the Areopagus (8 § 2) under qualifications of birth and wealth (3 § 1), while the Areopagus itself was composed of those who had filled the office of Archon.

1 Cambridge Review, .20 Feb. 1891, Such items generally represent the tradi- p. 212 4. tional accounts of Attic history accepted

2 Throughout this abstract, dates and (whether rightly or wrongly) by the other items derived from sources extra- Athenians themselves.—The dates in this neous to the treatise itself are distin- paragraph depend mainly on the Marmor guished by being placed within brackets. Parzwm (Busolt, Gr. Gesch., i 4047).

lx ABSTRACT OF THE A@HNAION ITIOAITEIA

It was the duty of the Areopagus to maintain the supremacy of law, to inflict personal punishments and fines, and to administer the State in general (3 § 6).

[In an Olympic year between 636 and 624 B.C.] an attempt to seize despotic ©

power was made by a young nobleman named Cylon [who had been a victor in the Olympic games of 640]. The attempt was unsuccessful: the adherents of Cylon were put to death under the authority of the Archon Megacles, of the house of the Alcmaeonidae, who violated their right of sanctuary and thus brought a curse on Athens and his descendants (Heracl. Epit. § 4).

The constitution at this time was thoroughly oligarchical. There was a conflict between the various orders in the State: the land was in the hands of a few; dis- content prevailed among the poor, who, if they failed to pay their rent, became the slaves of the rich (c. 2).

(3) Zhe Constitution of Dracon, It was with a view to providing a remedy for these evils that (in 621 B.C.) the first code of law was drawn up by Dracon (41,11). The franchise was at this time possessed by all who could provide their

own equipment for war. It was these who elected the Archons and other principal :

officers of State; and out of their own body a Council of 4or members was appointed :

by lot from among those who had attained the age of 30. Members of the Council were liable to fines varying with their social status. The Council of the Areopagus continued to maintain the supremacy of law and the efficient discharge of the duties assigned to the officers of State; it also received formal complaints from persons aggrieved by the infringement of any statute (c. 4).

In due time the friends of the exiled members of Cylon’s party acquired sufficient power to compel the Alemaeonidae to submit to « trial before a special court of 300 citizens selected from the noblest families of Athens. They were found guilty; the dead bodies of the offenders were cast out, and their surviving relatives condemned to perpetual exile. Athens was further purified from the curse of sacri- lege by Epimenides (c. 1).} ;

(4) Zhe Constitution of Solon. Dracon’s legislation having failed to remedy the wrongs of the poor, the conflict of the orders broke out afresh and was not allayed

until [c. 594 B.c.] both parties agreed on choosing SOLON as mediator and as

Archon (§ § 2). Solon cancelled all existing debts, whether public or private; and for the future he made it illegal to lend money on the security of the person of the debtor (6 § 1). With the exception of the laws on homicide, the code of Dracon was repealed, and a new code published. ‘lhe people were divided into four classes, Pentacosiomedimnt, Hippeis, Zeugitae, and Thetes; the various offices of State being now assigned to the first three classes in proportion to the amount at which they were severally rated, while the fourth class had only the right of taking part in the public Assembly and in the Law-courts (c. 7). The nine Archons were now ap- pointed by lot, out of forty selected candidates, nominated to the number of ten by each of the four tribes. A Council of 400 was also constituted, roo from each tribe. The Areopagus, which still retained the duty of supervising the laws and main- taining the constitution in general, was now empoweréd to try cases of treason (c. 8). In Solon’s constitution the specially democratical elements were:—(1) the prohibition of loans on the security of the person; (2) the privilege of every citizen to claim legal satisfaction on behalf of any one who was wronged; and (3) the right of appeal to the law-courts, The power of voting in the law-courts made the com-

1 On the date of Epimenides, see p. 3, | menides, as well as the trial of the Alc- and cf. Prof. Wright’s Date of Cylon, maeonidae, is conjecturally assigned to pp. 70 and 74, where the visit of Epi- 615 B.c.

ABSTRACT OF THE A@HNAION MOAITEIA xi

mons master of the constitution (c. 9). Solon also introduced a new standard of coinage, and of weights and measures (c. 10). His legislation, however, did not prove acceptable to either of the two great parties in the State. Finding himself beset and harassed by both, and declining to make himself despot at the expense of either, he withdrew for ten years to Egypt (c. 11).

When he had gone abroad, although the State was still disturbed by divisions, they lived in peace for four years; but, in the next year, and again four years later, their divisions prevented the election of an Archon. After another term of four years(?), the choice fell on Damasias [582], who succeeded in remaining in office for two years and two months. The interval of civil strife was closed by an agreement to elect ten Archons from the several orders in the State, five from the Zufatridae, three from the Agroect, and two from the Demiurgi. But the general discontent was not allayed. Some of the rich had lost their wealth; others had lost their political power; a few besides were inspired by personal ambition. At this time the three parties of the Shore, the Plain and the Highlands, representing the moderate, the oligarchical and the democratic spirit respectively, were under the leadership of Megacles, Lycurgus, and Peisistratus. The party of Peisistratus was reinforced by those whom Solon’s legislation had deprived of the debts due to them, and also by persons whose dubious birth gave them an uncertain claim to the rights of citizenship (c. 13). These struggles found their issue in the tyranny of Peisistratus and his sons.

(5) Zhe tyranny of Peisistratus and his sons. PEISISTRATUS, who had won distinction in the war against Megara, persuaded the people to grant him the protection of a body-guard, and with the aid of the latter seized the Acropolis (560 B.c.). He ruled in a constitutional spirit; but, five years later, he was ex- pelled by a coalition between the parties of Megacles. and Lycurgus. Eleven(?) years afterwards he was restored by the aid of Megacles on condition of marrying his daughter (14). This condition was only nominally fulfilled; and, about six years later, he was once more expelled. He withdrew to Macedonia, where he acquired money and mercenary troops. Ten years subsequently, with the help of Thebes, of Lygdamis of Naxos, and the Knights of Eretria, he recovered his power and dis- armed his subjects (15). His rule, however, was mild and humane. To encourage agrictlture he advanced money to the poorer classes, with a view to their staying in the country and looking after their own affairs instead of coming into the town and taking part in public business. With the same object he instituted ‘local justices,’ and himself visited various parts of the country, thus making it unnecessary for the tenants to neglect their farms by bringing their grievances to Athens. Besides this, the cultivation of the soil promoted an increase in his revenues (16).

Peisistratus died in 527/6 B.c., having held actual possession of his power for nineteen out of the thirty-three years that had elapsed since he had originally established himself as ‘tyrant’ (c.17). He was succeeded by his sons Hippias and Hipparchus, who at first ruled in their father’s spirit; but, when Hipparchus had been slain in the conspiracy of Harmodius and Aristogeiton (c. 18), the rule of Hippias became more severe. Three years afterwards (c. 19 § 2) he was expelled by Cleo- menes, king of Sparta (in the spring of 510 B.C.).

(6) Zhe Reforms of Cleisthenes. After the overthrow of the tyranny the rival leaders in the State were Isagoras, an adherent of the tyrants, and CLEISTHENES, of the house of the Alemaeonidae. Isagoras invited the aid of Cleomenes. Thereupon Cleisthenes withdrew, while Cleomenes vainly endeavoured to supersede the Council and to set up a body of 300 partisans of Isagoras in its place. Cleisthenes soon returned, and became leader of the people (c. 20). In 5088.c. he distributed the population

lxii ABSTRACT OF THE A@HNAIQN MOAITEIA

into ten tribes instead of the existing four; and instituted a Council of 500 (fifty out of each of the ten new tribes), in place of that of 400 (100 out of each of the four tribes). He also made the deme the unit of his social organisation, combined the demes into groups (rpirrdes), and assigned these groups to the several tribes in such a manner that each tribe had three groups allotted to it, one from the urban or suburban district, one from the coast, and one from the interior (c. 21). The reforms of Cleisthenes made the constitution more democratic than that of Solon, Among the laws now passed was that concerning Ostracism, which was at first intended to serve as a safeguard against the reestablishment of a tyranny. In 504 B.c. [or, more probably, in gor], the oath, which was still in use in the writer’s time, was first imposed on the Council. The Generals were elected according to tribes, one from each tribe (22 $2). The law of Ostracism was enforced for the first time in 488/7, two years after Marathon, the person ostracised being Hipparchus son of Charmus (§ 4); he was followed in 487/6 by Megacles [a nephew of Cleisthenes], by Xanthippus [the father of Pericles] in 485/4, and about 484/3 by Aristides. Meanwhile, in 487/6, for the first time since the establishment of the tyranny, the nine Archons were appointed by lot out of 500 [or more probably, 100] candidates selected by the demes. In 483/2, on the discovery of certain silver mines in Attica, Themistocles persuaded the people to lend the proceeds to the hundred wealthiest men in Attica, and thus brought about the building of the hundred triremes, with which the battle of Salamis was won [480].

(7) Zhe supremacy of the Areopagus. Thus far the growth of the democracy had been advancing with the gradual growth of Athens; but, after the Persian wars, the Council of the Areopagus once more assumed the control of the State. It owed this high position, however, not to any formal decree, but to the spirited action it had taken in connexion with the battle of Salamis. When the Generals were unable to cope with the crisis, it was the Areopagus that provided pay for the crews, and thus ensured the manning of the fleet and the gaining of the victory (23 § 1). The leaders of the people at this time were ARISTIDES and THEMISTOCLES. On the establishment of the Confederacy of Delos, Aristides assessed the amount to be paid to the common fund by the allies of Athens, beginning with the year 478/7 (§ 5). By his advice the inhabitants of Attica left the rural districts and settled in the city, on the assurance that all of them would be able to maintain themselves by the discharge of military duties or by taking part in public affairs, and would thus secure the control of the league. Thus it was that Athens came to adopt the policy of oppressing her allies, from which Chios, Lesbos and Samos alone were exempt.

(8) The restored and developed democracy. The supremacy of the Areopagus lasted for about seventeen years (478 to 462 inclusive). The power of the people was mean- while increasing, and EPHIALTES, on becoming their leader, attacked the Areopagus, by depriving it of all the more recent privileges by which it had attained the control of the constitution, transferring some of them to the Council of Five Hundred, and others to the Assembly and the Law-courts (462 B.c.). In this revolution he was aided by Themistocles (25).

Thereupon the administration of the State became more and more lax owing to the rivalries that arose between successive aspirants for popular favour. At this time the aristocratical party had no real chief, although their leader was Cimon, who was

comparatively young for that position, and had been rather late in entering on public ”

life. In 457/6 the office of Archon was thrown open to the Zeugitae. In 453/2 the thirty ‘local justices’ were restored ; and in 451/o0, on the proposal of PERICLES, it was enacted that the franchise should be limited to those who were of citizen blood by bath

ABSTRACT OF THE A@HNAION TOAITEIA Lxiii

parents (26). Under Pericles, the constitution became still more democratic. He deprived the Areopagus of some of its ancient privileges, and also prompted Athens to aim at the empire of the sea (27 $1). The Peloponnesian war (B.C. 431—) inured the people to military service, and led to their assuming the administration of the State (§ 2). Pericles was also the first to provide pay for serving in the Law-courts (§ 3).

So long as he was leader of the people, public affairs were managed comparatively well; at his death there was a great change for the worse (28 § 1). It was then that, for the first time, in the person of Cleon, the people had for their leader one who was of no reputation among the upper classes (§ 2); on the other side, the leader of the aristocracy was Nicias. These two were succeeded by Cleophon and Theramenes respectively. It was Cleophon who was the first to provide each citizen with the grant of two obols for a seat in the theatre (§ 3); and the series of demagogues, who succeeded him, owed their position to their recklessness of language, and to thelr readi- ness to gratify the immediate desires of the populace (§ 4). Of the leaders of the aristocratical party, Nicias and Thucydides (son of Melesias) are justly esteemed as statesmen. Concerning Theramenes there is a conflict of opinion; but, on calm re- flexion, it is clear that, so far from subverting every kind of constitution, he really supported each in turn, so long as it was faithful to the laws; thus proving that, like a good citizen, he was capable of living in contentment under any form of govern- ment, while he could never be a party to unconstitutional conduct, but on the con- trary was always its resolute foe (§ 5)?.

_ (9) The revolution of the Four Hundred. After the failure of the Sicilian expe- dition [Sept. 413], when the power of Sparta had been increased by her alliance with Persia, Athens was compelled to abolish her democracy and to accept the oligar- chical revolution of the Four Hundred. At this crisis it was proposed by Pytho- dorus that the popular Assembly should elect a Committee of thirty in all, to draw up proposals for the public safety ; and that any other person might make such proposals as he pleased, so that the people might decide on whatever course it thought fit (29 §§ 1, 2). An amendment moved [and probably carried] by Cleitophon made it an instruction to the Committee to take into consideration the constitution of Cleisthenes in drawing up their report (§ 3). The Committee reported in favour of the Prytanes being com- pelled to put to the vote any motion for the public safety (instead of exercising their own discretion in the matter). They also proposed the abolition of all indictments for illegal motions, all impeachments before the Council or the Assembly, and all citations before the Law-courts, so that nothing should hinder any citizen from offering such counsel as he thought fit. If any person attempted, either by fine or citation or prose- cution, to prevent such counsel being given, he was to be summarily brought before the Generals and delivered up to execution (§ 4). They further drew up the following form of constitution :— The revenues were to be spent solely on the conduct of the war. So long as the war lasted, no officers of State were to receive any pay except the nine Archons and the Prytanes. The franchise (including the right of making treaties) was to be entrusted to not less than Five Thousand of the citizens who were best able to serve the State. The list of the Five Thousand was to be drawn up by a Commission of one hundred formed by electing ten out of each of the tribes (§ 5).

When these proposals had been ratified, the [provisionally acting body of] ‘ Five Thousand’ elected from among their own members the hundred Commissioners for

1 There is a monograph on Thera- to which Theramenes belonged, see Dr menes by Dr Carl Pohlig (Teubner, 1877). | Jackson’s article on Socrates in Encycl. On the party of ‘moderate oligarchs’ rit. ed. 9.

ixiv ABSTRACT OF THE A@®HNAION TIOAITEIA

drawing up the constitution. The Commissioners proposed for the future a Council, which was to be in power for a year at a time, and to include certain officers of State (about roo in all) as members ex officio. The Council was to appoint these out of a larger number of selected candidates chosen out of the members of the Council for the time being. All other offices were to be filled by lot (30§ 2). There were to he four Councils of four hundred each, such four Councils serving in turn, for a year each, in an order to be determined by lot (§ 3). Members of the Council absent without leave were to be fined (§ 6).

For the immediate present, there was to be a Council of Four Hundred (as in the constitution of Solon), forty from each tribe, appointed out of a larger number selected by the members of the several tribes. This Council was to appoint the officers of State, and to have complete discretion in questions of legislation, official audits, &c.; but was to have no power to alter the new constitution (31 §1). Military officers were to be elected provisionally by the ‘Five Thousand,’ but ultimately by the Council (§ 2). No office, except that of a General or a member of the Council, was to be held more than once (§ 3).

About the end of May, 411, the existing Council was dissolved; and on June 7 the Four Hundred entered on office. An oligarchical constitution was thus established nearly a century after the expulsion of the tyrants (§10). The leaders of the Revolution were Peisander, Antiphon and Theramenes. The Four Hundred sent envoys to Sparta, proposing the termination of the war on the basis of zi possidetis ; but, as the envoys declined to surrender the maritime supremacy of Athens, Sparta refused to come to terms (c. 32).

(10) Zhe restored Democracy. The defeat of Athens in the naval battle of Eretria, and the consequent loss of Euboea, led the people to depose the Four Hundred, after they had been in power for four months (May to August, 411); and to entrust the management of affairs to the Five Thousand, a body consisting of all citizens capable of providing a military equipment. No pay was to be given for any public office. This revolution was led by Aristocrates and Theramenes, both of whom disapproved of the Four Hundred for keeping all the power in their own hands, and not referring anything to the Five Thousand. The constitution at this time appears to have worked excellently, inasmuch as it was a time of war and the franchise was entrusted to those who provided a military equipment (c. 33).

[After the victories in the Hellespont in 410] the people soon deprived the Five Thousand of their exclusive right to the franchise. In 406 the victory of Arginusae was won, but that victory was attended with the following results: (r) Under the misleading influence of passionate appeals to the feelings of the people, all the Generals who had won that victory had their fate sealed by a single verdict (see note on pp. 129—130); and (2), when Sparta proposed to evacuate Decelea, Cleophon protested that she should be required to surrender all the cities that owed allegiance to her (34 § 1). Athens soon had good reason to regret her mistake. In 405 she was vanquished at Aegospotami; and Lysander became master of Athens and established the rule of the Thirty (§ 2). .

(11) The despotic government of the Thirty and of the Ten. The THIRTY, instead of framing a constitution, appointed a Council of five hundred, out of a large number of selected candidates; associated with themselves ten officials in the Peiraeus, eleven superintendents of the prison, and three hundred attendants; and, with the help of these, kept the city completely under their own control. At first they acted with moderation: they professed to restore the ancient constitution; repealed the laws of Ephialtes curtailing the privileges of the Areopagus; and abolished the limitations

ABSTRACT OF THE A®@HNAION IIOAITEIA Ixv

to the right of bequest granted by Solon. But, as soon as they had established them- selves in power, they proceeded to put to death those who were eminent for wealth or birth or reputation ; and, within a short time, the number of their victims rose to 1,500 (c. 35). Alarmed, however, by the indignant protests and the ever increasing popularity of Theramenes, they offered to draw up a list of 3,000 who were to receive the franchise. Theramenes was still dissatisfied; the list was withheld, and, when published, was constantly liable to arbitrary alterations (c. 36).

Meanwhile, winter set in, and the Thirty were repulsed in their attack on Thrasybulus, who, with the exiles of the democratic party, had taken possession of the fort of Phyle. The Thirty now resolved on disarming the people and getting rid of Theramenes. For the latter purpose they compelled the Council to pass two proposals, (1) giving the Thirty power to put to death any person not included in the list of the 3,000; (2) preventing any one from enjoying the franchise if he had taken part in demolishing the fort of Eetioneia or had in any way opposed the Four Hundred. Theramenes had done both. After putting him to death, they disarmed all the people except the 3,000; and proceeded to further extremities of cruelty and crime (37).

After this, Thrasybulus and his soldiers occupied Munichia and defeated the partisans of the Thirty. The party of the city retreated to Athens; and, on the next day, held a meeting in the market-place, deposed the Thirty and elected Ten of the citizens as commissioners with full powers to bring the war to a conclusion. The TEN did nothing of the kind; they sent to Sparta to ask for aid and to borrow funds. Finding that this was resented by those who possessed the franchise, and fearing they might be deposed in consequence, they arrested a citizen of the highest repute and put him to death. They thus strengthened their position, and they were further supported by the Spartan harmost Callibius and his Peloponnesians, and by certain of the Knights. The party of the Peiraeus, however, were soon joined by all the people, and began to get the upper hand in the struggle. Thereupon, the party of the city deposed the Ten, and elected in their place another body of the same number, consisting of men of the highest character, among whom was Rhinon (who was afterwards elected one of the Generals). Under the management of this new body of Ten, and with the aid of Pausanias and ten Commissioners from Sparta, terms of reconciliation were drawn up and the democratic party returned to Athens {c. 38).

The terms were as follows: All who had remained in Athens might reside at Eleusis, while retaining their property and their full rights as citizens (35 § 1). The temple at Eleusis was to be common ground for both parties; but, except at the season of the Mysteries, the settlers at Eleusis were not to enter Athens, or the residents in Athens to visit Eleusis. The settlers at Eleusis were to contribute their share to the federal fund ($2). If any one killed or wounded another, trials for homicide were to be held, as of old (§ 5). Lastly, there was to be a general amnesty towards all persons, except the Thirty, the Ten (who immediately succeeded them), the Eleven, and the Ten who had ruled in the Peiraeus; and even these were not to be excluded, if they rendered an account of their office (§ 6).

A prominent part was played at this time by Archinus:— (1) He accelerated the date for the closing of the list of settlers at Eleusis (40 § 1); (2) he successfully resisted the proposal of Thrasybulus to confer the franchise on all who had aided in the restoration of the democracy; and (3) he insisted on the penalty of death being inflicted on one who attempted to violate the amnesty (§ 2). The funds which the Thirty had borrowed from Sparta for their own purposes, were repaid out of the

S. A. ra

Ixvi ABSTRACT OF THE A@®HNAION IFOAITEIA

public treasury (§ 3). A further reconciliation was effected with the settlers at Eleusis in B.c. 401/o0 (§ 4).

(12) The restored and extreme Democracy. The constitution established in B.C. 403 remained in force until the time when the work was written (B.C. 328—325) with ever-increasing accessions to the power of the people. The people had made itself master of everything, and administered all the affairs of State by means of the decrees of the Assembly and the decisions of the Law-courts. In the latter, no less than in the former, the people ruled supreme. Even the judicial decisions formerly in the hands of the Council were transferred to the people, a course which the writer approves on the ground that small bodies are more liable to corruption than large ones (41 § 2). At first it was decided not to provide pay for attendance at the Assembly; but, as its members were habitually absent, an allowance of one obol a day was introduced by Agyrrhius, to be increased to two obols by Heracleides, and to three by Agyrrhius himself (§ 3).

Part 11, which describes the machinery of the ‘existing Constitu- tion,’ under the general heads of (i) the Franchise (c. 42), (ii) Legislature (43—45), (iii) Administration (46—62), and (iv) Judicature (63 to end), may from one point of view be regarded as entirely concerned with a single subject, being an account of ai dpxai, the ‘posts of power or service, honour or emolument, for which the Athenian citizen be- comes eligible or qualified sooner or later,’ when once the franchise is conferred on him. It may be divided into four sections (i) the condi- tions of the franchise (c. 42); (ii) the exercise of the full franchise in the eyxdxAror dpxat (cc. 43—62), first the kAnpwrai, the Council with sundry other authorities (43-54), and the Archons (55-59). From these may be detached (iii) the xetporovyral apxai, or dpxat mpos wéAenov (61), and (iv) the Dikasteria (63 to end), placed here because they are permanent and not concerned with administration (q diofkyors), although recruited by the Lot (Mr Macan, 7 A. S., xii 21). Or, again, we may for convenience use apxai in the narrower sense, and divide the second part into three main portions under the head of (i) woAcreéa (c. 42); (ii) dpyat (cc. 42-—62); (iii) Sixacr#pia (cc. 62 to end).

In (i) we have first an account of the method of enrolling citizens, with interesting — details as to the military training of youthful citizens between the ages of 18 and 20 (c. 42). In (ii) the foremost place is occupied by the administrative functions of the Council and of the officials who act in concert with it (43—49); while the éxxAqgtla is only briefly dealt with in connexion with the rpurdvecs and mpéedpor in c. 43 and c. 44+ Then follow certain other officials appointed by lot, with some account of the public Arbitrators (s0—s4), and the nine Archons ( 55—s9), with a detailed statement of the duties of the Archon (56), the Basileus (57), the Polemarch (58) and the Thesmothetae (59) respectively. Next come the d0do@érat, with some notice of the Sacred Olives (60). Thus far for officials appointed by lot. Next in order we have the military officers (61), who have already been briefly mentioned with other officials elected by show of hands (43 § 1). This portion of the work closes with a chapter on Salaries (62). The remainder is entirely concerned with the Law-courts, and, in particular, with the way by which the dicasts were allotted to the several courts, the method of voting, the

ABSTRACT OF THE A@HNAION IIOAITEIA Ixvii

measurement of time during the proceedings, and lastly the arrangements for paying the dicasts when their duties were over.

A large amount of the contents of the Second Part was already known to us in a fragmentary way, through the quotations preserved by gram- marians and lexicographers; but it is a signal advantage to have before us the source of all these quotations with the opportunity of testing every statement by the light of its immediate context. We are thus at last able to deal with a first-hand authority for the Constitutional Anti- quities of Athens. Whatever hesitation there may necessarily be as to the historic value of certain details in the First Part of the treatise, espe- cially in cases where the writer is describing the institutions of a distant past, which had left behind it np contemporary records except a single chapter from the code of Dracon, with the laws and poems of Solon; or where his account refuses to be reconciled with that of writers such as Thucydides and Xenophon; there can be no question as to the great importance and the completely trustworthy character of the Second Part, with its terse and clear description of the machinery of the State towards the close of the third quarter of the fourth century pc. And the value: of all this is unimpaired by any doubts that have been entertained-as to the authorship of the work.

$10. Conspectus of the Literature of the’ Anvaiwv rodtreia,

(The order in each division is mainly chronological except in B III and IV, where it is alphabetical.)

(A) Published before the discovery of the Papyrus in the British Museum.

(1) Aristotelis rerum publicarum reliquias collegit C. P. Neumann. Heidelberg, 1827.

(2) Heraclidis politiarum quae extant recensuit F. G. Schneidewin. Gdttingen, 1847.

(3) Fragmenta historicorum Graecorum collegit C. Miiller; vol. 11 pp. 1oz—107 5 Heraclides, 26. 208—224; Paris (Didot), 1848.

(4) Valentini Rose Aristoteles Pseudepigraphus, Leipzig, 1863, [quoted in this book as Rose, 4. P.].

“(5) Die verlorenen Schriften des Aristoteles, von Emil Heitz, Leipzig (Teubner), 1865.

(6) Fragmenta Aristotelis collegit disposuit illustravit Aemilius Heitz, Paris (Didot), Nov. 1868.

(7) Aristotelis Opera; edidit Academia Regia Borussica. vol. v Aristotelis qui ferebantur librorum Fragmenta collegit Valentinus Rose, pp. 1535—1571 [quoted as Rose, 343? to 568?],—Index Aristotelicus, Bonitz. Berlin (Reimer), 1870.

(8) W. Oncken, Die Staatslehre der Ar. in historisch-politischen Umrissen, vol. 2, esp. pp. 410—528 (Engelmann) Leipzig, 1875.

(9) Aristotelis qui ferebantur librorum Fragmenta collegit Valentinus Rose, pp. 258—386 [quoted as Rose, 381° to 611°], Leipzig (Teubner), 1886.

f2

Ixviii CONSPECTUS OF THE LITERATURE

On the Berlin Fragments.

(10) F. Blass, Hermes, 1880, xv 366. (11) Th. Bergk, Rheinisches Museum, 1881, xxxvii p. 87. | (12) H. Landwehr, (2) de papyro Berolinenst, no. 163, Berlin, 1883; (4) papyrum Berol. commentario adiecto edidit, Gotha, 1883; and (c) in Phzlologus Suppl. v roo—ro6. (13) H. Diels; Abhandlungen der Berliner Akademie, mit 2 Tafein, Mai 1885, ii pp. 1—57.

(B) Published after the discovery of the Papyrus. (I) EDITIONS.

(1) Aristotle On the Constitution of Athens, edited by F. G. Kenyon, M.A., Fellow of Magdalen College, Oxford; Assistant in the Department of ss, British Museum. Printed by Order of the Trustees of the Museum (Preface dated 31 Dec. 1890), rst ed. Jan. 30, 1891 ; 2nd ed. Feb.; 3rd and revised ed. 25 Jan. 1892.

Preliminary notice of discovery in the Times, 19 Fan. (reprinted in Classical Review, v 70); Reviews of 1st or 2nd ed.:—in Times, 30 Jan. ’91; Athenaeum, 4 April, p. 434—6; Saturday Review, 21 March, p. 358; Edinburgh Rev., April, p. 470—494; Revue de l’Instruction Publique en Belyigque, pp. 1339; and elsewhere: also in signed (or acknowledged) articles by Mr Macan, Mr F. T. Richards, Prof. Tyrrell, Prof. Gildersleeve and Prof. J. H. Wright; M. Dareste, M. Haussoullier and M. Weil; Prof. Blass, Prof. Diels, Prof. Bruno Keil, P. Meyer, and G. J. Schneider (see under their respective names in B |||). Review of 3rd ed. in Academy, 8 June’g2. Descriptive article (signed kK) in Review of Keviews, 14 Feb. ’91, with reduced facsimile of col. 29 and 30.

(2) Aristotle on the Constitution of Athens. Autotype Facsimile ed. 22 Plates, 20x1g§ inches. Folio; ed.1, March, ’91; ed. 2 in the same year.

Reviews in Zimes, 4 March, ’91; Athenaeum, 4 April, p. 434436, and elsewhere.

(3) ’A@nvalwy odirela exdidoudvy érl ry Bdoer THs Sevrépas dyydxis Too K. Kévvoy éxddcews. A.’ AyaSdvixos. (Barth and Christ) Athens; 1891.

(4) Aristotele, la Costituzione degli Ateniesi, testo greco, versione italiana, intro- duzione e note di C. Ferrini. (Hoepli) Milan [rev. in Athenaeum, 5 Sept.’g1, p. 317].

(5) Aristotelis Tlo\rela "A@nvalwy, ediderunt G. Kaibel et U. de Wilamowitz- Moellendorff, ’91. ed. 1, July; ed. 2, September (Weidmann) Berlin [reviewed in Berl. Philol. Wochenschr., 1892, p. 453 (F. Cauer); Neue Philol. Rundschau, ’92, p- 210 (P. Meyer); Lit. Centralblatt,’92, n..2, p. 56; Revue des études grecques iv 405 (Weil); Deutsche Litteraturzeitung, ’91, p. 1639 (Gomperz); and elsewhere].

(6) Aristotelis quae fertur ’A@qvalwy zodreia. Post Kenyonem recensuerunt H. van Herwerden et J. van Leeuwen ; accedunt MsTI Apographum, Observationes Palaeographicae cum Tabulis iv, Indices Locupletissimi ; (Sijthoff) Leyden, ’91 [re- viewed in Berl. Philol. Wochenschr. , 1892, pp. 613, 649; Class. Rev. vi 2o—24; Neue Philol. Rundschau, ’92, p. 210 (P. Meyer); and elsewhere].

(7) Aristotelis IloAcreia ’AOqvalwy, edidit F. Blass (Teubner) Leipzig, Jan. 1892 [reviewed in Wochenschr. f. klass. Philol. no. 38; and elsewhere].

(8) a school-edition of c. r—41, by Karl Hude of Copenhagen (Teubner, Leipzig, ‘Dec. 1892).

Editions have also been promised by

(9) H. Diels (Berlin); (10) B. Haussonllier (Paris).

(il) TRANSLATIONS.

English. (1) with Introduction and Notes (and Facsimile of first eleven lines of col. 10) by F. G. Kenyon, M.A. (Bell) London, July, r8gr. (2) E. Poste, M.A., Fellow of Oriel Coll., Oxford; (Macmillan) London, July, ‘91; ed. 2, Dec. 92. (3) T. J. Dymes, B.A., late Scholar of Lincoln Coll., Oxford ; (Seeley) London, 1891.

OF THE A@HNAION TOAITEIA Ixix

German. (4) @. Kaibel u. A. Kiessling, two editions in 1891 ; (Triibner) Strass- burg. (5) F. Poland (Langenscheidt) Berlin, ’g1. (6) M. Erdmann (Neumann) Leipzig, 1892. (7) H. Hagen see in III (31).

French. (8) Th. Reinach (Hachette) Paris ; (9) B. Haussoullier (Bouillon) Paris, Nov. 1891.

Htalian. (to) C. Ferrini (Hoepli) Milan ; (11) C. 0. Zuretti (Loescher) Turin.

Russian, (12) Belajew, Kasan; (13) anonymous translation in Journ. d. ais. russ. Ministeriums d. Volksaufklirung, Jul.—Aug. ’91.

Polish, (14) L. Cwiklinski, Krakau, Nov. ’92.

(Several of the above Translations are reviewed in the Athenaeum, 5 Sept. ’91, p. 316, and by Mr F, T. Richards in the Academy, 15 Aug., 91, p. 137.)

(IN) SIGNED (OR ACKNOWLEDGED) CONTRIBUTIONS TO PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS &c.

(ems. =emendations)

(1) Adam, J., On Solon inc. 12 § 5 mply dvrapdtas miap ééethev yada. Academy, 14 March, ’g1, p. 259. (2) Allen, F. D., Prof. Wright’s paper in 1888, on the date of Cylon; Zhe Nation, 5 March, ‘gt, p. 197- (3) Bauer, A., (2) Vortrag in Graz, 18 Feb. ; Wissenschaftliche Rundschau der Miinchner Neuesten Nachrichten, no. 97, 103, 109. (4) Preussische Fahrbiicher, vol. 68, parti. See also lV (1). (4) Bernard- akis, G., "Eaiorody epi ris wok. AO. rod Ap., dvarumwors THs Epnuspisos, Athens, ’gr. (5) Benn, A. W., Onc. 25, Academy, 14 March, ’g1, p- 259. (6) Blass, F., Review in Litterarische Centralblatt, 28 Feb. 301—4 (with numerous emendations, reprinted in Class. Rev.v 175). Seealsoed.in!(7). (7) Brieger, A., die Verfassungsgeschichte von Athen, nach Aristoteles’ neu angefundener Schrift, Ussere Zett, ii 18—36, ’gr. -(8) Brooks, E. H., ems. in Class. Rev. v 182. (9) Burnet, J., ems. in Class. Rev. v 107, 117. (ro) Bury, J. B., ems. in Academy, 7 March, ’91, p. 234 5 Athenaeum, Pp. 3443 (=Class. Rev. v 175). (11) Busolt, G., ‘zur Gesetzgebung Drakons,’ Philologus, vol. 50, pp. 393—400. (12) Butcher, S. H., c. 13, 21, Class. Rev. v 178. (13) Bywater, I., ems. in Academy, 14 Feb. ’91, p. 163-4 (=Class. Rev. Vv 105—). (14) Campbell, Lewis, ems. in C/ass. Rev. v 105—, 119. (15) Chin- nock, E. J., ‘Rare Words,’ Class. Rev. v 229. (16) Cholodniak, J., General article in Fournal d. k. Russ. Min. der Volksaufkiirung, May ’91, p. 58—7o (in Russian). (17) Comparetti, D., Muova Antologia, xxvi 3, vol. 34, fasc. 13. (18) Cox, Rev. Sir G. W., ‘Aristotle as an Historian,’ Academy, July—Aug. ’92, pp. 52, 111, 152, 171. (19) Crusius, 0., ‘die Schrift vom Staate der Athener, und Aristoteles iiber die Demo- kratie,’ PAilologus, vol. 50, pp. 173—8.- (20) Curtius, E., Berl. Arch. Gesellschaft (Berl. Philol. Wochenschrift,’91, p- 27). (21) Dareste, R., (a) Séances et travaux de Acad. des Sciences Morales et Politiques, 91, p. 341—364 (abstract of Part ii); (2) Yournal des Savants, May,’91, p. 257—273: (22) De-Sanctis, G., ‘Studi sull’ "AO. won.,’ Kivista di filologia, vol. xx p. 147—163. (23) Diels, H., (2) Deutsche Litteraturzeitung, '91, nO. 7, p. 239—242; no. 24, p. 878; (4) Archiv f. Geschichte der Philosophie, iv 478; (c) On Epimenides, Siteungsberichte der Berliner Akademie, ’g1, p. 387- (24) Ellis, Robinson, ems. in Class. Rev. v 181—2. (25) Fraenkel, M., (a) Zeitschrift f. Geschichtswissenschaft, ’91, p. 164—7; (6) Rh. Mus. xlvii 473. (26) Gennadios, A., ’Axpéro\s, Athens, 18 March—2 April (Class. Rev. v 274). (27) Gertz, M. C., (a) Filologishe Tidskrift, '9t, p. 252—5; (6) Fahrb. f. Philologie,’91, p. 192. (28) Gildersleeve, B., Rev. in American Fournal of Philology, xii 97, cf. 2. i 458, iv 92, on Solon inc. 12§ 5, ply dvarapdéas. (29) Giles, P., English Historical Review, April, -’92. (30) Gomperz, Th., (a) ‘ Aristoteles u. seine neuentdeckte Schrift,’

Ixx CONSPECTUS OF THE LITERATURE

Deutsche Rundschau, xvii 219, May, ’91 ; (6) ‘Ueber das neuentdeckte Werk des Ar., U. die Verdichtiger seiner Echtheit,’ Anzeiger der Wiener Akademie, no. xi (3) [both printed separately]; (c) Deutsche Litteraturzeitung,’gi,n0. 24, p. 877; nO. 45, p. 1639. See also IV (5). (31) Hagen, H., trans. in Schweizerische Rundschau, ’9t, no. 4—6. (32) Harberton, Lord, On c. 35 § 1, Class. Rev. vi 123. (33) Hardie, W. R., ‘The diatrnral’ (c. 53), Class. Rev. v 164. (34) Hartman, J. J., general descriptive article in De Nederlandsche Spectator, 14 March,’91. (35) Haskins, C. E., em. (20, 5) Class. Rev. v tir 6. (36) Haussoullier, B., (a) Revue des Etudes Grecyues, no. 12 (belated no. for Dec. 1890), p. 4753 (6) Revue Critique, 91, no. 10, p. 181—6; ’92, No. 10, p- 179—183; (c) Acad. des Inscr. et Belles Lettres, ’91, Feb. 13 and 20; (d) Revue de Philologie, xv 2, p. 98 f. (37) Havell, H. L., ‘The Great Discovery,’ Mac- millan’s Mag., March, ’91, p. 392—400. (38) Headlam, J. W., (2) ‘The Constitution of Draco’ (c. 4), Class, Rev. v 166-9; (4) ‘On the use of the Azatus in the ToXrela,’ ib. 270—2; (c) ‘Notes on Early Athenian History (i) The Council: égéra: and vatkpapot,’ 76. vi 249—253, and (ii)‘ The Council,’ 2, 293—8. See also IV (8).

(39) Herwerden, H. van, (a) Berl. Philol, Wochenschrift, ’91, pp. 322, 418, 610; (6) Mnemosyne, ’91, p. 168. See also ed. in I (6). (40) Hicks, R. D., ems. Camé. Philol. Soc. Proc., 12 Feb. ’91, p. 103; Class. Rev. v 111 a, 116 b. (41) Hill, G. F., c. 25, Class. Rev. v 169; 176. (42) Holzinger, ‘ Aristoteles’ athenische Politie und die Heraklidischen Excerpte,’ Phzlologus, vol. 50, p. 436—446. (43) House- man, A. E., em. in Class. Rev. v 110 a. (44) Houtsma, E. 0., Berl. Philol, Wochenschr., 24 Jun.’91, p. 801. (48) Hude, C., ‘Coniecturae Aristotelicae,’ F%/olo- giske Tidskrift,’9t, p. 248—251. (46) Hultsch, F., ‘Das Pheidonische Masssystem,’ Fahrb. fiir Philol.,’91, p. 262—4. (47) Immisch, 0., On c. 41, Berl. Philol. Wochenschr, '91, P. 707+ (48) Jackson, H., ems. in Camb. Philol. Soc. Proe., ° 12 Feb. 91; Class. Rev, v 105—, 122. (49) Kaibel, G., article in Mord und Siid, Apr. ’91, p. 80—92; cf. I (5). (50) Keil, Bruno, (a) rev. of Mr Kenyon’s ed. in Bert. Philol. Wochenschr., 91, 28 April—16 May ; also separately printed, pp. 56; (4) rev. of van Herwerden and van Leeuwen’s ed., 2d. ’92, pp. 613, 649. Cf. IV (10). (51) Kenyon, F.G., (a) ‘New Readings,’ Class. Rev. v 269— 3 (4) ‘Recent Litera- ture,’ 2. 332. Seealsoedd.inI (rz). (52) Kontos, K.8., (z) Le Spectateur (Athens), 13 Apr. 91; (6) ’A@nva, iii 289—400; (c) Brod, i 44. (53) Lacon, B., ‘Hyuepa (Athens). (54) Lean, W. 8., Academy, 7 March, ’gt, p. 234. (55) Leeuwen, J. van, (a) Mnemosyne, xix 2, April, ’91, reprinted in Class. Rev. v 2243 (b) Vers- lagen en Medeelingen der Kon. Acad. v. Wett. afd. Letterkunde, 1891 (May), p. 154— 176. See also ed. in I (6). (56) Lipsius, J. H., Verhandlungen d. k. Siichs. Gesell- schaft d. Wissenschaften, ’9t, p. 41—6g (also printed separately). (57) Macan, R. W., (a) Review of Mr Kenyon’s first ed. in Oxford Magazine, 4 Feb. ’91 ; (6) Fournal of Hellenic Studies, April, xii 17—40 (on the historical aspect of the ’A@. oX., 11 March, °91). (58) Maehly, G., Review in Avista di Filologia, 91, p. §51—7. (59) Mar- chant, E. C., (az) ‘The Deposition of Pericles’ (c. 44), Class. Rev. v 165—6; (4) Emendations, 26. v r1o5—. (60) Marindin, G. E., Class. Rev. v 176, 177, 181. (61) Mayor, John E. B., (2) ems. &c. in Camé. Univ. Reporter, 3 March, ’91, p. 607; Class. Rev. v p. 16§8—}; (b) references on subject-matter, 24, 120—2; also in Proceed- ings of the Camb, Philological Society, 17 and 26 Feb.’91, pp. 1o—15. _. (62) Mayor, Joseph B., (a) onc. 7 § 4, and c. 17 § 4, Academy, 28 March, ’g1, p. 304; (4) ‘Un- aristotelian words and phrases,’ Class. Rev. v 122—185; (3) em. 2b. 175. (63) Murray, A. 8, onc. 7§ 4, Class. Rev. v 108. (64) Newman, W. L., (2) Review of Mr Kenyon’s ed. in Class. Rev. v 158 —164 3 (4) em. 2d. ro5—. (65) Nicklin, T., ems. in Class. Rev. v 227, 228. (66) Niemeyer, K., Fahd. fiir Philol.’gt, p. 405—

OF THE A@®HNAION ILOAITEIA [xxi

415+ (67) Oman, C. W., paper read at meeting of Historical Society, 19 Nov. ’9r (Academy, 28 Nov., p. 483). (68) Pais, E., Rivista di Filologia, xix 557—369. (69) Pantazidis, PiAoAoyixdy rapdpryua ris ‘Horlas, 1891. (7o) Papabasileios, *AOnva, ii 278 —288. (71) Paton, W.R., (2) Athenaeum, 21 Feb. ’gt, p. 251, and Class. Rev. v 105—, 178—, 2253 (4) ‘The Attic Phratries,’ 7d. 221. (72) Platt, A., ems. in Class, Rev. v 109, 175—, 185. (73) Poland, F., Yahrd. fiir Philol. ’91, p- 2§9—262. (74) Radinger, C., Philologus, vol. 50, pp. 229, 400, 468.

(75) Reimach, Th., (a) ‘Trois Passages du livre d’A. &c.’ (on cc. 4, 8, 25) Académie des Inscr. &c., 5 June, ’91; Revue Critique, n. 24; (6) ‘La Constitution de Dracon et la Constitution de l’an 411,’ Revue des Etudes Grecques, ’gt, p. 823 (c) ‘Aristote ou Critias ?,’ 2. 143—158. (76) Richards, F. T., (a) Rev. of Mr Kenyon’s ed. in Academy, 14 Feb. ’91, p- 165—7; (6) Rey. of Bauer’s Forschungen and of Mr Kenyon’s and Mr Poste’s Translations, 74. 15 Aug. ’91, p. 137——8; (c) Letter, 7b. 13 Aug. ’92, p. 133, mainly on discrepancies between Politics and ’A@. tron.

(77) Richards, Herbert [quoted in critical notes by surname only], (2) ems. in Academy, 14 Feb. gt, p. 163—4; and 18 Apr. p. 3713 (4) ems. in Class. Rev. v 105—, 122, 175, 224, 3343 (c) ‘Unaristotelian words and phrases,’ 7d. 184, 272. (78) Ridgeway, W., Academy, 21 Feb.’g1, p. 186—7 (Class. Rev. v 109). See also Origin of Metallic Currency and Weight Standards, pp. 306, 324. (79) Ruehl, F., (2) Rhein. Mus.,’91, p- 426—464; (6) Wochenschr. fiir klass. Philol.,’92,no. 1; cf. (128). (80) Rutherford, G., (2) ‘The New Aristotle Papyrus in its bearings on Textual Criticism,’ Class. Rev. v 89—91; (0) ems. 7b. 105—, 175. (81) Saint-Hilaire, B., Revue Bleue, 21 March, ’91. (82) Sandys, J. E., (a) ems. in Academy, 7 Feb. ’91, p. 137 (Class. Rev. v 105—); (6) ems. &c. Camb. Phil. Soc. Proc., 26 Feb. ’gt, p. 14 (with additions in Crass. Rev. v 119—120). (83) Schneider, G. J., Review of Mr Kenyon’s ed. in Wochenschr. fir klass. Philol., 29 Apr.—2o May, ’91, pp. 371, 498, 528, 544. (84) Schoell, R., Miinchener Allgemeine Zeitung, Beilage, no. 106—109; Sonderabdruck der 41 Philol.-Versammlung in Miinchen, Mai ’g91 (J. G. Cotta) Munich. (85) Schvarez, J.. Ungarische Revue, Apr. ’9t. See also IV (12). (86) Sidgwick, A., ems. in Class. Rev.v 105—. (87) Stewart, J. A., em. in Academy, 7 March, ’91, p. 234 (Class. Rev. v 179). (88) Smith, Cecil, Ostracism of Xanthippus, Class. Rev. Vv 277. (89) Smith, J. A., em. in Academy, 14 Feb. (Class. Rev. v 118). (90) Szanto, E., Wochenschr. fiir klass. Philol., ’9t, p. 761. (91) Thompson, E. §&., (2) em. in Class. Rev. v 223, 224—3 2773 (4) The Draconian Constitution, 24. 336; (c) Date of the Expulsion of the Pisistratids, 2. vi 181; (Z2) Age of the diat- rytal, 1b. 182. (92) Torr, Cecil, (2) on the date, Athenaeum, 7 Feb. (Class. Rev. v 11g note); (6) on 51 § 4, Class. Rev. v 117; (c) on the orparnyol in c. 61, 7. p. 119; (¢) onc. 54, the Delian festival, 26. 277. (93) Tyrrell, R. ¥., (a) ems, in Academy, 28 Feb. ‘gt, p. 210; 7 March, p. 234 (Class. Rev. v 175—); (6) ‘The New Papyri,’ Quarterly Review, April, ’9t, p. 320—350. (94) Vanderkindere, Revue Belgique, March, ’9t- (95) Wachsmuth, C., ‘zur Topographie von Athen,’ Rhein- isches Museum, ’91, Heft 2. (96) Walker, E. M., Chronology of 462—445 B.c., Class. Rev. vi 95. (97) Wardale, J. R., Class. Rev. v 273- (98) Weil, H., ¥our- nal des Savants, April, ’91, p. 197- (99) Whibley, L., (2) on cc. 22, 23, 28, Class. Rev. y 168—9 ; (6) em. 2. 180; (c) on the Authorship, 2d, 223. (100) Wright, J. H., (2) Review of Mr Kenyon’s ed. in Zhe Nation, 7 May, ’91; (6) ‘Did Philochorus quote the ’AQ. mod. as Aristotle’s?’, American Fournal of Philology, xii 3, 310—318. (c) ‘The Date of Cylon,’ a Study in early Athenian history, Harvard Studies in Clas- sical Philology, iii 1892. Also reprinted, pp. 80 (Ginn and Co.) Boston. (ror) Wyse, W., (2) ems. in Camb. Phil, Soc. Proc. for Feb. 12, ’9r3 also in Athenaeum, Feb. 14

Ixxii CONSPECTUS OF THE LITERATURE

and 21, and Academy, 21 Feb. p. 186 (Class. Rev. v 105—); (4) ems. in Class. Rev. Vv 225—; (c) notes, 2d. 122, 224, 274—6, 335—6; (2) on mpodavelfew, 16 § 2, 2b, vi 254—7-

Many of the following articles appeared at a later date than the above :—

(102) Bérard, J., Avistote, La Constitution d’ Athénes, (Extrait) Paris. (103) Betge, popular article in Gegenwart, ’91, no. 29. (104) Buseskul, (a) on cc. 4 and 25, Journ. d. Min. der Volksaufkl.; noticed in Berl. Phil. Woch.,8 Oct. 92, p- 1289; (6) in Russ. hist. Rundschau, ii 221—239 (both in Russian). (105) Cauer, Paul, Aristoteles Urteil tiber die Demokratie, Fleckeisen’s Jahro. ’92, p. §81—593- (106) Cavazza, P., Discorso in Annuario dell Istituto di studi superioriin Firenze, pp. 20,°92. (107) Derewizki, A., (in Russian) Charkow, ’91. (108) Dimitsas, M. G., “EN\ds, iii 4

P- 357—379- (109) Duemmler, F., Die’A@. wor. des Kritias, in Hermes, ’92, p. -260—280. (110) Ferrini, C., Rendiconto dell Ist. lombardo, ser. ii, vol. xxiv, fasc. 8—9. (111) Fontana, G., On Aristides in’AQ. roA., pp. 26, (Tedeschi) Verona.

(112) FraccaroH, G., due versi di Solone (c. 12, 28), in Rivista di Filologia, xxi, p. 49—50. (113) Goodell, T. W., ‘Ar. on the Athenian Arbitrators’ in Amer. Journ. of Philology, xii 319 —326. (114) Grunzel, J.,(Friedrich) Leipzig. (115) Hertz, M.C., Onc. 38, Jahrb. f. Philol.,’’91, p- 192. (116) Hude, K., On the murder of Hipparchus (where Ar. differs from Thuc. he is probably following Androtion), Jahrb. J. Philol., ’92, p. 171—6. (117) Knoke, F., popular article in Grenzboten, ’91, no. 4344+ (118) Kohler, U., (A) On Heracleides of Clazomenae, Hermes, ’92, p. 68 f. (8) Die Zeiten der Herrschaft des Petsistrates; Sitzungsberichte of the Berlin Academy, 7 April, ’92, pp. 339—343; a not entirely accurate abstract in Berl. Phil. Woch., 13 Aug. p. 1053—6. [(a) The account of Peisistratus in cc. 14, 15 is primarily derived from Hdt. i 59—64, combined (but not harmonised) with other sources of information. The second exile lasted 10 years; the first rupayvis 5; and the first exile and the second and third rupavvis, 6 years each. This result was probably obtained by deducting the 10 years of the second exile from the 33 years of c. 17, and dividing the remainder (23) into four approximately equal parts, thus making the rupavvls last for 17 years in all, and the exile for 16 years. The 19 years of rvpavvls in c. 17 § 1, which are inconsistent with this, are obtained (as already suggested on p. 76 a) by deducting the 17 years of the rule of the Peisistratidae (c. 19 ult.) from the 36 years assigned by Hat. to the rule of Peisistratus and his sons. (The connexion of Peisis- tratus with Rhaecelus explains the offer of Amyntas I to allow Hippias to settle at the neighbouring town of Anthemtis, Hdt. v 94.) (4) The author’s method of combining different sources of information is further illustrated by comparing his account of Cleisthenes (c. 2o—21) with that of Hdt. (The beginning of the ordots is placed by Kohler before 508/7, and the reforms of Cleisthenes in s07/6.) (c) In the figures given in cv. 24 the main stress is laid on the total, 20,000 (cf. Arist. Vesp. 706—8), not on the details; it is an exaggeration to put the number of the dpyal e&vdnuoe and brepépior at 700 each; and the estimate of 2500 hoplites and 20 guardships properly belongs to the time of the battle of Tanagra. A body as numerous as the 2,000 gpovpol must have held office for more than a year. (d) c. 25 describes the censorial .. powers of the Areopagus as éml@era, whereas, in cc. 3, 4, 8, these powers are described as having belonged to it from the earliest times. Hence we may infer that c. 25 is founded on a different account of the historical development of the powers of the Areopagus to that followed in the previous chapters. Further, it is more probable that Ephialtes, in his attack on the Areopagus, cooperated with Pericles than with Themistocles. The story about the latter in c. .25 is a lappische, chronologische unmégliche Erzdhlung, probably borrowed from some such writer as Stesimbrotus.]

OF THE A®HNAION TIOAITEIA Ix xii (119) Kurze, F., Westermann’s Monatshefte, Nov.’91, p. 281—4. (120) Mahaffy, J. P., obiter dicta in Problems in Greek History, pp. 84, 87, 89, 96, 122, 128. (121) Melber, J., Aristoteles ’A@nvalwy aodwrela uw. die bisher dariiber erschienene Littera- tur in Blitter fiir das bayerische Gymnasialwesen xxviii 1, p. 29—44 (Class. Rev. vi 375)- (122) Meyer, P., (a) der meue Ar. u, die Schule, in Gymnasium, ’92, no. 2—3; (4) Reviews in Zeitschr. f. d. Gymnasialwesen, XLVI 144—155. (123) Muller, H. C., in ‘EAAds iv, pp. 76 ff, and Kenyon, dd. 137, Leyden, ’92. (124) Munro, J. A. R., ‘The Chronology of Themistocles’ career,’ Class. Rev. vi 333 f. (125) Nissen, H., die Staatschriften des Ar.in Rhein. Mus.’92, vol. 47, pp. 161—206 (holds that the Ilo\cretac were intended to lead up to the publication of a code for the dominions of Alexander, and also to serve as a series of hand-books for the use of Macedonian diplomatists. The article is ably criticised by Bruno Keil, die Solonische

Verfassung, Pp. 127—150). (126) Piccolomini, Aeneas, J Aristot. et Herodam animado. criticae, in Rivista di filologia, xx p. 456—264, Turin, 1892. (127) Post- gate, J. P., em. #Adcare for dacare, in c. 5, 16 (Class. Rev. v 109). (128) Ruehl,

F., Der Staat der Athener und kein Ende, in Jahrb. f. class. Philol. Suppl. Bd., 18, pp. 675—706; also reprinted (Teubner) Leipzig. [Rev. in Meue Philol. Rund- Schau, °92, NO. 15, p. 229 (P. Meyer); Woch. f. kl. Philol.’92, no. 35, p. 949 (G. J. Schneider); Ber?. Phil. Woch. 15 Oct. p. 1317 (Schoffer). ‘Fassen wir des Ergebniss meines ersten Aufsatzes (79) und das der vorstehenden weiteren Ausfiihr- ungen zusammen, so ergibt sich die neue Schrift als ein Werk, das sich sehr nahe an die aristotelische ’A@. oA. anschloss, stellenweise fast oder ganz wértlich, das ihr manche feine, echt aristotelische Wendung verdankte, das sie aber einerseits an vielen Stellen zusammenzog, anderseits dagegen auch erweiterte und méglicherweise auch einzelne Partien durch andere ersetzte’ (p. 700). He holds that the editor of the work was ‘Herakleides Lembos’ (p. 7o1 f.).] (129) Schoffer, Val. von, (2) On the date of the ’A@. mod. in Introd. to Birgerschaft u. Volksversammlung 2u Athen, I, Moscow, ’gi (in Russian), Berl. Phil. Woch. 8 Oct. ’92, p. 1290; (4) Reviews in Berl. Phil. Woch. 8 and 15 Oct. ’92. (130) Schultz, H., Russ. Phil. Rundschau, ii p. 33—44 (in Russian). (131) Stern, E. v., die meuentdechte’AO. won. des Ar. pp. 42 (Abdruck aus B. II der Annal. der hist.-phil. Ges.), in Russian, Odessa, ’92 3 Jattacks the views of Schvarcz, Riihl and Cauer, Ber?. Phil. Woch. 8 Oct. 92, p. 1291]. (132) Szanto, E., 2x drakonischen Gesetzgebung, in Arch.-epigr. Mittheil- ungen aus Oesterreich, XV 2, p. 180—2. (133) Tacchi-Venturi, Cie7/ta Cattolica, xii no. 995—6. (134) Zielinski, Th., onc. 4, in Russ. Phil. Rundschau, i 2, p. 125 f. (in Russian). (135) Zingerle, A., Zeitschrift f. d. Oesterr. Gymn. xiii 207 f.

(IV) SEPARATE WORKS.

(1) Bauer, A., Litterarische u. historische Forschungen zu Aristoteles’A@. woh. (C. H. Beck) Munich, pp. 190, May ’o1. (Rev. in Athenaeum, 5 Sept. '91, p- 317+ Academy, 15 Aug. ’91, p. 137; Berl. Phil. Woch. 15 Oct. ’92, p. 1321, Schoffer; and elsewhere.) [In three parts: (1) On the relations of Ar. to the historical literature of Greece ; (2) historical results derived from the 7A0. wod.; (3) Chronological tables, drawn up in accordance with the dates given in the ’AQ. 7oA.]

(2) Cassel, Paulus, Vom neuen Aristoteles u. seiner Tendenz (Bibliograph. Bureau) Berlin, ’91. (Rev. in Berd. Phil. Woch. 1% Oct. ’92, p. 1320, Schoffer; and elsewhere.) [An unscholarly pamphlet, describing the ideal of the author of the ’A@. mod. as ‘die alte, erbliche, patriarchalische, gewissenhafte, konigliche Verfassung.”]

(3) Cauer, Pr., ‘Hat Aristoteles die Schrift vom Staate der Athener geschrieben?

Ixxiv CONSPECTUS OF THE LITERATURE

thr Ursprung und ihr Wert fiir die altere athenische Geschichte,’ (Gdschen) Stuttgart, pp- 78, gt. (Rev. in Academy, 6 June ’91, p. 540; Athenaeum, 5 Sept. ’91, p. 3173 Deutsche Litteratur-Zeitung, p. 878, Diels; Litt. Centralblatt, p. 1120; Wochenschr, fl. Phil. no. 28, Szanto; Gymmn. p. 567, P. Meyer; Berl. Phil. Woch. 92, p. 1288, Schéffer; and elsewhere.) [Argues against the treatise being the work of Aristotle.]

(4) Droysen, H., Vorldufige Bemerkungen zu Aristoteles’ ’AQ. mod., Oster Programm des kénigstadt. Gymn. (Girtner) Berlin, ’91. [Mainly chronological. ]

(5) Gomperz, Th., Dze Schrift vom Staatswesen der Athener und thr neuester Beurtheiler, (Holder) Vienna, ’91. [A polemical pamphlet directed mainly against Dr Franz Riihl’s article in Rheinisches Museum, xvi 426.]

(6) Hagfors, E., de pracpositionum in Ar. Politicis et in’ AQ. rod. usu, Helsing- fors Dissertation, pp. 130 (Mayer u. Miiller, Berlin, ’92). [Rev. in Waoch. f. kl. Philol. ’92, p- 997- The net result of this elaborate statistical investigation is that, in the prepositions, the writer finds nothing in the ’A@. mod. divergent from the usage in the Politics. On the other hand, there is little in the use of prepositions in the former that is distinctively characteristic of Aristotle. This is limited to the use of é dpyijs (for év dpxq), € Swaps, and of wept twa. The conclusion is :—‘ quantum ex prae- positionum usu concludere licet, ille liber ab Aristotele Jotest esse conscriptus.”]

. (7) Hammond, B. E., Greek Constitutions, (a sketch including fresh details from the’A@. od.) pp. 68 (E. Johnson) Cambridge, ’gr.

(8) Headlam, J. W., Appendix to Historical Essay, Election by Lot at Athens, pp. 183—190, (University Press) Cambridge, ’91. See also III (38).

(9) Herzog, E., Zur Litteratur tiber den Staat der Athener, pp. 83 (Fues) Tiibingen, Nov. ’92. (1) On [Xen.] ’A@. mod. ; (2) on Ar, AQ. rod. c. 4.

(10) Keil, Bruno, Die Solonische Verfassung nach Aristoteles, pp. 248 (Gartner) Berlin, Nov. ’92. [Ar. was engaged in the preparation of the Podztics from about 350 to 335 B.c. It was apparently after this that he put into shape the materials collected for his IloN:reiat, the redaction of the’A@. vod. falling between 329 and 325. In its polemical passages and elsewhere, it shows the influence of the ’Ar@ls of Androtion, besides other traces of further research subsequent to the preparation of the Politics. It was intended for publication, as is proved by the elaborate style of certain portions, by the attention paid to rhythm at the ends of the sentences, by the avoidance of hiatus, and by other indications of deliberate purpose and methodical plan. The work did not, however, receive the author’s finishing touches, and was probably not given to the world until after his death.—The text of chaps. 5— 13 is printed with critical notes, followed by a commentary on each chapter, together with many valuable remarks on the work as a whole. Among the restorations of the text here proposed are c. 9, If Omws wept) ris Kploe[ws 6 S)fLuos 7 K]Uptos, c. 10, 5 map’ d[Al]yov, u. 11, Io yeverOan Thy [véav] rdéw, c. t1, 12 4} o[xeddy d]rapaddal[Krov]. ]

(1 1) Meyer, Peter, Des Aristoteles’ Politik u. die’A@. woX., nebst einer Litteratur- Uebersicht, pp. 72 (Cohen) Bonn, ’91. (Rev. in Berl. Phil. Woch. 8 Oct. '92, p. 1291, Schoffer; and elsewhere.) [Gives some useful parallel passages from the Politics; but goes too far in contending that Politics ii 12 and c. 4 of ’A8. mon. are both equally authoritative. ]

(12) Sehvarez, Julius, ‘Avistoteles u. die’AQ@. rod.,’ 1 Abtheilung des Werkes Die Demokratie, pp. 25 (Friedrich) Leipzig, ’91. [Ascribes the treatise to Demetrius Phalereus. ]

(13) Schjott, P. Aristoteles om Athens Statsforfatning, Christiania, ’91, Dybwad. (Rev. by B in Lit. Centralblatt, no. 29, p. 1025.) ;

(14) Wright, J. H. Zhe Date of Cylon, (Reprint of III (100 ¢), 1892); noticed

OF THE A®HNAION TIOAITEIA Ixxv

in Academy, 11 June, ’92, p. 570; Class. Rev. vi 4573 Berl. Phil. Woch. ’92, p. 15553 and: elsewhere. [Places the attempt of Cylon between 636 and 624 B.C., and the trial and banishment of the Alcmaeonidae, and the visit of Epimenides, in 615.]

The principal books of reference used in preparing the commentary are: (a) the Corpus Inscriptionum Atticarum, quoted as CIA; with E. L. Hicks, Gk. Historical Inscriptions, and Dittenberger’s Sydloge; also von Hartel’s Studien tiber Attisches Staatsrecht u. Urkundenwesen (1878), and Meisterhans, Grammatik der Attischen Inschriften, ed. 2 (1888).

(6) the Zndex Aristotelicus of Bonitz; and the editions (or translations) of the Politics by Susemihl, Jowett, Newman and others; also the various editions of the Fragments.

(c) the Greek lexicographers, esp. Bekker’s Amecdota, vol. i; Etymologicum Magnum (Gaisford); Harpocration (Dindorf); Hesychius (Schmidt); Photius (ed. Porson, revised by Dobree, 1822, who printed as Appendix the Lexicon Rhetoricum Cantabrigiense; Dobree’s transcript of the latter was also published posthumously in 1834); also id. (ed. Naber, 1864—5); Pollux (Bekker); and Suidas (Bernhardy).

(2) in Gk. History:—Herodotus, Thucydides, Xenophon, also C. Miiller’s Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum, quoted as FHG:—among modem writers, Thirlwall, Grote (ed. 1862 in 8 vols), Curtius (ed. Ward), Duncker, Busolt, Holm, Abbott; also Gilbert’s Beztvdége. In Chronology, Eusebius (ed. Schoene, 1866—75); and the Marmor Parium in Miiller’s FHG; also Clinton’s Fastz, and Peter’s Zeittafeln.

(e) in Antiquities and Law: (1) Boeckh, Die Staatshaushaltung der Athener, ed. 2, 1851, ed. 3 (by Frankel) 1886; also the translations of ed. 1 by Sir Geo. Cornewall Lewis 1828, 1842; of ed. 2 by Lamb, Boston, U.S., 1857. (2) the new edition of K, FP. Hermann’s Lehrbuch der Griechischen Antiquitaten), (3) Meier u. Schoemann, der Attische Process, 1824, ed. Lipsius 1881—6; also Lipsius, in Verhandlungen d. k. Sachs. Gesellschaft d. Wissenschaften,’91,p.41—69. (4) G. F. Schoemann, Antigui- ties of Greece, vol. i translated by Hardy and Mann, 1880. (5) Gilbert, Griechische Staatsalterthiimer, 1881—5 (new ed., and English trans. of vol.iin preparation). (6) Busolt, Die Griechischen Alterthiimer, 1887 (ed. 2,’92), and Stengel, Sakralalterthi- mer, 1890, both in Iwan Miiller’s Handbuch. (7) A. Mommsen, Heortologie, 1864. (8) Smith, Dict. of Gk. and Roman Antiquities, ed. Wayte and Marindin (with Ap- pendix on ’A@. 7ro\.). (9) Daremberg et Saglio, Dict. des Antiguités. (10) Haussoullier, /a Vie Municipale en Attique, 1884; Hauvette-Besnault, /es Stratiges Athéniens, 1885; A. Martin, les Cavaliers Ath., 1887; Diirrbach, ZL’ Orateur Lycurgue, 1890, and other monographs in the same series. (11) Philippi, Beitrdge zu einer Geschichte des Attischen Biirgerrechtes (1870),and Der Areopag und die Epheten, 1874. (12) Fraenkel, die attischen Geschworenengerichte, 1877. (13) Schulthess, Vormund- schaft, 1886. (14) U. von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, dus Kydathen, in ‘Philol. Untersuchungen,’ 1880. (15) Dissertations by Thumser, de Civinm Atheniensium muneribus, 1880; Kornitzer, De Scribis Publicis, 1883 ; Haederli, Asty u. Ago? n, 1886; Panske, de Magistratibus Attics, gui saeculo A. C. quarto pecunias publicas curabant, i, 1890; and others. (16) Articles in Philo- logical Journals, &c.

1 Vol. 1, Part ii, Der Athenische Staat was published in Nov. 1892, too late to und seine Geschichte, edited by Thumser, be of use in the present work.

Ixxvi ABBREVIATIONS USED IN CRITICAL NOTES

§ 11. Abbreviations used in the critical notes, &e.

SIGLARIUM.

Papyri Londinensis lectiones litterae ‘unciales’ indicant ;

[ ] quae in papyro prius, ut videtur, fuerunt, nunc autem evanuerunt ;

< > quae in papyro per errorem omissa, propter sensum addenda sunt; {. ] quae in papyro scripta, ut aliena omittenda sunt:

+ obelus lectionem corruptam designat ;

* asteriscus coniecturas non antea ab editore prolatas.

Editiones.

K!= Kenyonis ed. prima; K? secunda; x? tertia;

K-w!= Kaibel et von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, ed. prima; K-Ww’, ed. altera; H-L=van Herwerden et van Leeuwen;

B=Blass.

§ 12. List of Lllustrations. ,

In Frontispiece. Fig. 1; Heliastic muvdxcov, from Daremberg and Saglio’s Dict. des Antiquités, iii 190, fig. 2410; first published by M. Rayet, Axnuazre de P Association des Etudes Grecgues, 1878, p. 206. See note on p. 235.

Fig. 2 and 3; two bronze counters, probably used in the allotment of citizens to the several heliastic divisions. On the obverse, four owls and two sprays of olive, encircled with the word @ecmo8eTwN. On the reverse, fig. 2 (from the Berlin Museum) bears the letter E; fig. 3 (published in Parnassos, Athens, 1883), the letter A. From Daremberg and Saglio, /c., fig. 2411, 2412. See note on p. 236 4.

Fig. 4 and 5; heliastic cvpBoAa. On the obverse, a copy of the design on a rpidBodov,—an owl surrounded with two sprays of olive, and A@H in fig: 4, © only in fig. 5. On the other side, a letter, probably denoting one of the heliastic sections. See note on p. 2404. From Daremberg and Saglio, Z¢., fig. 2413, 2414,

Fig. 6 and 7; bronze Wjdoe used for voting, found at Athens (Bu//. de Corr. Hellén. 1887, xi 210). From Daremberg and Saglio, /.c., fig. 2415—6. See note on p. 246.

On p. 39; Aeginetan Didrachmon; Berlin Cabinet, Friedlander u. Sallet, Beschreibung, no. 2. From Baumeister’s Denkméler, fig. 1010.

Ibid. and Title-page. Early Attic Tetradrachmon; Berlin Cabinet, z.s., no. 54. From Baumeister’s Denkmdler, fig. 1013.

CORRIGENDA.

p. 24, 1. 17 from end: read ‘ either as early as 636 or as late as 624.’ p. 7,1. 3: dele asterisk. p- 133, in critical note on 35, 5: read Ilepatéws K, K-W.

ADDENDA TO INTROD. AND COMMENTARY \xxvii

ADDENDA,

Introduction, p. xii. The sketch on pp. ix—xii is perhaps needlessly limited to the literature of the theory of government. A survey of ‘political literature’, if interpreted in its wider sense, might have included some account of the de Pace and the Areopagiticus of Isocrates. Of these two political pamphlets the first advises Athens to abandon the Empire of the Sea; the second commends the earlier mode of appointing the officers of State by election (alpecis) rather than by lot («Aspwors), and pleads for the restoration of the censorial power once wielded by the Council of the Areopagus. Both of these works may be ascribed to the year 355 B.c., and both have important points of contact with the ’A@yvalwy modrela, which was written nearly 30 years later. Some of these points are noticed in Bruno Keil’s Solon. Verf., pp. 78 ff, 215 &c.

p- 1. The observations of Blass on the rhythm of the ’A@qvalwy wodrela are perhaps unduly fanciful. In the extreme case quoted in the text the metrical corre- spondence is possibly due to accident alone. The central clause of the sentence is 2 quotation, Tovrov BovAerat Tis Karnyopety; and it is difficult to believe that, in the language used immediately before and after this clause, the writer was consciously guided by the metrical value of the successive syllables of the quotation itself. One may also fairly mistrust 4 theory which leads its exponent to print the trisyllabic Tletpards in c. 35 § 1, while everywhere else he prefers the quadrisyllabic Hepaiéws. A more cautious and sober view is that of Bruno Keil, /c., p. 36, who observes :— ‘die Unfertigkeit des Aristotelischen Buches lasst eine Rhythmik in dem Umfange, wie Blass sie annimmt, m. E, iiberhaupt gar nicht suchen’. Elsewhere, p. 33, he makes the interesting remark: ‘das Zempo der Sprache unseres Buches ist im ganzen ein schnelles’.

Commentary, p. 9 (c. 3, 25): Povkodetow xr] Cf. Bruno Keil, in Bert. Phil. Woch. 21 May, 1892, p. 652 f.

p. 14(c. 4, 6): Tapas] The earliest inscription in which the rayla: are mentioned belongs to the first half of the sixth century, CIA iv 37378, p. 199, of raplae rade xarkla «rh. Cf. J. A. S. ix 125.

p- 28 (c. 7, 23): Aupthov “Av@eplov] Bruno Keil, Solon. Verf., p. 67, identifies with this monument a work of art mentioned in CIA, ii 742 A 12 (Catalogi signorum ex aere factorum), early in the second half of the 4th century :—dvd0qua’AvOeulwy[os....] kuvfy exer kat Dyxnv] vel Ab[pov]. He accordingly infers that the: monument may be described as dvd@qua AvGeulwvos, elxdw Aipihov. Kohler describes the age of these Catalogi as ultimis decenniis saeculi quarti non multo antiquior. But the work of art itself may easily have been very much older, some of the rest in the list having certain portions missing. Cf. Boeckh, in 311’, 279°.

p- 79 f (c. 21, 12): Siéveupe]. Add, Milchhoefer’s Untersuchungen uber die Demen- ordnung des Kleisthenes, with Map, Reimer, Berlin, Oct. ’92; and Szanto, Hermes, *g2, p. 312.

p- 1344 (c. 35, 9): “HudArov kal "Apxertpdrov] Bruno Keil, Solon. Vetfr, P- 54) proposes to identify Archestratus with the mover of the last amendment in the decree concerning Chalcis, CIA iv I, p. 12 n. 274, 70, *Apxéorparo[s] ere Ta ev Adda kabdmwep [A}rixdfs: ras [8] edOdvas Kadxidei[o}. card opav abrav evar év Xadxlde kabdrep "AOhwnow "AOnvalos, whi puyis Kal Oavdrov kal drylas. mepl 6€ rovrwy epeow elvar "AOivage és tiv pualay Tov Oecpoberav xara TO Whdioua TOD Sipov. The spirit of this proposal harmonises with the policy of Ephialtes.

rae me

Ixxvi ADDENDA TO

Addenda Notulis Criticis. 3m=Blass, Mitteilungen aus Papyrus-handschriften, ; in Fleckeisen’s Jahrbiicher, Oct. 1892, pp. 571—5- Lectionum harum ipsa.papyro inspecta prolatarum exemplar Blassii ipsius benevolentiae acceptum refero ; ex eisdem nonnullas ab eodem impertitas in editione capitum 1—41 in textum nuperrime recepit Hude. Recensentur infra etiam coniecturae quaedam, quas nuper proposuit Bruno Keil.

2,2 hv yap [rére]: fv yap air(Gv) Bm (Hude).

3, 6 é [dpx]ils jv] a J W Headlam prolatum accepi et defendi: kat m[dr]puos [qv] Bm (Hude). 10 [riv dpxiqve onpetov] &: [radr(nv)]- texuyjpi(ov) & Bm (Hude). 11 dprdovor [kafdmrep]: durdtovoy wolrep Wessely et Bm (Hude), 14 drordpws mor’ exer muxpbv, éyévero yap év rovros Tois xpdvars: daorépws Tor’ exel, - puxpdv By» tapadddrroe rots xpévors Bm (Hude). 17 [udvov ra érlOlera: m[ep] ax oanie én[{]Oera (replaivew] érlfera?) Bm. 22 wrelww [9] eviatoros. [odror] pev

ov xp(dvov) : mAclwy éviavolas. [T]e wer ody xp(dvw) Bm, coll. Pl. Leg. 779 D od« éAdrrwy évavolas (Hude).

4,10 dte[yyv]a[obat] : duelyyu]av, carte (vel sponsi. ) exigere, Bm (Hude) ; idem coniecerat Frinkel, Rhezm. Mus. xlvii 473, sed alio sensu, sfondere. 12 r(apa)oyxopuevous* cum Blassio conieceram: dexouévous K, K-W, (participio cum €ovs constructo) Bm (Hude). 13 ovrep <elaw> Hude.

5, 8 écopdv7’ Naber (Hude). 9 Kal yap téredhatver kai mpos: ‘Kawouevyy’ (de Attica, pereuntem), év 7 (HI) pds Bm (Hude). 17 é perplow t[péperbe]: & perploot TL... Oe BM; recte igitur 7l@ec0e proposuerat Platt. 21 rip re pi[o- XpnJarlay (quod coniecerat Kontos) Bm, qui usitatam lectionem ¢iAapyuplay cum litteratum vestigiis non congruere arbitratur, sed spatium litteris tribus pHM paullo angustius esse confitetur.

6,15 amex bécGa <édéoGar> Hude, hiatu sine causa admisso. 18 Karappv- raly[elw : kaTrappurfivar Gertz (Hude), hiatu admisso.

7, 7 Karextpwoev (5é rods vduous): karéx\yoev (ICEN iam antea Wessely) Bm ‘machte fest’, ‘gab Geltung’, Hude; sed explicandum potius /eges suas intra centum annorum spatium inclusit. 9 rivjualra dijetAey : Trunuare [dc]etAev Wessely, Bm (Hude). 11 ras ulev ofy dpxas : x(al) Tas wey dpyas (spatio inter ME et N vacuo relicto) Bm (Hude). :

8, 21 [kat] rd re dda: [9] Td ve GANG BM (Hude). 24 [rod *rpdrrjecda: [rob €]xr[évJer@(ac) Bm (Hude) ; idem coniecerat Tyrrell.

9, 11 drs (ep) rijs kploelws 6 S]j[uos 7 K]Upios Keil.

10, 2 rovjoa K ; rocfioale] Bm. 5 wap’ d[Al]yor Keil. 6 jv 8 6 dpxatos xapaxrhp ScSpdxpov. érolnoe dé kal <rad> orabua mpds t[d] vduiopa, t[p]ets Kal <rerrapdxovra émavijoas els ras> éfqxovra uvas 7d Tddavrov dyovoas Keil, Solon. Verf, p. 166. 8 éfjxovra: Sydoqxovra Gertz (Hude). 9 [al] prat: [al y’] #vat Bm, supra versum hastam numeri signum prodentem cerni posse testatus: al tpeis kal elxoot (xy’ Gertz) wvat Hude.

11,10 An yevécOar rv [véav] rdéw? Keil. 12 7 o[xeddv d]rapdddaxrov Keil; 7 alex ploy mapahddt[ew Bm, et deinceps 50e]v [d]udorépous. 13 ovord[yte]: ovord[yrja Bm (Hude).

CRITICAL NOTES Ixxix

12, 14 dco: dros Hude. 51° ppacalar’ dv Hude. 54 toddatow: rodMuolup Bm (moAAqjow Hude). ve de _ 16,17 7a: 7d H-L (Bm). 18 wralrrd]\w: émmedas Hude, quod obiter con- ieceram. 27 é6[pu]dAfeZ]ro: ev Buu (ov) qv Bm (Hude), qui lectionem novam idem ac evedupobvro valere dicit, sed exspectares potius evexwpud fero, 31 [sponpe?ro] : [éIB[ovd]}e[r0] Bm (Hude). 35 Euewev <év> [7H dpxy, x(al)] 87 exméoor: Ewewer, [k(at) 3h] K(at) Or? éxrécoe Bm (Hude). 42 ’A@nvalw[y] K (Bm).

17, 4 eglevy]ev yap: epfev}ye (4p) Bm. 18, 19 7(av) [hoerav]: r(av) [4AA]wy K (Bm).

19, 20 d0ep edrdpnoay krrd: br eUmopo. Hoav Xpnudtov, <droBdérovres> hiatu bis admisso Hude.

21, 3 <7 ToNrelav de karéotnocev >. % -& mpdrov udv oly <ow > éveue Hude. 22, 42 drlwous: driwos Hude. 24, 11 rév reddy [kal] <rdv drd> rap ous pa xwv Hude. 19 dda 5¢ <déka> vijes al rods pdpous dyovrm, <éyovoo> Hude. 28, 16 rais Oppais <Xapifouevos> J B Mayor (Hude).

29,7 ro[d Em) [jdov] : Told ’Avadd]y[o]riov Bm (Hude), demi potius quam patris nomine etiam alias usurpato, c. 28, 22, c. 34, 27, c. 38, 223 Pythodorum igitur non Epizeli filium tribus Aegeidis sed Anaphlystium quendam tribus Antiochidis fuisse censet B. 8 7(dv) Baotdda Bm.

81, 19 [rots] adrois: rots dorots K? (Bm). 32, 16 braxoulod]yrww : bro: kovéyrwy (H-L) Bm.

36, 13 rodvw perv xXpbvov brepeBdddovro <éx@épew Gertz>—, Bre 6é Kal édotev abrois [éxpépew]], rods wey éEqrecWav tov <éy>yeypaypdvav, ros 8 dvrevé- ypayay tiv whey Hude.

38, 7 *éadlorehdov]—perame[umbuevor : erre[u]ro[y]—perameumopevor Bm (Hude).

39, 24 robs 5° év rg dares ev Trois < ev Te dere Tois> Ta <abTa> Tiyuhpara Tape- Xouévas Gertz (Hude).

41,3 % & Soxodce 8 dixalws [rod Shuov] AaBeiv ryv wodtTelay (wfo}Aer[cJav Bm), Hude. 27 <dy>edndvGaow Hude.

42,11 éay: HAN (deleto H) Bm. 43,15 xadlfew: Kaeizel Bm.

47, 12 ra els <y'> é[rn] rempapéva: Ta els [’’ ér]n 7. Bm. 14 [dpecde]rav &v[avriov]: ad[Ae]n[...... ], @AX(wv) evayrlov Bm. 17 [8oov] ay mpinra: & dy mplyrac Bm. == 30 Ta yeaupatleia 7a] ras KaraBords dvayeypapudva: Ta ypop- barela K (2.2. K=Kard) ras KaraBodas dvayeypaypeva Bm, coll. v. 20.

48, 5 durdlody d]vdyxy: durdd[ovoy dpd-yxn Bm. 8 ra xpl[quara]: ras r[iua]s Bm. 16 d[yoplais: aN.... atc (ante alc vinculi vestigium litteram k vel A vel y indicantis) Bm, qui dv[adcxt]ais, appel/ationum causa, dubitanter conicit. 21 76 <re>[abrod]: 76 [6 abrot], avrod per se spatium non implet, Bm. 25 émi}ypdger: avaypade Bm. 27 [riv] edOwav: [ratr(nv) 7(hv)] efOvvay Bm, spatio sex litteris apto.

49, 1f kaddv i[wmov éx]wv: xad[O [rpoped]s dv Bm, numero plurali cum con- textu congruente. Cf. Pl. Leg. 738 B rpopevs trmuv. ;

54, 32 [viv] 5(€) wpédckecra: (TT superscr. poc, deinde Keital) [x(a?) H]galo[7Ja, ért KygicopSvros dpxovros Bm, confessus ‘Hpacortwy in wevrernplia mutationem nus-

quam alias commemorari. 36 Kal rob[yJoua.

55, 2 [mpayyarlwy, spatio non sufficiente: [dmdvr]wy Bm. 3 [elpy]rac: [mpoe}ipyra[e mavult Bm.

56, 21 [ris re]: [ras (littera producta) Bm. 30 els 7[0 di]xaorijpiov: els [c]kacrjpiov Bm. ; 57, 2 [ray émipednrav ods] 6 Shuos Xetporovet: T&v er. ay 66. x. Bm. 25 kai Sexdfolvow] ev lep[G.] kat vral[@]orn, coll. v. 29 els 7d iepdv, Bm, notas quasdam fallaces, non litterarum vestigia vera, superesse arbitratus. 28 d[lkacov é]uBareiy :

v[bpos é]uBareiv Bm. 61, 27 Kat ddrdov ris [roo “A]upwvos: Kal v[iv] rHs (superscr.) [Tod “A]upwvos mavult Bm.

Ixxx ADDENDA TO CRITICAL NOTES

62, 5 S[nudrlas: Sqyfov]s Bm. 63, 18 mudciov: [kal] midxiov, suadente spatio, Bm.

Pag. 31, 18 ka[he? els 7d KJAnpwrihpvop : KAnp[ot Kara K)\npwrnpiov Bm. 24 [dp- Xwr): literae primae hasta superest, legendum igitur [«fpué], Bm. brdpxet—25 els [ay laird: bmapxec—els Tov (Wessely) k[\jpo], sortitiont tam antea paratus est, aut sortem tam antea duxit, Bm, els Tov [apcOndy sensui magis congruere confessus. 26 eldy|x[ws EA[k]ec [Bddavo]y éx ris wdplas: EIAKYC.---- €! xrA, supra quattuor litteras primas eAk (ut videtur) scriptum, Bm, cui nihil sensui aptum obtigit: scri- bendum fortasse éAxvo[as alpjet. 27 Kal dp[éléas abraly, ove li]av 7d ypdumua, S[el]avvcw mplGrov aird] TO dpxovre BM. 30 dou: oOloy Bm, coll. v. 32. 36 do’ dy det [w]édAy: ocanttep (deleto N) KTA, Soamep [dv w]é\Ay Bm, quod exspectabant K-W.

Pag. 32, 1 éxdofrov] e1x: éxdafrov elAnx[5]s Bm. 4 post ‘ypduma €1, coniciendum igitur Horie’ Bm. 17—27 ois 3. dérofra}y[x]avove[ey drrodid[dacw] of éum[f]er[ae {emtrett. KT... fortasse per errorem scripto) [74] mudkia. ol 5& dmn[péra} of dy- Boatal Kol (2) [ras gudijs éxaorns mlapadijioacw ra appara év éri 7d dixaloryp]iov exagrov, €[v] offs] | eveor ra dvopar[a ris] pudfs ra dyzia | ev exdorp zfay ScJcalornpllov. mapadiddace [ 5€ rots elAnyx[dow darod]dovar rots dixaofrais éy éxdorw [Skxalornpl]y dpOug ra | mudxa, [tv ? (post muda T, ut videtur, superscriptum) é« Tov[rwy oxolroivres dtro[Sfdaou Tov, [mo]Oov. Bm. Inv. 22 7a [dvdulafra quondam conieceram, sed postea 7a [mw ]d[xca] praetuli. 28—35 xara Sucagripiov (PIN littera Oo super 1 scripta). ri[@era: 8] & r@ mplobry T]Ov | dixacrnp[twv x(al)} KA[npwrylpia Kal K[UB]oe [x]aAxot I ev ots érvyéyparra: [7d xpwluara rév dux[aory- ploy] J cal repos «d[Bo.}, év of[s éorw] trav dplxaly z[a dvd [pafra em yeylola uudva. ot ax ]ovres [Se] ray [Oeop]offeray xwphs éxal7épo]us rods Ko[Bous euf[a]\rovew, 6 6 pev zl av Secor mpl ov els &y KAnpolr[A]piov, 6 5é raw dpy[ay els Erepjov — — —

Pag. 33; 337 et 33>, composita a K-w (B), vix revera coniuncta fuisse putat Bm; 33% et 34° potius componenda: cumque primum 34° et 35%, deinde 35 et 35°, denique 35 et 36 coniuncta sint, fragmenta in hunc ordinem redigenda:—32, 33>, 34a (cum 33” coniunctum), 33°+ 34° 35, 36, 37-

Pag. 35, 1 7Gv \Joywy B: NJOMON K3; NOMON (itaque in v. 2 # map[ruplay]) Bm. 7—8 Toeeliliedivos Bm. 12—13 xarmyopot eofrevdo[y Bm.

Pag. 36, 5 [u]) [rwe]s bro[B]adrwvrar non recte: [u}) [mploimo[BddXwvrat (K-W) substitui potest, Bm. 17 mé[fer]: wié[fJwy satis clare apparet, Bm. 23 da- Bovres [d]}rnpér[as (non iam inserto 4’) Bm. , 24 [ée]paice [rl] dBafca Bm. Cf

Arist. Vesp. 993, pep’ ébepdow (ras Wihpovs). 27 [kal] rd wAvipy S9X(a), A supra AH scriptum, Bm.

APIZTOTEAOYS AOHNAIQN TIOAITEIA.

1. — — [M}povos xa® icpdv dudcavres dpiotivdny. Kata- yvoabévtos 8€ Tob dyo[u]s [adt]od per ex Tov tTddav éeRAHOncay,

Oapeen

I 1 katapNwc@enToc. Sensui repugnat xafap8évros, etenim tunc temporis erat 7d dyos KarayvwoGev tantum, nondum autem KaGapOév. 2 adroi scripsi; quod cum verbis in altero membro (7d -yévos avrayv) satis apte quadrat ; cf. Paus. i 25, 3 avrol re of daoxrelvavres evoulcOnoay Kal of €f éxelvwy evaye’s THs Oeod. Idem scripserunt K—w et K? Kirchhoffium et Kontum secuti. vexpol quondaim kK, oi vexpol H-L, sed articulo quem desideramus spatium non sufficit, et in ipsa papyro litterae T potius quam p apparet vestigium.

TESTIMONIA. 1 Capitis primi partem deperditam in compendium redactam conservat Heraclidis epitoma (Rose, Frag. 611, 23): rods werd KUdwvos (Kvkd\wros codices meliores) di rhv rupayvléa él rdv Buydv Tis Oeod wepevydras of mept Meyaxhéa

dméxreway, kal Tovs Spdoavras ws évaryeis HAavvor.

I. Cylon’s attempt to establish a tyranny, and its consequences.

Mipwvos] Myron of Phlya is men- tioned by Plutarch alone, Sol. 12, as the accuser of the Alcmaeonidae who were involved in the curse of Cylon. Ata later time one of the Alcmaeonidae, named AewBwrns, had his revenge for this act of a member of the deme of Phlya by bringing a charge of high treason against a distinguished member of that deme, Themistocles (Plut. Them. 23; cf. 2b. 1 § 3). Busolt, Griechische Geschichte, 1885, i 508.

Ka’ tepdv spucoavtes] Cf. decree quoted in c. 29 (at end), édudcayres Kad? lepav rerelwv.

dptorlvSny] cannot be taken with xad’ lepav éuécavres, but must go with some such verb as é6lxagov in the earlier part of the sentence. We may perhaps infer from Plutarch So/. 12 that the sentence ran as follows: [édlxafov 5¢ rpiaxdoi Karyyo- podvros] Mipwros xa’ lepav dudcavres dpsrtvdyv. According to Plutarch the Alcmaeonidae were tried by a court con- sisting of 300 persons selected from the

S. A. i aad

noblest families (d:catévrwy dporlvinv). The number is confirmed by its being identical with that of the Boule of the partisans of Isagoras which Cleomenes king of Sparta endeavoured to establish at Athens in a subsequent attack on the Alcmaeonidae (Hdt. v 72). For dpiorty- Snv cf. c. 3, 1. 2.

Karayvecléyros—rod dyouvs] ‘The charge of sacrilege having been made good’ by the sentence of condemnation passed by the court.

ek Tév Tddov &eBANOyoav] The same incident is mentioned in Plutarch J. c., and Thuc. 2. c. In the latter it seems to be more closely connected with the second expulsion of the évayeis (in 508 B.C.), than with the first.

The principal ancient authorities on the affair of Cylon are as follows. Hdt. v 71, qv Ktdwy rev APnvalwv dvhp ’Odup- miovikns. ovros él rupavvlé exdunoe, mpoo- monoduevos 5é ératpnlny rav HAuKiwréwy karahaBelv rhv dxpbrokw émeipyOn, ov dv- vdpevos 5é émixparioa ixérns Wero mpds 7d dyahua. TovTous dvicraot pev ob mpu- Tames Tov vauxpdpwv (al. vavepapréwr), olep &veuov rére Tas “AOjvas, breyyvous

I

2 AOHNAIQN

COL. I, l. 2—4.

3 TO 8¢ yévos adtav eduyev devpuyiav. °E[me]uevidns 8 o Kpis émt

TovTous exdOnpe TH TroAL.

whi Oavdrov' gpovetoa: 5¢ avrovs alrlyn exer "Adkpewvldas. taira mpd ris Teo- oTpdrov HAuklys éyévero. The above ac- count is unduly favourable to the Alcmae- onidae. It is materially corrected by Thucydides, i126 § 2, KtAwy qv ’OAvpmo- vlens, dvip 'A@nvatos Trav maar evyevys TE kal duvarés...6 6&...xaTédaBe Thy dxpbmrodw ws émt rupavvlds... § 6 of 5¢ werd Tod Ku- Awvos modtopkovpevor Pravpws elxov alrov re kai Udaros daroplg. 6 péev ofy Kidwy kal 6 ddeAgds abrod éxdtdpdoxovew* ol & Gddoe ws éméfovro Kal ries kal arébvynoxoy bd TOD Auwod, Kablfovow éml Tov Bwpydy ixéra Tov év ry axporéve. dvaorncavres 5¢ ad- Tovs of Trav ’AOnvalwy émrerpappevor Thy pudakhy, ws édpwy dmrobvijcKxovras év Te lepg 颒 @ wndev Kaxdy trovjcovow dra- yarydvres améxrewar. § 7 Kadegoudvous dé Twas Kal éml rv ceuvav Oedy [év Tots Bw- pois] év rH mapsdw diexpyjoavro. xal ard Tobrou évaryets Kal drurjptoe THs Oeod éxeivol Te ékahobyro Kal 7d yévos 7d dm’ éxelvwr. dracay pev ofy Kal of ’AOnvaio rods évaryets TovTous, #Aace O¢ Kal Kveopudvns 6 Aakedaiudmos torepoy pera ’AOnvalwy craciatéutwy (B.C. 508), Tovs Te fGvras éXavvovres Kal Tay TeOvewTuv Ta doTE dveE- Aévres €£€Barov. Plutarch, Solon 12, sup- plies us with the following narrative, which has several points of contact with the account in the text. 7d dé KuAdvevov dyos 70n pev éx moddod Sterdparre Ti mwodw, € ov Tos cuvwudras TOU KUAwvos ixeredovras rhv Oedv Meyaxdijs 6 apxwv éml dixy karedOety ereev cdayras b¢ Tod ous Kpokny krwaorny Kal ravrns éxoudvous, ws éyévovro mepl Tas ceuvas Oeds xaTraBal- vovres, adroudrws THs KpdKys payelons, apunoe cvddapBdver 6 Meyaxdfjs xai of ouvdpxovres, ws THs Ooo Thy ikeclay dao- Aeyouévys* Kal rods pev ew xarédevoar, ol 5€é Tots Bwpmots rporpuyédvres drecpdynoay* ovo. 8 dpelOnoay ol Tas yuvaikas abrav ikerevoavres. €k TroUTou 5é kdrnOévres éva- vets euioodvro’ kal tay Kvudwvelwy ol mepryevouevar waduy joav loxvpol Kal ora- oudgovres del deréouv mpds rods dard rod Meyaxddous, év d¢ r@ rérTe xpbyy Tis ordcews axunv AaBovons uddtora Kal Tod Shou diacrdvros, 75n Sbgav Exwv 6 Ddrwv mwaphrdev els péocov dua rots dploros Tov "AOnvalwy, kal Sedwevos cal diddoxwy erece tovs évaryets Neyouevous dlxnv brocyxeiy Kat KpOnvar tpiaxoclwy dprotlvdny dixatov- twv, Mupwvos d¢ rod Prvéws karyyo- podvros éddwoay ol avdpes, kal peréorncav ol SOvres rav 8 drodavdvrw Tods vexpods

dvoptiavres ééppipav varép Tovs dpous. Tat- Tas 6é Tals Tapaxais kal Meyapéwy cuvert- Oepévaw aréBardy re Nicaay of "A@nvaia kal Zadapivos éééredov adfis. Kal PbBor ties éx Secdamovlas dua xal pdopara Karetxe Thy méduv, ol Te wavTes ayn Kal puiacpovs Seouévous Kabapuav mpopalverbat bid, Tov lepav yydpevov. otrw Sh perd- mepmros abrois Kev éx Kpirns Ermevldys --€\Oav 6é cal re Thdrwre xpynodpevos Piry ToAAG TpocuTepyacaro Kal mpowdo- tolncev aire Ths vouoPectas.,.7d dé wéyia- Tov, ihacpois Trot Kal Kafapyois Kal Liptoect KaTopytdoas kal kafoowwoas Tip moh om}. koov Tod dtxalov Kal w&ddov evrrecOR mpos bubvoay Karéornce.

The date of the Olympic victory of Cylon is 640 B.c. Sex. Julius Africanus (early in 3rd century A.D.), as quoted in the Chronicon of Eusebius, i p. 145= 198, has, under O/. 35, 1=B.C. 640, Re- cursunt Cylon Athentensis, ts qui tyran- nidem affectavit. Plutarch /.c. implies that Epimenides visited Athens, in con- nexion with the expiation of the curse of Cylon, shortly before the legislation of Solon (archon 594 B.c.). Hence the at- tempt of Cylon has generally been placed after the date of Dracon (621 B.c.). Thu- cydides, i 126, 3, places Cylon’s attempt to seize the tyranny in an Olympic year. It has therefore been assigned to the Olym- pic years 620 (Clinton and Peter), 616 (Duncker), 612 (Corsini). But Herodotus /.¢. describes the partisans of Cylon as an éraipyly Trav jAtkwwréwv, which points to a company of young men. Hence it has been suggested that the attempt was made ° at an earlier date, before the time of Dra- con. It has accordingly been assigned to various Olympic years between 640 and 620 B.C., either as early as 636 or as late as 620 (Busolt, Griechische Geschichte, 1885, i 498 note 8, and 505). The same opinion was maintained by Prof. John H. Wright as reported in the Proceedings of the American Philological Association, 1888, p. xxvi. His arguments were drawn from the language of Herodotus, Thucy- dides and the other authorities on this incident; from considerations of the pro- bable age of Megacles and the date of Cylon’s father-in-law, Theagenes of Me- gara. He also urged that ‘the adoption of the earlier date lent unexpected coherence and significance to certain phenomena in early Attic history, the episode thus being one of the important steps in the social

gi yh A ido

CH, 1, 1. 3—CH. 2, 1. 1,

TIOAITEIA 3

\ \ an , 2. peta S€ tadtTa cuvéBn ctacidcar Tovs Te yvwpiwous Kal TS

1 craciacal fortasse in AlacTHCal mutandum, idem suspicantur H-L coll. Arist. Vesp. 41 Tov Sfjuov hud BovrAcTat Suocrdvae ; alioqui rdv Sfuoy secludendum.

and political development of Athens, and not an unrelated event.’ This opinion is confirmed by the text which clearly im- plies that the affair of Cylon preceded the date of Dracon.

epvyev depvylav] Plat. Leg. 871 D, 877 C, 881 BD, devyérw depuylay, 877 E, (8rav) & devpuyig tis pedyy. Plut. Sol. 24, Tots devyouow aepuyla tiv éavTuv. Photius, s.v. paorhpes: Tav depuylay pu- yadevdTuv.

*Emtpev(Sys] The purification of Athens by Epimenides is generally assigned to B.C. 596—5, shortly before the archon- ship of Solon in 594—3 (Clinton, 7as¢z,

-and Busolt, i 509). These dates are con-

sistent with the account in Plutarch and were possibly suggested by it, or derived from some common source, such as Her- mippus of Alexandria, quoted in Plut. Sod. 11. The chronology of the life of Epimeni- des is however extremely uncertain. Dio- genes Laertius, i 111, quotes Phlegon as stating that Epimenides returned to Crete and died not long after at the age of 157. He adds that Xenophanes made him die at the age of 154, and the Cretans at 299. (But the Cretans, as we know on the authority of Epimenides himself, ‘are always liars.’) Suidas puts his birth in Ol. 30 (about 659 B.c.), and describes him as an old man at the time of the purification, which he places in Ol. 44 (B.C. 604—), corrected by Bernhardy into Ol. 46 (B.c. 596—). At the latter date he would have been 63.

On the other hand, Plato, Leg.-642 D, 698 c, describes him as coming to Athens and offering expiatory sacrifices in 500 B.C. This account is rejected by Bentley and Grote. The former says of Plato: ‘that great Man did not tie himself in his Discourses to Exactness of Time’ (Pha- Jaris, p. 58); the latter regards the statement in the Zaws as ‘a remarkable example of carelessness in chronology’ (@. G., c. 10, ii 294). The sacrifices ascribed to Epimenides by Plato may, indeed, be connected with the outbreak of a plague attested by an inscription of about 500 B.C. (CIA i 475, Busolt i 509), but this is not enough to warrant our placing the prophet a century later than the age of Solon.

Thus we have two accounts of the date of Epimenides, (1) that represented by

Plato, placing him about s00 B.c.; (2) that represented hitherto by no earlier autho- rity than Hermippus, placing him about 600 B.c. (2) is supported by the text, which mentions his visit immediately after an account of a trial assigned by Plutarch to the time of Solon. The dis- crepancy between the two accounts is explained by Diels as arising from the fact that Plato is referring to the Epi- menides of literature and not to the Epimenides of history. The Theogony ascribed to Epimenides was written under Orphic influence shortly before the Per- sian wars; and the story of the protracted sleep of Epimenides, which lasted for a whole century, was a fiction designed at the same time to give currency to the poet- ical fabrications ascribed to him. The curse of Cylon was originally expiated through the banishment of the Alcmae- onidae and the purification of Athens by Epimenides about 600 B.c. In the fol- lowing century the Alcmaéonidae re- turned and about 508 B.C., after the expulsion of the Peisistratidae, when Cleisthenes, the Alcmaeonid, was the foremost man in the state, the influence of the exiles led to a revival of the memory of the ancient crime. At such a time as this the story of Epimenides was naturally revived by the opponents of Cleisthenes, and his oracles invented as part of their machinations against the guilty race of the Alcmaeonidae (Diels, Sztzungsberichte of the Berlin Academy, April 16, 1891, part xxi; abstract in Berliner Philolog- asche Wochenschrift, p. 766).

éml rovrots] either ‘thereupon,’ or ‘besides.’ "Eat rotros in the former sense = peTa Tatra has hitherto been found only in the spurious works (Eucken, Sprachgebrauch des Ar. p. 51). The latter sense (praeterea) is on the whole preferable, and is found in /het. ii 6, 1384 ag. Cf. Pol. ii g, 1271 @ 39, émlt roils Baowebow 7 vavapxia érépa Bacidela xabéornkev.

éxd@npe] For the details of this purifi- cation, see Plut. Sol. 12 ad fin. (kaOap- pois), and Diogenes Laertius 1 110.

Il. Zhe conflict of the classes before the times of Dracon and Solon.

pera. taira] ze. after the affair of

Cylon, which must have been the main

I—2

wn

4 AOHNAIQN

COL. 1, L. 4—12.

TdHOos mordv xpovov [Tov Shuov]. Fv yap [rére] 4 wroderela t[ois 2 Te] ddrows GAvyapyiy Tact, Kab 81) Kal éSodrevoy of révyte|s TIois mrovatois Kal adrol [kal T]a réxva Kal ai yuvaikes, nal éxadobdvro Tedatat Kab éxTnwopor’ Kata TavTny yap THY picOwow [ei]pyd-

2 rév Sfjuov secluserunt K, K-W, H-L, B: defendit J E B Mayor. elpydfovro H-L.

dyri ratrns yap Tis woOdoews H-L.

TESTIMONIA. nominat.

5 meddrat cal éxrnpdpot. s Cf. schol. in Plat. Zuthyphr. p. 327; Pollux iv 165 éxryudproe (éxrnubprov

5 KeTayTP TMIce°r

*Photius s. v. weAdra: 2 Aristotelem

codices, emendavit Jungermann; éxrnudpor Cobet Pollucis sui in margine) 6¢ rapa tols ’Arrixois, id. iii 82; Plut. So’. 13 (Rose, Ar. Frag. 3512, 3893).

subject of the previous chapter; although, in the part that has been preserved, the narrative of its consequences is brought down to the time of Epimenides (and Solon).

For the general sense, cf. Plut. Sol. 13 init., ot 8 ’A@nvaio: THs Kudwvelou werav- Mévys Tapaxfs Kal uebeordtwv...rav éva- yar, Thy waday ads ordow saép Tis Tontrelas éoraciagov, dcas 7 xdpa Siapopas eixev, els rooatra udpy Ths méAews da- ordons.

In the editio princeps Tov Sijpov was re- garded as ‘superfluous,’ and as ‘ probably a gloss upon 76 wjOos.’ The text was thereupon defended by Professor Mayor as follows: ‘when Cobet removes glosses from late texts, he can appeal to scholia, in which even common words are explain- ed. Readers and scribes in Egypt, say 100 A.D., needed no such helps: again mAHOos is not coextensive with dfu0s, and is elsewhere found in close connexion with it (20 § 1; 21 § 1). Here of yrd- ptwot and 7d 7AHOos are the factions whose struggles convulse rév Ajuov. For ora- odgw is here transitive. Otherwise roAdy xpévov must have been placed just before or just after cragidoat. In the manuscript reading it separates the complex subject of the verb from the object and keeps the reader in suspense.’ Mr Kenyon, in his third ed., replies that ‘dfuos does not seem to be used in this treatise as de- noting the whole state except with the collateral sense that the state was a de- mocracy.’ Even in c. 14 § 1, émavaoras -.7G Oyu, and 15 § 3, wapedduevos rod djuou 7a Srda, ‘there is the sense of an attack on the democracy by a despot,’ He also modifies his view respecting roy dfjuov, suggesting that the words were ‘written as a correction of 73 7A9G0s, not as an explanation.’

The transitive use of oracidtew, above suggested, is very rare. In [Dem.] 11 § 18, p. 157, 10, ray éxelvov mparyudrwv

obdev oracidfew tapacKevdgouer (quoted in L and S) really means ‘we do not cause faction in any of his affairs’ (see Weil ad /oc.). The intrans. sense is also clearly marked in Lysias 18 § 18, rots Geois bebe els dudvoray KaTacrivar Thy mwodw wadrov 4 [rl rymwpiay Tov rapedn- AvObT wy TpaTbmevot] Thy wev woAW oTactd- gas Tovs 6¢ Aéyovras Taxéws TAouTiou. The trans, use is found in ‘Anon. apud Stobaeum 510, 1 otkous’; but the Ldices to Plato and Aristotle supply no example of this use. To express the trans. Isocrates uses Toteiy oractagey, p. 68 B, and 279 D. oraciage is intrans. twice in 8 § 5, twice in 13 § 2, also in 20 § 1, and elsewhere. Hence we must either take it as intrans. here, and strike out rév Sov (which I prefer), or regard craciacat as having taken the place of a trans. verb Ata- cTucar. Cf. Hdt. ix 1 § 2, méure Xpijpara els.rods Swacrevovras dvdpas & Tho. wool, euro 5¢ Thy “Edda dta- orhoets évOebrev d& Tovs uh Ta oc ppove- ovras pyidlws wera TOY oTaciWTéwy Ka- Tacrpéyer. Xen. Hell, ii 4 § 35, dutorn bE kal rods év rg doret. Plut. Sof. 13 (of the same period) ris méAews Stacrdons. Ar. Fol. 1321 a 15, bray Siacr&or, and 7, 19 Tavry O€ émixparotow dv rais Suacrdccow ol Simo Trav edrépwv. As a_ possible alternative one might suggest dacracd- gat, ‘to form into separate factions,’ Pol. 1303 5 26, d0ev mpochauBdvorres Tovs ev TH. Twodtreduart Suecraclacay mdvras,and 1 306 @ 3, dtecraclacey avrovs mpds rods ebré- pous.

§ 2. ‘rots re dAXots...Kal 81 kal] 16 §§ 2, 10. In 18§ 2 and 19 § 3 we have xal alone in the second clause. It is excep: tional for re to be omitted, as in Lycurg. Lever. 95, émi rhy adAnv xdpav xa 6h cal (where Baiter prefers émt re).

weAdto1] used by Plutarch in eight passages as an equivalent for the Roman clientes (Romulus 13, Poplicola 5, Corio- Janus 13 and 21 § 4, Marius 5§ 5, Crassus

CH. 2, 1, 2—13. TOAITEIA 5 fovto Tav Trovaiwy Tods aypods (% 8& maca yh 8 brAtyov Hy), Kal eb pn Tas picOadcers [a ]oSidoler, aydyior Kat adtol Kab of maides éyiyvovto, kal [oi Saveicpol mlaow emt tols cépacw joay péxpt Zddwvos* odtos S€ mpAtos eyév[eto Tod] S/[uov] spo- 3 a0TdTns. Xarerdtaroy pev ody Kal TiKpOTATOV HY TOIs TONNOLS TOY Kata THY ToNuTelay TO [Sovrev]ew. ov pHY GAXA Kal em) Tois Grows edvoxépasvov ovdevds ydp, ws ecimeiv, éerbyyavov peré- NovTes.

8 ETINONTO (K-W): éylyvovro (H-L, K%); in titulis Atticis annorum 445—292 A.C. quadraginta tribus locis inventum est yiyvouat, nusquam ylvouat (Meisterhans, Gram- matik der Attischen Inschriften, p. 1417); itaque ubique praetuli yl-yroua kal of daveicpol maow Blass (K3 p. LXIV): xal [Se]d[eudvor rots Savelolacw K, Kal yap Kd.

K-W; brdxpep yap H-L repugnante papyro. 11 dovdevew K-W (K%, B): [7d Tis ys un Kparjetv H-L Blassii coniecturam secuti.

21§ 5, Cato Minor 34§ 3, Tib. Gracchus 13 §2); alsoin Agis 6§ 5, and Quaest. Conviv. ii 10, (6 «ir7ds) Bowrlov Geof medarns xal mapaciros wy. éernpdpor] (1) Plut., Sol. 13, states that these tenants paid their landlords a sixth part of the produce (ra Trav ywoudever tedobvres), Similarly, Hesychius, s. v. éml- Hopros. (2) Photius, s.v. reddrau, says that they cultivated the soil in return for a sixth part of the produce (rw wépet Trav kapray eipydtovro Thy -yiv). Similarly, Hesychius, s. uv. éxrypdpor, and the Scholiast on Plato, Euthyphron 4 C. Thus Plutarch makes them pay 1/6 and retain 5/6 for their own maintenance ; while Photius makes them pay 5/6 and retain 1/6. The former view is preferable and it is supported by Oncken (Staatslehre, ii 437 n) who observes that a tax of 1/6 was sufficiently severe to imply a con- siderable amount of distress, and by Gom- perz (in Appendix 111 to his polemical pamphlet, Die Schrift vom Staatswesen der Athener, pp. 45—48). picOwory] ‘rent’ (not ‘wages’). nf. pigOdoes drodtdotev. Dem. 28 § 12, dzro- SéSwxe rhy picOwow, and 43 § 58 (dex) Tous pH darodidovras Tas pwcOdboes TUY TeWev ar. 8’ oAlyev jv] c. 4 ad fin. The sense is not materially different in Pol. viii (v) 6, 1306 a 16, TAs rodcrelas de’ dAL-yww ovens, and infrac. 29 1. 9, dv édlyww roujowyrae Thy wontTelav, also Fol. 1318 b 34, al re yap apxal det da rav BeATlorwv ecovrat, 1301 512, Thy pev kardoracw mpoatpodvrar Thy abriy, & abray & elvar Bovdovra, 1293 @ 28, &0 atrdy éxev (Eucken, Sprachge- brauch des Ar., p. 38). ; dyoypor] Plut. Sol. 13, xpéa hauBa- vovres éml Tois obuacw dyuryywot Tots Savel- Sovow joav, 15 § 8, THY cywyluwy mpds

dpydpiov -yeyovorwy today.

Diod. Sic. i 79, 16 (of an Egyptian law- giver) ray dpeddvrwy thy exmpakw Trav Oavelwy éx THs ovolas wdvoy éromjoaro, Td 5é caya Kar’ ovddva Tpbrov elacev brdp- Xew dryuryiuov.

Saveopol xrr.] c. 4 ad fin., c. 9 § 1 Oavelfew émi rots owuacw., Dion. Halic. Ant. Rom. iv 9, p» 658, 6 Reiske (of Servius Tullius), vduov Ojoouar, undéva Savelfew éml cwpacw érevbépos, and v 53, P- 970, 4 (ol Savelfovres) els Secpovs Ta Tav Uroxpéwy drfyov couara. The word daveruds occurs in £¢h. 1131 @ 3, Plat. Rep. 473 E, Leg. 842 D, 921 Cc.

Tod Sypov mporrdrys] In Plut. So/. 13 ad fin., the oppressed citizens resolve on choosing va mpoordrny dvdpa, and the choice falls on Solon. The same term is applied zx/ra c. 28 to Solon, Peisistratus, Cleisthenes, Xanthippus, Themistocles and Aristides, Ephialtes and Pericles, Cleon and Cleophon. Ac- cording to Grote’s definition, which is mainly applicable to a time later than that of Solon, the term ‘denotes the leader of a popular party, as opposed to an oligarchical party (see Thuc. iii 70, 82, iv 66, vi 35) in a form of government either entirely democratical, or at least in which the public assembly is frequently convoked and decides on many matters of importance’ (Hist. of Gr. vii p. 304 n). See Dr Hager’s article in Smith’s Dict. of Ant. ii 504.

§ 3. oddevds...ds elmetv] An ex- ample of the normal use of ds eizeiv, to modify a numerical exaggeration. To the passages quoted in my note on Dem. Left. § 140, the following may be added, from Aristotle’s Politics. ws elmetv is used with was in 1263 0 4, 1273 617, 1282 a 5,

6 AQHNAIQN

COL. 1, l. 12—21.

3. hv 8 4 rdkis rhs dpyalas ToduTelas THs mpd Apdxovtos

[Toad].

Tas pev apxas [xabilotacay dpiotivdny Kal mov-

tivdnv' jpxov 8 [7d] pev mpdt[ov Sid Biov], wera S€ rTadra

Ill 3 dca Blov K-w, H-L (K3, B): del quondam kK.

1314 @ 14, 1319 @ 30, 1323 @ 20, 1328 4 16; also with numbers in 1285 4 34 oxeddv vo éorly ws elarety, 1302 @ 19 oXEddY WS elrety tpets. ws émt 7d wreforov elev Oc- curs in 1297 4 33, 1335 @ 8. ss drdws elrrety, in 1293 4 34, 1299 @ 25, 1310 @ 37.

ds elrrety is less frequently used to modi- fy a strong metaphor or other emphatic phrase unconnected with number: 1263 @ 36.7ots Sovdors xpovrat Tos GAAAWY, ws elrety ldlos, 1268 a 23 Tas KuUptwrdras dpxas ws elev, 1324 0 6 Tav Trelorw vouluow xvonv ws elrrety Kemévwn, 1301 0 5 dpxat pev ody ws elmeiy [bracketed by Susemihl, transferred after ayyal by others] atra: cal wyyal Trav ordcewy eloty, 1304 8 5, of kar’ dperyv Siagépovres ov Todor ordow ws elrety, 1312 6 23 ebOds ws elrelv. ws eros elreiy is combined with was, 1252 5 29; also énfra c. 57 § 1, and with mheiora in 49 § 5. It is quite un- necessary to substitute it for ws elzet here.

Ill. Zhe Ath Constitution before the time of Dracon.

According to the current account the title of king was abolished on the death of Codrus. His son Medon, and twelve successors, beginning with Acastus and ending with Alcmaeon, were archons for life. In the second year of Alcmaeon (752 B.C.) the life archonships of the Medontidae were reduced to the duration of ten years. The names of seven decen- nial archons have been preserved. In 4712 .B.C., with this limitation in the tenure of the office, the archonship was thrown open to all the Eupatridae. Lastly, in the archonship of Creon (683 B.C.), or on the expiration of that of Eryxias (682, Duncker, Hist. of Greece, ii 135 E. T.), the single decennial archon was abolished, and his duties were distributed over nine officials who held office for a year only, and were elected by the Eupatridae out of their own body (Grote, #.G., ii chap. 10 zwit.). The legend that it was out of gratitude for the heroism of Codrus that the title of king was abolished has no earlier authority than that of Justin (ii 7). It is not recognised by Plato or Aristotle, or by any early writer. Plato describes Codrus as meeting his doom in quest of glory and in the interests of the royal

status of his descendants, Symp. 208 D, brreép Tis Bacihelas Tov waldwv. Aristotle, Pol. viii (v) 10, p. 1310 4 37, implies that he was one of those who earned their royal power by their services to their country (kara médeuov Kwrtoavres Sov- reve). The life-archons were elected from the royal house, and bore the title of Bactheds (Pausanias i 3 § 3). This title was never formally abolished, but survived even in later times in the name of the dpywv Gaoinets. The institution § of the office of life-archon is described bya« Pausanias, iv 5 § 10, as a change dv7l Baoirelas és dpxiv vresOwov. In ex- planation of this phrase it has been sug- gested that the life-archon was ‘respon- sible to the general body of the Eu- patridae’ (See ARCHON, p. 166 a, in Smith’s Dict. Ant.); but it seems more probable that Pausanias used a phrase which was an obvious antithesis to an irresponsible monarchy without having any real knowledge of the nature of the responsibility attaching to the holder of a life-archonship (Busolt, i pp. 400 f).— Cf. Lugebil, Fahkrd. f. class. Philol., suppl. Bd v 539—564. '

dpeoelvBnpy a whourlvinv] inf. § 6. Pol. 1273 @ 23, ob yap pdvov dprorlydny G@\XG kal wrourlydyy olovra dey al- petoOat rods &pxovras, 1293 4 10, émov ye ph pbvoy rrovTivdny GAG Kal dpt- otlvdny aipotyra ras dpxds, 1272 6 36, Tavrny 8° alpotyra: Thy apxiy apirrivdyy. =kar’ dperiv 1273 @ 26. Isocr. Paneg. 146, ov dp. émedeypévous. Plat. Leg. 855 C, dp. dmropuepicbey Sixacrhpiov. In Andoc. de Pace 30, moddovs *APnvalwy - drovécavres aproriviny xal Tov cuppdxav, I should prefer to read dpdyv, which is combined with dzodAvvat in Plato Rep. 421A. The adverb is defined by Timaeus as meaning kar’ dydpayablay aiperév. Prof. Mayor adds to lexicons the following _ examples of dpiorivdnv : ‘Dem. p. 1069, 7; Plut. Sol. 12 § 2, Lysand. 13 § 7 (where also wAouriviny, as in Septem Sap. Conv. Ir pr. p. 154). Euseb. Acl. Proph. iv 4 p- 177,18. CIA i6r1, App. Bell. Civ. 135. Aelian in Suid., Atovuclwy oxwuparor, has mAourivdny’ (Class. Rev. v 120).

Sid Blov] Pol. 1270 4 39, 1272 @ 3% 1285 @ 15; imf. at end of § 6.

CH. 3, l. 1—13. TIOAITEIA a

2 [Sex]aeriav. péyotas 88 cal mpdrar Tdv apydv joav Bao[irevs kal Tod ]éuapyxos nal dp[yav]' rovTwr dé rpl[oT]n wer ) Tod Bact- dws, atirn yap *eE [dpy]ils jv]. Sevrépa & émixatéotn [1) more |u- apyia Sia 76 ye[v]éoOar twds Tév Baciéwv TA TodewiKa pad[a- xovs, 8bev kal] tov "lwova pere[réeuw}pavto ypeials xlatadaBovons. tereuvtaia & 4 [Tod dpyxolvros' [of] udv yap mAelous [é]ri Mé8orTos, wv 8 2%, "A / \ ra \ > he sg a ie go. 8 emi “Andotov daci yevéoOar [thy apynv' onpetov] § éerrupépovaw [ru] of évvéa dpxovtes duvvovar [xaOamep] emt Axd- oTov Ta GpKia Troinloey, os él Tov[to]u Ths Bacidelas Tapayo-

nodvroyv tav Kod[prdav], *avrarododercav TO apyovts Swpewv.

p é dpx p

6 ef dpxfs qv J W Headlam, quod accepi coll. 16 § 1, 28§ 1, 55 § 1, Pol. 1297 6 17 4 mpdérn dé rodcrela év rots"EAAnow éyevero pera Tas Bacirelas éx TOY ToepovvTwr, 7 bev €& dpyiis éx trav imméwy, et Ar. frag. 611 (1) R° A@nvator 7d per €& dpxfs éxpavro Baowrelg. év dpxy jv hiatu sine causa admisso K?; év [dpxq xaréorn] K-W, warptos éyévero H-L, sed lectioni neutri spatium sufficit. 7 inseruit J B Mayor (H-L, K). 7 yevéoOat K-W,B. TIOAEMIA K (K-W, H-L): wodeuixa Blass; cf. 23,14. 8 GOev kal K (H-L), litteras 06 aliquatenus cerni posse arbitratus : [mp@rov] 6¢K-w,B. 10 ém’ H-L. Ty apxny K (H-L): Tadryy K-w: [Baordd]ws B. [onpuetov] K, K-w, H-L: t[Lovrw] B. 12 Ta épxia morjoew (litteris primis quinque incertis) K3; Ta dpria mowmjoew e papyro eruerat Wessely. [rijs méAews &pyjew kK}, [ris] woAlews d]ptev Kw, [Bacrrdws pt lew Platt (H-L). Tovrov Tijs H-L (K3): ris é[kelvov] K1 (K-W). 13 dvi Tov dobecdv, litteris evanidis scripta, K8, B: T]v [SareEgpyudvwy] K-W: pro dv7l rév dobewdy (ANTIT = AoGeicwN), quod litteris valde obscuris scriptum esse dicitur, scripserim aut dv7t- mapadobecdy (ANTITTAOBEICWN) aut (quod usitatius est) dvramodoPeoGy; litteris fere

tredecim spatium sufficit.

§ 2. modeuapxfa] This account of the original relation of the ao\d€uapxos to the Bacideds is illustrated by the Schol. on Plat. Phaedr. 235 D, where the former is described as womrep Aoxayds TOD Bacidéws (Wyse in Class. Rev. v 224). Similarly in certain semi-savage tribes the institu- tion of a ‘war-king’ has grown up beside that of the regular hereditary monarch. Cf. Post, Bausteine, ii p. 84.

padakovs] Heraclidis epitoma, Rose, Frag. 611, 1, dd 6¢ Kodpeddv ovkére Baothet’s ypodvro 5a 7d Soxety rpudav Kal padaxods yeyovérat.

*Iwva] Ion, the son of Creusa, daughter of Erechtheus, was summoned to the aid of Athens against Eleusis and was en- trusted with the conduct of the war. Hdt. viii 44, Paus. vii 5, 1, and esp. i 31 § 3, "AOqvalwy él rob rodéuov Tod mpds *EXevowlous €rodkewapxnoe. Cf. Schol. on Arist. Aves 1527, marpwov 5é riuGow *Aro\Awva ’AOnvaior, érel “Iwv 6 rohé- papxos “AOnvalwy é& *Amé\Awvos kal Kpeotons Tod HovGov (yuvaiunds) éyévero (Rose, Frag. 343?= 3813). This scholium may have been derived either from the present passage, or from another in

which Ion was mentioned near the be- ginning of the treatise.

vedevtata—dpxovros] It is uncertain whether the president of the board of nine magistrates bore the title of Archon before the time of Solon. Probably up to that time the members of the board were called mpurdves and their president retained the ancient title of Baotdeds. It was the BaciAevs that presided over the archons when assembled as a judicial body (Busolt, i 408). On the other side, see Gilbert’s Gr. S¢., i 117—118.

§ 3. Mé8ovros] son of Codrus. ’Akdo- tov, successor of Medon (Busolt, i 403).

épvbover.] The oath of the archons is also mentioned in 7 § 1 and in 55 ad fin., but this particular clause is not cited else- where.

Tapaxwpyodvrev] For the constr. cf. Dem. p. 38, 24, déiw duds wh rapaxwpely rhs Tdzews, p. 655,17, 7. THS apxfs. For the sense, Pol. 1285 6 14, Ta ev atrav mwaptévtwy Tov Bacihéwy, Ta dé Tay bxAwy mapacpouuevun, év pev Tais dddaus

‘médeow, al marploe Ovolae KaTedelbOnoay

Tots BactheDor wdvor.

dvramodolac ay: * corre-

Swpedv]

ow

nm

°o

8 AQHNAIQN COL, I, lL. 2I—29.:

oe n V3 , 5 TOUTO wey odY OTTOTépws ToT exer pLKpOY, éyéveTO yap ev ToOUTOLS -

La) id 0 \ ‘4 tf 2 f a > fal a 15 TOls Ypovois’ Ort dé TeAevTala ToUTwY éyéveTo THY apyar, [on]uEtov

2

°

kal [rd] pr[S]av [rdv wlatplov tov dpyovta Suoixeiv Bomep 6 Bactreds nal 6 odeuapyos, adda [povoy ta ériBjera. 816 ‘\ \ 4 e 3 A tn mn 2 Oé > é: OL n Kal vewotl yéyovev % apy? peydrn, Tois én[s]Oéros av§nOleioa, Bec]uobérar S& modrAo[i]s Botepov erecw ypéOncav, Sn Kar’ 4 éviautov aiplovpévor] Tas apyds, drws dvaypdypavtes Ta Odo pia durdrroc. mpos THY Tov [mapavopotlyTav Kpiow' 8d Kai povn TaY dpyav ov« éyévero Treiwy [4] évvataros. [obTou] péev ody 5 Xpovov ToaodTov mpoeyovoty *4AAHAwY. Gxnoav® SF ody Ewa waytes 14 puxpov [Siadper, dre 54 ev drdxjrois Tots xpévors Paton, mexpdv Siadéper ev rovras <rTois> xpbvos H-L; puxpdv, add’ [ody éyéve}ro ev rovros <rois> xpdvots K-W 3 puKxpdv aly iaddar]roe Tots xpévots, vel ucxpdv ye wlapa]\Adrrec Tots xpdvors, B. éyévero yap év rovro.s rots, litteris evanidis scripta, K%, 16 rarpluy Wyse, Blass, K-w, H-L (K°), coll. 57 § 1 ras marplovs Ouclas docket obros (6 BactAeds) waoas. 17 adda [pbvor ra érlfjera K3, Bs; an w&AAov? GANA Kawd Twa éwlBera H-L; GAN [dws mndev Bjéya K-w. 20 alpovpévwy Wyse, Blass, K-W, H-L, K%. 21 rapavopotyrwr K (K-W, B): d&kocuolyTwy H-L spatio vix expleto. 22 TIAEIOIN K: mhelov K-w, B;

wre H-L. wri 4, vel wdhy el, H Richards. 23 AAAHWNHCAN: dAdww. Banoo K: d\AfAwy. Foay Jackson, Blass (K-w, H-L); malui dAAjAwy. gKnoav: GdATAwY.

édlxagov Herwerden coll. Suid. s. v. dpxwy: xabigov Gennadios, svryfoav Kontos.

sponding privileges being (at the same time) assigned to the archon.’ dvri Trav So9e.eGr, suggested by Mr Kenyon, is con- fessedly a somewhat remarkable expres- sion, and is interpreted to mean ‘in con- sideration of the privileges which were surrendered to the archon’; but this is hardly satisfactory in point of sense. What we expect is dv7urdAwy dodacdy rg dpxovre Swpedy.

6rotépws tor exe] De Physica Aus- cult. 232 6 35, dmorépws mor’ exe. De Sensu, 446 a 21, drorépws more ylverat mepl Swijs 467 617, dworépws moré Set xa- Aety (Index Ar.).

§ 4. Ocopobérat, literally ‘ legislators,’ from @ecpol, the old term for véuo. The name was ‘probably applied to them as the judges who determined the great va- riety of causes which did not fall under the cognizance of their colleagues; be- cause, in the absence of a written code, those who declare and interpret the laws may be properly said to make them’ (Thirlwall, ii 17). According to the text, the object of their appointment was to secure that the enactments of the law should be publicly recorded and duly

reserved, with a view to their being en- ‘orced against transgressors. In the ab- sence of a code of law, such as Dracon afterwards gave to Athens, the 0éojua of the text were presumably ‘judicial deci-

sions’ recorded as precedents for similar cases in the future. See also Holm, Gr. Gesch. i 516.

kar’ éyiavrov—ras dpxds] B.C. 683.

dvaypdavres] not exactly to ‘com- mit to writing’ (Poste), but to engrave on a tablet and set up in a public place (this is the force of ava-); in brief, ‘to record publicly.’

86] does not appear to refer to the im- mediately preceding clause, but to the beginning of the previous sentence. It was because the ¢hesmothetae were not in- stituted until the time when magistrates were appointed annually that, unlike the three senior archons in former days, they never held office for more than a year.

§ 5. odro.—dAAWAwv] ‘Such then is © the order of precedence which these ma- gistrates have over one another in point of date,’ de, (1) Bactheds, (2) rodduapxos, (3) dpxwv, (4) Oecpobéra. ddArrov is somewhat loosely used. ; dkyoay 8’ obx dpa wmdvres xrd.] With reference to the lexicographical articles quoted above, in the Zéstzmonia, it was remarked by Schémann (Azz. Gr. p. 412 E. T.) that ‘before the time of Solon, as we are assured by evidence which, it must be admitted, is exceedingly apocry- phal in character, the nine Archons were not permitted to sit in judgment all to-

CH, 3, lL. 14—25.

TIOAITEIA 9

eos ft ” 3 x, ¢ ot évvéa apxovTes, adr’ o pév Bactreds ¢[7]ye TO viv Kadovpevov a , Boveonetov, rAynciov Tod mputavetov (onpuetov dé éte Kal viv yap

25 BOYKOAION (K, H-L, B): Bovxodefov K-W.

TESTIM.

23—33. Bekk. Anecd. 449, 19 et Suidas s. v. dpywy: ...mpd pev Tov

Dorwvos vouwy ov« ekfy abrois dua dixdfev, “GAN 6 perv Bacireds” xabjoro apa To xadoupéviy Bouxodely, 7d 5¢ Hv ‘“wAnolov rod mpuravelov,” “6 dé wodeuapxos” ev Avkely kat 6 dpxwy rapa rods érwvimous, of 5¢ (om. Suidas) Oecuobérac mapa rd

Geapobéarov.

KUptol re joay wore ‘rds Slkas avroredeis” moreioOar, vorepov dé

Zorwvos obdév Erepov avrois redeirar } pdvov dvaxplvover (vmoxp, Suid., dvaxp. Pearson

et Matthiae) rods dvridlxous.

gether. They were, however, equally precluded from doing this in the times better known to us, and the statement must therefore be based on some kind of misapprehension.’ It was also noticed that, before the time of Solon, the archon could not have had his official residence Tapa Tovs érwvdpous, as the statues of the érdvupot, or national heroes that gave their names to the ten Attic tribes, could not have existed before the institution of those tribes by Cleisthenes (508 B.C.). Hence it was inferred by K. F. Her- mann (Gr. Staatsalt., p. 407, note 14) that the information referred to the post- Solonian time. But at that time the official residence of the Archon-Basileus was the Stoa Basileios, not the Basz- Zeion. Accordingly it was suggested by Wecklein(Monatsber.der Miinchen.Akad., 1873, 5. 38) that the Basilezon, which he supposed was the residence of the @udo- Baotdeis, had been confounded with that of the Archon-Basileus.

- We now see that the main source of the information, so far as it.is correct, was the present passage. The information really refers to the time before Solon; but the lexicographers commit an ana- chronism, for which they are themselves responsible, in placing the office of the archon near the Afonyyzd, instead of in the Prytaneum, in the neighbourhood of which the statues of the Aponymi were afterwards set up.

Bovkodctov] We are here told that the official residence of the Archon-Basileus was the building which, in the time of the writer, was called the Bovxodelov. This explains the otherwise obscure passage quoted in Athenaeus, p. 233, from the law relating to the Archon-Basileus: rods 8¢ mapactrous éx Tis Bouxorlas éxréyew x Tod pépous Tod éavra@v éxréa xpiOuv KTr. In Telfy’s Corpus Iuris Attici § 358 the words é« ris (or éxrés) BovxoNas are strangely rendered absgue dolo. It is now, however, clear that they must refer to the residence of the Archon-Basileus

and are used in the same sense as éx rod Bovxodelov, which was perhaps the original reading.

The Bovxodetov is possibly connected with the Bougiyov, or field of sacred ox- ploughing, described by Plutarch (Con- tugalia Praecepta, xiii) as below the Acropolis: ’A@yvatot rpeis dpbrous iepods dyovct...rplrov bd mod Tov KadovpeEvov Bovgiyiov (Miss Harrison, Mythology and Monuments of Ancient Athens, p. 166). It has been suggested that a black-figured’ vase-painting on a Aydria in the Berlin Museum, where an ox is standing within a small Doric shrine, not bound as for sacrifice, but free and stately, is a repre- sentation of the sacred ox in his Bovko- AeZov, whether it be the building below the Acropolis or some other shrine of Zeds Tlodeds (25. p. 428). It is more probable, however, that the Pouxodezov was connected with the worship of Dionysus, who was often represented in the form of an ox (cf. Eur. Bacchae, 100, 9Q20—922, 1017, 1159). There was a play of Cratinus called the Bovxddor, which began with a dithyramb, and it has been inferred from Aristoph. Vesf. 10, Tov avrov dp’ éuol Bovkodets DaBd- gvov, that the votaries of the Thracian Dionysus, 6 raupbuopos, were called Bovkddrr (O. Crusius, in Philologus, xlvii 34). It will be observed that in the text the Bovxodefov is mentioned in connexion with Dionysus. Curtius is content to regard it as having been in primitive times a royal farmhouse, including a slaughter-house for the royal sacrifices (Stadtgeschichte von Athen, 1891, p. 51).

amputavelov] The position of the Pry- taneion is disputed, and it is sometimes supposed that there was more than one building of the name. Pausanias tells us (i 18 § 3) that near the Agrauleion is ‘the Prytaneion, in which are inscribed the laws of Solon.’ By this is probably meant the original Prytaneion, the centre of the ancient city and the site of the hearth of the state. This Prytaneion was probably

30

10

AOHNAIQN

COL, I, 1. 29—36.

THS TOD Bacthéws yuvaikos 4 ctpperkes evtava yiryverar TO Ato- fy N c £ £ t vuow Kal o ydpuos), 6 O& dpywv TO mpuTaveiov, 6 Sé Trodéwapyos x an, AU o & , A 2 a a 2 4 ny TO EmreAuKecov' 6 mpoTepoy péev éexadreito TroAcwapxetov, eel bé , I > , \ A > , EriduKos avpxodopynoe Kat xateckevacev avTo Trodenalpyy cas, ’ a Eravnevoy éxdjOn' Oecpobérar & eiyov To Oecpobereiov. él 8é

26 CYMMIZIC ctupetkis K-W, H-L, K3, coll. Meisterhans, p. 1442. 27 Kai 6 yduos delet Rutherford (H-L).

(K-W). 29 roAeuap[yOv] H-L, invita papyro.

PINeTal 28 ETTIAYKION : -€lov K etc.

TESTIM. 26 Hesych. Atovicou yduos: rijs Tod Bacthéws yuvaikds Kal Beod ~ylverar

yapuos.

28 Hesych. Emvx(e)tov (cod. eariAvxcov) : dpxeiov Tot modeudpxov ’AOnvyoww.

a little to the east of the ground beneath the northern, or north-eastern, cliff of the Acropolis, somewhat high up the slope (Miss Harrison, /.¢., p. 165). Before reaching it Pausanias had seen (i 5 § 1) the statues of the éadvuyor ‘above the Bouleuterion’ ox Council Chamber of the Five Hundred. Near the latter he sees ‘what is called the ©édos, where the Prytanes offer sacrifice.’ It was ap- parently for this reason that the @édos was sometimes called the mpuraveiov, e.g. in Schol. on Aristoph. Pax 1183, réros "AOivnow Tapa rpuTavetoy & @ éoTh- kagw dvdpidyres os erwvimous Kaholow (zd. p. 171 note 106). Curtius places the original Prytaneionin the Old Agora which, according to his view, was S. of the Acropolis; he recognises a second Prytaneion in the Tholos situated in the Agora of the Cerameicus; while he re- gards the Prytancion of Pausanias, on the northern slope of the Acropolis, as a building belonging to Roman times (Stadigeschichte, p. 302). Wachsmuth (Stadt Athen, i 465) accepts the Pry- taneion of Pausanias as the original build- ing and regards the Zholos in the Cera- meicus as a ‘dépendance’ in which the Prytanes had their public meals in the democratic days of Athens. Round the original Prytaneion rose the official resi- dences of an earlier age. First among these was the Baoleov, or official resi- dence of the kings, which may be identi- fied with the building in which the four pudoBacte’s performed their religious rites (Pollux viii 111, év 7@ Bacirely TO mapa 7d Bovkodetov) and with the residence of the Archon-Basileus (Wachsmuth, p. 468). See also Busolt, i 407 note 4.

éru kal—ydpos] Either on the second day of the Amthesterta at the beginning of March, or at the Greater Dzonysia at the end of that month, there was a pro- cession representing the entry of Dionysus *Enev@epevs ‘from without the city into

the little temple of the Cerameicus,’ ‘and his incorporation into the city by union with the noblest woman of the land, the wife of the king.’ On this occasion the Basilinna was accompanied by fourteen venerable priestesses, and was solemnly and secretly betrothed to the god. In the temple in Limnae she administered a vow to the priestesses, offered a mystic sacri- fice, wherein she prayed for all blessings for the state, and then remained for the night in the interior of the temple. Cf. [Dem.]c.Veaeram, §$§ 74—78,and Momm- sen’s Heortologie, pp. 358—360, quoted by Mr Purser on Dionysza in Smith, Dict. Ant.i639@. The passage in the c. Meae- ram § 76 speaks of the law relating to the Bacl\wva as inscribed on a tablet in the temple of Dionysus év Aluyats opened only once a year on the second day of the 4x- thesteria. It also describes her as rv be yuvaika SoPnoopévyv, but says nothing of her spending the night in the temple.

*ErAvKketov] Suidas, ». v. dpxwy, de- scribes the official residence of the Pole- march as év Avxeiy, and accordingly it is generally held that ‘the Polemarch had his office outside the walls, but quite close to the city, beside the Lyceum, a shrine con- secrated to Apollo and frequently men- tioned on account of a gymnasium exist- ing there’ (Schémann, Antiquities, p. 412 E. T.; see also Curtius, Stadtgeschichte, p- 58). The office was doubtless ém Avkely (not év Auxelw), and this is what is meant by the name ’Emvxeov, This is far more probable than the story about the ‘polemarch Epilycus,’ which is justly rejected by Mr Kenyon,

Ocopo8eretov] Suidas, s. v. dpxwy, on the authority doubtless of the present pas- sage, says that the Qeopobérar held their court apa 7d Gecpol éovov (Bekker, Anecd. 449, 23, Tapa 7d Oerpobéorov). Cf. Hyper- ides, Ezx. xxii, Oecuoberav cuvddpiov. It was there also that they dined at the public expense: Schol. Plato, Phaedr. 235 D,

CH, 3, 1. 26—34.

Ldrwvos a[arlavtes eis TO Ocopoberetov cvvrNOov.

TIOAITEIA

It

Ktpior 8 Hoav

\ if cal a kal tas Sixas avroredeis [xpivlew, nal ovy domep viv mpoava- ‘4 A. \ a kpivey. Ta peév ovv [epi] Tas apyas TovTov elye Tov TpdToD. e Qt A 3 a \ 9 8é tov ‘Apeotrayitéy Boudry thy pev Takw eiye Tod Siarnpetv

32 adrored[ws] J] B Mayor (H-L).

84, 88 apeoTTareiT

ol 6¢ Oeouobérar eE elor Tov dpiOudv, ad’ Gv kal 6 réros, rov aurjecay Kal éat- rotvro, Oeuloriov (leg. Oecpobéc.ov vel Oecpoleretov) éxade?ro. Its position is unknown, but it was not improbably near the mpuraveiov, though there is no- thing to prevent its being placed in the dyopd, as (from the very first) the Aecpo- 6érac had judicial duties to discharge. Kohler conjectures that it was near the BovAeuryjpiov, but the evidence for this is inconclusive (Wachsmuth, /. ¢. i p. 482—

, li 353—4). . intB Shenton] Diog. Laert. i 58 (of Solon), cat mp&ros rv cuwaywyiy tov évvda dpxdvrwv émrolncer, els TO ouvertreiv, ws "AToAAbSwpds dyow ev devrépy mept vouoberav. The text con- firms the conjecture of Schémann (4zz., p. 412 E. T.) that the ‘Thesmothesium ’ was used by the whole board of the nine archons. It also favours the view that as early as the time of Solon all the nine archons were called Thesmothetae (K. F. Hermann, Szaadsalt. § 138, n. 3, and Bergk in Rheinisches Museum xiii 449, quoted by Wachsmuth, Z. c., ii 354).

avroreXcis kplvew] c. 53 § 2.

kplvev...rpoavakplvev] ol. 1298 a 31, Térapros dé tpdwos TO mavTas Tepl mdvrwy BovreverOat ouvidvras, Tas &’ dp- xas mepl pndevds xplvery adda pdvov wpoavakplvetv, Svrep 4% TedeuvTala dy- poxparla viv Stocketrar tpbrov. This is in favour of xplvew, as against srotetv (sug-

gested by Suidas).—‘In the later and .

better-known times of Athenian law, we find these archons deprived in great mea- sure of their powers of judging and de- ciding and restricted to the task of first hearing the parties and collecting the evidence; next, of introducing the matter for trial into the appropriate dikastery, over which they presided’ (Grote, 1. G. chap. 10, ii 283 ed. 1862).

§ 6. 1 Tov “Apeowayitav BovAy] The first establishment of the senate of Are- opagus is sometimes ascribed to Solon. Thus Plutarch, So/. 19 zzz¢., says of Solon ovoTnodpevos Thy év "Apel maryy Bovdiy éx Tay kar’ énavrdov dpxévrwy. But in Ar. Pol. ii 12 12744, it is stated that the Council of the Areopagus was already

in existence: Goce 5¢ Brwy exeiva per |

brdpxovra mporepov ov NdoaL, THY TE Bov- My Kal tiv Tov dpxav alperw. On the other hand, Cicero, de Off. i 22 § 75, speaks of it as the senatus, gui a Solone erat constitutus; and Pollux, viii 125, de- scribes it as established by Solon as a tribunal of homicide, in addition to that of the Ephetae. ‘But there can be little doubt’ says Grote, ii p. 281, ‘that this is a mistake, and that the senate of Areopagus is « primordial institution, of immemorial antiquity, though its con- stitution as well as its functions under- went many changes. It stood at first alone as a permanent and collegiate au- thority, originally by the side of the Kings and afterwards by the side of the archons. It would then of course be known by the title of Zhe Boulé— Zhe senate or council; its distinctive title, ‘Senate of Areopagus”’ (borrowed from the place where its sittings were held), would not be bestowed until the forma- tion by Solon of the second senate or council, from which there was need to discriminate it.’ The Areopagus appears to represent the Homeric BovAy yepovTwy (Meier and Schémann p. to), and is prob- ably as early as the time of the Attic kings; but, if so, its number must have been very limited. By modern writers its number is sometimes supposed to have been either 300 (Schémann, Jahrb. f. Ri. Philol. 1875, p. 154, Hermann, Staatsalt. § 102, 17, Lange, Zphet. u. Areop. p. 27, Duncker, Gesch. des Alterth. v 473 =f. G. ii 141 E. T.); or 360, representing the 360 yévn (Philippi, Aveop. uw. Epheten, p. 206); or 60, z.e. 15 nominated by each of

the four tribes, and including theg archons,

the remaining 51 being those known as the Ephetae (aust, i418). As soon as it became customary for the archons to be added to the Areopagus at the end of their year of office, the number would cease to be fixed; but we do not know at what time this method of recruiting the Areopagus was first adopted. Mr Kenyon suggests that ‘the automatic process of forming it from all ex-archons was proba- bly put into operation from the date of the establishment of the annual archonship.” wiv piv tdfw «rd.] This confirms Grote’s statement that ‘the functions of

35

12

AQHNAIQN COL, I, 1. 36—4i.

\ id n I Tous vouous, SidKes O€ TA TAEloTA Kal TA péyloTa THY év TH TONE, n rd kal Kodafovoa Kai Enulvolica wdvtas Tovs axoopoivtas Kupias. ¢ \ Y a eI 4 > / 5 ‘ 4 by a 2 6 » yap alpeois Thy apydvTwy apiorivdny Kai mrovTivdny jv, €& dv

a a ot ‘Apeorrayira: cabiatavto. vnke dia Biov kai viv,

\ \ 4 a 2 an kA ts 800 Kal ovn TOV apYav avTH peLe-

4. 1 wev odv mpdtn modTela TavTHy e[i]ye THY bol ypa]dnv. pera 8€ taba, ypovov Tivds ov qToddod SteNOovTos, én’ *Api-

36 kal KoAdgovca: xal delet Gennadios (H-L).

ante 4 yap aliquid excidisse putat Keil.

37 yap: 6 mavult Gennadios,

the Areopagus were originally of the widest senatorial character, directive ge- nerally. as well as judicial.’ With the context, cf. Isocr. Aveop. § 37, Tiw é& ?Apelou mdryou Bouhiy éréornoay émyser- eicbat THs evkoopulas, As obx oldy 7° Hy peracxely wAHY Tols Kah@s yeyovbcr kal mokhy dperyy ev Te Bly Kal swdpood- vay éviedevyuévors, and §§ 30—55, esp. § 46, Tovs dxocpoivras dviyov els riv Bov- Aq. Athen. iv 19 p. 168 A: d70 dé rods adowrovs Kal rods uh &k Twos meptovolas f§Bvras 7b wadaidy dvexadobvro of "Apeora- vyirat cal éxddagov, lordpyoav Payddnuos Kat Biddbxopos (FHG i 394, cf. 387, 17).

Statypety rods vépous}] Aeschin. 3 § 6, bray SiarnpndGow ot vouo TH wore, op gerar kal 4% Snpoxparla.

yap] The Areopagus was entrusted with all these powers, decause it con- sisted of archons who had themselves been elected under special qualifications of birth and wealth.

The constitution of the Areopagus is the subject of a fragment of Philochorus (frag. 58 in Miiller’s Frag. Hist. Gr., i 304): €k yap T&v évvéa Kabicranévwn ap- xovrew "AOjyynor rovs ’Apeoraylras eéet cuvestdvat Suxacrds, ws mnow ’Avdpotiwy év devrépg TOv "ArOidwy Uorepov b€ met- dvav yéyovey && "Apelov mdyou Bovdyt rouréoriv é& dydpav wepipaverrépwv mev- thxovra Kal évés (this implies an identifi- cation of the Ephetae and the Areopagus). ov mavrTds avdpds qv els rHv é ’Apelov ma- you BovAhy redelv* GAN’ ol map’ ’APnvalors mpwrevovres ev Te yéver kal mdovTY Kal Bly xpnor@, ws lorope? Piréxopos da THs Tpirhs Tov abra&v ’ArOlduy.

$w—xal viv] ‘This is also the reason why it is the only office which has con- tinued to be held for life down to the present day.’ For 81d Blov, cf. 2 § 1.

IV. Zhe Draconian Constitution.

wiv troypadiyv] ‘outline’, ‘sketch’. Ar, de Gen. Anim. ii 6, 743 6 20—25,

esp. of ypagels varoypdarres rais -ypay- pais otrws évadeidovor Tols xpwpace 70 fgov. De Anima, ii 1, 413 @ 10, Tory ..TatTy SiwploOw Kal vroyeypdpOw rept * poxfs. Pol. ii 5, 1263 @ 31, eorw & évlais Tédeow obrws broyeypaypevor.

Xpévov—StehOdvros] A vague note of time, the event from which the writer reckons being apparently the affair of Cylon and its more immediate conse- quences (c. 1).

*Apiotalxpou dpxovros] The name of this archon (’Aploratxuos) is now known for the first time. It follows that Dracon was not the dpxwy émavupos of the year, as has been sometimes supposed (e.g. Busolt, i 510). Cf. Pausanias, ix 36 § 8, Apdxovros ’A@nvalos Dec pmodery- cavtos éx Trav éxelvou xarécrn vouu, obs éypagev éml ris apxijs, GAkwy Te érécwv Abeav elvar xpy, Kal 67 Kal Tipw- plas wotxod. It may fairly be assumed that he was one of the Gecpodérat, in the narrower sense of the term. Hence Grote is right in describing him as ‘the thesmothet Drako.’ His legislation may be assigned to B.c. 621 (Clinton’s Fast, sub anno; Busolt, i 510).

Gerports eOnkev] This confirms the view that he was one of the deopobérat atthe time. Geoyol was the term generally applied to the laws of Dracon: Andocides, de Myst. § 81, xpijo Oat rots ZbAwvos vouos kal rots Apdxovros Gexuots. But even the laws of Solon were by himself called ées- vol. Plutarch, So. 19, quotes from one of them the words Gre Oeopds épavy Bde, and the word occurs in his own poems c. 12 § 4, line 18, Oecpods...eypaya, The same ancient term was preserved in the oath of the zeplodo: in Pollux viii 106, Kal rots Oecpots Trois iSpuyévors melooua, which in later Greek would have been ex- pressed rots vduors rots Keyudvors (cf. Grote, c. 10, ii p. 283, note).

§ 2. W 88 rds x7A.] To identify the rdés, or constitution, with the Aecpol, or

CH. 3, |. 35 CH. 4, 1. 3.

TIOAITEIA

13

otalyyou dpxovtos Apd[xwly rods Oecpods eOnxev’ 4 Se rdkis 2

legislation, is inconsistent with the distinc- tion drawn by Aristotle in Pol. 1289 2 15, monirela pev yap éore Taéis Tals ToAeow 7 mepl ras dpxas...vouor 5¢ kexwpiouévor TRY Snrovvrwy Ti. wodtrelav, Kal? ods det TOvs dpxovras &pxyew «rr. Cf. also 1286 a 3. This distinction is maintained in cc. 7 and 9g, but not inc. 34. The term Gecpol has a distinctive meaning and can only refer to a code, not to a constitution (Class. Rev. v 167 a).

Dracon has hitherto been recognised as a legislator alone. There is a well-known passage respecting him in Ar. Pol. ii 12, p- 1274 6.15, Apdxovros dé vépor per clot, monirelg 5 brapxovon Tovs vdmous @Onkev xtd. This passage, which describes Dra- con as adapting his laws to a constitution already in existence, is inconsistent with the present chapter, which almost ignores the legislation of Dracon and represents him as the framer of a constitution.

The passage in question comes from a chapter which, in the opinion of Zeller, Susemihl and other Aristotelian scholars, has suffered from considerable interpola- tion. Thus Mr W. L. Newman conjec- tures ‘that Aristotle may have left only the fragment about Solon and a few rough data for insertion after the notice of the Carthaginian constitution, and that some member of the school, not very long after his death, completed them as best he could’ (Newman’s ed. ii 373, 377) Accordingly it is possible that the pas- sage about Dracon in the Politics was not written by Aristotle himself.

In Rhet. ii 23 § 29, 1400 4 21, Ar. quotes Herodicus (the physician) as saying of Dracon (6 vouobérns), re ox dvOpdrrov ot voyot GANG SpdKovros’ xaAerol yap. Of the actual legislation of Dracon little is known, since his laws (with the excep- tion of those on homicide) were repealed by Solon (c. 7 § 1 TAjy Tay gomkwy and Plut. Sol. 17 there quoted). This is pos- sibly a sufficient reason for the’ absence of any reference to it in the constitutional part of this treatise, except in the words Tods Oeopods 20nxe. All that survived is sufficiently described in the second part of the work, in the account of the pro- cedure in cases of homicide (c. 57).

According to the text the main points in the constitution of Dracon’s time are (t) a hoplitic franchise, already in exist- ence; (2) those who had this franchise elected the Archons, the Zamzae, the Strategi, the Hipparchi and the Prytanes (unless, indeed, these are identical with

the Archons) from among those who were duly qualified by a property-qualifi- cation. (3) A Council of 401, elected by lot from among those who had the franchise, and were over 30 years of age. The same limitation held good for other offices filled by casting lots, and no one was to hold office twice till every one else had had his turn. (4) Members of the Council were fined for not attend- ing meetings of the Council or Assembly, and the fine varied with their status.

This ‘Draconian constitution’ has, not unnaturally, been viewed with suspicion. It tells us of a Council of 401, of which we never hear elsewhere, and (which is more serious) of certain property-qualifi- cations which have hitherto been regarded as part of the subsequent legislation of Solon, and which the author himself mi- nutely describes in connexion with Solon (c. 7). A writer in the Athenaeum, 1891, p- 435 4, denounces it as ‘the amazing Draconian constitution.’ It has also been attacked by Weil (Yournal des Savants, Avril, 1891), and Cauer; also by Mr Ma- can in the Yourn. of Hellenic Studies, April, 1891, pp. 24, 27, and in detail by Mr J. W. Headlam in an article in the Class. Rev., v 166—168; followed by valu- able criticisms by Mr E. S. Thompson, zb. p. 336, and by M. Théodore Reinach in the Revue Critique, p. 143—5.

Mr Headlam’s main points are these: (t) No other writer knows anything of a constitution attributed to Dracon. Plu- tarch, when speaking of the Oeopot of Dracon, mentions nothing but a code of law. (2) Other passages in the modcrela itself support the view taken by Plutarch and in the Politics. (a) In chap. vii the writer speaks of the @ecuol of Dracon in connexion with the new code of laws made by Solon, but makes no reference to Dracon in speaking of the constitu- tional innovations of Solon. (4) The recapitulation in c. 41 states that the cha- racteristic feature of Dracon’s legislation was the publication of the law. This is inconsistent with chap. 4 and its very re- markable constitution. (3) Among the provisions of the constitution at least one could not possibly have been devised in Dracon’s time, the property-qualification for the archonship being expressed in terms of money that probably belong to a later age; nearly all of them are very difficult to reconcile with what we know of the state of Athens at the time; and several of them inconsistent with other

14 AOHNAIQN

4 t \ , > auTn TOveE TOV Tpo7rov eLNE.

COL. I, l. 42—2, 1. 4.

if amedéboT0 ev } TrodtTela TOs Orda

a \ ~.

Trapeyouévors’ npodyto bé Tovs pev évvéa apxovtas [Kal Tlovs f

[rTlawias ovciav Kextnuévous otx éddtTw déka pvdv édevOépar,

IV 4 ay’ (=avrys): correxit K.

pey per compendium, ut videtur, scriptum

(K-W, K3, B): mihi quidem A’ (82) potius quam Mm (uév) videtur scriptum: om. H-L,

5 APYONTEC 6 é@\arrov 7 K-W.

Aeka: éxardv Thompson; diaxoclwv

Weil (Fournal des Savants, p. 10); ‘maiorem censum nemo non expectet’ H-L.

statements in this book. (4) None of the provisions, some of them very remarkable, are ever quoted by later writers. (5) The whole constitution is exactly like those afterwards described in connexion with the aristocratic revolutions in 411. The details connected with the above criticism will be noticed as they occur in the fol- lowing notes.

Dr P. Meyer (Des Aristoteles Politik und die ’A@nvalwv rodrela, pp. 31—44) regards the passage in the Politics and the present chapter as, both of them, equally genuine, and vainly endeavours to reconcile the two. He holds that the ‘Draconian constitution’ does not differ materially from the constitution which preceded it, the dpxyala moNurela of c. 3. If so, the writer of the present chapter has not succeeded in making the points of resemblance clear. The ‘Draconian constitution’ is defended with greater success by Prof. Gomperz (Die Schrift vont Staatswesen der Athener, p. 43). He holds that, in distributing the citizens of Attica into four classes, Solon availed himself of existing social divisions, and gave them a new definition. This may hold good in the case of the imme?s, the fevytra: and the Ofres. But it is difficult to accept it in the case of the wevraxocto- uéiyvot. The term is used without any explanation in the present chapter; but, in the description of Solon’s constitution, it is defined with precision as though it were then used for the first time. One would be glad to believe with Mr Kenyon, in his note on this chapter, p. 13 ed. 3, that ‘a sober historical judgment will probably in the end find its statements not so startling as they at first appear’; but at present the contents of the greater part of the chapter seem to require the most careful scrutiny before they can be finally accepted.

Considerations in favour of the account are urged by Busolt, in Phz/ol. 1891, vol. 50, pp. 393—400. He points out that the Pseudoplatonic Axiochus, which has seve- ral points of contact with this treatise (cf. -c. 18 § 1, 34 § 1, 42 § 2), uses the phrase

éml rijs Apdxovros 4% Kiera bévous modcrelas (p. 365). While admitting the coinci- dences with the oligarchical constitutions of 411, he holds that the oligarchs profess- ed to aim at the restoration of the rérpuos motrela, which may fairly be identified with the pre-Solonian constitution. (1) The term wrevraxoctomédiuvos must origi- nally have referred to measures of corn: Solon extended its meaning to measures of wine and oil, and gave it a different value by changing the standard. (2) Fines in money may have been exacted by the State at a time when private transactions were settled by the transfer of oxen. (3) We know little of the early history of the orparyyia, but it is possible that the fears inspired by the affair of Cylon may have led the aristocracy to limit the authority of the polemarch by means of four orparyyol appointed from the wealth- ier class.

daeBéSoro xTX.] not dredd6y. The tense implies that the franchise had al- ready been given and that this was not part of the alleged constitution of Dracon. This point is brought out by Mr Poste who translates: ‘Sovereign power was already wielded by the class of persons capable of providing its own equipment for war.’ He adds in a note: ‘This agrees with the statement of Aristotle, Fol. ii 12, thi rakon made no change in the constituffon. The revolution had already taken place. Drakon’s task was to adjust the laws to the changed centre of political power.’ Mr Kenyon’s ren- dering is here less exact: ‘The franchise was given &c.’ (see, however, Class. Rev. v 467 4).—The same kind of franchise is to be found in the constitution pro- posed by the party of Theramenes in 411, c. 33 at end, Thuc. viii 97, and Xen. ffell. ii 3 (Class, Rev. v 168 a).

Séca pvdv] We have to notice (1) the nature, no less than (2) the amount of the property-qualification required of archons.

(1) At this time property was reckoned not in money but in corn. Now, the quali- fication of a fevylrns was to possess land capable of producing 200 pédiwvo: a

CH. 4, 1. 4—11.

[Col. 2.] Ta

” ddras apyas || <ras> édarrous ex tév érda rapex[ouéver],

\ be » * t > Le 7 , > o- oTpaTnyous O€ Kai lrmapyous ovoiay atropaivoytas ovK EXaTTOV

| td ot

7p

Do) mi H( 6107 Ol

(Sc

KaTov uvov édrevOépay Kat matdas €[x«] yaperhs yuvatnos yvn- bus umép Seka etn yeyovotas’ TovTous 8 eer die[yyv]a[oOac] Tovs vTavers Kal Tovs otpaTnyovs Kal Tods immdapyxous Tos evous

7 <ras> éddrrovus Richards, Blass, K-W, H-L, K%. 8 @\atrov Marchant coll. br. Adv. in Thuc. ii 13: éAdrrov’ olim K. 9 4 éxarov in exacrov of (=dxTd) fabat Marindin (Smith, Dict. Ant. ii 1071 4). 7 delet Thompson, utpote ex numerali = <xardv) natum. eAEYOEPWN: corr. Wyse etc. 10 A’ AI (supra scr. Ael)...8? 5c Pynpew H-L; dveyyvav Schulthess deletis verbis cat rovs orparnyovs kal rods lrmdpxous; .K-W; 8 @€e dteyyviocda K%, B. 11 tof yévous K!: rods vous Paton et

Tas tas dpxas Tails véais éxotoas bmegeva, et Ar. Pol. 1322 a 11 Tas Tay evo iger) waddov ras véas (dpyds).

van} Leeuwen (edd.), quod et in papyro scriptum et unice verum est, cf. [Dem.] 25 Ea

TIOAITEIA 15

pédtuvos of corn was worth at this time about a drachma (Plut. So/. 23). Land of this extent must thus have been worth not} less than 2000 drachmas. According to this, men were eligible to the archon- ship who were excluded by Solon from all office (Class. Rev. v 167 6).

(2) In the constitution described in c. 29,|the archons and prytanes alone were to #eceive pay, 2 obols a day, implying thaf§ no high property-qualification was reqamgred. The comparatively high quali- ficagion for the generals, 100 minae (if thef text is sound), would be natural in 411 but] not in 621 (zd. 168 a).

Busolt, however, points out that the b qualifications of 100 and of 10 minae pectively correspond to the relative es of gold and silver in ancient times, ti. He supposes that a piece of land valfued at 1000 Aeginetan drachmae might produce a return of 120—130 Aeginetan or }166—180 Attic drachmae; and if we assume that in those early days, when money was scarcer than in Solon’s time, a mpedimnus was worth only 2 to 3 Aegi- ne(fan obols, the yearly produce would be from 360 (or 390) to 250 medimni. This wopuld correspond to the census of a leds unfler the Solonian constitution (Pho.

181, Pp. 393—400).

4 6. Revberav, ‘unencumbered.’ Isaeus 101 § 17, 6 wey KAfpos éXedepos Fv, con- ier with bmoxpews. Dem. 35 § 21,

trbridéace tadr’ édevOepa, and § 22, én’ AdvOepas Tots xphuace Saverfouevar. Dit- tepberger, Syl/oge, no. 344, 383 294, 10; 120, 20, 28. Cf.c. 12, 34.

. 8 otpatnyots] It is urged by Mr Headlam that (2) We have no other record of|orparzyol at this time: in the list in c. vig § 3 they are not mentioned. * (+) The clause about their children is entirely

new. (c) If there were such officers, they held an inferior position, and the comparatively high property - qualifica- tion is unaccountable (Class, Rev. 167 4). Qualifications of a similar character may, however, be noticed at a much later date, in Deinarchus, contr. Dem., § 71, Tovs vowous mpohéyew TH pyropt kal TY oTpary- 7@ (Te) Tiv Tapa Too Shpou mlarw aé- otvrTt AawBdvew, watdsomotetobat Kara Tous vémous, yay évrds Spwy Kexrh- Oat, wéoas Tas Stxalas lores mapaxara- Oduevov, ottrws déobv mpoecrdvat Tod 57- pou.

SteyyvdoGat] If this is the right read- ing, it must presumably be rendered ‘should have security given on their be- half.’ The accepted meaning of the word in the passive is ‘to be bailed’ by any one, e.g. Thuc. iii 70, dxraxoclwy raddytwv tots mpotévas Suny yun ev o1.

tods mputdvets] Here mentioned for the first time, whereas the form of the sentence (so far as the text is sound) im- plies they have already been referred to. If so, they must either be included among the dddas dpyas Tas éAdrrous, or they are identical with the évvéa dpxovres. As to the latter alternative, it is probable that up to the time of Solon the archons were called mpurdves. This is inferred by Busolt, i 408, from the term for court- fees, mpuraveta, which cannot be ex- plained with the help of anything in the post-Solonian constitution, and from the analogy of Greek states in Asia, where the king was succeeded by a mpvrans. It will be remembered that the official residence of the Archon was the mpvu- tavelov, c. 3 § §. This appears better than identifying them with ‘the presi- dent of the Council and Assembly in later days.’ ;

°

15

16 AOHNAIQN COL. 2, 1. 4++8.

péxpe evOuvar, éyyuntas Tértapas éx Tod adtod Tédous *rrapac: Hévous ovtrep of oTpaTnyol Kal of tmmapyot. Bovdrevew Sé TeTpa cious kal &va Tovs Naydvtas ex THs ToALTELas’ KANpoda Bat SE Kal T THY Kal Tas dAXas dpyas Tods brép TpidKovTa ery yeyovéTas, Kat TOV avTov un ape mpd TOD mavtas *[Sc]eAOeiv’ Tore Sé warlw]

12 err..tac éyyuyras K%, K-w, B; émiehnras H-L. 6 K1; 6 (=7érrapas) H-L etc. AX (?supra scr. OA?) xOMWOYC; dexouévous K, K-W, H-L: mapexop Rutherford, trcyomeNoyc fortasse volebat corrector; idem conicit Blass qui ectypo tre (supra scr. OY=odmep) YOMENOYC in TTCYOMENOYC correctum agnos{cit. 15 TPiAKONOETH. 16 mepiedOetv K!. Expectares potius aut eis rdvras mepfteh- Ociv aut did mévrew dieAOetv THv dpx7v: quod ad illud attinet, cf. Plut. Avdst. 5] ws mepipOev els abtov % dpxh; quod ad hoc, Ar. Pol. 1298 a 17 et 1300 a 25 ews dy bteAO7 Sia wdvrwv : etiam wdvras éf9s Aaxeiv conicere in promptu est, coll. [Xen.] Ape.

Ath.i6 ph éay rAéyew wdvras ékfs wndé Bovrcvery.

éfedOcivy K-W, H-L, K3,B; duehPety

malui: praestaret dtefeAOety (K-W?), sed spatium non sufficit.

péexet edOuvav] ‘until the audit.’ At Athens, according to the evidence of later times, all officials were bet@uvor. Aeschin. Cres. § 17, obdels dorw dvured- Ouvos Tv kal érwoody mpos Ta Kowd TpoceNnrvO drwy.

twrapacxopévous] Often used in middle with pdprupas, Pol. 1269 a 2, rapacx dobar TrRO0s papripwy, and Ant, 5 §§ 20, 22, 24, 28, 30, &c. Cf. Aeschin. ¢. Cres. 199, cuvyydopous rapacyécba. The usual verb with éyyunras is kafiordvar, Dem. 24 §§ 39, 40, 55, and esp. 144, ds dv éyyunras Tpets KabioTH 7d abrd Tédos TedobyTas.

§ 3. Bovdedew] This is the only men- tion of a Draconian council of 4o1. In c. 8 we are told of Solon BovAny dé érol- noe TeTpaxoclovs, 7.¢. ‘he set up a council of 400.’ Had the writer already men- tioned a council of 401 he would prob- ably have expressed himself differently in c. 8. The addition of the ‘one’ is a common device to prevent the votes being exactly equal. But it is a device mainly characteristic of later times, e.g. the dicacrypia consisting of 501, or 1001, ducagral. On the other hand, we have the 51 Ephetae who are generally ascribed to the time of Dracon.

ék THS Todurelas= ex Tv TodTor.

kAnpotePar] the first mention of elec- tion by lot in this treatise. Hitherto, it has been generally agreed that, even in Solon’s time, the Council was not ap- pointed by lot, and this view is accepted by Thirlwall, Grote, Schomann (Axzig. p. 331 E. T.), and others. The introduc- tion of the lot for this purpose has been usually ascribed to the time of Cleisthenes (508 B.c.). But the present passage im- plies that the use of the lot was as early as the time of Dracon. This, if true, sup-

(la Cité Antique, p. 212—4, ed. 18%3), that the lot is an institution of religious origin and therefore of great antiquity. See Mr J. W. Headlam’s Election by Lot at Athens, esp. pp. 183—, and note, on c. 8 § 1 tzfra. TavtTyv] Thy dpxiv, sc. Td Bovdedew. tds ddAas dpxds, exclusive offfithe Archons, Strategi and Hipparchi, al {yidy mentioned, but probably not excluy, é of the ddAas dpyas Tas éAdrrovs. a tpuikovra ern] This is the agé which an Athenian citizen could become a Bovdevrys (Xen. Mem. i 2 § 35) of a dikaoris (c. 63 § 3, cf. document quoted in Dem. Zimocr. 151, and Pollux, viii 122). It has already been inferred (Meier and Schémann, Att. Proc., p. 240 Lipsi that the same requirement of age hi good for other officials, the dAAae dpjyat of the text. (The Ephetae and the public Envoys were, however, required to be} 50 years of age; the Diaetetae 59.) Sls tov airov pa] dpxew «rA.] 1299 @ 10, wh Tov adrdv Sls GAN’ Gabak Hovoy (dpxew) and 1317 b 23 7d ph |éls Tov adrov dpxew pndeulay % ddcydxs| 4 édlyas diw rev xara méAcuov. Of officials in general we read in Dem. Zimocr. 1150 (document quoted as épxos jAvacrav) offre Gls riv abrny dpxiv Tov abrov dvdpa offre Svo0 dpxas dpta: rov abrov év TH aire du- avrg. The same citizen could be a @bv- Aeurys more than once, as is shewn by the case of Timarchus and that of mosthenes (adv..Mid. 114 and Aeschin., f. £. 17); and is stated in c. 62 ad fly. It is doubted by Boeckh (Staatsh. ii 743) whether the same citizen could be a Bqu- Aevrys for two years in succession, | this is purely conjectural (Hermant’s

ports the opinion of Fustel de ne

CH. 4, lL. r2—18.

TIOAITEIA 17

i lel lal = ‘

vrapyhs KAnpodv. ei 5é Tis THv BovrevTay, Stay Epa BovdArs 1.

> ¥

éxkrnotas 7, éxdelrroe THv avvobov, aréTivoy 6 fey TEVvTAaKOGLO- 18 18 éxAbro H-L.

Staatsalt, § 125, 1). The émordrns rov mpurdvewy was not allowed to hold that office more than once (c. 44 § 1).

The rotation of all in office was a well- known device of later times (cf. Headlam’s Election by Lot, p. 88): but it may well be asked how far it was applicable to a large body of citizens, most of whom lived at a considerable distance from Athens. It was in fact the work of a de- veloped democracy (Class. Rev. v 168 a). Ar. Pol. vi (iv) 14, 1298 @ 14, év ddaus 5€ tontrelas Boudedovrat al cuwvapxlat ouve- odoat, els dé Tas dpxds Badlfovo. mdvres kara pépos ex Tay pudawy Kal Tay jopluy Tov éd\axlorwy mavredus, ews Av dreé- EXOn Sia Tavrwy. ib. p. 1300 @ 23, yap mdvres (ol moNrat Tas apxds Kai- ordow) alpéoe, } mavres éx wavTwr Khpy (cat [9] é& dardvrwv 9 as dvd wépos, olov kara gvdas cal Sjuous kal garplas, ews dv 5€XOy Oca wavrwy Tay ToT OV xrh.). It is characteristic of the oli- garchical spirit my ééy déyew mayras é£fs unde Bouvdevew ([Xen.] Rep. Ath. i 6).

SeAetv] thy dpxjv. Cf. Blov dreAGetv. It would, however, be more natural to say dia raver StehOety or drefeOeiv (rhv dpxjv), as in Pol. 1273 617, dea wavrwv ...dteApAUGE Td dpxe kal Td dpxeoOar, and the passages quoted in last note.

For é£e\etv ex urna (van Leeuwen) cf. Horace’s sors exitura, but this use of é- e\Geiv is doubtful. In Fol. ti 11, 1273 @ 16, the word is applied otherwise, to the ‘going out of office’ (of certain officials in the Carthaginian constitution), kai yap éfeAndvbbres apxovor kal wéddovTes.

€pa BovArjs] c. 30 § 4.

éxxAnolas] Of the general assembly of the citizens, in or before the times of Dracon, nothing is known. ‘The people must have had some power’ (says Mr Abbott, History of Greece, i 2301), ‘or the Draconian laws would not have been published, and Solon would not have been chosen to reform the constitution. We do not know that the officers were elected by, or responsible to, the assembly, and of legislative and judicial authority the people had none. Perhaps we may as- sume that war could not easily be pro- claimed without their consent, as they formed the bulk of the soldiers, If that were the case, the safety and power of the State depended, in the last resort, upon the General Assembly.’

S. A.

a 8€ tTW15...ékXelrrou...darérwvov] Good- win’s Moods and Tenses, § 462.

ékAelrou Tv oivoSov] Xen. Hell. v 2 § 22, ef 6¢ rus TOv mbAEwY ExdAlaroe THY oOTpa- radv, etvar Aaxedapovlors érefnucody ora- Thpt xara Tov avdpa THs hucpas. The phrase is not found in Aristotle, although in Po/. 1331 6 10 we have mpos @yopg...kal ouv- 6dy Twi Kowy. ovvodos is applied to an éxxdAnola in 1319 @ 32, of dé -yewpyobivres bea 7d SteomdpOar Kara Thy xwpay oir’ amavrdow o6 duolws Séovra THs cuvddov tauvrys, and to the sugciria in 1271 @ 28, 5e. yap did Kowod paddov elyac THY ovv- odov, xabdarep év Kpjry. éxdelrew is generally intrans. in Ar.—Fines for non- attendance are mentioned in Pol. 1297 @ 17 (among the devices by which oligar- chies deceive the people), mepi éxxAnolav pev 7d édelvar waow éxxdrnodtew, Snulay 6é érixeicOae Tois ebmdpors éday wh éxxAnowd- gwow..., and (among the counter-devices on the part of democracies) 1297 @ 37, Tots perv yap dardpots proOdr topltovaw éexxAnord- fover kat Sixdgovow, Tots 6’ evirdpos odde- play rarrover gyulav. 1294 @ 38, év pev yap tats ddvyapxlas rots edmdpos fnulav TaTTovew, dv pn dixdfwow, Tots de dadpors ovdéva pucbdr, év dé rats Snuoxparias Tots pev drdpos pucOdv, Tots 5¢ edmrdpots ovbe- play gnuiav. .

Mr Headlam observes that the only Athenian instance of a law inflicting a fine for non-attendance at the Council is to be found in the constitution of the 400 in c. 30 wt.

There is no evidence as to fines for non-attendance at official duties in the earlier part of Athenian history. The fines inflicted by Solon’s legislation are of a completely different character.

In the laws of Dracon fines were levied in terms of so many head of oxen: Pollux ix 61, kdv Apdxovros vouots éorty daorti- vew eixoodBotov. This may have been the compensation paid to a man’s relatives in a case of unintentional homicide. But (as observed by Busolt, Pzlol. 1891, Pp 399) fines paid to the public chest in t form of oxen would be very inconvenient, and in such cases the payment was prob- ably exacted in money.

dmérwov] Ar. Pol. ii 12, 1274 6 20, {nulay drorlvew (in an interpolated chap- ter).

are ree trmets, Levylrys] see c.7 §4. All these have hitherto been

2

°

18 AOHNAIQN COL. 2, 1. 9—17. HéSipvos Tpeis Spaypds, o [Se E]armeds Svo0, Cevryirns Se piav. % d84 Bovan 4 e& "Apeiou rdayou dtrak Hv Tadv vopwv Kal Sverhp[e Tals apyas Srrws Kata Tos vopmous dpywow. ékiv Sé TH ddixovpeve mpo[s THY THV] Apeoraryset[ av] BovaAgy eioayyédrev arropaivovts map dv adixetras vopov. ert dé Tois cd[palow Hoav ot Savecopoi, 5

Kaddrep elpntar, kal ydpa 80 ddiryov jv.

5.

19 <6> fevyirns H-W, H-L; sed exspectares 6 dé ¢. 23—4 éxl—jv spuria putant Richards et Keil.

iA \ lo) L ” 2 a ‘4 \ a towauTns 8& THs TdEews ovens ev TH ToALTEia Kal TéV

22 APEOTIALEIT. deSeuévor quondam dubitanter

K (K-w); dedaveccuévor Richards, H-L; ol daveccuol Blass (K? p. LXIV).

regarded as characteristic results of So- lon’s legislation ; but some sort of pro- perty classification, even before the time of Dracon, is implied in c. 3 § 1, where magistrates are described as chosen m)ou- tiny.

We here reach the end of that part of the chapter which is open to most dis- pute. Its possible origin is thus indicated by Mr Headlam :

‘The constitution described betrays the thought of a particular party; the reformers of this school used to advo- cate their policy by maintaining that it really would restore Athens to the con- dition in which it was before the demo- cratic changes began. Many as we know looked on Solon as the originator of the changes which they deplored (Ar. Po/it. ii 12). They would then recommend a constitution of this kind by saying it was like that which prevailed in Athens be- fore the time of Solon. This has misled some transcriber or editor. After the words rods Gecuovs 26yxev, influenced by the expression at the beginning of chap. iii he desiderated some account of the con- stitution in the time of Draco and in- serted this passage out of some other book ’ (Class. Rev. v 168 6).

§ 4. oidak tov vépov] Plut. Sol. 19, tiv & dvw Boudry érloxorov wrdvrwy Kat ptraka TOV vopmuwy exdbioer, inf. 8 § 4.

Tov vopov] esp. the Gecuol of Draco mentioned in 1. 3 immediately before the disputed passage.

eloayyéAAeww] ‘to impeach,’ or ‘lay an information’ or ‘denunciation.’ The first known instance of the verb belongs to an inscr. soon after 446 B.c. (Bull. de Corresp. hellén. 1880, p. 225). The use of the term here does not correspond pre- cisely with any of the technical senses which it afterwards bears in a more highly developed stage of Atticlaw. An eloayyeNia could be brought before the Archon or the Polemarch in certain cases,

or before the Boule or the Ecclesza, but not before the Council of the Areopagus. See Dr Hager in Smith, Dzct. Ant. s.v,

§ 5. él 8 xrd.] vc. 2§ 2. In spite of the advantage of being able to appeal to the Areopagus against acts of injustice, the people had the standing grievance of having their persons mortgaged to their creditors &c. The statement follows na- turally from the previous sentence and leads up to the account of the rebellion of the poor against the rich in the next. It is therefore unnecessary to accept the view of a writer in the Zdinburgh Re- view, 1891, 479: ‘the statement is quite superfluous; the conjunction does not link it with the preceding sentence, which is concerned with a wholly different sub- ject, and the form, ‘as has been said,’ shows clearly that it is a marginal com- ment made by some one who wished to impress the fact on his memory.” So far from wishing to strike out this passage, we should be grateful for its preservation, as it has made it possible to restore the sense in the previous mention of the same facts in chap. 2. It has already been shewn that it is quite in harmony with the context.

V—XII. The legislation of Solon.

V § 1. rdews] If in the previous chapter, the description of the rags is an interpolation, and the mention of the Gecuol in relation to the Areopagus and the economic condition of the poorer classes is alone to be regarded as genuine, the use of rdtews here becomes open to suspicion, unless we are content to regard the powers of the Areopagus and the right of bringing grievances before them as sufficient to constitute a raéts, or consti- tutional order of things.

év rq twodttela] almost equivalent to Tijs wokirelas, the gen, being avoided be- cause of the gen. preceding. Cf. De Gen. Anim. 1, 1, 715 @ 1, érel 5& wept ror drwy poplwy epnrar rav év rols twos.

CH. 4, 1. 19—CH. 5, 1.9. TIOAITEIA 19

[w]odrAdv SovArevovtwy Tots ddéyous, avtéotn Tois yvwpipors 6 2 Ofpos. laxupas 88 tis otdcews ovons Kal mod[dy] ypovoy dvTi- KaOnuévov addjro.s, ebdovTo Kowh SiadraxTHv Kal apxYovTa VA * \ ca >? 7 > lal 2 \ Lorova, kal tly mods|tei[aly érétpepay aiT@ Touoavte TH edeyelav is dotly dpyy yiyvdloxw], Kat wor ppevds vdo0ev adyea xeiran, mpecButarnyv écopdy yaiav “laovias. kal yap téredadver al mpds éxatépous trép Exatépwv pdyeras V 2 an éwavéorn? Wyse. 7 PINw[Ckw] K, K-w, H-L: yeyvdoxw certe usque ad annum 325 A.C. in titulis Atticis scriptum fuisse constat (Meisterhans, p. 1427): an oluwwfw? H-L. 8 “Iaoviny Richards (Class. Rev. v 334 @). 9 eTreAAYNEN legit K (émjAavwev K1 sed tempus praesens flagitat contextus).

éradddrret J B Mayor, Richards, cf. Pol. 1255 @ 13, 1257 6 38, 129549. émeheatver quondam tentabam, sed desideratur accusativus velut rov’s tpaxuvouévous; ére-

Aavve. K3, sed sensus in obscuro.

[cupBovrevwy aoAdi] mpds H-L.

mon TiKw-

§ 2. dvrucadypévov] a metaphor im- plying two forces watching one another. The literal sense is found in Thuc. v 6 § 3, and similarly with dvrixabltecPac zd, iv 124 § 2.

SiadAakriy Kal dpxovra] Plut. So/. 14, 6400 Kat StadraxTHs Kal vowobérys, Praec. Ger. Reip. 10 § 16 p. 805, oddevi yap éupléas éavrdy dAdAd Kowds wy Tact kal wdvta Aéywv kal mparrwv mpds bud- vowavy, npéOn vouobérns emt ras duadioes, 2b. p. 825 D juepov StaAAaKr yy, and esp. Amatorius 18 § 14, 763 D, Todrov etdov- To Kowy OcadAaKTHY Kal dpxovTa Kat vouobérnv. The last passage supports the opinion that Plutarch had a first-hand acquaintance with this treatise.

The archonship of Solon is assigned to B.C. 594 (Clinton /. Z., ii p. 298 = 3633; Busolt, i 524, note 2). Cf. note on 13 §1.

trv éXeyelav] here, and in 1. 3 from end of chapter, ‘the elegiac poem.’ The fem. form is found in Theophrastus, Hist. Plant. ix 15, 1, and also in late authors (e.g. Plut. Sol. 26, Cimon 10). Aristotle uses 7a éXeyela in Poet. 1, 1d Tpimérpwv 4 deyelwv, Rhet. i 15, éheyeta Dordwvos, iii 2, édeyeia Acovualou (cf. Class. Rev. v 334 2).

The lines quoted have been hitherto un- known. They may fairly be accepted as the opening couplet of the poem cited in Dem. de Falsa Leg., p. 421, § 255, some- times called ‘YroOjxac els ’AOnvatous. The passage as there quoted begins with the words: tperépa 88 médts ara ev Acds odor’ bAetrat

aigay kai paxdpwy Oedy dpévas abavdrwv. Voemel saw no difficulty in regarding the passage quoted by Dem. as the actual be-

’ ginning of the poem: ‘‘Particula dé non

obstat initio....Similia initia Tyrtaei, Mimnermi, Callini. Imo optime con- venit commoto atque elato Solonis animo relicta sententia ‘Aliae quidem urbes in- terierunt et interibunt,’ sic incipere: ‘sed Athenae sunt perpetuae’.” But, if the couplet quoted in the text comes from the same poem at all, we now have the true beginning of that composition. The poet begins in a strain of sorrow and dejection due to the sad condition of his country, mingled with fear of the consequences of the avarice and pride of the wealthy (z7- Sra, Thy Te prrapyuplay Thy & brepnpavtay). Afterwards (in the passage preserved by Dem.) he changes his tone to one of ex- ultant trust in the overruling power of the patron-goddess of Athens. He then dwells on the injustice, the insolence, and the greed of the djuovu Hyeuéves ; and insists on the evils caused by bad legislation and the blessings brought about by good. Thus far we have only an attack against one of the two parties in the state. The other topics may have found a place in the lost portions of the poem.

*Iaovlas] “Iaovtny is proposed by Mr H. Richards on the ground that Solon is not likely to have used /omza for ‘all lands where Ionians dwell.’ The Ionic form may have been wrongly written Iaoviay, and then altered into "Iaovlas in conse- quence of the superlative. Considering, however, that it was a fixed belief of the Athenians that Ion had been their own moéuapxos, and was the father of the four progenitors of the Ionian tribes, Attica may well be called the oldest land in all the Ionian world.

émeXatver] apparently intransitive ; used elsewhere of military movements

2—2

20 AOHNAIQN COL. 2, 1. 18—29. ro Kal SiapdicBytel, Kal peta TadTa Kowh mapatvel [kata]ravew Ti evertdaav pirovixiav. Hv 8 6 Yorwy TH pev [pidloes cal rH an a cal tf lq d6£n Tdv mpwtwv, Th 8 ovcia Kal Tois Tpdypact TAY pécwV, ws Ex Te TOY GAXNwV CporoyeiTar Kal avTos ev Totcde Tois ToUpacw paptupel, Tapaivav Tois ToVaioLs 4 TAEOVEKTELY® dpeis 8 hovxydoavtes evi ppeot Kaptepoy Hrop, of moAAGy ayabav és Képov [jr] doaTe, 2 4 f 4 dé é BA ‘ ia tal év petplowcs t[pépecOle péyav voov' ote yap nets t > +f e cal la ¥ % wy mesooped, oO byiv aptoa md[yt’] éoerar. \ 2\ 4h 27 a y 2 + a Pcs \ kat dros det THY aitiay Ths oTdcews avaTTEL Tois TAOUVCILOLS 510 > ’ a a bs a tg 4 20 Kal év apyy Tis édeyelas Sedoixévar Hyoi

rata]? K-w, qui legi posse existimant KAITAPTTOAI...€ETAIKAITTPOC $ quae si revera

olim exstabant, licet conicere kal ydp modt[rev]erac xat mpds, quod confirmat aliquatenus Aristides ii 361 Dind. in commentario exscriptus, qui in loco nostro suos in usus convertendo verbum ézodrevero bis usurpavit. 11 PIAOTIMIAN superscr. NIKI. pice Richards, Wyse (edd.): pyoe olim K. 16 ddoare K! sensu intransitivo usurpatum : correxit Postgate coll. Tyrtaei loco infra allato; idem conicit Naber (edd.). 17 7[t@ecde] Platt (H-L); uerplos réprecbe Kontos. 18 dpzia: dpOua Tyrrell, coll. Theogn. 1312 adpOusos 762 Pidos, adde Hat. vi 83 réws uev 64 age iv dpOma els dAdHdous: dpxca Kontos (H-L). | wd[v7’] K-w quod locis infra laudatis confirmatur; 7éANX K! qui Ta potius quam Tra in papyro legit; rafr’ H-L (K3, B); 76)’ quondam Blass. 19 aie€l (K, K-W, B): del(H-L). Formam utramque usurpant decreta

such as ‘charging’ (Hdt. ix 49), or ‘marching against’ (i 17); here perhaps of ‘attacking.’ This sense would lead up, to the next verb mdxerat. Another suggestion, émadA\drret, as observed by one of its proposers, ‘seems suitable to describe the attitude of a man who sees and takes both sides of a question at once, who is at home in both camps’ (H. Richards in Class. Rev. v 107 a). But we should expect ducxepatver or dvrirelver.

mpos éxatépovs trip éxatépwv] The purport of this part of the poem must have been the same as that of the ddyo of Solon described in Aristides, ii 361, who probably had this passage in view: kalrot DoAwy ra pev els Meyapéas éxovra Goa Aéyerat, Tods Sé vomous ovK WOE Tept- ud ob5e Tods Adyous Tods UTéep TOV ev7d- pwy pds Tov SHmov, ovde Tods Urep T&v wordkOv wpos rods Trovelous ovK pdev, o0d’ doa AAAa erodiTEveTo, ovK Gdwy ob’ év pérpors érodurevero, GAA TH Tijs pyTopixys TUTw Kadapds Xpwpevos.

§ 3. TH piv pice xrA.] Plut. Sod. 1, dvips ovola pév, ws pact, kal duvaduer uéoou Tay tonTav, olxlas dé mpwrys Kara yévos.

Tov péowy xrr.] Ar. Pol. vi (iv) 11, 1296 a@ 19, onmetov bé Sei voulfew Kat 7d Tovs Bedtlorous vouobéras elvar THY Méowy Twoditay* Lddwy Te yap Av ToTwy

(6nAot & éx ris moujoews). This statement is proved by the verses here quoted. rév pBéowv must not be confounded with our ‘middle classes.’ It refers rather to the moderately wealthy citizens (see New- man’s Politics of Ar., ip. 300). Cf. Pol. 1295 6, 12964 7, 13, 1289 6 29 f.

jovxdoavres] The vb is transitive in this tense alone. Plat. Red. 572 A, houxd- gas pev Tw dvo0 dn, 7d Tplrov Se Kwhoas. These four lines have been hitherto un- known.

ot—és képov yAdearte] ‘ye that plunged into surfeit of many good things.’ Tyr- taeus 11 (7), 10, dudorépwy 8 els xépov njAdoare, Hdt. ii 124, és trocodrov #iacav (70 rp&yyua), ‘they drove it thus far’; v 50, és wacay kaxérynra éddoas.

otre ydp tpets—oerat] neither shall we (who are oppressed) continue to obey you, nor will you (who are wealthy) find all things perfect.

dpria wdvr’] Solon 4 (13) 3f, edvoula & etkocua xal dpria mdvr’ Grodalver, and 726. 40, gore 8 Um’ abry wdvra Kar’ dvOpirous dpria Kat mwurd. Theognis 946, elu rapa ordOuny bpOhy dddv, obderé- pwoe | kwouevoss xph ydp pw’ aprea wdhvrTa voew. _ tiv altlav...dvdmre] ‘ascribes the ori- gin’ (K). Rare in Aristotle; AZet. 12, 4,

3

¥

CH. 5, |. 1o—CcH. 6,1.6. TOAITEIA 21

, THY Te dliAapyupliay thy O bmepndaviar, os 8a tadTa Ths éyOpas éevertala]ns. A a fal 6. xtptos S€ yevouevos Tov mpayyldtlav Ydrwv Tév Te Shywov is a nrevdépwce kal év TO Trapovte Kal eis TO wéAXOY, KoAVCAS B[avel]- few él toils c@pacw, Kai vomovs éOnxe nal ypedy almolxomas > ra X fal PANE A lal ig A - n ér[olince kai tév iSiwv Kal tadv Snuociwy, ds cecdyOevav Kadod- 3 fal aw, Os arocecapévav TO Bdpos. ev ols reipovTat ti[ves] Sxa- , fe. a a 2 Padre avtov’ cuvéBn yap TH Dorw@ve pédrovtTse mroseiy thy publica usque ad annum 361 A.C., ex quo anno del tantum inventum est, quamquam Gacwrey in titulis diu duravit alel (Meisterhans, p. 25”); itaque del ubique scripsi ; quod autem inter Aristotelis editores nonnulli modo hanc, modo illam formam malunt, velut in Pol. 1276 @ 36, 38 ubi inter trium versuum spatium xalqep aiel et xalirep del legitur, vix credibile est scriptorem eundem formam utramque usurpasse.

21 tiv te P[tAapyup}iay K, K-w, H-L; Thy ¢[tAoxpyuar]iav Kontos, Bernardakis: ri te a[xpnulartay B. THY Te UTep. (K, K-W); THv 6 dep. J B Mayor, Jackson,

H-L; et metrum et re iteratum poetae versum produnt.

VI 1 <é> Zébdrwy K-w. c 4 acEICayOla: ds cerody Peay K etc.

3 xat véduous @Onxe secl. K-w,

Reinach.

kadodow : ‘fort. éxédouy scribendum’ (K-W).

5 ATTOCICAMENO!: drocedpevos K, H-L; dmrocecauevwy J B Mayor, K-w, B.

Bapoc K etc.: [dx@]Jos H-L.

TESTIMONIA.

dmokxomas érolnce, Thy cetadxOerav Neyoudvyy (Rose, Frag. 611, 3°).

VI 3 Heraclidis epitoma: voyoderav ‘AOnvaios cal xpewr

Hesych.

ceacdxbea’ Zorwy xpeadv droxom ny Snuoglwy Kal ldwwrikdv evopobéryoev, nviep

cecdxGeav éxddrece Tapa 7d drocelcacba Td Bdpos Tay Savelwy.

ceodx Gera, = Apostolius 17, 52.

Photius (= Suidas)

3, av Tods Adbyous els dpiO nods dvijrrov, ‘to ascribe or refer to.” Common in Plu- tarch, e.g. Lycurg. 6, riv apxhv kal rhv airtay rijs rodirelas els Tov I1dGtov dvjpe, 13 § 3, 7 dé GdAov Kal wrdoys vouobectas épyov els Thy madetav dviwe, Numa 12§1, els wdis Sdvayuv Oeod ra mepl ras yevéous kal ras reAevTas dvdmrovres. Cf. dvagé- pev. Mr Poste and Mr H. Richards (Class. Rev. v 466 a) understand it ‘im- putes the blame.’ This might be defend- ed by Od. ii 86 pwapor dvdyat (Schol. wepirorfioat, TeptOeitvar), where Ameis pre- fers ék p&uov dvdwat. But in Attic Gk we should expect mepidarre i this sense (Dem. Left. 10). THs éXeyelas, § 2.

SeSorcévar xrd.] Plut. Sol. 14, de- douxws Taw pev Thy prroxpnyatlay Tar dé tTHy wtepndaviay. The double ve is far more ‘common in verse than in prose (Kiihner, § 520).

VI§1. Kwddoas Savelfey xrdv.] Plut. Sol. 13, ZOAwvos,..THy TOV Xpewy aToKo- why cercdxGeray dvoudacavros. Tolro yap éroujoaro mp&rov moNlreuya, ypawas Ta pey imdpxovra Tw xpewv dveicOa, mpos 68 rd Novrdv El Tots cOmact pndéva

davelfew. Diog. Laert. i 45. The phrase xXpewv dmroxorat is found in Dem. 17 § 15, 24 § 149, Andoc. de Myst. 88, Plut. ii 2268, Cic. ad Att. vii 11 § 1, x. droxoT) in Plato, Legg. 736 c.

werd xSeav] (1) Most of our ancient authorities understood this to imply a complete remission of debts; this is the view of the text, and of Philochorus, frag. 57, and it is accepted by Schémann, Ant. p. 328 E. T.; Gilbert i 130; Landwehr, Philol. Suppl. Bd v (1884) 131 ff; and Busolt, i525. (2) Others, including An- drotion (see note on 10§ 1), held that Solon relieved the debtors, partly by a diminu- tion in the rate of interest, partly by the introduction of a new money-standard; this is accepted by Boeckh; Hermann, Staatsalt. § 106; E. Curtius; and (in the main) by Duncker, Gesch. d. Alt. vi ed. 5,158. (3) Grote (c. 11, ii 304) assumes a total remission of debts, but limits it to the case of debts secured on the debtor’s person or his land.

§ z. ovvéBn—érdovrovv] Plut. Sol. 15, mpaypua & abrg ocummecety é-yerat wdvrev dvapbraroy aro Ths mpdiews éxel-

21

on

10

15

22 AOHNAIQN COL. 2, 1. 29—40.

ceody[Olevav mpoeurety tist Tév [yrwlpipoly], éreO’, ds perv of Snpotixol Néyovor, TapactpatnynOjvar Sia THv dirwv, ws 8 ot [Bovr]épevor Bracdnueiy, cal adrov xowwvely. Savercduevot yap odToL auverpiavto moddyv yopav, [wera 8] od TOAD Ths Tav Xpeay droKorhs yevouévyns érdovtovy' GOev hacl yevécOas Tods tortepov So[ko]ivras elvat TadaoTAOUTOUS. Ov pV GANA TiO[ave-] 3 tepos [6] rav Snworixe[y A]oryos’ ov yap [eix]os ev wev Tots AAXows obTw mérptov yevécOae Kab xowvov [da]r’, é£ov adr@ [Jods [ér]épo]us imotrouodmevov Tupavvely Ths TodEws, auhotépors arrey[O]écbar kal mept mrelovos [ro]joacbae 7[d Kalrdv Kal Thy Ths modews cwrnpiav 7} thy abtob Treovetiav, év [otT]w S& pexpois [kat] dv[akiolis xatappuTaiv[e|w éavrov. bru S& ravtny eoye THy 4 éLovoiay, Td Te mpdypara vooobyta palptulpel [rod]ro, cal év Tots 10 perd 8’ K etc. (cf. Magn. Mor. 1211 6 1, per’

11 PINOMENHC (K}): yevouévys Rutherford, K-w, [véuJous kK,

8 \, cd K etc.: bd K-W. od mod); era per H-L. H-L, K3, 14 dor’ Richards, Jackson, Blass (edd.): dua’ olim K.

el

K-w: [ér]€po]us Blass (H-L) coll. c. 11, 13. 19 M....PO...TO litteris obscure scrip- tis. paprupe? legunt Wessely et Blass, quod mihi quoque in mentem venerat. rodro mecum coniecerunt K-w”, @ idcaro Wessely, quod vel propter hiatum vix tolerari potest. erexeploaro quod olim protuli (coll. Plat. Rep. 408 C larpol voowdes pere- xetploavro, et 346 E Ta GANSrpia Kaka peraxerplferdar dvopAobvra) acceperunt H-L, sed repugnat papyrus. paprvp[cJo[y ué]ya Blass, sed To potius quam [a in papyro apparet.

ys. ws yap Bpunoev dvidvar Ta xpéa Kal Abyous apubrrovras éfyres Kal mpérovcay dpxjv, éxowdoato Tav dirwy ols uddora tmirevur Kal xpwpevos érbyxave, Tots mepl Kévwva cat Kdewlay cat ‘Imréuxov, ore vi pev od pédrer Kwelv, ypeGv dé rove admoxomas @yvwxev. of dé mpodaBdvTes evOds Kal pOdcavres edavelcavro cuxvov dpybpioy rapa T&v mdovolwy Kal weyddas cuwewjcavTo Xwpas. elra To Séymaros éfevexOévros Ta Mev KTHMaTA KapTrovjeEvot, Ta 6 xphuara Tots daveloacw ovK drobt- Oovres els alriay Tov UddAwva peyddAnv kai StaBoryy, worep ob cuvadixovmevov, AAG ouvadtxodvra, Katéornoay. ddda Toro pev ebOds EuOn Td eykAnua Tots aévre raddvros* rocaira yap evpéOn Savelfwr, kai Tatra mp&ros dpijke xara Tov vduor. @mot 5¢ mevrexaldexa éyovow, wv Kal Tlorvgndos 6 ‘Podus eore. rods pévroe plrous abrot xpewxorldas xadodvres dteré- deoay (the story of the five talents comes from some other source than the text). Praecept. Ger. Reip. 13 § 10 p. 807, Tobro yap kal Xerdwea Karjoxuve kal diéBare mpos Tovs ToAlras* émel yap év vp AaBwy Ta égrjuata Kougloa, Kal Thy cecdxPeav (rodro & Fv wroxdpispa xpewy dmoKorss) eloeveyxeiv, exowwoato Tots pitas’ of &

épyov aiixdrarov empatay’ édavelcayro yap tropOdcavres dpytpiov wodv, kal per’ édlyov xpévov els pus Too vdpnou mpoax- Oévros, of pev épdvnoav olxlas re Napmpas kal yiv cuvewynuévor toddhy é wv édayel- cavro xpnuarwy* 6 dé Dodwv alriav erxe TwadtKety HOLKNLEV OS.

mahavoTAotrous] Lys. 19 § 49.

§ 3. Karappumatvev] To the passages from Isocr. and Plato, quoted in L and S, may be added Plut. de Cohibenda Ira 6, ii p. 456, karappuralve kal mlumdnow dboklas, de Profectibus in Virt. 17, ii p. 85 F, ob & dérwooty diay puralvecda. The word is not found in Ar. :

§ 4. tavTyy TH eovelay] sc. rod Tupav- vey. Plut: So/. 14 and Solon fragm. 33, obk Eu Zédwv Baddppwv xrh., there quoted: also fragm. 32.

vd Te TPAYpaTA vorotvTa KTA.] Prof. Tyrrell (Class. Rev. v 177) defends pere- xpovoaro (K1) as follows: ‘‘The idéa of a balance underlies the word, as in wapa- kpovec@ar, and ‘he shifted the balance of affairs’ would be a not unnatural way of saying ‘he changed the face of politics.’ But, even if werexpotcaro were defensible in itself, one could hardly justify such a mixture of metaphors as ‘adjusting the

CH. 6, 1..-7—CH. 7, 1. 3.

TIOAITEIA 23

/ mh a A TOMPATLW AUTOS TOAGYOD péuvnTaL, Kal ob GAOL TUVOMOAOYODGL 20

mav[ res].

tA \ a \ n ‘ TAaUTHY wey OdV YPN vowitery YpevdH THY aiTiay Elva.

tf n 7. qmonsteiay 6& katéotnoe Kal vowovs €Onxev ddXovs, Tots Se / o a a Apdxovtos Oecpois ératcavto xpapevor TAHY TGV hoviKeY. ava- £ A \ - ? \ -, y > a a lal ypapavtes 5€ Tovs vopous eis rods KipBeus Eotnoay ev TH oTOa TH 3

TESTIMONIA. VII 3 *Harp. xupBets: *Plut. Sol. 25 (of EvAwoe dEoves) mrpoonyopedOncay, ws *Schol. Arist. 4v. 1354 (=Lexicon Dem. Patmiacum,

(BaciAlé. cod. D et Photius).” *ApiororéAns pyol, KUpBers.

“dvaypdpavres—ev TH arog TH Bactdela

p- 130 Sakkelion) xvpBews...xara dé évlous dtoves tplywvo (KaTrackevaouard twa EvAWwa tplywva Lex. Patm.) é ols qoav ol rav mbrewr vouor yeypaumévor...xabdaep kal’Ap. év 7H AQ. Tor. not Kal’ AmoAbdwpos (Rose, Frag. 3527, 390°).

balance of the maladies of the state.’ My former suggestion vocobvra perexerpl- caro is defended in point of expression by the passages of Plato quoted in the critical notes. It is also incidentally con- firmed in point of sense by a passage in Grote’s History of Greece (ii 327), where he speaks of the ‘discontents of the miserable Athenian population’ experi- encing Solon’s ‘disinterested and healing management,’ The ve in this case would mean ‘and accordingly’ (being armed with this authority), as often in Hero- dotus and Thucydides, and not seldom in Xenophon (Kiihner, § 519, 3). The usage of Ar. does not differ in this from that of other writers (Eucken, De Ar. dicendi ratione, i p. 13).

The suggestion that the sense required is ‘docet et res publica aegrotans et’ (K-w') admits of being carried out by proposing TATE TPGYUATa vooowvra “apTUpeEt TOUTO. The sequence paprupe?...uéuyyrat...cvvo- poroyotot would in this case find its parallel in c. 5 § 3, ék re Tay EAAwY duodo- yetrat kal airds év Toicde Tols momjpacw waprupe, and12§ 1. Cf. Pol. 1334 4a 5 Gre 5 Sel...uaprupel Ta yeyvoueva Tots Adyos, Metaphysica 282 6 22 6 dédyos Haprupe, De Anima 410 @ 29, ws —, paprupel Td viv rex dv, Lth. ii 1, 1103 6 2 paprupel Sé cal 7d yeyvopevor év rais modeow, &c. Since-this note was written paprupe? has been conjectured in K-w?, and this is the reading which I now prefer.

vorotyra] c. 13 § 3, oracid{orres fol- lowed by vogoiyres metaphorically used in the same sense. Plat. Rep. 470 C, vooety...xal craciatev, and 556 E, voce Te kal adr aura padxeras (7) 3ONs).

pépvytat] ‘makes mention of,’ usually c. gen.; here ér: is due partly to the influence of cvvowodoyoier, and still more to paprupe?, if that be accepted. Cf. 12 § 1, br<—oupndwvotowr—peurnrat,

VII § 1. Apdkovros Gerpots] u. 4 § 1.

awry trav hovikev] Plut. Sol. 17 cnit. TpGrov pev ody tods Apdkovros véuous dvethe TAY TOY PovikGy aravras dub Thy xareréryra kal 7d wéyeOos Tay émert- plov. Cf. Dem. 23 § 66, Aelian V. A. viii 10, Josephus Agion. i 4, 7v Snuoclwy ypappdrwv dpxaordrous rods bd Apdxov- Tos avrois wept Tay govixdy ypadévras vb- nous. Onthe revision of the laws of Athens, after the restoration of the democracy in the summer of 411 B.C., the laws of Dra- con respecting homicide were once more retained. An inscr. of 409 B.C. records a decree authorizing the ypaumarevs of the Bovd} to give the dvaypagijs, or re- corders ‘of the laws, a true copy of Dra- con’s law. Apdxovros véuov Tov mepl Tod [povov [a]}o[a}ypayd[y]r[wr of ay[aypa]- ois Tov vipuwv—é orpryn Oly K[al KJa- [r]a[6éy]r[wv mpdcbev r)n[s] crods rijs Baowrelas. (Cf. Andoc. i 84, 85)... Then follows a copy of the mp&ros dtwy of Solon, containing Dracon’s law on invo- luntary homicide (c1a i61; Dittenberger, p- 87; Hicks, Greek Hist. [mscr. p. 112).

xipBes] Rectangular wooden tablets painted white and arranged in sets of four, each set forming a‘ pillar’ about the height of aman. This pillar revolved on an upright axis; hence the x’pBews were called dfoves, the axes ligneae of Gellius ii 12. The xdpBers are mentioned in a fragment of Cratinus, quoted by Plutarch Sol. 25. An inscr. of 409 B.C. cites the mp@ros dgwy (see note on wAjy Tov povi- kav). Lysias, Or. 30, ¢. Micomachum (B.C. 399), § 17 Tas Ouolas Tas ex Tay kipBewy. In Dem. Aristocr. p. 629 § 28, the law of homicide is found é& rw @ (z.e. mpurw) do (as emended by Cobet).

Aristotle is said to have written a trea- tise in five books repl r&v ZorAwvos désvwv (see list of his works, ascribed to Hesy- chius, in Rose, Fragw. Ar. p. 16, 1. 140). Eratosthenes supposed that the several tablets were triangular in shape. This

24 AOHNAIQN

COL, 2, 1. 41—45.

/ 72 / LA 4 Bacitreip nal dpooay yphoecOar mavres’ of 8 evvéa apxovTes

mistake was corrected by Polemon of Ilium, who, on the strength of his own observation, insists on the quadrangular shape of the tablets (Harpocr. s. v. dEove: of Dérwvos vduoe év EvAlvous joav doo. yeypappévor...foay O€, ws not Tlodéuwy év rots mpds "Eparocdévyy, 7 e- Tpaywvor Td oxhua, Sacprovras de ev TE TIpuravelw, yeypaupévor xara movTa Te Bépn’ mowotor 8 évlore payraclay Tpl-ywvor, 6rav éml 7d orevdv KALOGor Tis ywvlas. Polemo fragm. 48, Miiller, FHG iii 130). A pupil of Eratosthenes, the famous critic Aristophanes of Byzantium, gives a clear account of their shape: Etymolo- gicum Magn. p. 547, duporépuw dé (sc. ray KbpBewr Kal Trav dfévuv) 7d karacKkevacua To.olrov’ mrwOiov tr péya dvdpsunxes, hpuocuéva exov tiKa Terpaywva, Tas meupas mrarelas exovTa Kal ypayparwy TAnpets, ExaTépwOev 5¢ cvwdaxas (‘ pivots’), Gore xweloOar Kal meporpéperOar Ud TOY dvarytyvwoxouévev. The ‘grammarians’ Didymus (Plut. So/. 1) and Seleucus (Suidas, s. wv. dpyeaves) wrote mono- graphs on the doves. Plutarch, in his life of Solon, refers to the first, the thir- teenth and the sixteenth dfwy (c. 24, 19, 23), and states that some small fragments of the doves were still to be seen in his own day in the Prytaneum (c. 25).

Some of the Greek lexicographers erro- neously distinguished between the xipGees and déoves in respect to shape, material and contents (cf. Schol. on Apollonius Rhodius iv 280). The distinction as- sumes the following form in Tzetzes, Chiliades, xii 349:

oi dgoves Terpdywvor, tpiywvor 88 ai kpBets,

elxov 58 of a a&£oves vouous TOUS idvaras,

at KupBets elxov vomous 8€ rods mepi Synociwy.

vw fy »

kat éru of ev doves dmjpxov amd EvAwy, ai KupBeis Foav b€ yadkat.

But the identity of the dfoves and xup- Bes has been proved by Hulleman, Miscellanea Philol. (Amsterdam, 1850), and is now generally accepted. Cf. Preller on Polemon, p. 87; Frohberger’s Lysias, Ill p. 233 Rose, Ar. Pseudepigraphus, 414; and Oncken, de Staatslehre des Ar., 422. In view of the text, it is no longer possible to regard the xpBets (placed in the crod) as later copies of the doves in the Prytaneum (so Busolt, i 539, and Miller, Handbuch, 1v i 118).

TY orog tH Bactdelw] called 4 orod % Baowdela in CIAi 61 (quoted in n. on wiv r&v povixav). Harpocr. s. v. Bacld- los oTod: SUo elat croal map’ dddAndas, F Te Tod "EXevOeplov Ards kal 4 Baclrecos.

In literature it is known as 4 Tod Baowh- éws orod (Plat. Huthyphron 2 a, Theaet. 210 D) or 4 oro 7 Bagtdews (Aristoph. Eccl. 684). Cf. Pausan. i 3, 1, Kadov- pévn orod Bactheos vOa Kadlger Bacrheds éviauolay dpxwy apxiv Kadoupévny Bact- Aelav. Pausanias, entering the inner Cerameicus from the north, sees the orod PBacidews as the first building on his right, z.e. on the W. side of the Cera- meicus. Apparently he did not go inside, and he tells us nothing of the altar out- side, where the Archons took their oath. (See esp. Wachsmuth, Stadt Athen, ii 344—351; Curtius, Stadtgeschichte von Athen, p. xc 6, and p. 294; and cf. Miss Harrison’s Mythology &c. of Athens,

. 240)

The use of this srod as a place for keeping a record of the laws of Athens is attested in Andoc. De Myst. 82, 85,

- dvaypdwa ev rH orog, and 84, els Tov

totxov iva mep mpbrepov dveypadyoay. The statement of Anaximenes (in Harpo- cration, 5. v. 6 kdrwOev véuos), that Ephi- altes transferred rods déovas xal rovs KUp- Bes from the Acropolis to the BovAeursjptov and the dyopd, is inconsistent with the text, and is probably a mere flourish of rhe- toric. The xépBes were apparently al- ways in the dyopd. Cf. Oncken, Staats- lehre, ii 422. Secret meetings of the Areopagus were sometimes held é rq Baotrely orog, Dem. 25, Avistog. A, § 23.

Spooay xrrA.] Plut. Solon 25, Kowdv bev ody Wuvvev Bpxov 4 BovdAy Tods Zddwvos vomous éumeddoev, tdov 8 exacros Trav Ocapoerav ev ayopa pos TG ALOy, xa- traparif~wv, ef tr wapaBaly Tov Oecuav, dvopudvra xpucody loouérpyrov dvabjcew év Aedgots. On the oath of the Archons, cf. c. 55 § 5, and Plato Phaedr. 235 D, kat cot éyd, womep ol évvda dpxovres, dmt- oxvotua xpuvony eixdva loouérpyroy els Aehodods dvabhjoew.

The word loouérpyrov is omitted in the text and in Pollux viii 86. It is ingeni- ously explained by Bergk (Rhein. Mus. xiii 448) as virtually equivalent to loo- oraotov and as implying that the statue in gold was to be equivalent in weight to the amount of silver received as a bribe. This, he urges, is suggested by Deinar- chus i 60, ii 17, where the dexazoiv tlunua may be explained with reference to the relative value of gold to silver at Athens in the time of Solon, being ro: 1 According to this view the archons swore that they would pay a fine equivalent to ten times the value of any bribe they

CH. 7, l..4—10.

TIOAITEIA

25

2 ‘f x ? bl opvovtes Tpos TS NiOw Kateparioyv avabnoew avdpravta ypuaody, 5 édy Twa TapaBe@ct Tadv vowav' bOev ett Kal viv obTws durvovat. , Se \ , | eS \ L \ 2 Katexvpwoey S€é TOs vomous eis éxatov [E]rn Kal Svérake THy ToN-

Telay Tovde <ToY> TporTroV.

3 tynpalra Sdcjetrev eis tértapa tédy, KaOdmep Sinpynto Kat mporepop, ets mevtaxoctopl édi|y[ov Kat imméa] kab Cevyitny. cal

8 révde <rév> rpdrov edd.; cf. c. 29 § 5, 37 § I.

9 <7a> Tijpara Blass

(H-L); ante Tywjmara lacunam indicant K-w, ‘velut <7d waéy mdfOos éx> Tiyenpatov

deter,’ coll. Hesych. et Harp.

TESTIMONIA. 5 *Harp. Alos:...dolkace 8’ "A@nvator mpbs re Aw rods dpKous movcia Bat, ws ’Ap. év TH’ AO. mon. Kal Biddxopos ev rg y’ Uroonwalvovow. 9 *Harp. lamds:...’Ap. ev ’AO. mod. pyoly Ort Dodwy els rérrapa Sretrde rédy

received. In the text, however, we have no reference to receiving bribes and no mention of the bulk of the statue ; nor again have we either here, or in the excerpts of Heraclides or in Pollux, any mention of Delphi. Suidas (as observed by Thomp- son on Pl. Phaedr. /.c.) ‘makes the statues three instead of one and represents them as portrait-statues of the delinquent’ (xpuocn elxdy: Guvvov ol ’AOhynow ap- xovres, dv Te mapéAOwow ep’ ols av dpxw- ow, xpvony elkdva abTrav dvabjoew ev dare, év IlvGor, év ’Od\vurig). But por- trait-statues were not in use in Solon’s time, and ‘it is very unlikely that the Del- phians would have allowed their sacred peribolus to be defiled by the statue of a detected criminal. And if the penalty was intended to be enforced, the offering must needs have been of much more limited dimensions. It is therefore con- ceivable that both icouérpyrov and av- Tod were introduced by late writers into the text of the original oath, in order to make it conformable to the supposed meaning of Plato.’ The text shews that this conjecture is right, and also that the insertion of év AeAdois has no warrant in the original form of the oath.

The Aldos was possibly identical with the altar of Zevs d-yopatos (Wachsmuth, Stadt Athen, ii 352).

§ 2. elséxarov ery] Plut. So/. 25 init., loxwv 5€ rots véuous waow els éxardv év- avrovs @dwxe.

§ 3. Teyjpara x7.) Hitherto it has been universally held that the classifi- cation of citizens according to property was first devised by Solon. Plut. So/. 18, devrepov 5¢ Dédwv Tas pev apxas aad- gas, womep joav, Tois evmbpors dmroNuTely Bovdduevos, tiv 5 GAXnv pltat aodcrelav, Hs 6 Ojos ob peretxer, CdaBe TH Tyuhuara

Tay mworiTdv, Kal rods wey év Enpots duo kal ypois mérpa mevraxdoia rovotvras mpwrovs erate Kal mevraxoo.opedluvous mpoonyopevoe’ Sevrépovs 6€ rovs tmmov tpépew Suvaudvous 7 wérpa moceiy Tpa~- kdowa* Kal rovrous immdda Tedobvras éxd- ou" fevyirat & ol rot tplrov Tiwhuaros dvouacOnoay, ols wérpoy Av cuvapdorépwr Siaxociuv. ol dé dovwol mavres éxadoivro Ofjres, ots obdeulay dpxew edwkev apyyy, AAG TH cuvercAnord few kal Sicagey udvov peretxov Tis modirelas. The quotations in Harpocration are to the same effect. They ignore the ‘ Draconian constitution,’ and they lend no support to the phrase: kabdtep binpnro kal mpérepov. Those who decline to accept the ‘Draconian consti- tution’ must necessarily omit the words just quoted. Mr Kenyon suggests that the statements in c. 4 can only be recon- ciled with the general ascription of the classes in question to Solon, by sup- posing that the latter brought them into a new relation to the political constitu- tion. Solon began his reforms by re- pealing all of Dracon’s laws except those relating to homicide. This implies that ‘Solon madea clean sweep of all the laws relating to the constitution, so as to have a free hand in reconstructing it according to his own ideas. He then re-introduced the property classes, as well as the Coun- cil of Four hundred and the Areopagus.’ This explanation is skilful and ingenious and may possibly be right.

On Solon’s ryujara, see Boeckh, Book iv c. v; Grote, c. 11, vol. ii 318; Busolt i527. The term tluqua occurs first in CIA i 31.

tevylrny] from feiyos, ‘a team,’ applied to one who kept a pair of mules (Isaeus 5 § 43; 6 § 33), or of working horses, or a yoke of oxen.

26 AOHNAIQN COL. 2, 1. 45—3, |. 7.

Ojra. tas wlev od]v dpyas amévemen || dpyew ex mevtaxoctope- (Col. Sipvev Kat imméwv cal Ceuyurdv, Tods évvéa apxovtas Kat Tods a Taulas Kal ros TwAr[ Tas] Kal Tovs Evdexa Kat TOs KwAaKpéTas, OY, > +s a EQ na tf > e) 5 \ AY éxdatous dvddoyov TO peyéOes Tod Tiy[yH]ularo]s amrodidovs z[Hv a an / 15 dp|yjv. ois 88 7d Ontixdy Tehobaow éxxdrnolas cai Sixaotnpiov 11 rds pév oby dpyds K, K-W, H-L: [kal] ras [me[-ylor]as] dpxds Blass, qui aut pe-

“yloras (quod legi posse concedit kK) delendum, aut in sequentibus complura mutanda putat.

7d wav wrHO0s "AOnvalwy, mevraxoctopedluvovs Kal imméas kal fevylras Kal Ofras. *Id, mevraxociouédipvor :...67t 5 Téd\y erolnoev ’AOnvaluy ardvrwy Sbhwv, av joav Kal ol revraxoctopédyuvol, dedprwkev Ap. év’AO, wor. *Id. Offres:...els réroapa Siypnucvys map’ ’A@nvalos rHs woduTelas ol dwopwrara édéyovro Onres Kal Onrixdy Tedely xrh. Pollux viii 130 remjpara 8 qv rértapa KrXK. Hesych. ék ripqudrov:...dippnro yop } wodirela Kara DérAwva els récoapa, wevraxociopediwov... Id. fevylovov:...7v

é dinpnuévyn 4 trodirela els récoapa Timjpara.

(Cf. Rose, Frag. 350, 388°.)

15 Schol. Arist. £. 627 (ol Ofres), ofs odd dpxew épetro, 7 Sixagew Kal éxxdyord-

few pdvor.

was dpxds daévapev dpxev] This does not mean that the members of all the three highest classes were eligible for the office of archon. The first part of the sentence must be read in the light of the second, which implies that there was a kind of scale of eligibility according to the class in which the citizen was placed. Those in the first class alone would be eligible for the archonship. Cf. Plut. Aristides 1, rhv émdvupov apxyy, hv Ape To Kuduy Aaxov éx THY yevuy Tay TA péyiora Tinpara KexTnuévwy, ods Tevra- kootopediuvous mpoonybpevov. The same class supplied the raula: c.8§1. On the raplat and the wwAnral, see c. 47; on the évSexa, c. 52.

kodakpéras] The form given by Photius and Suidas: xwdaypérys in the Ravenna ms of Aristoph. and in the lexicon of Timaeus; lit. ‘collectors of hams,’ so called from receiving the prime parts of the victims to aid them in providing the public meals in the prytaneum. They are said to have had the control of fi- nancial matters in the time of the kings; in later times they acted as treasurers of the xaucrariae. They were left un- touched by the legislation of Solon, in connexion with which they are men- tioned in the text; but in the reforms of Cleisthenes they lost the charge of the finances, which was then transferred to new officers called Afodectae (48). Under Pericles they were assigned the duty of paying the dicasts, and they were con- sidered officials of some importance in the time of Aristophanes (Schol. on Vesp. 695, 727, Av. 1541). There is no docu-

mentary proof of their existence after the Archonship of Euclides (403 B.c.). Cf. Boeckh, ed. Frankel, note 302, and Sché- mann’s Antiquities, i 327 E. T.; also Mr Wayte’s article in Smith’s Dzct. Ant., 5.v., Gilbert, i 119 and Busolt, i 159.

éxcdorous—tHv apxrv] Pol. 1291 4 38 év peév obv eldos Snuoxpartas Todro, Td Tas apxas dard Tiywnudrov elvat KTr.

Tots 8 ro OnTiKdv TeovoWW—péOvoy] Pol. ii 12, 1274 a@ 15, Zéddwv ye gouxe Thy dvaryKaorarny dmrobidbvac Te Siu Stvayiv, TO Tas dpxas alpeicOat Kal ev- Odvew.... Tas 8 dpxas é« Tov ywuplyov kal ray evmbpwy KaréaTnoe Tacas, éx TOY TevTakooiomediuver kat fevyerav kal [rpl- tov Tédous] THs Kadounévns immddos* TO 6€ réraprov 7d Onrixdv, ols ovdemids apyiis perfv. Cf. end of this chapter, rovs 6é dddous Onrixdv, ovdemuas peréxovras dpxiis.

76 Ontixdv TeXovov] ‘those who be- longed to the thetic census.’ It will be observed that they are not here called Ofres. Of those who were placed in the fourth class Grote (ii 321) observes: ‘It is said that they were all called 7hétes, but this appellation is not well sustained and cannot be admitted: the fourth com- partment in the descending scale was in- deed termed the Thetic census, because it contained all the 7%é4es, and because most of its members were of that humble description, but it is not conceivable that a proprietor whose land yielded to him a clear annual return of roo, 120, 140 oF 180 drachms, could ever have been desig- nated by that name.’ See, however, |. 11.

teXely does not necessarily mean actual

CH. 7, |. 11-—20. TIOAITEIA

27 4 petédmxe povov. eee dé Terely revtaxoctopédiuvov pev ds av ex THS oixelas To TevTaKdota péeTpa TA cvVdudw Enpa Kal bypa,

e , \ \ / a ia A / \ t immada 8 Tovs Tpraxdata TrovodvTas (@s 8 éviot act tovs imrro-

fal , a“ \ A t Bg n th tpopelv Svvapévous. onpetiov dé pépovar Te Te dvowa Told] Tédous, @s ay amd tod mpay[ulatos Kelwevov, Kal Ta avabnpata THv 17 ris: ys Bywater; rfjs defendit Kontos (Athena iii 321—2).

Syp@v H-L coll. Plut. Sof. 18 (év Enpots duod Kal vypois). coll. c, 3, 11. 20 ws dy—xeluevoy delent H-L; dy delet B.

EnpGv Kat 19 5° émipépovor H-L

TESTIM. 16—19 Pollux viii 130 of wév éx rod wevraxdora wérpa Enpa Kal bypd, Trovety KAnOévres...08 5€ tiv lamada Tedobvres ex pev TOD SivacOar rpépew tmmovs KexhioOas doxofow, érolouy 6é wérpa tpraxdora (cf. Schol. in Plat. Rep. 415). Bekk. Anecd. 298, 20 mevraxociomedipvot: of €x THs olkelas yis wowbvres Tevrakdota péTpa

cuvanow Enpa cal vypd.

Id. 267, 13 lrmds:...ol rovobvres Tpraxdown mérpa.

18 Schol. Arist. £g. 627...darmets 6 adrods wvduatov dua 7d divacOaL...’rmov

exacrov avlra&vy tpépev.

Etym. cod. Vossianus, p. 1170, Gaisford, fevylocov :,..devrépous

bé rods immorpopeiv Suvapmévous kal rods rods twmous dé (leg. kai rovs lrwada)

“rehodyras éxdAouv.

payment, but ‘the being included in a class with a certain aggregate of duties and liabilities, —equivalent to censeri, ‘to rank as’; Boeckh, p. 36, Grote, p. 321 n.

éxxAnolas—povov] Pol. 1281 b 30, Aelrerat 6) To BovreverOar Kal xplvew peréxe avrous KT).

§ 4. moug] [Dem.] Phaenipp. 42 § 20, p. 1048, WAourels elxdrws ereday moins olrov pev pediuvous mréov 7 xtAlovs, olvov dé Merpnras wmrep dxraxoclous. mevTakdo.e «td. Hitherto, it has been sometimes supposed that one who obtained from his land a net return of 500 measures of dry "produce, such as corn or barley, together with 500 measures of liquid produce, such as oil or wine, ranked in the first class (Bruno Keil in Berl. Phil. Woch. 1891, p. 521 0.). It has also been held that a net return of either s00 dry measures or s00 liquid measures constituted a claim to that class (Busolt, i 527). It is now clear that the 500 measures could be made up of dry and liquid produce taken together, and this is also the purport of some of the evidence previously known to us, ¢.g. the article in Bekker’s Axecd. 298, 20, which, it now appears, was taken from the present passage. By mérpa is meant either a pédiuvos (=six éxrets=six modit =about 12 imperial gallons, or a bushel and a half) of dry measure, or a perpyris in liquid measure. The latter is the standard dudopeds of 12 xdes = 69'33 pints, or slightly over 84 gallons, and therefore three-fourths of the standard dry measure, the pédcuvos.

immdda] (redeiv). Isaeus 7 § 39, de- ypdwaro pev tlunua puxpby, ws immdda dé

Terav dpyew jélov ras dpxds. In the Lex. of Photius, the first article on tar7mds (followed by Suidas) makes the curious mistake of distinguishing the trmeis and the (mds and treating the latter as a fifth class ; the second article, with the help of Harpocration’s quotation from Il. 9, 10 of this chapter, corrects this mistake, adding rép obv imméwy oi (sic) irmddes.

és 8° rol dact] There is no real discrepancy between the two views, all whose land produced a net return of 300 pébiuvor being deemed to have enough property to enable them to keep a horse for military purposes and to serve in the cavalry. Suidas, s. v. lmme?s, following Schol. on Aristoph. £7. 627, says: iazets 6é avrovds wyduatoy dud 7d dbvacAat, elrrore xpela yévotro, Urmov Exacrov abrav rpépev. In addition to the war-horse (laos 7roNe- puoryptos), a horse would be required for the servant of the ime’s, and those who belonged to this class would also need a team for agricultural purposes (Boeckh, p. 639, Lamb, p. 579, Frankel).

&s dv—kelpevov] ‘as though’ (or im- plying that’) ‘ the name was derived from the fact just mentioned.’ Ar. Analytica Posteriora, T 3,72 6 g, ws ovdx ay émtara- pévous. rept dxovorGv 803 65, exacrov Tav poplwy mpoorimroy, ws dv ard TANYs érépas év, and 804 4 25, pwvoiow, ws dy 7d Tretua Biagduevov. Kelpevov, used, as often, for the perf. pass. part. of rlOnuc. Isaeus 3 § 32, ef ris qder 7008” bad Tod marpos Keluevov, nomen a patre impositum (Cobet, V. Z. 311, WV. L. 703). Similarly in the next few lines, dva0juara.. .dvdxe- rTat...dvéOnke.

&iva6yjpara] Polemon, a contemporary

25

28 AOHNAION COL. 3, 1. 7—14,

apyalav' avdxevtas yap ev axpordre eixov [Acdhirov]], é[¢’ 9% ér]u- yéyparray Tade'

Audirov *AvOeuiov thv8 dvéOnxe Oeois,

Ontixod avtl réXovs immad’ dwenpdpevos. kal mapéatnxep barmos [éxpaptupar]], os TH immdda ToDTO onpuali]-

21 Ardidov secl. Thompson, K-W, B. 23 Kal rd émlypappa Arpldrou ’Avbeulwy lnmov r6vd' dvéOnxe Oeots Pollucis codices, ubi viderunt critici aut Ar@ldov et émlypapya, coniungenda esse aut cum Bekkero legendum Ardldou ’AvOeulwy rév6’ Irrov Geois avéOnxev, Pollucis vero e codicibus unus habet Adldou ‘AvOeulwy rbvd’ dvéOnxe Bets. Nostro autem in loco versum hexametrum nonnulli restituerunt, velut <frmrov> Arpirov ’AvOeulov dvéOnxe Oeotoe Tyrrell; Arptdov ’AvOeulwv rid’ <elxdv’> eOnxe Geotot numerosius J B Mayor, dvéOnxe ex oveOyxe ortum fuisse arbitratus (Class. Rev. v 177 @); Arpldov ’AvOeulwy rivd <elxbva> Geots avéOnxe Thompson (ib. 225 2). Sed Pollucis codices, non minus quam papyrus nostra, testantur versum priorem pentametrum fuisse. 25 EKMAPTYPON (K): téxuaprupay (K-W): émipaprupdv Tyrrell et olim Blass (H-L); etiam éx r&v dpiorepav Blass, sed exspectares é£ dpiorepas. Equidem TeKMHPION ad explicandum sensum quondam adscriptum postea in EKMAOPTYPWN mutatum fuisse crediderim; Ty in litura. els waprvpiov ed. Blass.

TESTIMONIA. 21—24 Pollux viii 131 ’AvOeulwy 5¢ 6 Arpldrov xaddwrlferar oe érvypapparos bre dard Tob Onrixod Tédous els Thy lrmdda weréorn, kal elkaw eorw év axpo- mode tmmos dvdpl mapeornxds* kal 7d érl-ypapyua | Ardtdov ’AvOeulwy rovd’ dvéOnxe cots

| Onrixod dvri rédous lrmdd’ duerauevos (Falckenburgii codex).

of Ptolemy Epiphanes (B.c. 204—181) devoted four books of his repujyyois to the dva@juara on the Acropolis (Strabo, ix 396). If the present passage was inserted at a later date than the time of Aristotle, it may possibly have been borrowed from the work of Polemon; but the only reason for doubting whether it is by the same hand as the rest of the treatise is the exceptionally frequent occurrence of fiatus, dxpowdder elxcoy Aigidou ég fj émvyéyparrat. The passage was known to Pollux (viii 131), but whether his quotations from this treatise are taken at first hand or not, is un- certain.

Ardtdov] The statue was dedicated by Anthemion son of Diphilus. Diphilus himself had apparently belonged to the Oyrixdy réXos and would therefore have had no claim to be represented with a horse beside him. Mr A. S, Murray is therefore probably right in regarding the statue as that of the son, Anthemion (Class. Rev. v 108). Anthemion prob- ably owed his promotion from the lowest to the second class either to a legacy or some other stroke of fortune which sud- denly made him a wealthy man (Boeckh, p- 641 Lamb).

It is very improbable that an inscription of such a date consisted of two penta- meter lines. ‘ Vix crediderim inscripti-

onem vetustam ex duobus pentametris constitisse. Exempla quidem id genus titulorum quae Kaibel in ind. [Zpegr. Gr.] p. 702 affert, sunt recentissima’ (Preger, Juscr. Gr. Metricae, 1891, no. 74). The lines happen to give a consecu- tive sense but are possibly selected from two successive couplets of the original set of verses, the intermediate hexameter being omitted. ‘dvépa mapeornxéra in versibus omitti non mirum... In anaglyphis sae- pius equi ad ordinem equestrem signifi- candum additi sunt, cf. Goettling, Opusc. Acad. 243’ (Preger, /.¢.).

ekpaptupav] éxuaprupe=falam testi- Jicor in Aesch. Zum. 461, Nourpav eepap- Tupe pévov, and Aeschin. p. 15, 19, Or. I § 107, dy obdéva éyd mapaxadd defpo Thy éaurod cuupopdy, yv elNero ovygy, els modhovs éxuaprupfcat. This sense is just tolerable in the present passage, though the word is perhaps needlessly strong for the context. It would be clearly out of place to give it the technical sense corre- sponding to that of éxuaprupla (Class. Rev. v 177 a), ¢.e. a deposition made by a witness who, by reason of illness or absence abroad, was unable to attend in court. The horse in this case may meta- phorically indeed be described as giving evidence; but (so far from being either absent abroad or on the point of leaving the country) it is standing in the very

CH. 7, 1. 2I—CH. 8,1. 1. TIOAITEIA

29 \ a r a

vovala]y. ov pny GAN’ edrNoydTeEpov Tois wéTpois SinphoOar Kabd-

mep TOvS TevTaKoTLomedipvous): Cevyictov 5é Terelv TOs Staxdc.a

Ta cuvdudw Tovodvtas: tods 8 dAXous OntiKdv, oddemas peré-

xovtas apxijs. 81d Kal viv émedav épntar tov pérdovTa KAy-

poda bai tw’ apynv, Twotov Tédos Tedel, OVS’ Av els elzrou Ontuxédr. 8. tas 8 dpxds éroince Kdypwtds ex mpoxpitwv, [o]ds

26 METPIOIC.

27 8’ &e redelv Kontos (H-L).

VIII 1 t’AapxHc (=r 7s 4’ dpyijs) frustra tueri conatus est Bury: emendavit kK.

TESTIMONIA. 27—29 Pollux viii 130 of 5€ 7d fevyjovov (codd., Hesych., Phot., Schol. Plat., Bekk. Az. 260 ult.: fevylovov Etym. Magn.) reAodyres dd dtaxoclwy

Hérpuv Karedéyovro...oi 6¢ Td Onrixdy ovdeulay dpxiv pxov. be oddemcas weretyov apxijs, ws Kal’Ap. Sndot év’ AG. Tod. Onrixdv : oboe 5¢ obde yuds weretyov apxijs.

*Harp. Ofjres:...o8rou Etym. Mag. p. 452, 15

centre of Athens, on the platform of the Acropolis. The technical sense is there- fore out of place, and the word is prob- ably corrupt.

ds—onpalvoveav] For the participle used as an accusative absolute after os, cf. c. 29 § 3, ws od Snuorikny AAG Tapa- wryclay otcay Thy...rodurelavy, and Pol. v (viii) 4, 1338 4 13, (of Adxwves) Onpidders dmepydfovrat Tots mévos, ws Toro mpds dvdplay uddora cuppépov. Kiihner, G. G. § 488 d; Maetzner ad Lycurgum, § 90, p. 231; Rehdantz, Jud. Dem. s. v. Par- ticipium. Trans. ‘implying that this was the meaning of the status of Knight.’

tevylovov] This form is supported by the Etymologicum Magnum (and Gudi- anum) alone. The codex Sorbonicus of the latter, p. 1170 D Gaisford, has fevylovov: TS Xapaxriip. tov did rod covov, olov, ’Adpodlotov,’ Arpeploroy (sic), TpoBadtovor. ottrws oby Kal fevylctov. ‘Per @ scriben- dum docet Choeroboscus in Crameri Anecd. ii p. 215, 10.’ Frankel (n. 805 to Boeckh) urges that fevyjovov is the right form, and is better accredited than fevylovov.

Siakécva] The property qualification of the fevytrac has hitherto been a matter of dispute. Boeckh, p. 641 Lamb, fixes it at 150 medimni. This he infers from a law quoted in [Dem.] Macart. 43 § 54, p- 1067, according to which a wevraxo- giopédiuvos was to pay the émlxAnpos a dowry of s00 drachmae, a leis 300, and a fevyirns 150. From the corre-

spondence of the first and second of these ,

sums to the annual income of members of the first and second class, he infers that the dowry required of a fevyirns is identical in amount with his annual in- come. But he admits that all the positive evidence is in favour of 200 medimni.

This view, which is adopted by Grote (ii 320 note), is supported by the autho- rity of the text.

Sto Kal viv xrd.] ‘Hence it is that even now, when one who is about to draw lots for any office is asked to what rank he belongs, no one would say that he belonged to the rank of the Thetes.’ The subject of pnrac is the officer super- intending the drawing of lots for an appointment. The same vague use of the verb occurs in c. 55, érepwrécw and pyoty. As it was under the superintendence of the Thesmothetae that officials were appointed by lot (Schémann, Axtguities, p. 402 E. T.), the subject is probably 6 decpo- Oérns.

At first it was only the mevraxocto- péduysvo. who were eligible to the office of archon; next the lets; the fevytrac became eligible in 457 B.C. (see c. 26). The present passage, as observed by Mr Kenyon, is interesting as shewing that the property qualification can never have been entirely abolished by law.

VIII § 1. KAnpwrds ék mpoxplrov] ‘appointed by lot, out of candidates se- lected by each of the (four) tribes.’ Each of the 4 tribes nominated ro, and, out of these 40, the g archons were appointed by lot. The archons had formerly been elected by the Areopagus; and, whatever may have been the rule under Dracon, it was Solon who, with a view to extending the political power of the people, devised the combination of selection and sortition described in the text. It has hitherto been sometimes supposed that appointment by lot was not used in Athens before the time of Cleisthenes. This is the view of Grote, C. F. Hermann, Busolt, Gilbert, Dunckex and others. Grote in fact cannot believe

3°

30

AOHNAIQN

COL. 3, 1. 14—21.

\ 2 [éxdo]rn mpoxpivece Tov puddv. tpoixpwev S eis rods évvéa Mg dpyovras éxdaorn Séxa, xa rov[rous] é[rrex]Ajpour’ Oey Ere dia-

2 mpoxplyece Gertz (K-w, K8,B); TTPOKPINE! (K1); mpotxpwe olim B (H-L).

3 rob-

Tots émexdipour K3 coll. 59 § 5, ‘litterae unius tantum spatio inter Toy et € relicto, ubi Toyc (ut videtur) in ToyToIC correctum.’ Totrous éxAjpouy K! (H-L); aut Todrwy aut <éx> rovrwy éxdijpouy (B) K-W; Kak TobTrwy éxdjpouy Gomperz.

it was introduced as early as the time of Cleisthenes (c. 31, iii 123 n.). Curtius (i 478 E. T.) assigns it to this time. Schémann, in his criticisms on Grote (Const. Hist. of Athens, p. 73 E. T-), shews that an earlier date was not im- probable; while Fustel de Coulanges (La Cité Antique, p. 212—4, ed. 1883) claims it as an institution of religious origin and therefore of great antiquity. The evidence of this treatise is in favour of its having been introduced at an early date.

The text enables us to understand the

statement in Isocrates that, ‘in the times

of Solon and Cleisthenes,’ they did not apply the lot to filling up offices out of the whole body of citizens, but selected those who were the best and the most suitable candidates for each office: Areop. § 22, ovk é& amdvrwy Tas dpxas KNypodyres GAG TodS BeArlorous Kal Tovs ikaywrdrous ép’ Exacrov ray epywv mpoxplvovres. Else- where, Panath. 145, he describes the con- stitution that the Athenians maintained ‘for 1000 years’ down to the age of Solon and the rule of Peisistratus, and says of the Athenians of old time that they év drlyats qudpars éwpwv rods viuous dvaryeypappévous (this can only refer to the legislation of Dracon). He then adds: wept ros abrov’s xpbvous Kablaracav él ras dpxas Tous mpoxpibévTas v1d Tov u- Aerav kat Snporwy. [Dem.] Neaer. 59 § 75 says of the dpywv Baccdeds in the times after the cuvoixiouds of Theseus: Tov pev Baciréa...6 Ofuos ypetro éx mpo- kplrwy kar’ dvdpayablay xetporovwy, where however we have mention of election by show of hands instead of appointment by lot. The use of the lot in the time of Solon is implied by Dem. Let. § go (after mentioning Solon), rods Pecpobéras Tovds él Tovs vowous KAnpoupmévous, but too great stress must not be laid on this phrase, as the orators sometimes ascribe to Solon institutions which really belonged to a later date.

The natural interpretation of the pre- sent passage is that Solon introduced a new principle by combining selection with sortition. In this respect it is not per- haps inconsistent with the statement in

Pol. ii 12, 1273 8 41, orxe 6é Dodww éxetva pev brdpxovra mpérepov ob karadioa, Thy Te BovAny (2.2. the Areopagus) kal riy rap dpxav alpeow, Tov 5& Siuov karacrioa, Ta, Sikacripia rojoas éx mévrwy. Aristotle had just before remarked that some had singled out, as an aristocratic element in Solon’s constitution, 7d ras dpyas aiperds (elva). He adds that Solon did not ab- olish this principle, for atpeois is not the ‘manner of electing the magistrates,’ but simply their election. They were still elected, but the details of the method of election were partly new; the new element being apparently the selection by the tribes. Aristotle approves of this method in Pol. viii (v) 5, 1305 @ 28, pera- Baddover 5é cal ex rijs warpias Sypoxpa- tlas els ri vewrdrny’ brov yap alperal pev al dpxal, wy drd rysnudrov dé, al- petra 5€ 6 Sihyos, Snpaywyodvres ol crov- Sapxiavres els TolTo Katoraow ws Kipioy elvar Tov Shuov Kal Trav vouwy. dxos dé Tod pn ylvecOat } Tob ylverBas FHrrov TO Tas pudas Pépew Tors dpxovras, adda By wdvra Tov Ofuov.

In Pol. vi (iv) 14, 12984 9, while dis- cussing oligarchies, he mentions some non-oligarchical elements: édv 6é@ éviwy bev aiperot éviwy 5é KAnpwrol, cal Kdy- pwrot hamhas 7 éx mpoxplruwr, f Kowa aiperol kal kAypwrol, Ta wey odcrelas dpt- orokparixis éore TovTwy, Ta dé modrelas atrfs. Cf. 12664 8; Plat. Leg. 945 B, 7533 Rep. 537 D.

GGev Ere Siapéver] This passage and its context are among the many in which the author argues from survivals, or infers a fact from a reason.

‘The signals of this method,’ as re- marked by Mr Macan (%. 4. 5S. xii 38), ‘are the innocent ydp (c. 2 L. 5, c. 3 1.6 ef alibi), the more elaborate d@ey or 86ev Kal (c. 3 1. 8, c. 81. 3), the suspicious 4:6, 51d kat (c. 3 1. 17, c. 8 1. 16) and above all the term onpetov. Wherever these signals

,occur the critical reader will beware of danger ahead. It may not be necessary in every case to reject the supposed evi- dence and inference, but it will always be expedient carefully to examine before ad- mitting them.’ The writer is here arguing that the method of appointing archons

CH. 8, l. 2—12. TIOAITEIA

31 f a a a

Meéver Tais hudais to Séxa KANpodv Exdarny, elt’ é« Tov’TwV Kva- a a > cy, lal

pedve[w]. onpeiov S Ste KAnpwrds eroincey ex Tov TYunudTeV

e 4% fal lal , a a

O Tept TOV TaLLaVv vo"oS, 6 ypwpevos [SiaTero]lboww ere nab vov'

2 bF a \

2 Kedever yap KANpody Tos Taplas ex TevTaKocLOoMEdipvel[y. Lor]ov

bev ody obtws evopobérycey mepl tdv évvéa dpydvTwv. 7d yap

> a € > "A 7 Ps \ > 4 ‘ a

apxatov 7) év “Apleip mayo Bova]) avaxadecauévn Kal xpivaca

Kal avriy tov émiryd ih’ éxa av apyaev én [é d

) THOELov ep ExaaTy THY apxav ém [évilaluT]ov

3 [SiatdEaloa aréctehrev. ural 8 joav rétrapes Kabdmep mpd-

Tepov Kal pudoBacrreis téttapes. ex Sé [THs] dulAjs éx]dorns 5 ETTOIHCAN (K): éolyoev Bury, Hude, K-w, H-L, B.

xévrwy secl. K-w?, 10 éxdorny H-L. hioav rérrapes: HCANA. 12 Teccapec.

8 epl r&v évvéa dp- 11 dcardiaca K, H-L: xadioréoa K-w. €k: éml H-L, sed spatium non sufficit.

TESTIMONIA. 11—14 *Photius vavxpapla:...vavepapla pev droidy te ocuppopla kal 6 dijuos, vatxpapos dé droidy re 6 Siyuapxos, Dédwvos otrws dvoudcavros, ws Kal "Ap. gnyat...éx 5€ ris ’Apirrorédous Twoderelas dy rpdmov diérate thy wédw 6 Dddrwy “‘gudal—exdorqv” (cf. Pollux viii 108; Rose, Frag. 349%, 3873). Hesych. vav«dapor.

adopted in his own day is a survival from that in the times of Solon. The inter- vention of the tribes is the point in com- mon between the two methods: but, whereas in the earlier method they select, in the later they only appoint by lot. In the former, the lot is resorted to in the second stage only; in the latter, in both.

Kvapevew] is synonymous with «Anpody, the xéayuos, or bean, being employed in the process of appointment by lot. The procedure was as follows: Two jars were set up; in one of these was placed a num- ber of white and coloured beans, in the other the small tablets with the names of the candidates. Then a tablet and a bean were drawn simultaneously and the candidate whose name came out along with the white bean was nominated (Schémann, Antiquities, p. 402 E.T.).

kvapetew occurs in the dpxos WuacTev in Dem. 24 § 150, doar (dpyat) pera Trav évvda dpxbvrwv kvapevovrat, cf. Xen. Mem. i 2 § g (Socrates) Aéywv ws uSpov eln rods Bev ris rodews dpxovras did Kudpov Kabe- ordvat, kuBepyAry 6¢ undéva ebérew xpnobat KuapeuT@. Cc. 22 § 5.

onpetov 8° Ste xrA.] The law requiring the rayla: to be elected from among the Tevraxoctopedtuvot is quoted to prove that Solon regulated the allotment of office according to the property classes. The law existed in the writer’s time but was practically unenforced, as appears from c. 4%. Pol, 1282 a 29, rns pev exxdyolas Heréxovot Kal Bovdrebovot Kal dixdfovow dd puxpay Tinquarwv Kal THs TuXovons

qruxlas, Tapredoucr dé xal orparnyovor kal ras peyloras dpxas dpxovow amd pet- fever. ;

§ 2. &y “Apelw mayo Bovdy] This passage gives us definite authority for the manner in which the public officials were elected in earlier times at Athens. Here- tofore it could only be conjectured that they were elected by the Areopagus. 76 dpxaiov is vague. and may either mean up to the time of Solon, or up to that of Dracon. In c. 4 we have been told that, under Dracon, the officials were elected by of Sirda rapexdpuevor, but the Draconian constitution is much disputed.

dvakaderapévy] ‘having summoned,’ without any necessary allusion to the fact that the Bovdy of the Areopagus was 7 Gvw Bovdy. Cf. Aeschines, /. LZ. 17, érewe Thy Boudry (the 500) dvakadéoacGar Tov *Apiorddyuov.

§ 3. gvdal] The successive names of the four tribes in the early history of Athens are quoted by Pollux viii 109. In the time of Erechtheus they took their names (TeAdovres, “Omdnres, Alyixdpecs, "Apyddes) from the sons of Ion. Cf. Hdt. v 66 (of Cleisthenes) r&v “Iwvos raliwy Terdovros cal Alytxdpeos kal ’Apyddew cat “Omdnros dradddéas Tas érwvuulas, Eur. Lon 1579, Tedéwv (Canter: Tedéwy vulg.) pev errac mp&ros’ elra Sedrepov "Ordyres *Apyadis 7’, éufs & dm’ alyléos & pidov #fouc’ Alyixopfs. (Schomann, Ox Grote, § 2, and Antiquities, p. 317 f. E. T.; Philippi, Az. Burgerrecht, pp. 233—2096.)

gvAoBactAcis] These officials are iden-

wn

aa

°

15

32

~ AOHNAIQN

COL, 3, |. 21—30.,

Hoav veveunuévas tpitTves pev Tpeis, vavxpapias Sé Sddexa Kal? n na a ea éxdotnv. [él d¢ rv] vavepapidv apy KabertnKvia vadkpapor, \ TeTaypévn mpos Te Tas e[ic]popas Kal Tas dam[dvas] Tas ‘yeyvo-

13 NayKpal|pal. H-L, sed spatium vix sufficit.

14 érl 5&8 ray Blass; qv 6¢ roy K; fw 8 éml rav K-w, 15 FINOMENAC (K-W).

tical with those called BaccAe?s (1) in the 13th Axon of Solon, quoted by Plutarch, Sol. 19, émeripous elvat wrhv Boor €& ’Apetov mayou i) doo éx Trav “Ederav 4 éx Ipura- velov karadixacbévres Ud Trav Bacthéwy émt dovy 4 chayaiow } émt rupayvlic &pevyov, and also (2) in the decree of Patro- cleides, Andocides, de AZyst. § 78 (founded on the language of the law just quoted), é£ ’Apelou rayou 7 ray ’EgerGv 7 éx Ipura- velov 4 Aedgwlov édikacbyn } vd Tav Bactrkéwrv, } emt dbvy ris éore guyn, A Odvaros xateyviadn, } oparyetow 4 rupdv- vos. In the context of the first passage they are called mpurdves; in that of the second, they are distinguished from the Archon-Basileus. The identity of the Baorrets of Solon with the ¢vdoBa- ovdets of Pollux (viii 111, 120) is sup- ported by the connexion of both with the IIpuravetov. The Bacrde?s apparently dealt with cases of persons who aimed at a tupayvis. They also presided over the Ephetae in the court of homicide at the Prytaneum (cf. 57 end). They probably represented ‘the priestly functions of the ancient chieftains of the several separate tribes which were ultimately fused into a single community’ (Prof. Ridgeway in Smith, Dict. Ant. s. v.). The fact that they were four in number was already known from the quotation of the present passage in Photius, ». v. vav- xpapla, Cf. Pollux viii 111, as emended by Wecklein, of 6¢ ¢. é& evdrarpiddy téooapes (5 for dé) dvres xrA. In the Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique, iii 69, we have an inscr. found on the Acropolis respecting a fund called ra gudoBacidtxa, part of which was spent on celebrating a religious festival.

tpirries ... vavkpaplor] The plupf. shews that these divisions had existed before the time of Solon. Photius, s. v. vauxpapla, carelessly quotes Aristotle as his authority for ascribing to Solon the origin of the term vavxpapos (ZdAwvos otrws dvoudeavros, ws Kal ’Apiororédns gnol). That he had the present passage in view is indicated by his quoting it ver- datim at the end of his article.

The existence of the vavxpapla: before the time of Solon is proved by Hat. v

71, where their rpuravers are described as holding an important position in the go- vernment of Athens at the time of the conspiracy of Cylon: of mwpurdaves trav vavipdpuv (al. vavxpaptéwv) ofrep eveuov rére Tas ’AOjvas; but Thuc. i 126 § 5 corrects this account and substitutes for them the nine Archons, adding rére 6é Ta TOAAG Tay TodiTiKG@Y ol eva dpyovres érpagcov. Schémann (Azz. p. 326 E. T.) endeavours to reconcile both narratives by assigning to the nine Archons a place on the board of Prytaneis.

The Naucrarz were the presidents of the Maucrariae, and the latter were the administrative districts into which the country was then divided. There were 12 in each tribe or 48 in all. Every four of these districts formed a group called a tpirrvs, or third part of a tribe. In Pho- tius p. 196 Porson, and in Bekk. Amec. p. 275, mention is made of a vavxpapla called Kwhtdis which is the name ofa strip of coast and cliffs near Phalerum. The term vav-

xpapla has reference to the duty imposed ,

on these districts of equipping a ship of war, in addition to that of providing two horsemen (Pollux viii 108). Grote, e. 10, ii 264 n., thinks ‘the statement that each Naukrary was obliged to furnish one ship can hardly be true of the time before Solon.’ The actual expense proba- bly fell on the wealthier inhabitants of the district, and it would naturally be from their number that the vavxpapo., or pre- sidents of the vavepapla:, were chosen. There was one president for each vav- kpapla, or 12 for each tribe. Hesychius S$. VU. vavKNapos (sic)'...Twes 58 dp’ éxdorys gunrijs Sddexa, olrwes agp’ Exdorns xupas Tas elaopas etéXeyov. Uorepov 6é djuapyxor éxAjOnoav (Schomann, Antiquities, p. 326 E.T.; Duncker, A G. ii 144 E.T.; Gilbert, Gr. St.i1 135; Fahrb. f. cl. Phil. 1875, pp. g and 452). vav«papos is formed from vais and the root xap (by metathesis pa) which appears in xpalyw ‘to complete or accomplish’ (G. Meyer in Curtius, Studien, vii 175).

tas elodopds] Pollux viii 108, ras 6

obrot (sc. of vavxpapor) kal ra é& adtav dvahwpara,

elagopas ras Kara Ojuous Stexerpordvoww: .72

4

wm

CH. 8, 1. 13—26. TIOAITEIA

33 L / ‘ 5 a n a pévas 810 Kal év rots vomots Toi[s L]odAwvos, ols ovKéTe ypavTar, a Cs mordax[od] yéypartas tovs vavxpdpovs elompdttew Kat dva- Aloxew ék TOD vavKpapiKod apyup[iov. Bovdr]ynv 8 érroince Tetpaxooio[us], éxatov €& éExdorns pudts, THY é Tov ApeotraytTav . a 4 e : érakev é[ml 76] vouodvaraxeiv, dorep UTApyev Kal mpoTepov émi- oxoTros olt|oa Tihs ToduTeias’ Kal Tad Te GANG Ta TeloTa Kal TA péytota THY TOMT<iK>Ov SveTHper Kai TOvs duapTavovtas NvOvVEV a a kupi[a] ovoa [Kat Cnluilodv] Kat xordlew, cal tas entices dvé- 33. aN By > , \ ‘4 n 4 depen eis ONLY OvK eriypdovca THY Tpdpaci[y Tod *rpdTT|ecOat, Kat Tovs él Katadvce Tod Syyov ovy[tlotapévous Expivev, LOrAw- Oé i > & \ * fal € a e A +,

vos Ger[ ros] vouor etcalyy]eA[ias] epi adtav. opadyv dé THY pev

17 tohdaxod Wessely (x3, B, litteris incertis ay); moAAax60c Paton (H-L), sed spa- tium vix sufficit; moA\[d«]s K-w. 20 él ro Paton, Gennadios (K-w, H-L, K3, B): én Ki, 21 xai els Ta ANG H-L. 22 T(WN) TTOAITO(N): T&v moduTiKEY Richards, Hude (K-w, H-L, K%, B), cf. 3, 35 7& mAciora Kal ueyiora Tav év 7H wore; Tay <tepl rwy> modtr@v satis probabiliter conicit K. 23 xal fnusoty Blass (H-L, K3); Tod {nycofy K} (K-w). éxreloes B. 24 rod mparrecOa (exigendi)

scripsi, coll. Plat. Zeg. 762 Bri durdaclay ({nulav) mparrécdw tov bropedyovra: Tob KoddfecGac K!; (hiatu admisso) Tod ed@Uver@ar Blass (H-L, K*); rod elompdrrecOat ?

K-W; 700 éxriverOa Tyrrell. K-W, B; 6 pev [ody tal7’ erage] K1 (H-L).

26 voor eloayyedlas Wessely et K?; véuor.........

éy rots vopoisk7A.] Phot. Lex. vavpapla: kat év rots vouors dé “édy tis vavxpaplas dudisBnry,” Kal ‘rods vaukpdpous rods kara Thy vauxpaplay,””

§ 4. BovdArjyv 8’ érolyce rerpaxoclous] A new council of 400 is here contrasted with the previously existing council of the Areopagus. There is nothing in the phrase to shew that the writer has made any mention of a previous council under Dracon. Cf. Plut. Sol. 19, cvornodpevos 68 rhy év ’Apeiy mayy Bovdhv...devrépay mpooxarévene Boudny dard pudijs Exdorns, Tertdpwr otcay, éxardv dvdpas émcdeta- Bevos.

*Apeorayirav] Philippi, Aveop. u. Epheten, pp. 199—246; Gilbert, i 136. Duncker, Gesch. d. Alt, (XII 12) vol. vi 187—194.

émloxotros otoa xTA.} Plut. 2c. Thy & dvw Bovdiy érloxomov mdvrwv Kal pv- axa Toy vopwy éxabioer.

Ta wreloTa Kal Ta peyiora KT] C. 3 § 6, dupner 5¢ TH WreloTa Kal TA péyiora Tay év TH ode, Kal KoAd Loca Kal (nutotoa mévras Tods dxocwobyTas Kuplus.

dvépepev] Dem. 41 § 8, Thy Tiyuqy ob’ éxely dcéducev ote viv els TO Kowdy dve- vipoxe.

els roAw] =els dxpéronw (cf. c. 60 § 3). Thue. ii 15, xadelras dé dxpbmods péxpe robde ere bm’ "AOnvalwy rods. Aristoph.

S.A.

Nub.69, Eq.267,Lys.245. ‘In inscriptions év dxporéaee is first found in B.c. 387—6, according to Bull. d. Corr. Hell. 1888 p. 149. In fourth century prose the use of més is preserved in certain familiar and unambiguous combinations: [Xen.] De Red. v 12, xpjpara els thy wodw dye- vexOévra. Schol. Aristoph. Lys. 273, éornoay év wove Tapa Tov dpxaiov vewy (possibly quoted from one of the writers of ’Ar0ides or from Craterus). For’ other references see Maetzner on Antiph. 6 § 39 év rq wédet. On the other hand Andoc. 387, and Aeschin. 2 § 175, have dvagepew els Tiv dxpbrodw” (Wyse).

él katadioe Tod Srjpou—vdpov elo- ayyeAlas] eloaryyé\dew has already been used in a general sense in 4§4. Wenow find a definite véuos eloaryyedlas ascribed for the first time to Solon. The special case here mentioned corresponds to the first of the three classes of crimes which, according to Hyperides, were included in the véuos eloayyeAtixts, pro Eux. 22, édy tis Tov Shuov Tov ’AOnvaluw xarahiy fo ouvly érl xatadvaoer Tod Sypov 7 éraipixdy ouvayaryy (Isocr. de Big. 6; Dinarch. ¢. Dem. 94). Cf. Theophr. apud Lex. Rhet. Cantab. s.v. eloayyedia: édv ris Karadvy Tov Shuov. The text implies that the definition given by Theophrastus applies to a far earlier date than the time

3

on

34 AOHNAION COL. 3, 1. 30—36.

a a 4 \ \ mod ToAAdKES GTacLdtoveay, THY Sé TodTaY évious B[La] THY a \

pebupllaly [ayarélvras 76 abtopartov, vouov &Onxe mpos adTovs sor, b5 dv cracvalovans Ths woAlew]s uly O]ftas Ta Sarda pmdé pel? érépwv, &riywov civas Kal THs TONEwWS pA ETEeXELY.

9. rad pév ody [rept ra]s apyas tlodtlov elye Tov Tpdror. Sone? 88 Ths Lérwvos rodtelas Tpia TabT’ elvar TA SnwotiKw@Tata’

28 dyaravras K-w et Kontos: dmoxvofyras Rutherford ; mepimévovras (J E B Mayor, Marchant, Blass, Gennadios, H-L) quondam conieci, coll. Plut. So. 20 mept- pévew axwidvws Ta TGY Kparotvrwy, sed o)NT potius quam OYNT in papyro apparet. meptopayras Bury coll. Thuc. iv 71 7d méAAov mepudeiy (B). Fortasse mepiopavras 7d dmoBaivoy scribendum. 29 Ofjrat H-L (K%, B); 7:OArat Richards, Blass, K-w, sed spatium vix sufficit.

IX 1 e1xe litteris evanidis (K, B): érage K-W, H-L. secutus K; Tpla 746° H-L, K-w. 7aé om. H-L.

2 tpla radr’ papyrum

TESTIMONIA. 28—30. *Gellius, ii 12: In legibus Solonis illis antiquissimis quae Athenis axibus ligneis incisae sunt quasque latas ab eo Athenienses ut sempiternae manerent poenis et religionibus sanxerunt, legem esse Avéstoteles refert scriptam ad hanc sententiam: ‘si ob discordiam dissensionemque seditio atque discessio populi in duas partes fiet et ob eam causam irritatis animis utrimque arma capientur pug- nabiturque, tum qui in eo tempore in eoque casu civilis discordiae non alterutrae parti sese adiunxerit, sed solitarius separatusque 2 communi malo civitatis secesserit, is domo patria fortunisque omnibus careto, exul extorrisque esto’ (Rose, Frag. 353%,

391°).

after Eucleides, to which it has been as- signed by Frankel, Att. Geschworenenger., P: 77:

There is a vague reference to eloayye- Nat in the time of Solon in Pollux viii 53, xirvoe 58 kard pev Ddrwva ras eloayyeXias expwov, xara 5€ rdv Padnpéa Kal mpds mevraxéoto, cf. Philochorus, 155 Miiller, eloyyyethav, ws pev Pird6xopos, xiAlwy Kabefouévwv, ws dé Anurjrpios 6 Padnpeds xAlwv wevraxooluy (cf. Duncker, G.d. A. vi 179 n). The special case mentioned in the text came before the Areopagus.

§ 5. vopov One xrdA.] Plut. Sol. 20 init. Trav 8 dddwv abrod vouwy tdios pev podiora Kal mapddokos 6 Kehedwv dripov elvac tov év orace pwnberépas peploos yevduevov. Bovdderar 6, ws Zouxe, wn dradas pwnd? dvai- obyrws éxew pds Td Kowdy, év dopadet Oéuevov Ta olxeta cal Te wh ouvadye pnde cuvvocely 77 marplde kahdwrifbuevov, GN adrdber rots Ta BeATlw Kal dixadrepa mparrova. mpocdéuevov ovykiwwduvedew Kal BonOeiv wGddov 4 mepynévew axwdvvws Ta Tov Kparotvrwy. Praec. Ger. Reip. 32 § 1, ii 823 F, daropioet...cal Oavpdoe rl mada éxeivos 6 dvip éypawer diriuov elvar Tov év ordoe. modews pnderépots mpocbe- wevov, De Sera Numinis Vindicta 4, ii 550 B—C, mapadoydrarov dé 7d Tod ZddAwvos, dripov elvar Tov ordoer pnderépg peplde tmpocbéuevov pndé cvoracidcavra, Cic. ad Atticum x 1, 2, ego vero Solonis...

legem neglegam, qui capite sanxit, si quis in seditione non alterius utrius partis fuisset. (Cf. Grote, c. 11, ii 341.) Prof. Mayor (Class. Rev. Vv 120 4) also refers to Cantacuzen. iv 13, and Nicephorus Gregora ix 6 fiz.

OyTa1 Ta Sada] metaphor from taking up a position in the face of an enemy. Plato, Rep. 440 E, ev 7H THs Wuxis ordoe rlOec Oat Ta Sha pds TOU Aoytorixod. The phrase is frequent in Xenophon’s Anada- sis in several military senses, e.g. els rdf Ta Owha riPecOae ii 2, 21 and v 4, II (Kriiger’s Lextkon, or Vollbrecht’s Worter- buch).

pdt ped’ Erépwv] Also in Thuc. ii 67 § 5, cf. v 48, 006’ Ud’ érépwv. vi 44 § 4, obdé ped? éréowy. vii 59 § 1, myde ped? &repa.

IX §1. ris Zodovos mwodrrelas—ta Syporudtrara] Isocr. 7 § 16, éxelyyy Thy Snpoxpatiav, Av drwy pev 6 Syuorikw- Taros yevduevos évouobéryce. Dem. 18 § 6, Bdrwv, edvous wy duly cal Syport- «és. For Solon’s relations to democracy see Fol. ii 12, 1273 6 35. In the lan- guage of Mr Newman’s excellent para- phrase in vol. i p. 373, we are there told that ‘certain persons regarded Solon as the destroyer of an extreme oligarchy, on the ruins of which he constructed the marpios Snuoxparia, a wisely mixed con- stitution: they took him to have founded

CH. 8, 1. 27—CH. 9,16. TIOAITEIA 35

TMpPOTOV ev Kal wéeyaTov TO pn Savellew ert Tois copacw, erevta 70 é€eivac TG Bovrowévy [Tiyswpeiv] brép Tdv adixovpevwr, tpitov 58 (<d> pdrortd pacw iayuKévat TO TAHOOS) H eis TO SiKLacT- x et \ oa ec 3h a , , , in prov] ép[ecr]s* xpos yap wy o Shwos Ths Wydov, kUpios yiryveras THS

4 Tiwwpetv Paton, K-w (K%, B), cf. 19, 2; Timmpetobar Wyse, H-L; duxdfecdar K?; Sixny AaBet (hiatu vitato) J W Headlam et Lipsius, coll. Plut. So/..18. 5 @ ins,

< 2

H-L (K3, B); @ kal K-w; # Ki.

6, 9, 13 FIN (K-W).

the Areopagus, to have introduced the system of filling magistracies by election, and to have created the popular dicastery, thus as it were equipping the State with a complete set of new institutions....To this view of Solon’s work Aristotle ob- jects: he says that Solon would seem to have found the council of the Areopagus, and the system of filling the magistracies by election, already established, and that he...left them as he found them, whereas he did institute the popular element in the constitution by founding the popular dicasteries. He appeals in support of his contention to the opinion of a second set of critics, who made Solon responsible for the existing extreme democracy. They complained that, so far from being the author of a mixed constitution, he over- powered the oligarchical element by the democratic, inasmuch as he gave supreme power to the popular dicastery. Armed with this judicial authority, ‘the people became masters of the State; one states- man after another had to play into their hands, and so the extreme democracy gradually came into being. Aristotle, however, holds that these inquirers a- scribed to Solon’s institution of popular dicasteries consequences which would not have resulted from it, if it had not been for accidental circumstances. Solon was far from intending to found an extreme democracy; he gave, in fact, only a modi- cum of power to the people—enough to content them and no more—and reserved office for the better-to-do classes. On the other hand, he was not the contriver of an elaborate mixed constitution, but rather the founder of the beginnings of popular liberty; still less was he the undoer of the power of the Few. He left office in their hands, and gave the people only just enough power to make the holders of office govern well.’

pi) Saveltery x7A.]6§ 1. Oo e&etvar— dStikoupévwv] Plut. So/. 18, olbuevos detv érapkeiy TH Toy TodhGv doGevelg, TavTl AaBeiv dlkyv brép tod Kax&s memovObros wre kal yap mdyyévTos érépov 7 Bda- Béros éffv 7rQ@ Swapévw Kat Bovdropévy

ypdpecbae Tov déixodvra Kal Sudxew, dp- Os eOlfovros To0 vouobérov Tovs moXlTas domep évds pépous cuvacbdver Oa Kal ouv- adyely dddjAos. Tobtw 5é TE vouy cup- puvotvra Adyor atrof dtayynuovevovory. épwrndels yap, ws eouxev, Hris olxelrar kdANoTa Tav modrewy, ‘‘éxelvy,” elev, “& Grav dducoupévwy odx Frrov of wy adtxovmevor mpoBdddovrac Kal Koddfover Tovs déixobvras.”

H els 75 Stxacrrjptoy &peots] The constr. changes from the substantival use of the infinitive to an ordinary substantive. The eulogists of Solon, referred to in Pol. ii 12, 1273 6 41, recognise the diuaory- ptov as the element which is dyuorixdv in his constitution; while his critics de- scribe him as having subordinated the oligarchical element, xdptov rrovjoavra 7b OicacThpiov mavrwy, KAnpwrov dv. Aris- totle himself subsequently mentions as one of the two elements in the neces- sary modicum of political power assigned to the people that of ev@dvew, z.¢. calling the officials to account in the law-courts, pnde yap rovrov Kiptos dy 6 bfuos o0- dos av ely Kai wodéutos. Plut. Sof. 18 (after saying of the Ores that To ouwex- KAnodgew cal dixdfew udvov peretxov Tis mwontrelas) adds: 8 Kar’ apxas mev ovder, torepov S¢ taupéyees éepdvy Ta yap mrelora Twv Suaddpwr évérimrev els Tovs Oixacrds. Kal yap doa rats apxats trate kplvew, dmolws Kal rept éxelvwy els 7d dt- KaoThpiov épégers edwxe trois Bovdopé- vos. Grote (ii 325) holds that the popu- lar dicasteries were not established by Solon, a view which is not in accord- ance with the text. He also points out (p. 326) that, although Solon laid the foundation of the Athenian democracy, his institutions were not democratical (as compared with those of Cleisthenes and Pericles). The dicasteries doubtless be- came more highly developed in later times, but of their existence in Solon’s time for certain purposes, such as the control of officials, there can be no rea- sonable doubt. See Duncker, Gesch. d. Alt, vi 179, 180.

3-2

1o

36 AOHNAIQN COL. 3, 1. 37—44. ére O€ Kat Sia TO py yeyp[a]PO[as To]ds vopous drAds 2 unde acadds, GX @oTep 6 Tepl TaY KANpwv Kal émiKdAIpwr, av[dy]«[n mrojAras dupisBytycess yiyverPat nai ravta BpaRevew Kal Ta Kowa Kal Ta ta 7d Stxalot]yp[vov]. olovTas pév odv tives érritndes doadels abtov rouoat Tovs vopous, Grrws 7 THS Kploews [o S]#[mos x]vpsos. od pny eixds, GANA Sia TO pH SVvacbat KabdroU

TONLTELAS.

9 mo\dds Paton, Blass, K-w, K°; qv ras K!; qv mwodkas H-L sed deest spatium. 10 7d duxacripiov K-w, K%, papyri lectio incerta (B): 7a dixaorajp[ia] K! (H-L), sed propter tot generis neutri vocabula pluralia in contextu cumulata numerus singularis videtur elegantior. 11 7 K*(B); 7 K-w (in papyro utrumvis legi potest). érus Tt THs Kploews 6 Sfuos H Kbptos K-w1; ‘aut re delendum aut érws 7 THs Kploews 6

Sjmos KUptos (B) legendum’ K-w?; diws THs Kpicews 6 Syuos F KUpios H-L.

12—

13 TrepiAdBeIN etiam ante KAGOAOY scriptum et deinde deletum; zavraxof sine

causa legendum suspicantur H-L.

§ 2. dmdds...cadds] Dem. Lest. § 93, arh& kal caph, Isaeus 11 § 32, ada Kal ywopipa padelv, Dem. 24 § 68, amis Kal waow ywupiuws yeypdpOa. In all these passages perspicuity is described as a merit in legislative enactments. Here the obscurity of some of Solon’s laws is said to have increased the powers of the people as interpreters of the law in the dicasteries.

6 wept tSv KArjpwv] The referefice is to the law of intestate succession quoted in Dem. Macart. 43 § 51, p. 1067. Parts of this law are paraphrased or expressly cited in Isaeus 11 §§ 1, 2, and 7 § 20. The law of the émlkAnpos is quoted in Dem. 43 §§ 16, 54, and 46 § 22, ending with the words dvertéixov wy eetvar exe bare KNijpov unre éexlkAnpov. This law is referred to in Isaeus 3 §§ 64, 74 and else- where. Both laws may be fairly ascribed to Solon, and students of Isaeus will admit the ambiguity of certain clauses in them. The greater part of Plutarch’s Sol. 20 is devoted to details of the law of the émlxAnpos, but the points there touched upon are curious rather than obscure. In the time of Aristophanes the decision of rival claims to the hand of an ‘heiress’ was one of the most cherished privileges of the Athenian dicast ( Vesp. 583587). Cf. inf. 42 § 5, wepl KAjpou Kal émixdhpou, 50 § 6 émikAypov Kaxwoews, and Kdijpuv kal émexdjpwv érdixactat, also 43 § 4.

dvdyan] sc. jv. Rhet.i 1 § 8 dvdykn émt rots xptrais xarahelrew, Eth. 1137 6 15, avayKn peév elreiv Kabddov, wy oldv re 6é 6p0Gs.

olovrar xrd.] Plut. So/. 18, Aéyera 5é Kal rods vduous dcadéorepov ypdwas Kal TodAas avriknpes exovras avfjoar Thy Tay dixacrnpluy loxiv> wh Suvvauevous yap

bré rev vouwy SadvOFvar aepl ov depé- povro auvéBawvev del detoOae dikacrav cal wav dyev audichyrnua mpds éxelvous, Tpbmrov Twa Tov vouwy Kuplous dvras. ‘It is hardly just to Plutarch’ (says Grote) ‘to make him responsible for the absurd remark that Solon rendered his laws intentionally obscure... We may well doubt whether it was ever seriously intended even by its author, whoever he may have been’ (Grote, c. 11, ii 330). We now see that Plutarch quotes from the text, where the authors of this opinion are not specified. The opinion is only quoted to be rejected. The real cause for the obscurity of some of Solon’s laws is introduced with the words od pi elkos KT.

Sid Td py SivacBar (sc. Ddkwva) kabd- Aov mepikaey 76 BAtiorov] ‘owing to ,his being unable to attain the perfection of legislative expression while drawing up his laws in general terms.’ It is characteristic of a legislator to deal with 7d xaOddou, leaving the dicast to deal with the details. Rhet. i 1 § 7, 4 wey Tod vouobérov xplows ob Kard& wépos adda mepl pedrAdyrwv re kal xadddrov éorly, 13 § 13, cumPatver d€ robro (rd emcees) Te Bev axdvrev Ta bé éxdvrwv Tov vouoberay, axévrwv mer bray AdOy, éxdvrwv 8° Bray Wh Stvwvrat Sioploa, adAN dvaryKkatov. pev 7 kaOddov elmeiv, wh F Se, ANN ds emt 7d mond. Eth. Nic. v 14, 1137 6 15, Pol. ili 11, 1282 4 2, (those in authority must be) kuplous mepl dow etadvvaroiow of vouor A€éyerv axpiBas did 7d ph padiov evar kaObdov dnrGoawepirdvrw, Pol. 1268 5 39, 1269 @ g, 1286 @ 10.

mepthaBetv, here ‘to define strictly, deter- mine in express words, draw up in a legal form’ (L and S), Plat. Zeg. 823 B, Opa

CH. 9, 1. 7—CH. 10, |. 4.

TIOAITEIA 37

meptraBety To BéXticTOY ov yap [S]ix[aov] ex Tey vov ryuyvopé- vov GAN’ &x THs dAdns TodtTelas Oewpeiv THY éxeivou BovrAnow.

10.

> & Lo a # n tal n / év [wev odv tlois vowors tadra Soxet Oeivar Snuotixd,

‘\ \ n pl nn fal

mpo S€ ths vowobecias Tovhoar thy Tdv ypealy amo]KoT yD, \ \ a , an

Kal peta Tadta THv Te TOV wéTpwY Kal oTaOudv Kal THY TOD é la

vopicpatos av—now. em’ éxeivou yap éyéveto Kal Ta méTpa pello

X 2 ‘aut wojoa: fuit aut roujoas, certe non roujoracda’ K-W}; Touncas K-W, B

woinoat H-L. CTACIN (H-L).

4 aYZHCIN littera 2 incerta (K), non ETTAYZHCIN (K-W) nec KATa- MEIZW (K, K-W), non MEIQ) (H-L).

yop wapmrodd te mparypd éort, meprecAnue pévov dvopare viv oxeddv evil. Ar. Eth. Nic. v 4, 1130 6 3, évt dvduare mepidaBely (embrace, include) tafra mdvra, iii 12, 1117 5 21, rump mepiraBelv. Pol. iii 16, 1287 6 19, Ta wey évdéxerar Tots vomos Tepdynpojvat, vi 5, 1320 @ 1, vouor of mepidnpovTar TA oWovTa Tas ToALTelas.

ov yap Slkarov—BovAyoww] One of the writer’s favourite methods of reconstruct- ion is ‘inference from the present to the past, from existing circumstances to their presumable antecedents, from a given state of institutions to a former condition of the same.” We here find ‘part of a formula for the critical application of this method,’ or rather for the limitations under which it may be applied (Mr Macan, ¥. #. S., xii 37 f.).

X § 1. mpd 88 rHs vopolerlas Krh.] Solon’s general legislation falls between the gewodx@eca and the alteration of the currency. There is thus no direct con- nexion between the change in the coinage and the famous ‘disburdening’ ordinance. It was not by a modification of the monetary standard that Solon relieved the oppressed debtors; it was by an absolute cancelling of the debt. The opposite view was held by Androtion, whose opinion is quoted by Plutarch only to be rejected: Sol. 15, xalroe rwes eypayay, wv dorlv Avdporlwy, ok droKxor] Xpedy, ddrAG ToKwy perpidryTL KougicHévras dyarficat rods mévynras, kal cacdxPeav dvoudou Td PiiavOpwrevya Tolro Kal Thy dua. rouTp yevouévyny Tay Te péTpwy érat- Eyow Kal Tod vouloparos Tiuyv. éxarov yap érolnce Spaxuav riv wvav mpbrepov €BdoujKovra Kal Tpidv ofcay, dar’ dp.Oug bev toov, Suvduer 8 Edarrov darodiddvrwv, wpedeicbar pev rods éxrivovras meydda pndev 5¢ BrawrecOae rods Kopugouévous. ot 6¢ theloro. rdvrwy 6uod Tuy cuuBoraluy dvalpeow yevérOar tiv cecdxGeay, Kal rovros cuvgder uaddov TA Tovpuara. 3

Tov pérpav Kal oradpav Kal...rod

vonlopatos aifnow] ‘the augmentation of the measures and weights and of the currency.’ Andoc. De Myst. 83 (the de- cree of Tisamenus), roNtrevec Oar’ AOnvatous Kara Ta tWarpia, vouos b€ xphcOae ois Zorwvos kal wér pots kal oraGmots. It was held by Boeckh (Aecrologée, 1838, xv § 2) that Solon ‘not only debased the coin but also altered the weights and measures.’ Grote dissented from this opinion on the latter point, giving his reasons in the Classical Museum, i p. 25: ‘IT believe that the statement of Andro- tion...has no reference to the medimnus and metretes, and that we cannot even deduce from it the vague inference...that Solon made some new arrangement of the measures.’ He interprets the words rwy uérpwv éravénow (Plut.) of the monetary standard alone, referring them to the ‘in- creased number.of drachmae, which every mina and every talent were now made to contain.’ He even adds that ‘we know positively that Solon did not meddle with the weights.’ He holds that it was ‘for the express purpose of affording relief to debtors, that Solon degraded the mone- tary standard, and maintains that Solon ‘would not choose such a moment for re- arranging the liquid and dry measures.’ The present passage conclusively confirms the opinion held by Boeckh.

THVv Tod voploparos av~noww] refers to the fact that 73 old Aeginetan drach- mas were replaced by 100 Attic drachmas, so that the same amount of silver was represented by a larger number of coins.

§2. td pérpa pelto tov Padwvelwv] Hat. vi 127, Beldwvos rob ’Apyelou rupav- vou...700 Ta mérpa Tomjoavros Tots IeXo- movynotoot. The date of Pheidon is dis- puted. He is sometimes placed in Ol. 8=B.c. 748 (Pausan. vi 22, 2, followed by Unger, Duncker, and Busolt, i 140 n); sometimes (by altering the text of Pau- sanias) in Ol. 28=B.c. 668 (Weissenborn, followed by Curtius). Hdt. /.c. mentions a

38 AQHNAIQN

COL. 3, l. 44—4, L. 1.

5Tav Dedwvetwv, Kal % pvad mpoTepov [ayoluca mapalrAne lsov

EBSoujnovra Spaypyas avednpaOn tails éxarov. || Hv 8 6 apxaios [Col. 4

5 &\kovea K-W, H-L, K3; d-yovca B; aut €Axovea aut &yovea, quorum hoc usitatius

sit, legendum putat Wyse; cf. c. 51 § 3 Tav orabudy dyorras. mapa [uckp]év K-wW; pels kal H-L; ras 7 Kal B.

mapalrAjo lov K; 6 rats: 767’ els H-L; els (hiatu

admisso) coniecerat Mahaffy (Athenaeum, 1891, p. 344), sed numerum omnibus notum

indicat articulus.

son of Pheidon among the suitors of the daughter of Cleisthenes, despot of Sicyon, which would make Pheidon’s date short- ly before 600 B.c. The first of these dates is half a century before the begin- ning of Greek coinage, which may be placed about B.c. 7oo (Busolt, i 355). The earliest authority for the statement that silver coczs were first struck by Pheidon at Aegina is Ephorus, quoted by Strabo p. 376, “Eqopos & éy Alylvy dp- yupov mparov korfval pyow bd Peldwvos, cf. 2b. 358, wérpa éfeDpe 7a Devddyia Kadovpeva Kal oraduols Kal vouicua kexapaypuévoy 76 Te GXo Kal 7d dpyupody (cf. Busolt, i 144 n). This last is the only passage which describes Pheidon as an inventor of weights; and even here the epithet ‘Pheidonian’ is applied to the wérpa alone. The Marmor Parium,

ep. 30, connects him with silver coinage as:

well as with a reform in the measures of capacity: Peldwy 6 ’Apyeios édjpevce Ta pérpa...kal dvecxedace (‘reformed them’) kal vouicua dpyupotv év Alylyy érolncev. The Etymologicum Magnum, s. v. 6BeNl- oxos, mentions his coinage, but implies that he made no change in standards of weight: mavrwv dé mpwros Peldwy ’Apyetos vouuoma exowey év Alyivy’ Kal dovs 7d v6- pucpa Kal dvahaBav Tovs 6Bedtoxous (spits, or small bars, of metal), dvé@nxe 7H év “Apye "Hpg, émetdy 5& rére of dBedioKoe Thy xeipa éwdjpovv, Touréore THy Spdxa (the grasp), qmuets, kalrep ux mAnpodvres Thy Spdxa Tots & 6Borois, Spaxuyy abriy Aéyouey mapa 76 dpagacba. Sev ert xat viv déyouev 6Bodosrarny Tov ToKirrhy, éredy oraOuots [rods d6Bedloxovs addit Orion p. 118 ‘qui Heraclidis Pontici auctoritate utitur,’ Gaisford] mapedtdouy oi dpxato. The text mentions him solely in connexion with mérpa, or ‘measures of capacity,’ and not in connexion with coinage or weights, the present section dealing in order with three topics (1) measures, (2) coinage, (3) weights, which must not be confounded with one another. Similarly, in another of the wodcretaz, that of Argos (Rose, Frag. 480, 3, Pollux 10, 179) “érpa alone are mentioned in con- nexion with Pheidon; ety & av xal eliwy

te dyyetov édXainpdv dd Tov Perdwvlwy wéTpuv dvopacpévor, imép av év ’Apyelg montrelg ’ApiororéAns dévyet.

The present passage tells us for the first time that the Pheidonian measures of capacity were smaller than the cor- responding Attic measures. The Phei- donian scale of measures may be identified with the Babylonian, and the ratio of the Pheidonian to the Solonian measures may accordingly be 12 : 13. Thus, in liquid measure, the Solonian uerpyris is already known to have contained about 39 dives, or 84 gallons: the Pheidonian perpyris would therefore contain about 36 /itves, or rather less than 8 gallons, and be identical with the Babylonian epha and the old Egyptian avtaée. Similarly, in dry measure, the Solonian pédiuvos con- tained about 52 4¢res, or about 12 gallons; and the Pheidonian, 48 /etres, or about 11 gallons (Hultsch, Neue Jahrb. fiir Philologie, 1891, pp. 263—4). For the opinion held hitherto, that the Phei- donian measures were larger than the Solonian, cf. Duncker, Hist. Gr. Bk 11, c. ii, vol. ii 26 E. T.

|) pva—tkatdéy] According to the statement of Androtion in Plut. So/. 15, Solon, in introducing a new standard for silver coin, lowered the standard to the extent of 27 per cent. 100 drachmas of the new standard contained no more silver than 73 of the old. Thus the new mina was equivalent in weight to 73 un- reduced drachmas. As 73: 100 :: 100: 137; hence, too drachmas of the old standard would be equivalent in weight to 137 of the new. 73 to 100 is pre- cisely the proportion between the Attic drachmas of 67°5 grs. and average Ae- ginetan drachmas of rather over go grss (73 | 100 :: 67°5 : g2°4), the Attic mina being to the Aeginetan as 100 : 137 (Head’s Historia Numorum, p. 309). If, however, instead of taking Aeginetan coins of average weight, we take those of actual maximum weight, the stater of two drachmae weighs 194 97s. The cor- responding Attic coin weighs 135 g75- Then as 194 : 135 :: 100 : 69§7. Hence the number of drachmas of the Aeginetan

CH. 10, 1. 5—7.

TIOAITEIA 39

xapaxtnp Siépaxpov. éroince Sé kal oraOuda mpods tld] vopiopa 7

7 xapaxrhp ddpdxuov <Bods>.? Wyse, coll. Poll. ix 60; xapaxrip <Bods cal 7d

véutoua> dlipaxuov J B Mayor. 7d vouiopa P HL,

orabua K-W, K3,B; orabudy K}; apds Tov oradpuov

standard, which would be equivalent in weight to 100 Attic drachmas, would be about 693. Thus, according as we take average or maximum weights, Mr Ken- yon’s text, rapamAjovov éBdoujovra dpax- was, will mean either 73 or 694.—The reading proposed by Blass gives us exactly 73 drachmas.

The new standard introduced by Solon in place of the Aeginetan has been con- vincingly proved by Mommsen (dm. Miinzwesen, p. 43 5g., Mon. Rom. ed. Blacas, i 29.5g¢., 73 sg.) to have been the Euboic, and henceforth Euboean coins would circulate ‘freely in Attica, side by side with the new Attic money (Head, p. 310, cf. 302 and xxxviii—xlii). Thus Solon’s reform of the currency was not necessarily due to economic reasons con- nected with the debts of the poorer citizens. It had a commercial object and was intended to facilitate trade with the eighbouring island of Euboea (especi- ally with Chalcis and Eretria), and with other Greek cities (for example, Cyrene), where the Euboic standard prevailed. It would also promote trade with Corinth, where a similar standard was in use (Busolt, i p. 525), and with the Greek colonies in Chalcidice and Sicily (Kéhler, in Mittheil. d. d. arch. Inst. 1885, xX 151 —157). It has further been suggested by Mr R. S. Poole (Diet. of the Bible, art. ‘Weights and Measures’) that the new Solonian standard was borrowed from Egypt. The Egyptian unit of weight was 140 grains, and the Solonian didrachm weighed 135 grains. Thus, whether the standard was actually borrowed from Egypt or Euboea, the Solonian coinage would facilitate intercourse with Egypt as well as with the countries where the Euboic standard was in use.

In this connexion it is interesting to notice that, after reforming the currency, and thus facilitating trade with countries employing either the Euboic or the E- gyptian standard, Solon set out for Egypt, where he stayed for ten years, one of his avowed objects being the pursuit of com- merce,

dverypsOy] ‘was raised to the full number of a hundred drachmas.’

iv—88paxpov] ‘the primitive type of coin was the two-drachma piece.’ xapax- Thp means (1), as here, 7d kexapaypévor,

that which has a stamp impressed upon it, cf. Plato, Politicus, 289 B, 7} Tod voulo- patos lééa cat oppayldwy kal mavrds Xapaxrfipos: (2) the stamp itself, as in Ar. Pol. i 9, 1257 @ 40 xapaxrijpa ém- Barovrwy, ww’ dmrodtcy Tis perphoews adrots’ 6 yap xapaxrnp éréOn Tot mécou onuctov. Oecon. ii § (of Hippias), 7d dé vopiopa 7d dv ’AOnvalors ddoKiuov érrol- noev rakas dé Tyuny éxédXevoe mpds avrdov dvaxoulfew* cuvedOdvruw 5 éwi TE Kopat frepov xapaxrijpa édwxe 1d adTd dp- yoptov.

Before the time of Solon, the only money current in Attica, as well as in Boeotia and Peloponnesus, seems to have been the Aeginetan didrachm of about 194 grains; but there are no Athenian coins extant of Aeginetan weight. Thus, apart from mere tradition (Plut. 7hes. 25 éxope 5¢ kal vomuocua Bodv éyxapatas), there is no proof of any coins having been struck at Athens before Solon (Head, p. xlii). The text must therefore refer to the old Aeginetan didrachms in circula- tion in Attica before the time of Solon. These coins had on the obverse a tortoise with a plain shell and a row of dots down the middle of its back; and, on the re- verse, an incuse square divided into eight triangular compartments, of which four or more are deeply hollowed out (Head, Z.c., P- 332, fig. 220).

From the time of Solon the standard coin of Athens was the tetradrachm of the

full Euboic weight of 270 grains. The common type is a head of Athena of rude

40

AOHNAIQN

COL. 4, 1. 2—I0,

gTt[plets nai éEjxovra pads To TadavTov dyovoas, Kal émudzeve- if e a fal n a a la a! BHOncay [ai] wval 76 oTaThps Kal Tois GAAos oTAOpols.

8 pels xal seclusit K; ante éBdourxovra (v. 6) posuerunt H-L, alii; defendit Ridge-

way, retinuerunt K-W, B.

archaic style with large prominent eye, wearing a round earring and close-fitting crested helmet : on the obverse is an owl with head facing and wings closed ; also an olive-spray and the letters A © E (zd. p. 310, fig. 209). After the time of Solon, coins of Eretria, stamped with the head of a bull, together with other Euboean coins, may have circulated in Attica, side by side with the Solonian ‘owls.’ But there is no authority earlier than Philo- chorus (in the generation after Aristotle), for stating that the early didrachms, which preceded the Solonian ‘owls,’ were impressed with the figure of an ox (Head, Zc. p. 309). Cf. Schol. on Arist. Av. 1106, 4% yAade él xapdyparos jv rerpadpdxuov, ws Pirdxopos' éxrAHOn be 7d vomucpa 7d rerpddpaxpov rére [4] yAadé. iy yap yAad& érlonuov Kal mpbowrov *"AOnvas, trav mpbrepov didpdxuwy dvrwv émlonuov 5€¢ Body éxévrwv, Pollux, ix 60,

dtdpaxmov’ 7d madadv bé Toir’ jy ’AOn--

valos vouioua, Kal éxadetro Bobs, bre Body elxev &vrerurwpévov. We cannot, how- ever, ignore the fact that archaic coins of Euboea, bearing the bull’s head, have repeatedly been found in Attica (cf. ’ Koehler, AMitthetlungen, ix 357—9).

érolyce—dyotous] ‘ He also instituted standard weights corresponding to the coinage, 63 minae weighing the talent,’ z.é. ‘at the rate of 63 minae to the weight of a talent.’ Cf. c. 51, roy cradpov dyovras bcov dy abrol rdEwouw.

Much difficulty has been felt respecting these 63 minae, on the ground that, in every standard, a talent invariably con- sists of 60 minae. Thus it is ingeniously suggested by Mr Kenyon and others that Tpeis kal ‘ was written as an explanation of TapamrAjotov above, and was subsequently inserted in the text in the wrong place,’ and this suggestion has been regarded with considerable favour. But the text, as it stands, admits of a ready explanation if we regard it as stating the weight of the Solonian currency as compared with the average weight of the corresponding coins of the Euboic standard.

The average weight for the Solonian silver coinage was slightly higher than that of the Euboic. Solon made his new talent consist of 63 old minae of the average Euboic weight; and this talent was, like

all other talents, divided into 60 minae, As the post-Solonian mina weighed about 6750 grains, the talent must have weighed 60 times that amount, or 405,000 grains, To obtain the weight of the mina super- seded by the Solonian mina, we divide by 63 and the result is 6428% grains. A stater, or fiftieth part of this, is 128$ grains. In other terms, 63 : 60: 135 :' 128%. This is in sufficiently close agree- ment with the actual weights of the coins of Euboea, as compared with those of Attica. The two-drachma piece of the former weighs 130 grains (only one grain and three-sevenths more than the weight above mentioned); that of the latter, 135 grains. The substance of this ex- planation is due to Prof. Ridgeway, who also shews that, while the Aeginetan standard was used for sélver, the Euboic was used for gold and silver, being in fact the only standard used for gold. Solon framed for the coinage of Athens a standard founded on that already in use for all transactions in gold. Possibly to adjust his silver currency to the standard gold unit, he augmented the silver stan- dard, making 63 old minas go to his new talent of 60 minae. Thus, while about 70 Aeginetan drachmas are equal in weight to too Attic drachmas, rather less than 63, or, strictly speaking, 622 Euboic minas are equal in weight to 60 of the Solonian standard.

The above note refers to the average weight of coins of the Euboic standard. In the case of coins of /ud/ weight, that standard is practically identical with the Solonian, the staters of doth weighing 135 grains (see Head’s Brit. Mus. Cat. of Cotns of Corinth, 1889, p. xix).

émBevenj@noav] ‘The minae were divided into fractions consisting of (/#i. ‘were apportioned out by’) the séater and the other weights.’ émdiarvéuw, “to distribute besides,’ Philo 2, 651; rut rt Josephus, 2. 7. 2, 6, 3” (Land S).

orarhp is the general term for a stand- ard unit of weight and (more frequently) of money. It here denotes the weight of a fiftieth part of a mina. The weights here meant are probably coin-weights alone, market-weights being apparently left out of consideration. Solon made no change in the weights used in com-

CH. 10,1, 8—CH. 11,1. 10. TITOAITEIA 41

11. Svatakas Sé tiv woduTeiay Gvirep elpntar Tpdtrov, ézrevd) mpootovTes avT@ Tepl TOY vowwy HvdxXdovy, TA pev emiTLOVTES Ta Sé€ avaxpivovtes, Bovddpmevos pyte TadTa Kwely pHT’ arey- OdvecOar Tapwv, arodnpiav émouoato Kat éurropi[av] dua Kai

Oewpiav eis Alyumrrov, [eir]av aos oily Elec déca eradv' od yap 5

olecOar Sixacov eivas [To]ds vopous éEnyeioOat Tapmy adAN’ ExacTov \ [A mn iA \ \ L >A a 27a yeypappéva rroujoat, aya S& kal cvvéBawlev] adt@ Tdv Te t 8 tf a 8, \ r) \ \ a lal yvopinav Stapdpous yeyevioGar toddovs Sia Tas TOY ypEdy droxotd[s, Klal Tas otdces audotépas perabécOar Sia TO Tapa SdEav adtois yevéoOar THY KatdotTacw. 6 yey yap Shpos @ero

™

XI 2 ENWYAOYN (K!}, K-w, B): qvexAouv J B Mayor (H-L, K*); verbum in codici-

bus optimis augmentum duplex habere constat.

3 KEINEIN. 5 elrav ws ovx

néer Wessely (K°, B); Aéyww ws odx ec coniecerat van Leeuwen; [epi Ka]vdrov

[rérJe «1. K...CTACIN

6 dlxatos Jackson (H-L).

7 wovjoat K, H-L: Tovey K-W, B.

10 THNIC ANTAZIN: THY odcay Kardoracw K!; Thy Kardoracw K-W, B3 Thy odcay rdéw >

H-L.

TESTIMONIA. 2—5 Heraclidis Epitoma, Rose, Frag. 611, 33, ws 5é d:xdouv (codd.; 3 évwydouv K-wW) abr@ Ties repl Trav vouwy, dredjunoer els Alyurrov.

merce, the Aeginetan mina being still retained unaltered (see Dr Percy Gardner on Pondera, in Smith’s Dict. Ant. ii p.

4492). . I§s. Stardtas—rorjoar] Plut. So/. 25, émel 6¢ rv vouww eloevexOévrwv Evior T@ Dér\wn cal? éxdarny mpocyerav huépay erawodvres 4 WeyovTes 7} cupBouretovTes éuBarrev rots yeypapucvos 6 Te TUXOLEY F dpapety, wreioror 8 joav of muvOavduevor xal dvaxplvovres kal Kehevovres avrov Srrws ekacrov exer xal mpds jv Ketrar didvoray érexdtidoxew xal cagnvigev, dpdv, dre Taira Kat 7d mpdrrew dromov Kal rd wh mparrew émlpOovoy, brws 5é rais daroplats brexorivar BovNduevos cat diadvye 7d Svodpecrov Kat @idalrioy ray modirav (epywact yap év peyddos maow ddelv xarerév, ws abrds elpnxe), rpdoxnua Tijs wAdyns Thy vavkAnplay motnoduevos été- weve Sexacrh mapa Tav’AOnvalwy daro- Snulav alryoduevos. yrmite yap év re xpbvy Tobrw kal Tots vouos adrovs éoecOat owes. mpGrov pev oby els Al-yurroy aglxero kal diérpuper, ws adrés pyar, Neldov él mpoxono. KavwBléos éyyidev aris.

qjvexAovv] This form is found in Xen. Cyr. v 3, 56, Isocr. 5 § 53, Aeschin. 1 § 58, Dem. Zacr. 16, Olymp. 19. In Lacr. 30 the MSS vary between évwx)ob- vey (2 and other Mss), évoydoduer (Aug. 1), qvwxAoduer (vulgo). The Rhet. ad Alex. 1445 6 2 has vaxdnoav. In Aeschin. 3 § 44 the MSS vary between

qvexnetro (Bekker, Franke, Schultz), and évwxAerro. Voemel, Proleg. Dem. § 67, quotes Photius: qvelxero Kal qvwxre... kowdv trav ’Arrixdy ldlwua. See also Lobeck’s Phrynichus, p. 154. amroSnplav éroujoaro] c. 13 zit.

8éka, érav] For the fact cf. Hdt. i 29, dredjunoe érea Séxa. For the construc- tion, cf. 2. vi 58, éredy Odywuor, d-yoph béxa hpepewy obk tararal ogi. Xen. Anabd. i 7, 18, ob paxetrar Séxa juepGv. Plat. Gorg. 516 D, wa atrod déxa érdv ph dxovceav THs pwrfs (of Cimon’s exile).

od yap olerPar Slkatov etvar—mrapdy] The nom. c. inf. after Sfka:ov efvac may perhaps be defended (1) by Dem. 15 § 16, wy oddevds avrol Sofvar dlkny Slkaov av elvat (where, however, several editors prefer dfxaso: dv, which involves a hiatus) ; (2) by Dem. Prooem. p. 1439, 14, éyw pev 6h Sixasoy wreikn@a mp&rov amdvrwv airs elmeiy. In the text the construction after Slkacov elvas is apparently identical with that often found after de?v (Rehdantz, Lnd. Dem. s. v. otec@at).

§ 2. dpa S¢ Kat xrd.] Plut. Sol. 16 init., Hpece 5 obderépous, AN ENUryve Kal Tous movalous dvehav Ta gupBdraca Kal Bad ov Ere rods wévytas, bri ys avadacpov ovx érolnoev édrloacww adrois.

perabéoOar] ‘changed their opinion with regard to him,’ z.e. ‘were alienated from him.’

6 pev ydp Sypos xr.) Plut. Sol. 14, Pavias 6 Adc Bros avrov lorope? rev ZdrAwva

°

42 AOHNAIQN COL. 4, 1. 10—27.

; a mwavT avadacta Touoew avrov, of dé yvoOpiywor [walAw 4 TH

4 avtny rakw drodecew 7 [wtxpov] waparrAdé[ew. o 8& dludoréposs jvavTtoOn, kat e€ov avT@ peO ororépwy éBovrdeTo ovota[yrs] Tupavvelp, etheTo Tpos aupotépous amrexOéabar cdaas THY TaTpisa

\ \ 4 / 15 Kal Ta BélATL]oTa vopobeTHaas.

12. tadta &§ Ste TodTov <Tov> Tpdmov garxev of T AdAOL cuphwvodar. mavtes, Kal adtos év TH Trounoes pé[uy]ntas repli avraév év Troiade

Siw pev yap ewxa Tocov yépas bacov arrap[Kei],

a yo? 2 \ yoo 9 f 5 Tums ovT apedwv ovT érropeEduevos. ‘ “a ? Wd Fa # 3 > cal ot & eixov Sivamw Kal ypnpacw joav aynto[i), kal tots éppacduny pndev alec]nées yeu. ” 29 ‘ > £ > f éotny © augiBadov Kpatepoy adKos apporépoice, vie]ndy & ovx« elac’ ovderépovs abicas. 10 Tadw 8 dtrohaivopevos Teph TOD TAHOovs, ws aldT]d Set ypjaat- 2 Sjpos 8 8 dv dpiocta abv Hyeuoverow Errotto, pyre Aiav dv[elOels pyre Bralopevos. 11 # scrips. K-w?, cf. Pol. 1296 @ 40 Tabryy drobobvar THy Tdéw: EIC (K, H-L), secl.

K-w}, B. 12 4 o[uixpdv] rapaddAdé[ew 6 dé] Blass (K-w, H-L, K*); lacuna in altera p discerni putat K, in altera spatium plurium litterarum capax superesse.

puxpov K-W. non apparet, Meisterhans, p. 134?.

XII 1 <7rdévy> propter homoeoteleuton exciderat. dmapxel: émapxe? Plut. (B), ubi darapxe? coniecerat Coraés:

yépas: xpdros Plut.

dmapkelv H-L (nisi forte dajpxee legendum). Brafduevos: mefduevos Plut.

7 Too’ H-L. 12 Alyy Plut.

TESTIMONIA. XII 4—9 Plut. Sod. 18.

13 HBoyAeTo (K-wW, B), quod in titulis Atticis ante annum 300 A.C. 14 aTTEXOECOHNAI.

elyev K-W. 4 AHMOI.

5—6 aTTOpeZAmMENOCOCOI.

11—14 Plut. Comp. Sol. et Popl. 2.

xpnodpevov ardry mpos duporepovs émi owrnple Tis rodews borer Oa Kpia Tois nev ambpas Thy véunow, Tots b€ xpnuatt- Kots BeBalwow r&v cupBodalwy.

dvd8acra] Dem. 24 § 149, vis dvadac- poy, Plat. Leg. 684.

€svavrdxrh.] Paraphrased byAristides, li 360 Dind., wapdv air craciatovons Ths Todews drrorépwv BovdAorTo mpoordyre Tupavvely, dex Odver Oat paddov dudorépas eldero birép Tol dixalov.

XII § 1. S8po—d8lkws] These six lines are quoted in Plut. So/. 18=frag. 5 Bergk.

1, 4. dawapket] ‘is sufficient,’ as in Aesch. Pers. 474, Soph. O. C. 1769, Eur. frag. 892, 4 Nauck?, dv odk darapKe? 3A7- opov}, Arist. frag. 395 ovx darnpKe, ‘it was not enough’ (L and S). Grote (ii 326), who had before him Plutarch’s

reading érapxe?, translates : ‘I gave to the people as much strength as sufficed for their needs’; but émapxeiy must mean either (a) ‘to supply’ or (4) ‘to be strong enough’ (whether to help or to hinder). Plutarch’s émapxet is the only instance of the absolute use of the verb given in L and S, except Soph. Ax. 612, émapxéore vouos 66’, ‘this law shall prevail’ or ‘hold good,’ =diapxéoet. Such is the satisfactory explanation given by Professor Jebb, who adds that in the only other instance, z.¢. in Plutarch’s quotation from Solon, ‘we must surely read daapxe? with Coraés.’ This opinion is conclusively confirmed by the reading given us by the papyrus. « : 2. Sipos—Piafdpevos]) quoted in Plut. Solonts et Poplicolae comparatio, c. 2; frag. 6 Bergk.

CH. 11, |, 11I—CH. 12, 1. 25. TOAITEIA

43

tixte. yap Képos UBpuv, Stay Todvs ddXBos érnt[ac] avOpetroow Gaois p1) vos apTLos 7.

3 nat wadw S& [érép]wOi mov Aéyes wep) Tdv SiaveiwacOar THY yhv 15

Bovropévor’

ot 8 ef’ dprayaiow HrOov, erri[S ei]yov ddvear, > . oe ? * » LZ ¥ 4 Kaddxouv ExacTos avTov drXBov evpyaew trodrvr, , f- , \ 2 an t Kai “Me KMTIANOVTA AElws TpayvY éexavely voor. xadva pev TOT éeppacavto, viv Sé pot yorotpevor rol Lov d]POar[pot]s dpdov wavtes date Syiov. od xpewv' & pév yap ecitra ody Oeoiow Hrr[ca], [dAra & old wlalrnv gepd[o]v, odSé pot Tupavvidos dvdave. Bia te [pel ew, ovdé melipa]s xOoves matpidos Kakoiotv eaOrovs icopoupiay éxeu.

13 TrOAYC: Kaxg Theognis 153. secl. K-w.

14 dvOpdry kal dr Theognis 154. & érépw6l tov R D Hicks, Wyse, Sidgwick, idem ego quoque con-

15 kat

ieceram (K-W, K3, B); 8’ dAdobt ov J B Mayor, Bywater, Blass; dda: tov Naber

(H-L); StayvGOe moo kK}. 0’ eTxov ? K-w.

OtavéuecOar H-L. 18 ‘Fortasse ards’ Richards. (K-w, K%, B): dio. in Plutarcho Reiskium secutus Bergk (K', H-L).

17 of & 颒 dprayaiow édrld? 21 épOadporo’ B. AHION 22 a pev

yap dedmra Aristidis (ii 536) codices TO; dua yap dedwra Stephanus, S Jebb; d uev

aeArra coniecit Gaisford, recepit Bergk, versus initium arbitrati. loco dda coniecit Gaisford; legebatur dua. 24 dvédve xTh.; Gvdavey (Richards) Blawa Ajyar’? H-L.

20, 21 Plut. SoZ. 16.

Aristide Bergk (K}). TESTIMONIA,

23 In Aristidis od Bury, H-L, K-w, K%, B: ad in

22—23 Aristid. ii 336.

tlera—émnrat] quoted as Solon’s by Clemens Alexandrinus (S¢romateus, vi 740): ZDddwvos d€ worjoavros* rikre: yap (v. 2. rot) Krd. ayrixpus 6 Odoyuis ypdder* tlere. ror xdpos UBpw bray Kaxw édBos érnrac (Theognis 153, followed by the line dv@pémw, kal 8rw wh vbos dprios 7). The Schol. on Pindar O/. xiii 12 cites the first line as ‘Homer’s:’ In the Proverbs of Diogenianus, viii 22, it appears in the form rixret ro.—Kaxw dvdpt Tapein.

Diog. Laert. i 59 quotes, among the apophthegms of Solon; kat rdv wey xépov brd Tod Thobrou yervacOar, Thy 5é UBpw bd rob Képou.

§ 3. Kal mddw 8’) kal—de is common in Ar.; e.g. Pol. 1252 @ 13, 1254 6 24, 1287 @ 7, 1297 6 16; and especially in Ethics iv, vii, ix, x; ‘adjungit autem kal—dé rem novam, saepe tam leni modo, ut idem fere valeat atque 7é. Etiam saepius quam Aristoteles Theophrastus iis particulis utitur’ (In the Mistoria Plantarum there are about roo instances ; in the Characters more than 70)—Eucken, De Ar. dicendi ratione, i 32.

érépwOl ov Aéya] Ar. de Anima i 2,

404 5 2 ('Avatayépas), ro\daxod mév yap 7d alriov rod Kadh@s kal dp0as Tov vody Aéyer, érépwOt S€ robrov elvac riHv ypoxiv, De Partibus Animalium, iii 2, 663 4 3, érépwOl mov Tot cwuaros. Plut. Sol. 2, XN érépwGt Aévyee (of Solon).

IL. 17—25. of 8’ éf’ dptrayatow—exerv] Lines 17—19, 24 and 25 are entirely new; 20 and 21 are quoted by Plutarch So/. 16; part of 22, 23 by Aristides, ii 536 Dind., 6 62 67 DoAwy Kal BiBlov ékerirndes memot- nkev...els abrov Kal Thy éaurod rodtrelay, év @ ddna Te 7 Aéyer kal rafras di pev— épdov. Two other fragments in the same metre are assigned by Bergk to the same poem. The first of these is described in Plut. Sol. 14 as addressed mpos P&xov ; the second is quoted by Plutarch imme- diately afterwards, beginning with ovK epu Ddrwy Badippwv.

1.19. Kat pe karlAXovra—vdov] ‘and that I, though smoothly glozing, would reveal my rude intent.’ éx@aveiy cannot be translated as though it were synonym- ous with xptwar. For kwr(\dovra, Aclos, cf. Theognis 852, 5s Tov éraipov wahOakd, kwrid\wr éarardy ébéhe.

20

25

AO.HNAIQN

44 COL, 4, 1, 28—31.

26 [qanw] 8& Kab rept THs an[oxloris TAv x[pe]dv Kal rév Sovdrevdv- 4 Tay pev Tpotepov edevOepwbevTwr Sé Sia Thy cevadyGer[ av]:

éym 5é trav pev obvera Evvyyayov

26 daroxomis trav xpeav Wessely (K3,B): dzro[pllas ris tay [revyT]wy K! (H-L); an[oplas] ris roy [bmrbypelwy K-w*. 26—52 dovrevévrwy—éxnpwOn mods in frag- menti Berolinensis pagina prima continentur. 27 <rére> Oia H-L. 28 otvexa, in poetis Atticis a criticis suspectum, saeculi quinti et sexti in titulis legitur, cia iv b 491, 8 dperis otvexa xal pidlas (saec. v), CIA i 487, 1 otvexa miords epus (saec. vi—v). Meisterhans, p. 177%. elvex’ K-w. elvexa Evvqyayov Platt, coll. Pol. 1285 6 7 dia 7d cuvayaryely (7d wAHO0s) eylyvovro Bacire’s éxdvrwy. otvexa E.vH- yayov H-L. Equidem oyNekaZYNHPAPON in papyro cerni posse, puto, recte tamen animadvertit K supra litteram 2 scriptum esse 0, et litteras ar litteris AaT aut Cat prorsus esse similes. otvex’ dfovnpdarov K1; elver’ d£ovyidarov K-W!, dfovy a- Tov K-w*. olvexa Eevarov Jackson et Tyrrell (cf. Plut. Sod. 13 éml ray tony mimpackduevot, 20. 15 dviryaryev dd tévys, et inf. vv. 36—309). otven’ é€avyyaryov van Leeuwen. Aut fvy7\arov (quod nusquam adhuc inventum est) aut fuynpédpov (quod a papyri scriptura nimis remotum est) Marindin. Trav pev otvex’ déo- vyrdrouy dhpuov, rh rovrwy mply Tuxelv éravedunv; quondam Blass, coll. dpwarndarely (Hdt. Xen.), fevyndareiv (Xen.), wddw vauxrnpetv (Aesch. S. C. 7. 652, Soph. Ant. 994); eadem fere Crusius (PAzlol. L p. 177). Trav ev otvexa Evvtyayov dijuov, rh ToUTwy mply ruxev éravodunv; RC Jebb, cuius interpretationem unice veram esse

patet.

Evyqyayor etiam Blassio postea placuit.

§ 4. 1.28. The doubtful reading déo- vyrarov is found in Aesch. Suppl. 181, ovpryyes...déovydaro, ‘whirling on the axle’ (L and S); ‘the sockets (in the naves) pressed by the axle, or through which the axle is driven’ (Tucker). It seems impossible to interpret it (with Mr Kenyon) as a metaphor indicating ‘ a tor- ture such as that of Ixion.’? Much less can we understand it as an allusion to the dfoves of Solon.—dtovnddrouv, impf. of afovydareiv, has been suggested; this is supported by O. Crusius (Phzlologus 1, 177) as a metaphor from the race-course which he considers characteristic of So- lon, comparing 1. 47 xévrpov...A\aBwv, and fragm. 23 Bergk, which merely mentions pavuxes Urmot. tevy~darov, ‘driven from the country as strangers,’ though not found elsewhere, is implied in gevy\areiv, and might be defended by Plut. So/. 13, émt Thy kévnv mempackdpevot, and 2b. 15 avi- yaryov dd Eévys followed by a quotation of Il. 38—41, yA@ooar—exovras.

On the whole, I prefer accepting in the first line Euvjyayov. For the second I gladly adopt a suggestion due to Pro- fessor Jebb, who makes the sentence interrogative. He adds that the rhetorical emphasis obtained by placing the relative clause (rwy pév) before the antecedent (rodrwv) seems to confirm the view that this is a question. ‘But, as to the ends for which I formed the popular party, or

(less probably) gathered the people into one (by healing the divisions which sepa- rated the various orders in the state), why did I desist before I had attained those ends?’ (With éravodpny, cf. 1. 63 in fragment at the end of this chapter: ‘anyone else would zof have restrained the people’ 088’ éravcaroxri.) Solon is here quoting the question addressed to him by some of his opponents who held that he had not carried his reforms far enough. He is in fact putting in his own words the complaint which elsewhere he gives in the words of the malcontents, mepiBahwy & dypav d-yacGels ovk éréomacev péya| dtkruov (frag. 33 Bergk4, 1. 3). In the triumphant cupupaprupoin xri., he seems to say, ‘ Earth is the best witness whether I had cause enough roi réy dqyov cwayayely, without going on to do those things which I am blamed for not doing.’ Prof. Jebb further points out that it is pro- bable that the first two lines formed a separate sentence, as Aristides does not quote them, and it is unlikely that he would have begun his quotation with the third line, ouypaprupoly, xrd., if it had been in the middle of a sentence. I may add that the sense thus gained is confirmed by a subsequent line, 1. 44, in which Solon protests that he has performed all that he has promised: S:\Oov ws trecxbunv. Cf. 1. 22, d wey yap elrra ody Geotow qvuod.

CH. 12, |. 26—33.

TIOAITEIA

45

Sjpov, ti tovTwy mplv Tuyely eravadunv; ouppaptuploi|n tabr’ dv év Sixn xpdvou entnp peyiotn Sarpdve[y ’Odv]uriov dpiota, I pérasva, ths eyo ote [G]pous avethov modAdXayy Ternydta(s],

29 Shuov te To’Twy mply tuxdv éravodunv, K}.

Sfudv re tovTwy mp rvyx[elly

éravoduny, K-W, alii; tovoUrwv Sidgwick, rovotrwy mply ruxwv van Leeuwen. 1 rov-

twv mp Tuxelv éravodunyv; recte Blass et Jebb.

30 xpévov etiam Aristides

habet: Kpévov mijrnp Clavigerus apud Bergk?, qui ibidem ipse conicit év Alkns

Opdvy. Kpdvov pirnp peylorn datudvwv 7’ ’OAvpTlwy Poste.

érn? J B Mayor. TESTIMONIA,

30—B4 Aristid. ii 536—8.

33 moddaxgG: an woAN

33, 34 Plut. Sol. 15.

Il. 30—54. ovppaptupoly — AvKos] Quoted by Aristides, ii 536—8, in two portions, (a) Il. 30—49 ending ov« dv karéoxe Syuov, and (d) el yap 7Oedov to the end. (4) is introduced with the words: elra rl pyoly 6 Dodwv;

1.30. év 8lky xpdvov] possibly (1) ‘be- fore the tribunal of time,’ a bold expres- sion, but less bold than that in Eur. Bacch. 889, Sapdv xpdvov 3d6a. Or, less probably, (2) ‘in the justice of time,’ z.¢. ‘justice which time eventually brings.’ cuumap- tupev is combined with xpdvos in Xen. Hell, iii 3 § 2, cuveyapripyoe 5é Tabr’ aire Kal 6 addnOéoraros Aeyouevos xpdvos elvate Solon appeals to Earth to bear witness before the tribunal of Time that he had attained the ends he had in view.

1. 31. pajrnp—I'q] Even the Attic land set free from its encumbrances is boldly personified as Mother Earth. Cf. Plato, Leg. 740 A, Sef Tov AaxdvTa thy AAiw Tairny voulfew pev Kowny airy THs méhews tvupardons, warptdos dé otons THs Xwpas Oe- pareve aitny Set pervovws 7 pnrépa maidas, T@ Kal SéoToway Ocdy adryy odcav Ovnrav byTwy yeyovévat, and 741, Tis yas lepas odons Tay Tavrwv Bed.

ll. 33, 34. Spovs—éAevOépa] These lines, and part of Il. 383—41, are quoted in Plut. So/. 15, cepvivera yap Zoddrwy év robros, Ste THS Te TpotmoKemerns ~yHs

Gpovs avetAc—viv édcvOépa: kal Tov dywyluwy mpds dpyipiov yeyovérwy TortTav Tos wer dvyyayer dard Eévns

yA@ooar ovKér’ "ATTichv—ExovTas,

1. 33. Spovs] Sir George Cox, Hist. of Greece, i 201, has suggested that this means Joundaries, and similarly’ in the Edinburgh Review, 1891, p. 493, ‘These boundary stones were the marks of the religious ownership of the Eupatrids.’ This view is refuted in Mr Evelyn Ab- bott’s History of Greece, i 407.

As regards the meaning of épos and cognate words in early Greek literature, the ambiguity in //. xii 421, du’ otfpoce bv’ dvdpe Snpiaac Gov, is made clear by other passages, which prove that the o@pa are “stones (xxii 405) marking off the allot- ments, and are easily moveable by a frau- dulent neighbour (xxi 489),’ Leaf ad loc. In Hat. i 93 ofpo. is used of stones bear- ing inscriptions. In the present passage we have the earliest instance of Spo in the sense of ‘ mortgage pillars,’ ‘ stone- slabs ox tablets set up on mortgaged pro- perty, to serve as a bond or register of the debt’ (LandS). This use is common in the time of Demosthenes, e.g. Or. 31 § 1, riOnow 8pous émi wev rH olxlay durxe- Ay, él 6€ 7d xwplov Taddvrov, 42 § 5, obdels Gpos érecrw éml rH éoxarig, and § 28, éxéXevoy detEas Spov elzrou erect, 49 § 13, Tovs dpous dvéorakxe, ‘has (illicitly) removed the tablets,’ and § 11, 7 ovcla bréxpews Tv daraca Kal Spor adrijs eora- car, 2b. § 61, boos adrod 4 ovcla dd@wpic- pen Hv, 25 § 69, ol reOdvres Spor éory- kéres, 41 § 6, Spous émiorica xiAlwv Spaxuay éuol ris mpocxds érl rhy olxlay. Isaeus 6 § 36, dmws.. 8por redetev. In Theophrastus (Char, 10=24 Jebb) it is characteristic of the puKxpodAdyos to in- spect the po day by day. Harpocr. s. v. Gpos* obrws éxddouw of ’Arrixol ra éwdvTa Tals broxepévats olklats Kal ywplots ypdu- para, Sndodyra Sr vroxetvrat Saverory.

Originally the 8pos was doubtless a boundary-stone or land-mark. In the absence of other means of registration, it became customary to inscribe on these boundary-stones a notice of the charges on the property. Solon, by his cecdx- Gea, released the poorer classes from the burden of their debts, and set the land, which was security for these debts, free from encumbrances. No sooner was the debt itself abolished, than the stones in-

30

35

40

46

AOHNAIQN

COL, 4, 1. 31—4I.

[wpdcO]ev Sé Sovrevovca, viv édevOépa. modrovs & *AOnvas, marpid eis Oedxtet[ov], [avy]yayov mpabévtas, ddXov éxdixws, adAXov Sixatws, Tos 8 dvaryKains tro xXpEelovs huyovtas, yAdooay ovKér “ArTiKHY iévtas, @s dv ToAdayG TAav[wpévovs],

Tous & évOaS’ avrovd S[ovaAt]nv deéa [Elyovras, 70n Searotdy tpopwevpév[ovs],

34 5¢: ye J B Mayor (H-L). stidis codices prope omnes. Aristides.

viv & H-L. 38 xpnoudv Aéyovras (quod intelligi nequit) 41 765n Aristides, correxit Bergk.

85 OEOKTICTON: idem habent Ari-

scribed with the record of the security were removed, and the land set free. (Cf. Blass in Hermes, xv 286 ff.)

Many exx. of these inscribed 8po. have been found. Those of Attica are published in CIA ii, the ordinary boundary-stones forming nos. 1062—t102 and the termini Sundorum pigneratorum nos. 1103—1153. A specimen is figured in Duruy’s Histoire des Grecs, i 385; and all the extant Greek inscriptions of this kind are collected and classified in the Zyscriptions Furidiques Grecques by MM. Dareste, Haussoullier and Th. Reinach, 1891, i p. 107—142. Classes A and B are securities (droriuy- wara) for money belonging either to minors (I—g) or married women (10— 24). Class C (25—59), records of sale with right of redemption, ‘ostensibly a purchase, but really a loan of money se- cured by the conveyance of property.’ ‘The debtor continues to occupy it, paying interest on the purchase-money and possessing the power of redemption within a certain time’ (Hager in Smith’s Dict. Ant. s. v. HORI). The following are some of the more interesting dated examples: A 5 (CIA ii 1138) él Nexo- Kdéous dpxovros (B.C. 302/1)" 8pos xwplwv kat olxlas kal rod téaros rod mpoodvros Tots xwplors KAjnpwv Suey droreriunucvev maoly dpdavois rois Xaplov lcoredois Xatplrmy cal Xapla. Bry (cr ii 1137) émi Kigeviamou dpxovros (B.C. 305/4)° bpos xwploy Kat olk.wy daroryunudtwy mpokds sevaplore IvGodépov Tapyyrriov buya- tpl, 7d Kara 7d Husou Kal Td éx TovTOU yeyvouevov alret els Aedorparoy dpxovra XXYHH... C 4g (CIA ii 1133) émi Ipait- Boddou d&pxovros (B.C. 318/4)' Spos olxlas mwempapévyns ért Moet, D 61 (CIA ii 1134) él Oeoppdorou dpxovros (B.C. 313/2)' Spos xwplov Tiyfs évoperoudvys Pavoorpdry Tlavavet XX= 2000 dr.

All these inscriptions belong to the

latter part of the fourth century. It can- not be supposed, however, that lending money on mortgage was unknown in the previous century. Under the Second Athenian Confederation (CIA ii 17), the Athenians were forbidden to purchase lands or houses in the territory of their allies or to lend money on mortgage. This implies that, under the First Confedera- tion, lending money on these terms was not forbidden. But it would appear that for some centuries the Athenians, while still employing boundary-stones for their public or sacred domains, gave up using them as records of mortgages. It has been suggested that ‘in the early times, which followed the reforms of Solon, no one had recourse to recording his claims on the detested tablets of stone whose removal from the land had been cele- brated with such enthusiasm by the legis- lator himself’ (Jnser. Furidiques, i 122). —For a similar reform among the Jews in the latter part of the fifth century, see Wehemiah v, 1—13.

nemnyétas] Lycurg. Leocr. § 73, dpous Tots BapBdpos rytavres. Thuc. iv 92, 4, Tots wey adXots ol rAHTLbXwpor Tepl -yys Spwy Tas paxXas ToovTar, huiy dé és wacay, Ww vixnOapev, els Spos ovK dvritexros mayt- oEeTalL

1, 36. mpaSévras] Solon ap. Dem. F. Z. P- 421, rv 5é wevexpav | ixvodvrar woddol yatay és dNdodarhy | rpadévres xrr. Cf. Grote, u. 11, ii 310 n.

1. 37. dvayxalys tro xpeots] Cf. 7 viii 57, xpeo? dvaryxaly.

1. 38—41. yAdooav—txovras] quoted by Plut. SoZ. 15.

1. 40. SovAlyv] Ionic forms are charac- teristic of Solon’s verses: cf. 1.41, Tpo- Hevpévous, and in Plut. Sol. 14, aldeSpat and doxéw.

1. 41. #0n—rpopevpévous] ‘trembling at each mood of their masters.’

CH, 12, lL. 34—53. TIOAITEIA 47 [er]evBépous eOnxa. taidta pev xpdrer vopov, Biav te nal Siknv cuvapudcas, [epleEa, al SvfdOov ws trecydunv. Gecpovs & cuolws TO Kax® Te Kayalo,

> a > 4 € 4 id evdeiay els Exactov apyocas Sixny, éyparpa. Kévtpov & addos ds éy® AaBdr, [xax]loppaséys te kal pioxtnuov avnp, > x / n ? *, a ove av Katéoxe Shuov'’ ei yap 7[Oe]Aov & ois evavtiolicr]|y Hvdavey rére,

Ld row a ef F aibis S & roicw ovrepor ppacaiato, ToNGv av avdpav 4S éynpbOn ors. Tév obver” adXKIV TavTOOEY TroLEdpEvOS

42 KpaTeel: xpdrec (kpdry cod. ©, Bergk) Aristides: xp.ry Papyrus Berol. 43 NOMOY (K, H-L): 6uod Aristides, Plut., Papyrus Berol. (K-w, B). 44 épeta Aristides. OvAAOov: Sufvuc’? Herwerden. 45 Te, ut videtur, correctum in @’ (K): & Aristides (Wyse, K-w, H-L, B). éuolous Bergk, Aristidis codices duos secutus. 49 AHMON: idem habent Aristides et Plut. Sod. 16: Ouudy hic et infra v. 63 legendum suspicantur H-L; idem olim Cantero et Reiskio placuerat. 50 a Tots: AYTOIC. tore: moeivy Sidgwick (H-L). 51 & Totcw otrepo ppacalaro Platt, K-w, K, B, ayTOICINOYTEpoOl(vel ai)ppacalaTo. d Toiow arepos Spica, dia (kaxd Valckenaer, Big. Schaefer, d(ya O Schneider et Ahrens, Spica dlya Bergk) Aristides. @ roto. Odrdpg Spica diya Ellis. d rotow obrépg (=ol érépg) dpacalaro quondam Blass. d xwpis drepor gpacalaro Sidgwick (H-L). d@ Toiad’ dy drepo dpa- oataro Tyrrell. 52 éxe.pé6y Aristides, correxit Valckenaer. 53 OYNEK (K, H-L): elvex’ K-w (cf. v. 28). adxiv: dpxhy Arist., dpyiv Bergk. TTOlIOYMENOC (K}): qovedpevos Platt, K-W, H-L, K3; xuxetuevos Arist. °

TESTIMONIA. 38—41, 43 Plut. Sod. 15.

1. 45. @eopots] In Plut. Sol. 19 end, Oecuds édavn S6e is quoted from one of Solon’s laws. Cf. note onc. 4 § 1. 1.47. kévrpoy] the ‘goad’ is here the symbol of strong control, as in Soph. Frag. 606 (of sovereignty), AaBwv dé xepot Kévrpa xndever modu.

1. 49. ode dy Karéoyxe Sipov] With these words the first quotation in Aristides ends. Plutarch, however (So/. 16), cites two lines with the following introduction: xalrot pnoly, ws, ef tis dAXos Coxe Thy av- Thy Sivan,

otr’ ay xardoxe Sfuov ovr’ ératcaro

mply dy rapagas miap étédy yada. Hence in Bergk’s ed. of frag. 36 these two lines are added to the passage quoted by Aristides; and the passage e yap HOedkov—NvKos, quoted subsequently by Aristides, is treated as a separate frag- ment (37), But the text makes it clear that this last passage followed imme- diately after his first quotation, while the couplet in Plutarch comes from a

subsequent portion of the same poem quoted near the end of this chapter.

1. 51. roto. otrepor ppacalaro] ‘what their foes devised within their hearts’ (K.). This does not explain the construction; Toto. cannot go with otrepo, for ‘their foes’ would be ray otrepo, ‘those dif- ferent from these.’ roto: must be dative after @pacalaro. ‘ppdgerOa: c. dat. and inf.=to tell one to do so and so,’ but the inf. is sometimes omitted, as in Hom. Od. x 549, Gd’ Louer 5) yap wot éré- gppade rérvia Kipxn. The sense seems to be ‘whatever at any time the other party would devise for their opponents,’ or per- haps, ‘urge their opponents (roto. = évay- tloist) to do.’ The évavrio: are the party opposed to Solon’s remedial measures. The otrepo are the popular party. With gdpacalaro cf. moolaro at end of next quotation.

1. 52. dvSpav—éxnpd0n] Hat. vi 83, “Apyos dvdpuv éxnpwen.

1, 53. movedpevos] An Ionism; cf, note

45

50

48

AOQHNAIQN COL, 4, 1. 42—COL. 5, L. 3.

tA as év Kvoiv TodKalow éotpddny AvKOS.

55 Kal mdduw dveditwv mpos Tas totepov avt[ dv] weurrtworpias ap- 5

60

65

gorépor"

Shum pev eb yoy Siapadyy dvedioar, ny n BA LA > 9 a xn & viv éyovow ovtrot d6pOarpoiow av

evdovTes eloor’

baot Sé peifous Kal Biay dpeivoves ? a y I a aivoiev dv pe Kal pirov totoiato.

el yap Tis GAXos, Pyci, TavTHS THs TYAS Ervxer,

> a a an SGP 35 A ovx av Kxatécye Siwov ovd éravcato, mpl avrapatas wiap é€eidev yana. || éyo 6& TovTwy damrep év peraryplp

dpos KatéoTny.

54 ETPADHN vel EFPAPHN: éorpdgyy Arist. (K, K-W, H-L, B). 57 AlAampadHN: Scapddnv Kontos et K-w (kK, B): 64 TIPINANTAPAZACTTYAPEZEIAEN : amply ay rapdéas

Blass (K-w, K%): ad@is H-L. w dupddny Platt (H-L).

55 avray

miap éé\y ydéda Plut. (et K-w1), unde Adam ad Plat. Crzt. 44 D coniecerat ply dvrapdtas—ékeirev, etiam Gildersleeve dvrapdéas legendum esse olim viderat; eadem

postea protulerunt Sidgwick, Blass, H-L (K%).

TESTIMONIA. 63, 64 Plut. So/. 16.

Tpw 7 tapdéas wiap ckethev yada K-w?, 65—66 Cf. Aristid. infra exscriptum.

on 1. 40, dovAlny. addKhy toetcPa means ‘to succour.’

1. 54. os év Kvolv—éotpddnyy AvKos] A reminiscence of Homer, //. 12, 42, & Te Kiverot...Kampios He Adwy oT pépeT at.

Cf. Solon 15, 23, Taira péev év Sy

or péperar kaka.

§ 5. Stadadbyv] dcadpddny is unknown. dtagpadéws means ‘distinctly’ (of sound) in Hippocrates 408. diadddyv, ‘openly,’ is here accepted. This is found in Pollux ii 129, appHdnv, Sappydnv, Suapddyv.

1.59. e¥8ovres] ‘even in their dreams.’ Dem. F. L. 275, & und’ bvap pAmiav TwToTe.

1. 60. Soot] sc. efot. The last two lines refer to the rich, the first three to the poor. The whole of this passage (57—61) is new.

1. 62. el ydp tis xrd.] Plut. So/. 16, quoted in note on 1. 49.

1. 64. mply—ydAa] mply c. subj. aor. (or mpl dv in Attic Gk) is properly only used after negative clauses, to denote a point in future time before which something else must happen; or (as Goodwin puts it, Moods and Tenses, § 638), ‘when a clause with mply, wnti/, refers to the fu- ture, and depends on a xegative clause of future time (of containing an optative),

In Soph. O. C. 459, |

mplv takes the subjunctive.’ Such a con- struction is out of place here, where we require mply c.indic. With the text, as emended, cf. Plat. Meno 86 D, ovx dy érecxewdpueda mpdrepoy elre didaxrdy etre ov didaxrdv 4 aperh, mply & Tu ore mpwrov éfnrhoaper (2b, 84 C and Theaet. 165 D: Goodwin, § 637).

dvrapdgas] In Ionic (as well as Doric poetry) dv- and au- stand for dva-. Od. 1 440, dyxpeudoaca, and elsewhere dv- oTiowy, avorirny, dvorhpevar; Ll. xxiv 750, dvoryoes; Od. v 320, avoxebdew; dvoxjoerOat, dvaxeo, dvoxerds.

miap] (lw) lit. ‘fat,’ an Epic and Ionic word; J/. xi 550, xvii 659, Bow éx miap édéc0at, of cream in Solon; also used metaphorically of ‘the cream’ of a thing, the choicest and best (L and S). Hesychius, riap: rd xpdricrov. This suits the context better than wap, which is ‘the first milk after calving,’ ‘beestings,’ or the rennet made from it. The sense requires not a particular kind of milk, such as ‘beestings’; but the best part of the milk, the ‘cream.’ The constr. is either ply avrapdtas yada éfetAev miap, or else yadda is acc. after the complex verb miap éfethev.

1, 65. éyd—karéornv] ‘I set myself as

(Col. :

CH. 12, l. 54—CH. 13, 1. 3. TOAITEIA

49

\ 13. rv ev odbv adrrobynpiav éroiujoato bia TavTas Tas aitias. be A Lorwvos 8 arodnuncaytos, éts Ths Toews TeTapayuévns, él wer ft a fol érn tértapa Sijyov [€lv novyia: r@ dé wéuTTT@ peta THY Vorwvos

a landmark between two armed hosts.’ Hdt. viii 140, 2 (of debateable land), Semalyw drep tudwv év rplBw Te pddora olknuévov Tav cumpdxwy mdvtwv alel Te Pbepopevay povvwyv, étalperoy meralxucdy Te THY vv exrnuévwv. pos, ‘landmark,’ or ‘wall,’ seems a harsh metaphor, ex- cept perhaps in one who, like Solon, had the 8por, the boundaries as well as the mort- gage-tablets, of Attica much in his mind. The passage is paraphrased in Aristides, ii 360 (of Solon), gory 5 év wedoply mav- Tw avipebrara Kal Sukairara, Gomep Ti vas ws ddnOas éx yewuerplas weprypamrovs gpuAarruw Spous.

XIII § 1. droSyplav eroujoaro] c. tr § 1.

2ZéAwvos—rerapaypevys x7.) ‘When S. had gone abroad, although the state was still disturbed by divisions, yet for four years they lived in peace, but in the fifth year’ &c. dmodyuety has two meanings (1) to be abroad, and (2) to go abroad. (1) is found in Pol. 1303 4 23, and Poet. 17, 1455 4 17, darodnuodvros: (2) in the present passage. The fact that rerapay- uévns precedes, accounts for the article in Thy oTdow,

TH St wéprry perd THv UdAwvos dpx vy] The archonship of Solon is usually placed in B.C. 594/3=O/. 46, 3. This is the date given by Diog. Laert. i 62 on the authority of Sosicrates of Rhodes, the author of a work on the Aistory of Crete and on the Succession of Philosophers, who flourished between 200 and 128 B.C. The archons about this time are given by Clinton as follows :

Ol. B.c.

40, 2=595 Philombrotus 3=594 Solon 4=593 Dropides

47, 1=592 Eucrates? 2=591 Simon 3=590 [Simon, in Marmor

Parium]

Jerome places Solon in 392: and the Armenian version of Eusebius in 590. 592 is already occupied by Eucrates, and 590 (in the Alarmor Parium, see § 2n) possibly by Simon. The text of c. 14 § 1 appears to place Solon 31 years before the archonship of Comeas (B.C. 560), 7.¢. in 591. But if Solon is placed in 591, Philombrotus and Dropides must be placed in g92 and sg9e, which are already

S. A.

assigned to other archons. Again, if Comeas is (by another method of reckon- ing) assigned to 561, Solon falls in 592, the year assigned to Eucrates. Eucrates, however, may really belong to a later date. Sosicrates (af. Diog. Laert. i ror) places him in Ol. 47 (592—589) and makes Anacharsis visit Solon during the archonship of Eucrates. But Solon left Athens for ten years when his own archonship was over, so that, if Sosicrates (our only authority for Eucrates) is right about the date of the visit of Anacharsis, Eucrates cannot be earlier than 583. On the year of Solon’s archonship, cf. Clinton, Fasti, ii 298; Fischer’s Gr. Zeittafeln, p. 114; and Busolt, i 524.

If Solon was archon in 594, and if ‘in the fifth year’ means four years after Solon, then the first year of anarchy falls in 590, and the second in 586. Then, if dua THv alravy xpbvwy is retained in the sense, ‘after the same interval of time,’ z.¢. four years later, the archonship of Damasias begins in 582. This is Mr Kenyon’s view. In this calculation the first period of four years of peace must include either the year of Solon’s archon- ship or the first year of anarchy; and the second period must include one of the years of anarchy.

On the other hand, if the first ‘four years’ extend from B.C. 593 to 590, then the first year of anarchy is 589; again, if éree wéumtw is taken as meaning ‘five years afterwards,’ the second year of anarchy is 584. Further, if oa ray alrwy xpévev is regarded as an inter- polation, the beginning of the rule of Damasias follows at once in 583. This is the view of Bauer, and of Kaibel and Wilamowitz. But the first year of Damasias coincides with that in which the Pythian festival was transformed into an dyav orepavirns, and the festival was held in the third year of each Olympiad, whereas 583 is the second year. The opinion that it fell in the second year of the Olympiad, which has been inferred from Thuc. iv 117 and v1, is refuted in Clinton’s Fastz, ii p. 195= 2453.

"Kostas if the archonship of Solon is placed in s91, the years of anarchy may be put at intervals of four years in 587 and 583. Then, if && rdv abrwv xpbvev

4

on

50

AOHNAIQN

COL, 5, 1. 3—7.

4 f y apxnv od karéornoay apyovra Sia THY otlac]|w, Kal mad ére A \ réunte <dia> THy avtHy aitiay dvapxiay érolncay. pera 8é e vy A tadTa Sua Tav avtadv ypovov Alaplalcias aipe]Oels dpywy ern

RII 4 OYKATECTHCAN (K-W, K3): od« éwéorqoay K) (H-L). 18 didéxew continentur fragmenti Berolinensis in pagina secunda. AITIANAPXAIAN: alrlay dvapxlay Campbell, Jackson, 6 bia Tay abray xpdvwy secl. K-w; did Tob

add. e papyro Berol. Housman, Burnet, K-w, H-L, K%, atrot xpévov? Herwerden.

4 dpxovra— 5 <dd>

be omitted, we get 582 as the first year of Damasias. This is the view of T. Reinach and of Poland. It has the advantage of leaving the text in c. 14 § 1 untouched, and it gives a date for Damasias which is consistent with Pau- sanias x 7, §, where the first Pythian ayer oarepavirns, which coincided with the first year of Damasias, is placed in

dar, was five years before Damasias, may provisionally be placed in 587, instead of 590, the year assigned to it by the Parian Marble; but 587 was on this view a year of anarchy; hence it is not improbable that Simon was really archon in 586.

All the above views agree in placing the beginning of the archonship of Dama- sias later than 586 B.c., in or about 582.

582. If so, the archonship of Simon The following is a conspectus of the views which, according to the Scholiastson Pin- | above mentioned. Mr Kenyon | aa°K'W, | and Poland

Solon, archon 594 594 591

First period of 4 years eae 593-590 591-588

First year of anarchy 590 589 587

Second period of 4 years oP eh 588-585 586-583

Second year of anarchy 86 584 583

Third period of 4 years eee nil nil

Damasias, archon 582 583 582

A space of 13 years, 594 to 582 in- clusive, does not allow of three periods of four years, and four years besides. It only admits of three periods of three years (and four years over). But these can only be obtained by altering rérrapa into tpla and méurrw twice into Te- tapry. This, however, would perhaps be going too far.

§ 2. Aapaclas] On the discovery of the Berlin fragments, much controversy arose respecting the Damasias there men- tioned. It was at first proposed to identify him with Damasias I, the archon of 639 B.c. This opinion was conclusively refuted by Diels (Beriin Acad. 1885, p. 12); and, now that we have the context of the fragment before us, it is obvious that Damasias IT can alone be meant.

Hitherto the determination of the date of Damasias II has depended on a mu- tilated passage in the Parian Marble.

(This important chronological document was bought in Smyrna by an agent of Thomas Howard, Earl of Arundel and Surrey, 1585—1646, and sent to Arundel House in 1627. It was first edited by Selden, 1628. In 1667, at the instance of John Evelyn, Letters, Aug. 4, 1667, Diary, Sept. 19, Oct. 8, 17, 25, it was presented by the Earl’s grandson to the University of Oxford, and in 1676 it was edited once more by Prideaux. After being preserved for many years in the Ashmolean Museum, it was removed to the University Galleries in 1889. It has been edited by Boeckh, cic ii 2374, and C. Miiller, ruc i 535—s90. The authority for the chronology recorded in this Marble is probably Phanias of Eresos, a pupil of Aristotle. The dates are reckoned by the number of years that had elapsed before the archonship of Diognetus, B.c. 264—3.)

CH. 13, 1. 4—9,

dto Kai Svo phvas ipkev, gws e&nrdOn Bla rhs apyns.

TIOAITEIA SI

Ca €lT

&oke[v] adrois da 76 craciatew dpyovtas érécOar Séxa, révte pev evrrarpiday, tpels Se d[yploixwy, di0 S& Snurovpydv, cab odrot

7 €ZHAACOH: correxerunt Richards, K-w, H-L (K3).

<é€k>rijs dpxfis H-L.

9 dmolkwy Berol.; litterae p partem inferiorem cerni posse putat K.

TESTIMONIA. 9 Hes. dypodrat dypotxoe (locus infra exscriptus).

The passage, with which we are con- cemed, is restored as follows: Il. 53— 54, [ap od "Auguxrdoves évixnoay éd]dvTes Kuppay, cat 6 dyov 6 yuurixds éréOn xpnuarirys dd Trav Aaptpwr, érn HH[H] AAIII (327), dpxovros ’AGHvynor Dluwvos. dg ob [év Aedgols orepjavirys dyav wadw éré0n, érm HHHA..II, dpxovros ’APHvnoe Aapactov toi Sevrépov. The interval be- tween the year of Diognetus and that of Damasias is here denoted by the symbols HHHA..II (312). (a) Boeckh and C, Miiller insert DI (6), thus making the number 318; (4) Chandler and Clinton, A (10), making it 322; while Dopp (the latest editor) proposes AI (11), making it 323. The corresponding dates B.c. are: (a) §82/1 or 581/o, according as we reckon exclusively or inclusively; or (4) 586/5, according as we reckon in- clusively with 323 or exclusively with 322. But the archonship of Damasias coincides with a Pythian festival; this excludes 581 and leaves us the choice between 886 and 582.

It has been urged in favour of 586/5 that Diog. Laert. 1 i 22 describes Thales and the other Wise Men of Greece as flourishing in the archonship of Dama- sias; and that 586/5 would be an ap- propriate year to mark their epoch, be- cause the eclipse predicted by Thales took place on May 28, 585 B.c. (Cf. Busolt, i 493.)

On the other hand, 582/1 is supported by Pausanias (x 7, 4—5), who implies that the first dywy oredavirys was in 582/1, and the last dyav -xpynyarirys in 586/5.

It may here be suggested, that probably the first year of Damasias coincided with the first celebration of the Pythian games after their transformation into an dydv orepavirns, z.e. with 582. Subsequently, a confusion may have arisen between the year of that celebration and the actual year in which the change was made (586). The archonship of Damasias was thus put four years too early. If the archonship of Simon coincided with the last dyav Xenparirys and if that dyay was four

years earlier than the change in the Pythian games (586), it follows that the archonship of Simon must be put in 590. Simon is placed in that year in the Parian Marble; and the evidence of the text, which gives at least ro years between the year of Solon and that of Damasias, points to 582 as the year of Damasias.

If Damasias was archon in 582, Solon would by that date have returned to Athens after his absence of ten years (593—584 inclusive). This may be held to favour the conjecture of Diels (Berd. Acad. 1885, p. 13 f.) that Solon refers to the usurpation of Damasias in fragm. 32 and 33, quoted in Plut. Sol. 14, ef 6é vis épecoduny xrr., and od épu Zorwv Badippwyv. The trochaic passage quoted above in c. 12 has been ascribed to the same poem, pds Pwxov.

é&nAdOn] The form éémddoOy is given in the papyrus and in the restoration of the Berlin fragment by Blass é&y\d[o]Oy. For 4AdoOnv Veitch, s.v. éAatvw, quotes Diod. Sic. 20, 51, cuv- Plut. Caes. 17. Gaisford, however, edits dm- and éé- nracOnv in Hdt. iii 54, vii 6 &c [Hdt. vii 6 e&n\doOntrd ‘Immdpxou...é&’APnvéwr. é&mddoOn cod. Florentinus: é&y\d@n ad. iii 51 and i 173, ééedac@els, in the latter passage the cod. Parisinus has ééedadels].

dpxovtas—Séxa] Owing toa lacuna in the Berlin fragment, which only mentions the three archons elected by the second class and the two by the third, it was supposed that the first class elected four, making nine archons in all. It now ap- pears that in this particular year the number was ten. This election was a reactionary measure. It implied an aban- donment of the classification by assess- ment which was the cardinal point of Solon’s constitution.

dypolkwv] The Berlin fragment has dmotkwy. There is a similar confusion in 1. 2 of the poems of Herondas, where ATTOIKIHC was first written and then corrected into ATPOIKIHC. The usual name for this class is yewudpoe (Plut. Thes. 25; Bekker’s Anecd. Gr. 257, 73 Etym. Mag. p. 395, 50, &c), or yewpyol

4—2

52 AOHNAIQN COL. 5, 1. 7—18. 10 Tov peta Aapaciay [j]pEalpy é]lvautov. @ Kat SArov ru weyiorny elyev Sivauiv 6 dpyov' daivovrar yap del ot[aloudfovres mept TaUTHS THs apyfs. Sdws Se Sierédovy vooodyTes TA Mpds EavTods, 3 of pév apyny Kal mpdpacw éxovtes THY TAY ypedy arroKoTHD, Cad + > a ¥ , € Q lol # ouveBePricer yap abrols yeyov’vas mévqaw, of be yi Tonureig 15 Suaxepaivovres Sid TO peyaddny yeyovévat petaBoryyv, evior 8é [1a thy] pds GAApAOvS Pirovixiav. joav [8] ai crdcess Tpeis, 4 pla pev THY Tapariov, dv mpoeaotiKker MeyaxdrHs 6 AXKpEwvos, oli |rep éd0xouy partota SioKxew Thy wéonv modtTelav: ddA Sé fal a Oy \ A / > 4 € lal ? 4 a TOY TedvalKav], ol THY ddvyapyiav elnTouv, Hyetto 8 av’tav Av-

20

koupyos: Tpitn & 7 Trav Siaxpiwv, éf’ 7 TeTaypévos Hv Ilewciotpa-

12 vocotvres 16 joay [5°] K, H-L: qoay dé Berol. (K-w, 8). 6é: ‘an & 4?’ Blass. 19 éfyrow: égfdouv hic

11 ddvapuy etxev Berol. del Berol. (H-L): aret (K, K-W, B). om. Berol. 15 6é: weév Berol. 18 olzrep: of 6é (ut videtur) Berol. et c. 34 § 3 coniecit Bury (H-L).

TESTIMONIA. 16—20 Schol. Arist. Vesp. 1223...xaT& yap ros Zddwvos vouous Tpeis Hoay al rdées (sic), mila wev TOv wapadrlwy, Gv mpoecorHKcer Meyaxdhs, érépa 8¢ Trav mediiéwy, wv mpoeorixe. AuKkodpyos, Tplty bé TOv Staxpluv, oy

mpoeoryxer Ilecolorparos.

(Schol. on Plat. Axzoch. p. 253, Moeris, 5.v. yervyral). But dypouxor is the term used in Dion. Halic. ii 8 (after men- tioning the evrarplda:), d-ypoixous dé (éxd- Aovy) rods &ddous moAlras of THY Kowa ovdevds joav Kipior’ ody xpbvw dé Kal ovToL TpocednpOnoay érl ras dpxds. Cf. Hesych. 5.U, dy potGrac’ dypoxo. Kkal-yévos’AA}- yyoww, of dvTiitecTéAXovro pds Tovs Eéma- tpl6as. jv dé ray yewpyav. Kal tplrov Td tév Snysovpy@v. (Landwehr in Philo- Jogus, Suppl. v, 1889, p. 139—158, Dze dret Stinde in Attika.)

§ 3. vorotvtes] of faction, c. 6 near end.. of pev...of 8%...evuor 88] The first two are different sections of the Eupatridae, some of whom resented the loss of money involvedin Solon’s ced Gera, while others lamented the loss of political influence ; besides these, a few were actuated by the mere spirit of factious rivalry.

§ 4. oTdoas tpeis...rav tapadlov .. Tay TeiaKay... trav Staxplov] Hadt. i 59, (Peisistratus) craciagévrwy rav ma- pdrwv kal trav éx rod medlov ’Abn- valwy, Kal r&v pév mpoecredros Meryaxdéos Tov ’ANkuéwvos Trav O¢ éx Tod medlov Av- kovpyou ’Aptcrohatiew, Karadpovijcas Thy tupavvlda iryepe tplrnv ordow, ovAdéEas dé cragusras kal TY Ay Tov drepa- kplwv, mpooras mnxavarat rodde. (Dion. Hal. i 13, ws dmepaxplous rids Kal mapa-

Nous ’AOqvyow.) Plut. Sol. 29, of dé &v Gores éoraclafov dirodnpoivros Tov ZéAwvos* kal mpoeorixer tov pev TWedsdwy Av- Koipyos, tav dé TlapddXwv Meyaxdijs 6 "Arkpaiwvos, Tealorparos dé tay Ara- kplwv, év ols qv 6 Onrixds bxdos Kal uddiora Tols TAovolos dxOdpevos, 26. 13 (of the ordoes just before the legislation of Solon), thy wakady adfis ordaw bmep Tis wodtrelas éoractafov, dcas 7 xwoa Stadopas elxev, els tocalra pépn Tis mévews diacrdons' qv yap To wey Tuv Acaxplwy yévos Syuoxpariuwrarov, éh- yapxinwrarov dé rd trav Tedtdwy rplro & of Idpadoe péoov twa Kal peucypévov alpovpevor modtrelas Tpbmoy éumodwy joay kal StexwAvoy rods érépous xparfoa (Mo- ralia 805 D trav Acaxplwy...rév Tledtéwy Tov Tlapadtwr, 763 D Ilapddhwy, *Esa- xplov, Tledcéwv). ITedcets is the form found in Diog. Laert. i 58, and Schol. on Arist. Vesp. 1223, « confused account (founded on this passage, see Zestimonia), in which the rdtes, as they are there called, are apparently regarded as the result of So- lon’s legislation. Suidas ». v. Tdpahko mentions the Iledidovor and Acaxpto

On these three parties, cf. Schomann, Ant. p. 327 f., E. T.; Gilbert, i 126 f.5 Duncker, 6, 447 f.

For the form meStaxdv,cf. Pol, viii (v) 1305 @ 21—24, mavres dé TodTo Edpwv d1d To0 Syuou morevOdvres, } 5é wlaris WT

CH. 13, 1. 1o—26,

TIOAITEIA

53

Ld 9 A 5 ros, Onulor]i[«]itatos elvar Soxdv. mpocexexdopnvto 8é Tovrous vA ’ t \ t 8 \ \ > t \ € lal 4 \ ot re ad[nlonuévor ta ypéa bia THY arrop[ijav, Kal of TO yéver py \ Ao poK Fe a n Kabapot Sia Tov poBov' cnpeiov &, bts peta THY <TaY > TUpdvYaV t ? f \ € Led # n katddvow étroincay Siarpndiopov @s TOAABY KOLVwVOUYTwY TIS

mouTEias ov TpoahKov. t[d]arav év ols éyedpryour.

5 2 7 ee) ay a eLyov r) EKACTOL TAS érrovupias avo TMV

21 mpocexexdAdAnvTo H-L, Kontos, Gennadios; mpocevervéunvro Butcher, coll. Dem. O/. ii 29 mpoovevéunode of ev ws Tovrous, ol dé ws éxelvous, Ep, iii 2 rats Tov Oyjou mpoaipécect mpocévemev cavTdv, Aristog. i 43 mpooveuovres abrods ToUTY.

23 rév addiderunt Rutherford, Blass, Gennadios, K-w, H-L (K%).

24 AlAduH-

MICMON : Stayngiopor scripsi, idem scripserunt Blass, K-w, H-L (K%).

dréx Pera 7) pds Tods mAovalous, ofov ’AG}- vol te [leolorparos aractacas mpds Tovs mediaxovs.

Sypotiucdraros] 14 §1; 16 § 8; 22 § 3.

§ 5. mpocekexoopnvrTo] ‘had joined their ranks’ ; the compound verb is not found elsewhere in this sense.

ot re—pdBov] The faction of Peisis- tratus was joined by those whom Solon’s legislation had deprived of the debts due to them. The allegiance of these was prompted by their losses. Peisistratus was also joined by those who were not of pure descent. The latter were afraid of the oligarchical faction gaining the as- cendency and depriving them of the privileges of citizenship in consequence of their inferior birth.. Landwehr, who doubts whether the parties really existed before the time of Solon (Phzlo/. Suppl. v 155), suggests that of dpypnudvor ra xpéa are the capitalists belonging to the aapadtor who had lost their money, where- as the wedvaxol still had their land.

ompetov 8’—mrpoojKov] The writer in- fers that the party of Peisistratus included persons of dubious origin from the fact that, after the rule of the Peisistratidae was brought to an end, there was a revi- sion of the list of citizens. Cf. note on 8§ 1, d0ev are dapéver.

Siaydiopsv] The word occurs in Athenaeus, 218 A, dtaypiouds 6 ~yerd- Hevos kara Twv "Hpacwldnvy orparnyuv. The verb is used inc. 42§ 1,1. 4, dcan¢l- fovra. The admission of citizens took place in their 18th year, when, if their title to citizenship was sufficiently proved, they were entered on the register called AnbapyeKxor ypauparetov and (probably two years afterwards) in the iva éxxAnowaort- xés. The lists of citizens were revised on special occasions, particularly when there was reason for suspecting that a number of persons had been improperly regis-

tered. The names were then read one by one from the register, and, as each was read, it was asked whether any objections were to be made to it. Such objections were discussed and evidence brought forward, so that the matter could not be despatched in one assembly, but required several meetings of the members of the deme (Dem. Zubulides § 9 seq.). If, finally, a vote was taken, and the result was unfavourable, the name was struck out (Schémann, Anz. 368 f. E.T.). See esp. Dem. Zudu/. (an appeal against the vote of the Syuoral, who had struck the speaker off their list) § 7, év rots Snué- Tas—rTiv diayjpiow yevéoOat, § 15, mepl aravrwy Tay Snuordy diapnploacbar, § 62 TH mporépg dtayydioe. Hitherto, the ear- liest known revision of the roll of citizens has been that in the archonship of Lysi- machides B.C. 445/4 (Philochorus in Schol. on Ar. Vesp. 718; Plut. Pericles 37. Phi- lippi, however, contends that the pro- cedure of diayypiots was not resorted to on this occasion, Burgerrecht, pp. 34 —4g). The next was in the archonship of Archias, 346 B.c. Cf. Harpocr. ». v, dta- Pigs: ldlws Aéyerat éwi ray év Tois Sipos ekeracéwy, al ylyvovrac epl éxaorov trav Snpworevouévuy, ef TE bvre wodlrys Kal Snudryns éotly } mapeyyéypamrac févos dy: Aloxluns xara Tiuapyou (§ 77, yeyovace diaynploes év roils Shuos, xal exacros tuav Wipov bédwxe repl Tod ocdparos, boris "AOnvatos dvtws earl kal doris uh). évredéorara dé dcethexrau repli Tov Siayn- gloewy, ws yeysvacw émt Apxlov dpxovros, "Avdporlwy év rh ’ATOLd Kal Bcddbxopos év S’ 77s ArOldos. Cf. Schol. Aeschin. 1 §$ 77, 1143 Hermann, Staatsalt. § 121, 19, and Meier and Schémann, p. 989 Lips.

elxov 8° tkacror—eyedpyouv] ‘These parties derived their respective designa- tions from the districts in which they held their lands,’ the Plain, the Shore

54

AOHNAIQN

COL. 5, l. 18—27.

14. Snpotixwrtatos 8 eivas Soxdv 6 Ieciotparos, cal opddp’ eddoxiyunnas ev 7S mpds Meyapéas odtum, Katatpavpatioas éavtov cuvéreice Tov Shor, &s [b]a[o] Tév dvTictaciwTév Taira metrovOla]s, puraxny éavt@ Sodvat Tob cwpatos, “Apiotiwvos

5 Lylpléhpavros tiv younv. AaBewv Sé Tols Kopuynddpovs Kadov-

XIV 2 nddoxiunkws H-L.

3 bd K-wW (K°, B): mapd K},

and the Mountain (or Highlands), The men of the Mountain led a hard life in the uplands of Parnes which afforded pasturage for sheep and goats, and were scantily supplied with the fruits of the field or of trees. (2) The men of the Shore enjoyed more abundant means of support in the building of boats, in ferry- ing and fishing, and in the manufacture of salt. (3) The men of the Plain formed the wealthiest class, with their groves of olives in the valley of the Cephisus and their fields of corn stretching inland from Eleusis. (Cf. Curtius, 7. G., i311 E. T.) Grote, c. 11, ii p. 300 n, observes that Plu- tarch’s description of the men of the Plain, as representing the oligarchical tendency, and the men of the Mountain, the demo- cratical, is ‘not quite accurate when ap- plied to the days of Solon. Democratical pretensions, as such, can hardly be said to have existed.’ Plutarch (or the autho- rity he follows in c. 13) possibly makes these parties come into existence too early ; elsewhere, c. 29, he places them after Solon’s time, probably on the autho- rity of the text, which distinctly describes the men of the Plain as oligarchical in spirit. XIV § 1. evSoxupnkds—rroddpo] Hat. i 59, mpérepov evdoxtunoas év 7H mpds Me- yapéas yevouevy otparnyln, Nioady re éAay Kal G\Aa darodeEduevos peydda epya. Plut., SoZ. 8, mentions the long and dis- tressing war with Megara for the pos- session of Salamis, and describes Peisistra- tus as taking the lead in supporting Solon in his endeavour to rouse the people to fight once more for the recovery of the ‘island. At the end of c. g he says of Solon, évlknoe rovs Meyapéas. He im- plies that the war for the possession of Salamis was the origin of Solon’s in- fluence in Athens; if so, it can hardly be put later than 600 B.c. But Daimachus of Plataea (third century B.C., quoted in “ Plut. Sol. e¢ Popl. comp. 4) denied that Solon acted as general in the war against Megara. That Peisistratus took any prominent part in a war as early as 600 B.C. is improbable, as he lived to 527 B.c.

(Abbott, H. G., i 400 n). Solon, who was some 30 years older than Peisistratus, took a leading part in the conquest of Salamis before he was archon, 2.e. pos- sibly about 600 B.c.; Peisistratus in the capture of Nisaea, probably about 570 B.c. (Busolt, i 521 n). Curtius (i 672, note 135) places the capture of Nisaea in 565, and Holm (i 481) shortly before the tyranny. Inc. 17 we are told that the relative ages of Solon and Peisistratus make it impossible to accept the story that the latter was orparnyés in the war with Megara for the possession of Salamis (2.2. the frst Megarian war), in which Solon was concerned. Salamis and Ni- saea were, however, recaptured by the Megarians (Plut. So/. 12); and Pesistra- tus may have distinguished himself in a subsequent war with the Megarians for the recovery of the island.

Katatpavpatioas «7A.] Hdt. i 59, Tpwuaticas éwuréy Te Kal Hucdvous Hace és thy dyophy 7d feiyos ws exmrepevyurs Tovs éxOpovs, of pv edadvovra és dypdv HOAncav droréca ShOev, edderd re rod Ojuou pudakis twds mpds avrod Kupicau... 6 d& Sjuos 6 Tay ’AOnvaluy éfararnbels, &wxé ol tov dordv xaraddias dvipas Tov- Tous of dopuddpa pev otk éyévovro Ile- aiotparov Kopurnddpor 5é* EvAwY yap Kopt- vas éxovres elrovré ol bricbe* ouveraya- ordvres 6€ obrot dua Ileowrpdry eoxov Thy axporokv. Plut. Sol. 30 § 1, kararpu- cas abrds éavrév 6 Ileciorparos. Polyaen. i 21 § 3 and Diogen. Laert. i 60 have karatpwoas, or karérpwoev, 2. § 66 éauT@ Tpavpara mowjoas. Diod. Sic. xiii 95 end, (of P.) éavray katrarpavuaricavra mpoedOeiv. Kxararpavyarifw is also found: in Polyb. xv 13 § 1, Dion. Halic. and Dio Cass.

*Apiorrlwvos x7h.]_ Plut. Sol. 30 § 2, *Aplatrwvos (sic) 6€ -ypdyyavros, drws So00Go. TevrjKxovra Kopuynpopa Te Iet- orpary PvAakh Tod cwHpmaros.

kopuvnddpous] Plat. Rep. 566 B, 7d OF Tupayvixoy alryua Td moAvOpvdAynTOv...alr¢iv Tov Sfuov gbdAakds Twas Tod odparos. Ar. Rhet. i 2, 19, Ieotorparos ém- Bovdevwr Free pudakiy kai AaBav érupdy-

CH. 14, 1. I—13. TOAITEIA

55

\ pévous, éravactas peta TovTwV TH Onuw KaTéaye THY axpdTroduy , \ nn a éret tSevtépwt Kal tpraxooT® peta THY TOY vowwv Oéow, él Fu Ya 2 K[wp]éov dpyovtos. Déyeras Sé Lorwva, evcwstpdrov rhv \ 7 A > L \ » oA e a \ ” guranny aitovytos, avTidéEas Kai eimei[y S]re Tav pev ely 3 sopetepos, THY S avdpesd[Tepo]s* Soo wev yap ayvoodar Tleuct- otpatop émutiGéwevoy Tupar[vidi], copwTepos elvat TovTwr, door & PINEA n > v e > \ x ed > yw eid0TES KaTAaTLWTAaLY, avdpetoTepss. émrel 5é Neyer [ovK Erres|Oev, eEapapuevos Ta Strha mpd TAY Oupdv-avTos pev pn BeBonOnnévar 7 devrépy: 5’ (=rerdprw) K-w et Bauer (B). 8 TTICICTpaTOY ut saepe:

Teo. ubique K® etc. 12 KATACIWTTWNTEC: correxit K. ovk éredev R D Hicks (K-w, H-L, K*). 13 EZalpameNoc: eéapduevos K (K-W, H-L).

TESTIMONIA. 8—15. Verbis fere isdem rem narrat Aelianus, Var. Hist. viii 16: ...(Zddov) egy bre rv we éore copibrepos, T&v dé dvdpedrepos’ dmdco wey mh yuww- oxovow bre pudakny AaBov rept 7} odpe. Tbpavvos éorat, dAAQ ToUTwY wey éore sopa- Tepos* drdoo de “yuvdo coves drogwraot, ToTwy avdperbrepbs éorw. 6 5€ AaBav rh Sivayuv Tdpavvos Hv. Kabefbuevos 5¢ Tédrwv mpd Ths olxtas, ty domléa kat 7d dédpu

mapadéuevos Ereyev bre cErcorac Kal BonOe? 7H marplde 7 dvvarac.

vevoe. Pol. viii (v) Q» 1310 4 15, oxedov yap of mreloro. THY TUpayywr ‘yeysvacw éx Snuoryerycav ws elwety, micrevOévres éx Tod diaBadrew Tors yrwptuous, and 2b. 30, ofov

.. Leclorparos ’A@jvyot...ék Snuaywyias répavvos karéorn.

karérye viv aKporoAw] Plut. Sod, 30 § 4, THv dxpbrodkw Karéoxe. Phaedrus 12, 5, arcem tyrannus occupat Pisistratus. The political importance of the citadel in revolutions is exemplified in Juv. x 307 n, Lucan viii 490, Diod. Sic. xvi 70 § 4, Plut. Zimol. 20 § 1 (Mayor).

ere—rtpiakorr] As Comeas was archon in 560 B.C., it would follow from the manuscript text that Solon was archon in 591. But, as Solon was more probably archon in 594, Sevrépy should be altered into rerdprw, the former being possibly a corruption of §. We thus get an interval of 33 years and keep the usual date for Solon’s archonship (Bauer, p.

45 f).

én Kapéov] Plut. Sol. 32, émeluce 8 ofy 6 Zédww dpfayevou rob Tleotorpdrov Tupavveiy, as per‘ Hpaxheldns 6 Tlovrixds lorope?, auxvov xpbvov, ws dé avlas 6 Epe- otos EXdt Tova Suoty érav. én Kuplov dp- Xovros pev yap Hptaro” tupavvety Ile- siorparos, 颒 “Hyeorpérov be Tdrwvd, gnow 6 6 Savias drodaveiy Tot wera Kwplav dpavros. (Plutarch is possibly quoting from the work of Phanias, on rupdvvwy dvalperts eeriueplas, Oncken, Staatslehre, ii 445 n.)

The present treatise and the Politics, v

5, 23, agree in stating that Peisistratus lived for 33 years after usurping the government of Athens; the Peisistratidae ruled for 18 years (Pol. Z.c.), and the interval between their expulsion and the battle of Marathon was 19 years (Thuc. vi 59). Thus the rule of Peisistratus be- gan 70 years before B.C. 490, 2.¢. in 560. The year given by the Parian Marble (297+ 264/3=) 561/o (as well as by

Jerome and the Armenian version of

Eusebius) must be corrected to 560 (Clinton’s Fast2, sub anno).

§ 2. elweiv dr. rav—dvSpedrepos] Plut. Sol. 30, dpwv 6e rods mer TévyTas dpynud- vous xaplfecOar r@ Tletovorparw Kal Oopv- Bodvras, ros dé movatous darodi8pdoxovras kat drrodevALavras, drrGev elrdv, ore Tov pév éore copdrepos, Trav dé dvdpedrepos* copwrepos mev Tw un cuviévTa Td TpatTb- pevov, dvdperorepos b¢ Tar cumévrww pév, évavtiodcbar 5é TH Tupavvlé. PoBovpévew. Cf. Diog. Laert. i 49—50, 65; Aelian Var. Hist. viii 16 (who tells the story in almost the same words as the text) ; and Aristid. i765 Dind. The story i also told in Valer. Max. v 3 E 3, os

e€apdpevos ta baka] Plut. Sol. 30, obdeves dé mpootXovTos aire ba Tov Popov anpdbev els Triv olklay THY éavrod Kai AaBav 7a Sarda kal po ray Bupeav Oéuevos els Tov orevur dy, “éuol ev” elirev ‘as Swwarov fw BeBonOnka TH mar ploe Kai Tots vous.” Moralia 794 B, 6 5¢ Zoku, Tis Tleowrpdrou Snuaywylas sre Tupavy Koy fy pnxavnua pavepis yevoudvys, undevos

I

om

56

AOHNAIQN

COL, 5, lL. 27—37.

TH warpibs Kal’ dcov jv Suvards (jdn yap odddpa rpecBurns 7y), aEvobv € Kat rods ddXous Tad’Td TodTO Trotely. Yorov [wey ody 3 ov]dev fwucev toTe Tapaxaddv: Ileciotpatos Sé AaBav TH

3 ry had apxny Sidker TA Koa TOALTLKOS WAAAY 7} TYPAVYLKaS.

obmew é

THS apxAs éppilouevns opodpovncavtes [oi] wept Tov Meyaxdéa kal Tov Avxod[pyoly é&éBarov avtov ext érer peTa THY TEOTHY

16 fvuoe H-L,

dpiverOar unde xwtew ToAuavros, adros eLeveyxduevos ra Bada Kal mpo THs olxlas Oépevos, HElov BonOeiv rods modlras. Diod. Sic. ix 29 Bekker, ovdevds 62 atr@ mpocé- Xovros dvadaBewv rHv mavomdlay mpondrGev eis THY dryopay yeynpaxds, Kal rods Beods emimaprupopevos epynoe Kal NOyy Kal Eoyw TH Tarpld. Kwéivvevoton BeBonOnkevar 7d kar’ atrov uépos. Grote, il 352, says of this incident, as related by Plutarch: ‘As a last appeal, he put on his armour and planted himself in military posture before the door of his house.’ 6€uevos, however, is not used absolutely, but must be construed with dda.

§ 3. ToAuTiKds pAAAOv 7] TUpavviKds] Cf. inf. c. 16§ 8. Hadt. i 59, obre reas ras éoloas owvrapdéas ore Oéopia peradddéas, éml re rotor xarecrewot eveue THY modw koopéwy Kadws Te kal eb. Thuc. vi 54. For wodirixas, cf. (with Mr Wyse) Isocr. iv 79, 151; ix 46, Zp. ii 3.

otto St—é€Badov airdv] Hat. i 60, mera 5& ob aroddov xpdvov twuTd ppovi)- cavtes of re TOD Meyaxdéos oraciwrar Kal ol rod Avxodpyou, éedavvovel pu. obrw wev Tleolorparos toxe 7d mpwrov ’AOjvas, cal Thy Tupavvida otkw Kdpra éppitwmé- yyy exwv daréBade.

éxrw ere] The sixth year from 560/59 would be 555/4.

The following are the notes of time given in the manuscript text for the chronology of Peisistratus :

14§1. Beginning of rule. éri Kwuéou.

14§3. First exile. &krw éret.

14§4. First return. éret dwoexdrw meta radra.

15 § 1. Second exile. érec pddtora €Bdbuq.

15 § z Second return. évdexdry.., ere,

17 § 1. Total duration of rule. (én)

évds Séovra elkoot.

7. Death, 33 years from beginning of rule. émi Ditovéw dpxovros..éry Tp dxovra. kat pla,

The above data alone account for a total of at least (5+11+6+10=) 32 years; and, as Peisistratus lived for

33 years after usurping the government, they leave only one year for the third period of rule. But c. 17 § 1 tells us that he ruled for 19 years in all; if so, his third period of rule must have lasted (19-5-6=) 8 years. On the other hand, the passage in Pol. v g § 23, p. 1315 6 32, gives 17 years for the total duration of his rule, thus leaving 6 years for the third period. The chronology has been much discussed both before and after the discovery of this treatise. The following table gives a conspectus of some of the arrangements proposed. As typical in- stances, before the discovery of this treat- ise, I have selected Clinton (Fas¢z, vol. ii, Appendix 11) and Busolt (i 551). To these I have added the years as arranged by Bauer (Forschungen 2u Ar.’ AQ. tod.), and Poland (in the notes to his German transl.). Thus far the chronology pro- posed accords, in the total number of years of rule and exile, with the data in the olitics. The other two estimates, those of Mr Kenyon and M. Th. Reinach, adhere more closely to the data of the present treatise.

S/alalelula Ist Tupavvis 6/576 1/5 |6/5 st exile 6 61/6 |4 /3 and tupavvis 1/1]71)6/6/6 and exile to | 11} 10 | 10 | 10 | ro 3rd tupavvis 10] 11)11|) 6 | 8 jc9 years of rupavvis| 17| 17] 17| 17| 19 |c.20) years of exile 16 | 16 | 16 | 16 | 14 |c.13

It will be observed that there is a general consensus as to the duration of the first rupayyls and the second exile. The greatest discrepancies are in the duration of the second and third rupavyls.

CH. 14, l. 14—28. TIOAITEIA

57

/ 399 ¢ P ” BA / \ 4 xatactacw, eb “Hynaoiov dpyovtos. érev 6€ tdmdexdt@t peta 20 lo £ an TavTa TepteAauvomevos 0 Meyardhjs TH oTacel, Taw éemiKNnpUKEL- f \ \ , 24? e ‘\ x 2 a aapevos pos [To]v Ileurictpatoyv ép @ Te THY Ovyatépa avTov # ¥ 3 ‘. > ” an _. Es © an AIppeTat, KaTHYayev adTov apyaixds Kal Riavy adds. TpO- Siaarreipas yap Noyov ws THs "AOnvas katayovons Lescictpator, \ a f \ \ 2 , © \ ¢ , , kal yuvaixa peyadny Kai Kady éEevpdv, os wév ‘Hpodords pyow éx tov Sypouv Tav Ilacaviéwy, ws 8 eviot Aéyouaw é« Tod KorduTob 4 a > rd otepavoTorww Opattav, 5 dvoua Dun, THv Oedv atropiunoapevos Tw Koopm cvvlecon|yayelvy] pet avTov, Kat o ev Ilevciotpatos

is)

5

20 dwoexdrw (K, H-L): rerdprw Thompson (K-w!); os

ravrny Bauer.

mwéunry K-w?, 21 raira:

23 apxalkwec dpyaixds (K, H-L, B), cf. Met. 1089 a 2 Bonitz

dpxaikas dmopioa: dpyalws H-w, cf. Pol. 13304 33 May dpxalws vrohapBdvover.

25 [kat] yuvaika K-w?, gnow: DH.

altera T, et fortasse altera A, suprascripta.

26 Ilacandy H-L. KOAYTOY, etiam 28 cuveiotyyayey (H-L, K%) potius

quam Kxariyayev (K}, K-w) in papyro legi putat K; elowyaye coniecerat Richards.

23 Plut. Sol. 3 § 5 (de alia re) dmdods éort Mav Kal dpxatos, unde apparet hanc

narrationem Plutarcho fuisse notam.

In the first exile, Bauer and Poland assume that grec dwdexdrw (14 § 4) is reckoned from the beginning of the usur- pation and that wera rafra is to be either omitted or altered into werd Tavrny ; while Mr Kenyon and M. Reinach alter Swoexdrw into rerdprw. In the second tupavvis, Bauer alters éret...€Bddum (15 § 1) into unvl...€Bdduw. For the length of the third rvpawis we have no data except those gained by subtracting the two earlier periods of rule from the total duration of actual rule. Of the above arrangements, Mr Kenyon’s alone strictly adheres to the total of 19 years. The 19 years of this treatise do not seem to admit of being reconciled with the 17 years of the Politics. It is suggested by Bauer that the difference may be obtained by supposing that the fractions of the years in the three periods of rule were excluded in one reckoning and included in the other. This would imply that each of the three periods of rule, as estimated in the present treatise, extended to an average of two-thirds of a year beyond the duration stated in the Politics. This -Js possible, but not probable. It may be added that the genuineness of the passage in the Politics is not certain. Susemihl, in his 2nd and 3rd editions, brackets the whole of the paragraph in which it occurs; and, even if both passages are equally due to Aristotle, the present treatise may possibly represent his latest views.

§ 4. ere SwSexdtw perd raita] This would naturally mean ‘ eleven years after the first exile.’ But the sum of the two periods of exile was (according to 17 § 1) 33-19, or 14 years; and the second exile lasted 10 years (15 § 2), leaving only four years for the first exile. Such a number of years may perhaps be obtained by altering dwdéxarw into rerdp- tw (see V. C.), and by assuming that the

symbol 6 followed by the erroneous ex- planation dexdrw led to the reading 6w- dexdrw. Another alternative (adopted in Kaibel and Kiessling’s transl.) is to count the eleven years from the beginning of the rule of Peisistratus. This involves either omitting werd rafra or altering it into mera rabryy (Thy rpwrny KaTdoracw). See Bauer, p. 50 f.

Treptedavvepevos xTr.] Hadt. i 60, repe- edauvduevos b€ TH ordce 6 Meyaxdijs émexnpuKeveto Ileouwrpdtw, el Bovdorrd ol riv Ouyardépa exew yuvaika eri rH Tupay- wld

Ovyarépa] Korovpay, Schol. Arist. Vid. 49, 800, and Suidas, s.v.

‘“Hpé8otos] i 60 ad fin., dv Te Syuy 7@ Tlaavés. This is the only passage in which any writer of prose is named in this treatise. The only poet quoted by name is Solon.

KodAvrod] Wachsmuth, Stadt Athen, ii 262 f.

$n] The Schol. on Arist. Zy. 449 calls her Mupplyy.

58 AQHNAIOQN COL. 5, l. 37—6, 1. 1.

éf’ pparos ciondavve twapaiBatovons THs yuvaikds, of & ev TO 30 dares mpocKuvobvtes edéyovTo OavpdfovTes.

15. 4 pev ody mpern Knabodos €[yév]eto TovadTn. pera 8é tadra, ws é&érece TO Sevrepov eres patiota EBddum pera THY Kabosov,—ot yap moddv ypdvov Karteiyev, GALA] Sia TO wy Botreo bat 7H ToD Meyaxdéous Ovyatpl ovyyiyverBar poBnbels au-

5 potépas Tas otacers UreEAAOEY Kal TpaTov péev ouvedKice Tepl tov @eppatov Kédrrov ywpiov & Kadeirar “Paixydos, éxeiBev 82 mapnrOev eis tors mept Ilayyasov rémous, S0ev yxpnuaticd-

30 mpocxuvooyres delet Gennadios rod Oavpdfovres interpretamentum arbitratus.

Oavudfovres delet Richards (H-L), defendit Gennadios coll. Xen. He//. i 6, 11. XV 2 TayTawce? (K, B): Tair’ ééérece K-W. Tair’ adOcs éfémece Gennadios (H-L).

éB5éuy: tplrw coni. K-w. Karéoxev B. 4 CYrrIN (K-w). 1A

(H-L, B). 6 pakHAoc.

3 KATECXEN, Karelyev Wyse (K-W, H-L, K%): dta- 5 owgxice: give coni. Gennadios, Hude

TwapatBarotons] A noteworthy Ionism, but not derived from the account in Hdt. The same word is used as a reference to the same incident in Cleide- mus, af. Athenaeum, 609 C, sredavbrrw- dis 6€ Fv, Kal abriy éf€dwxe mpds dou xowwviav 6 Ileolerparos ‘Immdpxy Te vig, ws Kreldnmos icropet év dydbwy vécrwv* “ékddwxe b¢ xal ‘Immdpyy TQ viel riv TapatBaTyoacay atm ywaika Biny, Thy Zwxpdrous Ovyarépa” (Miiller, FHG i 364). Cleidemus, who wrote an ’Ar@is (Athen. 235 A), has been identified with Cleitodemus, mentioned by Pausanias (x 15, 5) as the most ancient writer of Athenian history. Plutarch (Arést. 19)

' refers to his account of the battle of

Plataea ; so that his date is after 479 B.c.

The story is also told in Polyaen. i 21, 1; Val. Max. i 3, 3; Hermogenes de Invent. ii 185, 21 Spengel, with Schol.; and Phylarchus ag. Athen. 609 c (Mayor).

XV §r1. ere pddiora EBSdpo] It has been urged by Bauer (p. 51) and Rihl (Rhein. Mus. 1891, p. 442), that it is impro- bable that Megacles waited so long as six years to avenge the neglect of his daughter by her husband, Peisistratus; and the text implies that the duration of the second Tupavvis was short. Bauer accordingly suggests that éree should be altered into mwnvi, and for similar reasons K-W alter €B56um into rpirw. On the other hand it is plausibly suggested by Gomperz (p. 23 n) that the compact between Megacles and Peisistratus was made before the daughter of the former had attained a marriageable age.

Ti Tod Meyaxdéous Guyarpt) Hat. i 61, ola 6é maliwy ré of trapxdvTwy venvidwy kal Neyoudvew evaryéwy elvat Trav "ANkpwewv- wéwy, ob Bovdduevds of yevécOar ex Tis veoydpov yuvaixds Téxva éularyerd of ob kara véuov. ;

taeEnAOev] Hdt. i 61, dwadddocero éx Tis xwpas 7d wapdrav, dmixduevos bE és "Epérpiay éBovdevero dua Trois mal. Herodotus mentions the help offered by the Thebans and Argives, and byLygdamis of Naxos, and then continues: é ’Hpe- tplns 5é dpunbévres dia éviexdrou éreos dmlxovro drisw. Eretria alone is there mentioned in connexion with this period of exile.

§ 2. ‘Pafkndos] The Schel. on Lyco- phron, 1236, states that this was the old name of Aivos in Macedonia. It is identi- cal with the Atvera of Hdt. vii 123, and is situated to the S. of the promontory at the extreme west of Chalcidice, opposite the mouth of the Axius and Ludias. (There was another Alvos in Thrace, near the mouth of the Hebrus.)

tovs tept [Iciyyatov rérovus] the region near the mouth of the Strymon. Though Herodotus says nothing of this region in connexion with the second exile of Pei- sistratus, the account in the text is illus- trated by the passage in which the historian says of the tyrant on his final restoration: (i 64), éppl{woe tiv rupayvlda émixovpoot Te moddotot, Kal Xpnudrwr ovvddoiet, THY bev adrddev, ray 6¢ dard Drpupdvos To- Tapod cwisvrwy. Here rav wer and Trav 6é naturally refer to xpnudrwy alone, and ouvidyrwy in the second clause echoes

CH. 14, 1. 29—CH.15, 1.12. TOAITEIA

59

¥ pevos Kat otTpatidtas picbwoapevos, éXMwv eis "Epétpiay évde- iT mad éTres TO<TeE> TpOToY dvacw@oacba. Bia THv apy KaT@ patov avac@~aacba: Bia tiv apynv ei / f > n an i yy: érrexeiper, cvumpoOvpovpéevay aiTtS TodkdAov pev Kab adro?r, ‘4 pariota 66 OnBaiwv nai Avydauios tod Nakiov, éru dé Tév imméwv Tadv éxovtwv év Epetpia thy wodutelav. || vixnoas dé THV 3 x perpia Ti) fav. || ver 7)

J 9 ré<rTe> Blass (K-w, H-L, K%). c

ANACWCACOAI, dvacdoacba K3, B:

ANAKTHCACOAI?, dvaxrioacdac Herwerden (K-w).

TESTIMONIA. 12—13 *Schol. Arist. Ach. 234 laddqvade: of Iladdnvets dfjuds éore rhs ’Arrixis, Wa Tleoiorpdtw Bovdouévy rupavvetv kal "AOnvatos duuvopévos abrov cuvéotn modeuos...méuvytae dé Tovrov Kal ’Avdpotiwy xal Ap. év ’AO. mod. (Rose,

Frag. 355°, 393°)-

cuvddo.o. (=mpordéo.or) in the first. We may therefore agree with Thirlwall (ii p. 61), as against Grote (iii g2 n), who refers Tov pev to xpnudrwv and ray dé to ém- kovpoot. Thirlwall had said of Peisis- tratus that he ‘possessed lands on the Strymon in Thrace, which yielded him a large revenue.’ Grote thought this im- probable, adding: ‘If Peisistratus had established any settlement at the mouth of the Strymon, we must surely have heard something of it afterwards.’ The text does not indeed tell us that Peisis- tratus made an actual settlement near that river, but it supplies us with exactly the kind of evidence which would have removed Grote’s hesitation in accepting Thirlwall’s inference from the account in Herodotus. The text tells us more than the historian. It informs us definitely that Peisistratus visited the region near the mouth of the Strymon, and thence drew his supplies of men, as well as of money. It is interesting to notice these details respecting Rhaecelos and the country around Mount Pangaeus. The Pangaean Mount is plainly visible across the gulf of the Strymon from the neighbourhood of Stageira; and the bold promontory, north of Rhaecelus, is in full view across the plains that extend to the mouth of the Ludias from the Macedonian capital at .Pella. These topographical considera- tions may serve to support the ascription of the treatise to the authorship of Aris- totle, who was a Macedonian by birth and spent the first seventeen years of his life, and seven years besides, at his native town of Stageira. In the Historia Ani- matium, pp. 592 @ 7,.597 @ 10, Aristotle makes special mention of the eels and the pelicans of the Strymon. _ wddw] confirms the account of Hadt., implying that Peisistratus had in the first

instance retired to Eretria, though we are not expressly told so in the text.

dvardoacba...ryv dpxyiv] Hdt. i 73, dvacpoarOa: riv dpxyv, and in the same chapter dvadaBeiy and dvaxrac@a TH apxiy.

OnPalov] Hat. i 61, woAdAGy 52 weyddra Tapacxovrew xpyuara, OnBaior vrepeBa- Aovro 77 Ober TaY ypnudrwr.

Avyddpios] Hdt. Ac., cal yap ’Apyetor bicOwrol dlkovro ék TleAorovyycov, Kai Ndévéds age dvnp dmvypévos eOedovrhs, TO otvoua jv Avydays. Ar. Pol. viii (v) 5, 1305 @ 42, dray éf abris cuuBy ris éAvyap- xlas yiverOar rov ayyeudva, Kabdmep év Ndéw Av-ydapus, ds cal érupdvynoey vorepov tov Naglwy. The story of the way in which Lygdamis became tyrant of Naxos is quoted in Athen. viii 348, from ‘ Aristotle év ry Natlwy rodrelg.’ In consequence of the wrongs done by some Naxian youths to the wealthy and popular Telestagoras and his two daughters, dyavaxrjoavres of Ndéior kal ra bra dvadaBdvres éw7jOov Tots veavlcxos’ Kal peyiorn TéTe orders éyévero, mpocratotyros Tav Natlwy Avydd- pidos, ds dard Tabrns THs oTparnylas Tépav- vos dvepdvy tis marpidos. (Frag. 558 Rose’, )

tov traréwy—odirelav] ‘the Knights who held the supreme power in the con- stitution of Eretria’ (K.). modtreia is here tus civitatis, potestas in civitate, often used in the Politics in the phrase peréxew Tis monitelas (Lndex Ar. s.v. 3). Eretria was under the rule of an oligarchy of Knights, which was overthrown by one Diagoras, probably not long before the Persian wars, Fol. viii (v) 6, 1306 a 35, Thy év *Eperpia 8 éhuyapxlay tray trav imméwy Avayépas Karé\voey aduxnbels mepl ydpwy, and vi (iv) 3, 1289 4 36, émi 7&v dpxalwy xpovew Bros wodeow ev rots trros 7% SU- vauis Fv, ddvyapxlas mapa rovTos Foav’

60 AOHNAIQN

COL. 6, 1, I—7.

emt Tladrnvidt [udyn]v «al raBav [Thy dpy7y]y Kai mapehdopevos Tod Sipov ta dmra xaretyer dn THY Tupavvida BeBaiws, Kal 15 Ndfov édkov dpyovra xaréotnoe AvySapw. mapeire[to] b€ rod 4 Sjwov Ta Orda Tovde tov tpdmov. éEorduciay ev 7[O] Onoeio

13 dvadaBev? Richards, K3, B; xal els Ndfov éA@dy K! (H-L). mapethey K}.

14—15 Kal yap Ndfov éXav K-w: kal Ndgov édav

15 mapethero Rutherford, K-w, H-L, K*:

16 EZOTTAACIAN retinuerunt Kontos, K-w, B, titulis nonnullis

freti (Dittenberger 158, 11, titulo Iliensi post Alexandri mortem scripto, rév éfow\a- o.dv, et 349, 40, lapide in insula Ceo invento, év rj éEorhaclg éerdfew; eadem scrip-

tura etiam in Diodori Siculi codicibus servata est).

@HCEIW! nunc in papyro

legit K (B): alnakelw! legunt K-w, quod ex Polyaeno quondam sumpserat K? (H-L),

éxp&vro dé mpos rovs modeulous tm mors mpos rovs doruyelrovas, olov "Eperprets kal Kadxde’s x7. An inscription pre- served in the temple of Artemis, about a mile from the city, recorded that the Eretrians used to march to that temple with 3000 hoplites, 600 horsemen, and 60 chariots (Strabo, p. 448). Cf. Gilbert, Gr. St., ii 67 n.

§ 3. tiv érl TladAnvié paxnv] On the way from Marathon to Athens. Hat. i 62, él Taddnvidos ’APnvalys ipdy. The deme Pallene lay near Gargettos, between Pentelicus and the northern spurs of Hymettus. It has been proposed to place it S.E. of Hymettus, near Koropi (Ath. Mittheilungen, xvi 200—234); but this appears to have been the site of Sphettos, and the proposed identification does not suit the data in Hdt.; while the name of Pallene survives in Balldua be- tween Kantza and Hieraka (Milchhofer in Berl. Phil. Wochenschr., 1892, no. 1 and 2). Cf. Arist. Ack. 233 Bdérew Bad- Aqvade. In the Austrian map the name Baldnas is given to a stream which rises near Xantza and falls into the sea at Araphen, after flowing in a direction parallel to the route by which Peisistra- tus marched to Athens round the S. of Pentelicus.

Nagov—AvySapiw] Hdt. i 64, kal yap Tavrnv 6 Ilewlorparos xareorpéyaro tmodéuw Kal érérpeve Av’ySau. Schol. Aristoph. Vesp. 355, Natos éddw émt Ie- ToT parov.

As Polycrates came to the end of his rule of 16 years in B.C. 521, having been aided in its establishment by Lygdamis, it follows that Lygdamis was in power at Naxos in 537 (Duncker, G. d. A. vi 465 and 512). As Peisistratus, who restored Lygdamis, died in 527, it would follow that the third rupayyls probably lasted 10 or 11 years. The only alternative is to suppose that Lygdamis aided Polycrates

before he himself needed the aid of Pei- sistratus.

§ 4. mwape(Nero—rd Sada] character- istic of a Tupavyls. Pol. viii (v) 10, 1311 @ 12, 7d TO TAHOE pydey micrevew (51d Kat Thy Tapalpeow rowodvra Tov bh).

&ordtrlav] Cf. Xen. Anad. i 7 § 10, év 7H éfordolg, of an armed mustering of troops in preparation for a battle, the only passage in which the word is used by Xenophon. Cyrof. viii 5 § 9 éférhons. éforNlfecOat occurs in Anaéd.i 8 § 3, iit § 2, iv 6§ 7, v9 § 11, ekwardcopdvos iii 1 § 28, iv 3 § 3. Diodorus xix 3 & tails éfomAiclars pépew mavorNlay,

The story is told as follows in Poly- aenus i 21 § 2, Ilewlorparos ’A@nvaluv ra brda Bovdopevos mapedéoOat, mapiyyehey fixew Gmavras els ro ’Avdxetoy pera Tov brrwy. ol wev FKov' 6 5é mpowAGe Bovdd- Hevos Snunyophioat, Kal opixpg TH Pury Adyew fpxero. ol 6& eEaxovew py Suvd- wevot, mpoedOeiv atrovy Atlwoay els 7d mporvdaoy, iva mavres dkovoeav. émel 666 pev houxh diedéyero, of 5 évrelvavres Tas axoas mpocetxov, ol émlxoupor mpoedbdvres dpdpevo. Ta Orda KarhveyKav els Td Lepdy 7d ’Aypavdrov. ’A@nvatos ¢ yupvol Kara- AepOévres, TOTE HaoGovTo Tis Ileowrrparou Bpaxvpwrias, dre dpa Fv réyvacua xara Tov OTwy.

The’ Avdxewov, or temple of the Dioscurt or “Avaxes (Plut. Zhes. 33, Cic. Mat. Deor. iii 53), mentioned by Polyaenus, stood S.E. of the market of the Ceramicus (Curtius, Zext der Sieben Karten, p. 533 Stadtgeschichte von Athen, pp. XLVI and 82). It was probably some way up the northern slope of the Acropolis. Lucian, Piscator, 42, humorously describes the philosophers ‘planting their ladders against the ’Avdxeiov, and swarming up’ the Acropolis. Andocides, De Adyst. 1 45, mentions a cavalry muster at the *Avdxeov, and Thucydides, viii 93, says that the hoplites who had destroyed the

CH. 15, l. 13—20.

TIOAIT EIA

61

momoapevos exxdnoalew éreyeipe, [THs 5 dwvis éyddlacey puxpov' od hackdvtwy Sé KaTaxovew éxédXevcev avTovrs Tpocar[a]- Bilvat] wpos TO mpdrudoy THs axpoTrorews iva yeyovn waddov. év @ & éxetvos dsétpeBe 8 DV, GVENO i émt tov

( fy munyopev, avedovtes of él TovTM

17 ris 5¢ puwvijs éxddacev coniecit Kontos (laudant H-L in praefatione, accepit K5): [pOéyyerOar & éorovdjacey K-w; émerndés 5’ épvnoe Tyrrell et Gertz (H-L in

textu). 20 AletpelBe.

20—21 TOYT(WN). TetTar: rovrw Rutherford et

JEB Mayor, coll. Plut. Sulla 14 § 10 Kovupiwvos émt rottw Terarymévou (k?, B),

TOUTO K-W, To0T’ émureraryuévor H-L.

fort of Eetioneia 2evTo év 7p ’Avaxely Ta émha (Miss Harrison, ALythology etc. of Athens, 152).

The precinct of Agraulos, also men- tioned by Polyaenus, may be placed below the ancient stone staircase in the N. cliff of the Acropolis, some 60 yards W. of the N. Porch of the Erechtheum. (Cf. Curtius, Stadigeschichte, pp. XLIV,

:) athe Oncetov is mentioned in the text. Its position is approximately determined by the description of Pausanias. After leaving the Gymnasium and the Oncetov, which are near one another and ‘not far from the Agora,’ he passes from the Onoetov to the ’Avdxecov, and adds that above the latter is the precinct of Agraulos (i17 § 2, 18 §§ 1, 2). The Oncetov was probably E. of the Agora and is not to be confounded with the building on the ‘hill of Colonus’ within the walls, popu- larly called the ‘Theseum,’ but now generally identified as the temple of Hephaestus (Miss Harrison, 7. c. 145, 118). According to Polyaenus, the weapons are at first left in the "Avd«ecor and transferred to the ’Aypaddcov. Ac- cording to the text, they are left in the Oncetov and are then locked up es 7a trnolov olkjuara rod Oycelov, not ‘the buildings near the Theseum,’ as we might have expected, but ‘the neighbouring buildings of the Theseum.’ The latter phrase suggests that some other building than the Onceiov has already been men- tioned, and this (so far as it goes) is in favour of év7r@ "Avaxely, although it is not inthe ms. If & 7@ ’Avaxely is accepted, it proves that the Zheseum is near the Anaceum, below the N. cliff of the Acropolis (C. Wachsmuth, Rhetnisches Museum, x\vi 327).

Tris St ‘davis éx dacrev paxpdv] Lucian, Bis Accus. 21, Xad@vres Too rovou, Aelian, Hist. Anim. xii 46.

With P0éyyerOat 5° éorrovdacev wixpdv, printed by k-w, may be compared Dem.

F. L. 206, pbéyyecOat péyiorov ardvrwy, 216, Kady kal uéya ofros Pbéyierat,.., pairov éyw, 337, Kaddv POeyyoudrw, Pant. 37 § 52, méya pOdyyerou, Steph. 45 § 77, Aadety péya, Lysias 16 § 19, mixpdv dtade- “yoevor. éorovdacey is not, however, convincing.

76 mpomvdov] Apparently used on purpose to avoid the grander term mpomv- Aaa, which would have been an ana- chronism in so far as it would have suggested the Propylaea of the time of Pericles. mpézv)ovr itself is’ seldom used in the singular. Cic. ad Att. vi 1, 26, audio Appium mpbrudov Eleusine Sacere, Plut. Mor. 363 F, év Te mporvAw Tob lepod rijs ’AOnvas (at Sais), Plin. VW. A. xxxv 101, Minervae delubri propylon, xxxvi 32, in propylo Atheniensium. Pliny may have borrowed this exceptional form from Heliodorus, who possibly lived under Ptolemy Epiphanes, and wrote a work on the Acropolis (Wachsmuth, Stadt Athen, i 36). The word is found (in pl.) in Hdt., Hippocrates, and in an inscription from Smyrna. Mr H. Richards accord- ingly suggests that it may be an Ionism. But the word is also found in an inscr. of the 5th century from the Peiraeus, CIA ii 521 ¢ Pp. 122, mpomvAou Snuoctou Spos.

Traces of the foundations of this ancient portal have been noticed S. of the E. hall of the Propylaea. It faced S.W. (Milch- hofer in Baumeister, Denk. i 201 a).

yeyévy] Ar. De Anima ii 8, 420 a 1, Ota. TO Wadupds elvar 6 dnp ob yeywvel. mepl dxovrrGy, 804 4 24, pbéyyovra pev aN od Sdvayras yeywvety, dAAG wdvov puvotow, cf. 802 6 6, @ 23. Probl. g17 4 21, 6 ards TH ath port Toppwrépw “yeywvet mer’ ddAwv diwy 7 poyos, cf. gor 4 31 yeywvacr, go4 b 35 yeywrus (Index Ar). Antiphon, de caede Herod. 44, Todd mhéov yeywrely tore vixTwp 7 ped” uépay (Cobet, AZnem. iv 153). ‘yeywvelv is the normal form in Attic prose, but the word is far from common.

62 AQHNAION COL, 6,1. 7—21,

Teraypevo. Ta Orda [Kal katalKdyoavtes eis fra] wAnoioy oi- Kipata tov Onoetov Steojpnvav édXOdvtes mpos Tov Ietclorpa- tov: 6 dé, [éret t]ov dAXov Noyou érerénecer, ele Kal wept TOY 5 drrrwv, TO yeyovds [ds od] yey Oavyadtew ot[S a]Oupeiv, Grr’

2g arenOovtas ert tav idiwy eivar, Tov Sé Kowadv [adtds éme]pue- AncecOar TavTwv.

16. [4 ev ody Iletlovotparov tupavyls é& adpyts te katéctn [rodrov] tov TpoTrov Kai [weraBo]rAds oye tocatTas. Sider S 62 Ilevciatpatos, domep elpntas, [ra kata] THv rod peTpiws Kal PGdAOV TodTLKDS 7) TUpavuiKds’ ev TE yap Tois aAXous [pe]ray-

3 Opwros nv Kab mpaos Kal Tols duaptdvovar cuyyvwpmovikds, Kat 81 kal rots a[7ro|pou[s] mpoedaverte yp[nualta mpos Tas épyacias, date SiatpédhecOar yewpyobdvtas. todto 8 érroie Svoiv [yalpu, iv[a] 3 unre €v TO dates SiaTpiBwow GANA SveoTrappévor KaTa THY yopay,

21 abray [kal ovy]kAqoavres K (K-W, H-L), sed avr&y quidem in papyro abesse,

partem autem notae quae card, significaret apparere, indicavit Blass. 24 [kal os od xpi] H-L (K3), [ws od] xph B, [Aéywr ws ob xph] K1; [&p7 8 od Sety] K-w aOupely

25 elvac add. Marchant coll. Aesch. 4 § 8, Dem. Compendium quod verbum adros émipedjoer Oat

K-w (K3, B): [d-yavaxr]ey H-L. 15 § 11, 6 § 4, 26 § 33 et infra 16 § 3 mpds Tois ldlos dvres. elyae exprimit \ in papyro inesse divinavit Wyse, invenit K. Blass, K-w, K®: av’rds viv ér, H-L.

XVI 3 elpyra [ra xara] B: elpnrac [75y] (K3, K-w): elpqxapev (K}, H-L). 4 rois & dows (K?, K-w): ols OLecpuois] K1, rats outdlos H-L. 5 Trpaoc (K, B), cf. Voemel, Prolegomena Grammatica ad Dem. Contiones, § 29: mpgos K-W, H-L.

er

6 mpoceddverge Rutherford et quondam Wyse. 7 Ala... PECTEWPLOYNTAC litteris incertis scripta (K-w, K3, B): Suapurepes éyewpyobvro quondam K, duavenes éyewp- yotvro H-L. 8 Sceomapudvor <éot.> Kontos (H-L).

same spirit, we read in Plut. So/. 31, ws

reraypévot] Pol. 1298 a 23, Tas dpxas 6¢ Oeddpacros icrépyxe, xal rdov Tijs dpylas

Tas ép éxdoros Terarypevas. TeTrdxOar

may have éml with the dat. or acc., the former is found in Xen., and both in Plato. Plat. Rep. 345 D, 颒 @ réraxrat, Crit. 50 D, of ért rovrw rerarypévor vdpot, Leg. 952 E, Tovs él rotros dpxovras Teraypévous, 20. 772 B, éml mdvra xal exaora. TaxGels (xpovos), Tim. 47 C, ae ém’ aira ratra réraxrat, The gen. comparatively rare.

§ 5. dOupetv] AZez. iii 5, 1009 b 37, mus ovK aévov dbupioa, ducdupetv (Hdt. viii 10) is not found in Ar.

én tv t8lwv elvat] c. 16 § 3. Pol. viii (v) 8, 1309 @ 6, ol yap daropo. ob Bovdjoovras dpe T~e pndev xepdalvev, adda mpds rots lilous elvac maddov, of dé eUmropot duvjoovrat dia. 7d pendevds mpoc- deicbar TwY Kowar,

XVI§ 2. edpyrat] 14 § 3. ;

kal 5y kal] § 10.

Tots adirdpois—yewpyouvTas] In the

vb ov od Ddrwv ZOnkev, dAAG Ilecolorparos, @ TI Te xbpav évepyeorépay kal ri mwoAw jpepaorépay érolncev, For diarpéperdat Mr Wyse compares Xen. de Red. i 1; iv 49; Schol. Aristoph. Vesp. 1446, épya- Sbuevor Starpépowro. For the general sense, cf. Pol. 1320 b ¥, (even. under a democracy) xapiévrwy éort cal vobv éxdvruv ywpluwv Kal diarapBdvorras Tovs dmépous dpopuas duddvras tpémew ex’ épyactas.

mpocdd verte] In this verb po does not mean ‘beforehand,’ but ‘in advance.’ mpodavel yer, originally ‘to make an advance,’ develops the meaning ‘to lend without interest.’ The conjecture ‘Tpoo- eddverge, ‘he also lent money,’ is with- drawn. It rested on the assumption that mpoeddveve meant ‘he lent beforehand,’ a sense unsuitable ie the context (Wyse in Class. Rev. vi 25

§ 3. pajre.. XG] Pal. viii (v) 8, 1308

CH. 15, 1. 2I—CH. 16, 1.16. TTOAITEIA

63

kal bras [edrrolpobytes Tov petplwv Kat mpos Tots [i]8iow dvTes pnt ériOvpaor pyre cxoral[wou] émipenreiobar tav Kowdr. 4 dpa 8é cvvéBawev aitd Kal Tas mpoaddous yiyverOat pletfolus eEepyatouevns THs Ywpas emparteto yap amd TaéV yuyvouévav

5 Sexarny.

816 Kal tods Kata [Snpulouvs catecxevate Sixacras Kal

avros ener ToANaKis eis THY Yopav éericKxoTdy [Kal] Star[V]ov tovs Ssadepopévous, Srrws un KataBaivortes cis TO doTU Tapa-

6 werdar tay [ayp|av.

11 iN (K-W) sed in versu proximo fiIfN (K-W etc.). 13 KATECKEYAZE (K, H-L): Kareocxevace K-W, B.

4 a 2 Ff * / ToLavTns yap Twos e£0do0u TO Iletovrtpdte

12 €& épyafoudvys H-L. 14 diaddwy (K3, K-w, B): dead-

Adrrwy K! (H-L); lacuna vix quattuor litterarum capax.

511, pir’ avédvew Nav pniéva rapa rh oupperplay, ddAAG paAdov wepaicba. Rhet. i 4, 1359 6 6. For the general sense, Pol. viii (v) 10, 1311 @ 14, 7d é& doreos dmedatver kat diorxlfev duporépwy Kowwdr, kat rhs ddvyapxlas Kai ris Tupavvldos.

Stermrappevor Kata tTHv xdpav] Pol. vii (vi) 4, 1319 @ 30, Oia 7d wept rhy dyopay kal 7d doruv xKudlecOar wav 7d rowtrov yévos ws elmeiy padlws éxxdy- aidte. of S¢ yewpyodvres did 7d dre- omdpOarkaTarny x wopar ovr drayvrwcw 088 Ouolws Séovrar THs ouvddov Tavrys. vi (viii) 5, 1292 6 25, 8rav pev ody 7d yewpyexoy Kal 7d Kexrnudvov perplay odolav Kbpiov } THs mwodurelas, modTevovTat kara vduous* éxover yap épyagduevor Shy, od Sbvavrat b& cxordfev, wore Tov vowov émistioavres ExxAnotdfovar TAS avary- kalas éxxdyolas. vii (vi) 4, 1318 6 9, BéXrvaTos yap Shwos 6 yewpycxds éoru.. 51d hey yap 7d wh moddqy ovclay éxew doxoros, Wore wh) modAdxus éxxAnordgew. Diogenes Laert. i 98 says of Periander, on the authority of Ephorus and Aristotle, ox ela ev dorer §Hv robs Bovdouévous, Similarly, in the abstract of Aristotle, by Heracleides, od« émirpéruy & dare. Sfp (Rose, Frag. 611, 20).

Cf. Aelian V. HY. ix 25; Max. Tyr. xxix 3; and Dion Chrys. Ov. 7 i p. 257 f. R., i 520—1 R. (Mayor).

tov perplov] 27 § 3.

mpos tots tSloug dvres] See note on 15 § 5, émt répv lilwy elya.

pire cxoAdfwow] Similarly in Pol. vili (v) 11, 1313 4 23, the object of the Peisistratidae, in beginning the building of the Olympieum, was doxodiay (Kal meviay) Tov dpxouevwr. CE. 2b, 19 ff.

§ 4. Sexdrny] Hitherto, the main evi- dence for this has been the spurious letter of Peisistratus to Solon, Diog. Laert. i 53. The present passage supports the view of

Boeckh (iii 6), Arnold (on Thuc. vi 54 § 5) and Thirlwall (c. xi, p. 72—74), that Peisistratus levied a tax of ten per cent. Grote demurred to accepting this, on the ground of insufficient evidence. (It is mentioned in Zenobius iv 76, Man- tissa Proverb. i 76, and Proverbiorum Appendix, ii 66.) Thuc. 2 ¢., after mentioning Hipparchus, says érerjdevoay él mdelorov 5) Tupavvot oro. dperhy Kal étveow, Kat ’A@nvalovs elxooriy pdvov tmpacoduevot krd., and the scholars above- mentioned accordingly assumed that the tax was reduced by the Peisistratidae. The text implies that this assumption was correct.

§ 5. rots Katd Srjpous—8ikacrds] The origin of these ‘ district-judges,’ who went on circuit through the demes of Attica, is here for the first time ascribed to Peisistratus. Their number is stated as 30 under Pericles (c. 26 § 5), After the time of the Thirty Tyrants the number was changed to 40, four from each tribe (c. 53 § 1).

§ 6. rovatrys ydp tivos éd8ou Krd.] Zenobius, Proverb. cent. iv 76, kal opa- Keotwotodot aréderay (=Suidas s.v. xatopdxedor p. 189, e¢ cpakedtouds): Tleolerparos, ws gaciv, 6 tipavvos Sexa- TH TOV Yyewpyounevwy dmyre. Tods °AOn- vatous* mapuvy € more, kal lic rpeoBirnv mérpas épyagéuevov kal rbrovs Owdeas, Gpeto Tov mpecBurny, tivas éx roy rorwy Kopéforro rods Kaprovs. 6 dé dmexplyaro, ’Oddvas Kal cpaxddrous, Kal rodtwy dSexdryy Tlewlorparos péper. Oavudoas d¢ 6 Iect- oTparos THy mappnolay avdrod ris dexdrns dré\ecay ewe kal éx Tovrou of ’APnvaior TH taporula éxpyoavro, Mantissa Pro- verb. cent. i 76 (=Apostolius x 80 ed. Pontini), Diodorus Sic. ix 57 Bekker, ...6 épydrns epnce hauBdvew éx Tob xwplov kaxds ddvvas, GAN’ od0ev abr@ pédew* Tov-

2

°

25

30

AOHNAIQN COL. 6, lL. 22—43.

64 yoyvouevns cupBqvai dacs ta wept Tov ev tH ['Tunt]t@ yewp- a X \ LA ‘ f > x ION La ¥ yobvra TO KAnbev Uorepov Ywpiov atedés. Sav yap Twa TraltTa]A@ mérpas oxarrovta Kab épyatopevor, [81a To Oavpacat] Tov ra[iéa] éxérevev [ep]écOar Ti yiyverar éx Tod ywpiouvy 6 8, doa KaKa Kal ddvvas, én, kal TodTwy Tév Kaxdv Kal Tav [d]duvdv Teoiatparoy Sef AaBetv tHY Se[ed]Tyv. 6 péev odv dvOpwros [a]rre[Kpl]vato adyvoay, 6 S& Ieciotpatos jobels Sia THY Tmappyoiav Kal Thy gurepylav [d]teAH amavtwr éroincev abtov. ovdév 5 TO 7AHOOS 7 avd’ év Tols dANOWS Tapwyhes KATA Ti apyyV, GAN dei m[a]pe- oxlevlatev eipyvnv Kal é[r]jpes thy jovyiavy Ou Kai Toddaxis eO[pu]AA[ez]ro, ws [7] Tlevovotparov tupavvis 6 éml Kpdv[ov] Bios ein: cuvéBn yap botepov SscalSeEapévov] Tdv vidoy TOG yevécbat tpaxutépay THY apynv. péyrotoy b&é mdvtwv qv [TeV > ¥ x \ i 3 CA \ , wv érratvouluévav TO Snuotixov eivat TO HOE Kal hiravOpwrov. éy Te yap Tots ddNo[ts mponpelto] tavta Sioixeiy KaTa Tos vopous, ovdeuiav éaut@ trAcoveEiav Si6[ovs, Kai totle mpooKkAnOels Povov dixny eis "Apevov maylov] avtos péev amnvtnoev ws [adroXo|ynoo-

17 Ta: TO H-L. YMMHTO)I? 18 rarrdhky K; 7...Aw[s] K-W, Tavredds Wessely, B; sed exspectares potius émiuehGs vel érurdvws: mpecBirny invita papyro H-L. 19 wérpas: TreTpaic?, [év] mérpars K-w et Wessely. 61a, 7d Oaupdoa secl. K-w, ‘@avudoas scriptum malis’ H-L. matéa K-W, H-L, K%, B: wdrradov K}, sed spatium non sufficit. 20 [reptlylyverae K-w invita papyro. 21 Trav Kaxay kal rév dduvGy om. H-L; T&v ante dduvGv secl. K-w. 23 <atrév> dyvodv H-L. 25 TrapwyAel (K): mapyvdxdec J B Mayor (K-W, H-L, B). 26 érnpe Thy jovxlav (K3, K-W, H-L, B); émnpelas fovxtay coniecerat Blass. 27 [rappmdgjero K; [robr’ éhé}yero K-W, [Uorepoy éddyero] H-L; é@pthnoay Wessely (litteras priores saltem cum papyri indiciis obscuris congruere existimat K); ¢@[pu]AA[e?]ro B. 28 dia[deta- pévev] E Bruhn (8): did rhv UBpw Sidgwick, Gennadios, K-w, H-L, K%. 30 éma- vouxévwr J B Mayor, Newman, Bury, K-w, H-L (kK, B). 31 eldOe K (H-L); Tpoypeiro K-W, B.

tw yap 7d wépos Tleworpdry bddvar. 6 ‘AOnvatoe bard Tod ddeApod adrod ‘Imlov,

dé duvdorns...yeddoas érolnoe 7d xwplov drendés, kal évred0ev 7 mapoiula ‘Kal opd- Kedot mowofow dréeav. Procopius in Villoison, Axecd. ii 40.

The story has been traced to Demon, the writer of a work on proverbs, who is probably the same as the writer of an *A7Ols, earlier than Philochorus (Zenob. Athous ii 4 quoted by O. Crusius Azal. ad Paroem. p. 132). But, if this Demon is the same as the nephew of Demosthenes bearing that name, he is later than the date of this treatise.

§ 7. twapdxAet] mapoxdéw is found in Theophr. C. P. iii 10, 5. mapevoxdéw is less uncommon.

6 éwl Kpdvov Blos] ‘the golden age.’ [Plat.] Aipparch. 229 B (after the death of Hipparchus) rpla érn érupavvedOnoay

kal mdvTwv av Tv Twadadv yxovoas, sre Taira piva Ta érn rupavyls éyévero ev *AOyvais, Tov 3’ GAdov xpdvov eyys re Efwv *"AOnvato. dowep érl Kpdvov Baotdeb- ovros. The same proverbial phrase is ap- plied by Plutarch, Avs. 24, to the happy condition of the Athenian allies finder the administration of Aristeides, and in Cimon " to the liberality of Cimon (zz/f. c. 27 § 3).

ouveBn—dpxry] c. 15 § 1.

§ 8. Sypotikoy] c. 14 z22.

kal more mpookAndels—durev] Pol. viii (v) 12, 1315 4 21, gaol dé kal Mecot- orparov Jrouetval wore mpooxAnbévra Sixnv els "Apevov wdyov. Plut. Sol. 31, ds ye xal povov mpookdnOels els “Apecov mdryov 4n Tupayvay dmrivrnoe Kooulws droXoyyos- Mevos, 6 6é Kariyopos obx UrhKouce.

CH. 16, 1. 17—CH.17, 1.2. TIOAITEIA 65 Q pevos, 6 8& mpockarecapuevos PoBnOels Erumev. 81d Kal croddv xXpovov ewewev <év> [TH apyh, cat] br’ éxrécos wad dvehapBave 35 pgdios. €Bovrovro yap Kal Tév yvopiwwr Kai tdv [Snpo]ricady oi ToAAoL Tos pev yap Tals dulrtaus Tods $8 Tals eds TA Iva 0 , La \ * > x > La a BonPeiats mpola]jyeto, nal mpds apdortépovs émedvnes Kxards. 10 joav 6€ Kai Tots "AOnvatoss of wept tav [Tu]odvywv vduou mpaos kat’ éxelvovs Tods Katpods of 7 dAdov Kal 5% Kal 6 pddoTa 40 xaO[nxlov mpos THY <KaTdoTacw> Tis Tupavvidos. vdmos yap avtois Hy Bde Oécpia Tad ’AOnvailors] Kal mdrpia: édv [Tw]es Tupavvely erravictalyjras [él tupavvidi], 7) THv Tupavvida tis ovyxabiory, atywo[y eivas Kai] adtov Kai yévos. 17. Ilecictparos weév obv éyxateyipace TH apyh Kal am- / 4 s t v 3 ’ ee X t \ [é0]ave voorjoal[s ert] Pircvew dpyovtos, ad’ ob wév KatéaTn Td

34 飢é\urev Richards coll. Dinarch. 3, 98 et Plat. Leg. 943 A (H-L). 35 év dpxi H-L (K%): év rH dpxqy quondam Blass, K-w; cf.17, 3—4. In papyro x cerni posse putat K et post ewer partem inferiorem litterae ¢, deinde quinque sexve litte- rarum spatium. ETTEAAMBANE (K!); dareAduBave Wyse, Gennadios, Ferrini, H-L, K; dveduBave K-w (B). 38 dudorépas H-L. 39 Trpaol (K), cf. v. 5. 41 Kadjxwv K (B): dvixwv H-L; ka[Becrds]K-W. THNTHC: Ta 79SH-L. Kxardoracw addidit post rupayylios K, post thy B; lacunam indicant K-w, 42 ’AOnvalas Kontos (B): ’A@yvai[wy] K etc. éorl K (H-L): Kara 7a K-W; x(al) Blass. 43 HETTITYPANNIAITICYNKAOICTHITHNTYPANNIAA: 7 THY Tupavylda Tes ovyKabiory,

Blass,

kabiorg cuvwpociav, ariyuov H-L. 22, Lycurg. Leocr. 125. Hager.

nihil nisi 7 legendum suspicatur K; 4 K-w, B

K), B: elvat K.

éml rupavvids secluserat K (K-W), utpote quondam supra verbum rupavveiy per formulam usitatiorem interpretandi causa scriptum. éme<riOftar> rvpavvlde Richards coll. Pol. 1108 a édy Tis él rupavvlds éramorira: } ovykablory Thy Tupavyida <> T1<s> Kk: cum in papyro 7 et 7 prorsus similia sint, fortasse

h éwl rupavvlde tis ovy-

44 elvac kal H-L (‘fortasse recte’

XVII 1 ENkaTerfHpace (probat Rutherford). :

§ 9. 810—érepixe. kadds] Cf. the sketch of the best means for maintaining a rupavvls in Pol. 1314 @ 30—1315 6 10.

Sr’ éxméoou...dveAdpBave}] Optative of indefinite frequency, followed by the impf., as in Pol. viii (v) 5, 1305 @ 7, éml dé tay dpxyalwv, dre yévoiro 6 abrds Syuaryw- yos kal orparyyss, els tupavvlda peré- Baddov. For dveAduBave cf. Hat. iii 73, (rip dpxyv) dvadaBetv.

§ 10, al 87 kal] as often with of re ddAot preceding; supra § 2.

édv rives—kal yévos] Andocides, De Mysteriis, § 97, édv Tis Tupavvety émavacTy q Tov rhpavvoy ovyKaracrioy. In later times such an offence would be met by a karadtcews rol Shou ypapy, and the pe- nalty would be death and confiscation of property. The decree against the orator Antiphon and Archeptolemus (one of the Four Hundred) required them to be put

S. A.

to death and their property to be confis- cated. It also declared each of them to be aripov...cal 7d yévos ro éx Tovrow (Pseudo-Plut. wt. Antipfh. § 28).

Cf. Arist. Zhesm. 338, el rTis...rupavvety érwoet i Tov Topavvoy tvykarayelv, Vesp. 495, 498, 502, Lys. 630. The text shews that in Andoc. /.c. Dobree’s suggestion, <énl T@> Tvpavveiy, is unnecessary.

XVII § 1. éykareyrjpace] used meta- phorically in Dinarchus, Arzstog. § 3, 1o- vnptay dpxouévyv, contrasted with éyxara- yeynpaxviay, ‘inveterate.’ Plut. Phocion 30, weviay év 7...eyKareyipace. eyynpdc- xewv is similarly used c. dat.

Cf. Thuc. vi 54, 2, Il. yypatod reXeury- cavros; Val. Max. viii 9 E 2, ‘decrepitum.’

Pirovew dpxovtos] B.C. 527. The name of the archon of the year is now ascertained for the first time. The date of the death of Peisistratus was known

5

on

66 AOHNAION COL. 6, 1. 43—COL, 7, 1. 11. mpatov Tipavvos, étn TpLa[Koly[T]a Kal tpla Bidcas, dS ev rH apy Siepewvev, évds Séovta elxoor eplevylev yap 7a rovrd. 816 2 kal davepds Anpovow <ol> ddcxovtes || ép@pevoy elvat Tetoi- (Col. 7] otpatov Lddwvos Kai otparnyely év TH mpds Meyapéas mroréum Tepl Ladapivos: od yap évdéxerar Tals HrtKiass, €dv TLS avadoyi- Entrar Tov éxatépov Biov ai ép’ ov améBavev dpyovtos. TedEUTH- 3 cavros Sé Tleowrrparov, katetyov of vies THY apxiV, MpodyovTes Ta Tpayyata Tov avToY TpOTOV. Hoav dé dvo0 pev ex THS yaperhs, ‘Inmias cai “Immapyxos, S00 8 éx ths “Apyeias, lopav Kat “Hynoi- oTpatos, 6 mapwovipioy nv OerTards. eynuev yap Iewoiatpatos é€ 4

t

4 épevyey J B Mayor, Rutherford, K-w, H-L, K?: eb.fen: épuyey kK}, B.

5 AHpoyci: Anpodcw of K-w, H-L, Lacon, Hude (x3, B). 9 Trpoararontec: corr. Rutherford, J B Mayor, Blass, K-w, H-L (K*).

TUKAS > yaueThs H-L,

TESTIMONIA. 3 Heraclidis epitoma dy rn rupavvetoas ynpdoas dmébaver.

7 C&AaMEINOC, 10 <’Ar-

(Rose, Ar. Frag. 611, 4°) Tleolorparos

already. He died in the beginning of B.C. 527, the latter half of Ol. 63, 1. The date is fixed by Ar. Fol., quoted below, and by Thuc. vi 59 § 5. The former makes the rule of the ,Peisi- stratidae last 18 years; the latter says that the battle of Marathon was in the 2oth year after the expulsion of Hippias. cad 18+ 19=527 (Clinton, Fastz, ii 254).

i tTpidkovra Kat tpla] Fol. viii (v) 12, 1315 & 30, % r&v Ieowrparidav (apxy) "AOnynow. ovk éydvero b€ cuvexys* Ols yap épuye Ileclorparos tupavyav’ wor’ év érect TpidKovra kal Tpioly énra- kaldexa rn rouruy érupdvvevoev, éxTwKal- bexa 5¢ of raides, Wore Ta TdvTa eyévero érn TpidKxovra kal mévre. The passage is part of a paragraph regarded as an inter- polation by Susemihl, ed. 2 and 3.

évds Séovta elkoot] In Fol. quoted above, the rule of Peisistratus*is said to have lasted 17 years. It has been pro- posed to reconcile the two accounts by supposing that fractions of a year are in- cluded here, and excluded in the Politics, See, however, note on 14 § 3.

§ 2. épdpevov] Ael. % A. viii 16, Adyeras yap avrod madixa yevecOar.

Meyapéas] c. 14 § 1.

dmé8avev] Solon died not long after 560 B.C. (Plut. Sod. 12); Peisistratus, in 527-

§ 3. §§ 4 f. 6. .

é« THs yaperis] The name is not known.

tov atrév tpdirov] Thuc. vi 54

é ths ’Apyelas] Hadt. v 94, Iect- oTparos...kparjoas avrov (sc. Zeyelou) xa- réornoe Tipavvoy evar matda Tov éwurot vd0ov ‘Hynalorparov, yeyovbra ef ’Apyelas yuvaikés. ‘“ Herodotus calls Hegesistratus vé0ov, because after the middle of the fifth century (c. 26 ad fim.) women of foreign blood certainly could not occupy at Athens the position of a lawful wife: the children of a vy were both vé6o and fé&o. The same distinction is present to the writer : he contrasts ‘the wedded wife’ of Athenian birth with the ‘ Argive wo- man.’ The reading need not be altered. Thucydides (vi 55 § 1) seems to include Thessalus among the legitimate sons of Peisistratus, rav yvnolwy ddedpav”’ (Wyse, Class. Rev. v 226 6). In i 20 § 2, after stating that Hippias was the eldest son, he adds that Hipparchus and Thessalus were his brothers. The name of Thes- salus was probably given him out of com- pliment to the Thessalian allies of the house of Peisistratus. The Thessalians ineffectually sent 1ooo horse to defend Hippias shortly before his expulsion (Hdt. v 63). Plutarch, Cato major 24, calls Thessalus the son of Peisistratus and Timonassa, but we now know for the first time that this was another name for Hegesistratus. As regards the nationality of his mother it will be remembered that Peisistratus was aided, during his second exile, by mercenary troops from Argos (Hat. i 61).

Tapwvopiov] = érwvuula (c. 45 § 1)

cH. 17, 1. 3—CH. 18,12. TIOAITEIA 67 "Apyous avépos Apyeiou Ovyarépa, & dvoua jv Topyidos, Tiwovac- cav,hv mpotepov éayev yuvaixa Apyivos 6’ Aumpaxiadrns tov Kurpe- Mddv: GOev Kal 4 mpds Tors ’Apyeious évéoTn pidia, Kal suvepa- xécavto yxidtoe THY emt TladAnvide waynv ‘Hynowetpdtou Kopi- cavros. ryhpwar dé pace Thy ’Apyelav of ev éxrecdvta Td mpdTor,

ol 6 KaTéyovTa THY apyny xovra Tip dpynv.

18. joav 8& Kipiot pev Tov tpayndrov Sia Ta aEiwpyata cat Sia Tas HrtKias “Immapyos Kal ‘Immias, tpeaButepos 8 av 6

14 écyxe H-L. 15 ENECTH:

cuvéorn H-L.

16 ‘Hynowsrpdrov primus

detexit J B Mayor (K-W, H-L, K%, B): Iewusrpdrou kK}. XVIII 1 TWN MEN: pev THv Blass, Richards, edd.

Plat. Soph. 228 Cc. The adj. rapwwijuos is found in Plat. Leg. 757 D, and the corre- sponding verb in Ar, Phys. vii 3, 245 6 11, 28, Tapwvupedfovres Aéyouev, and Eth. Eud. iii 1, 1228 @ 35, TapwrumaserOar= Tapwriuws mapd Te Neyer Oar, The ordi- wee form of the adj. i in Ar. is rapdvupos. 4. “Apxives 6 ’Apmpakiditys trav x ybusan} Cypselus (tyrant of Corinth for 30 years from B.C. 658 or 655) was suc- ceeded by his son Periander. Among the contemporaries of the latter was another Periander, son of Gorgus, who was either a son or a brother of Cypselus. This second Periander was a tyrant of Am- bracia. The establishment of a branch of the Cypselidae in Ambracia was in accord- ance with the ambitious policy of that dynasty. They attempted to occupy the coast of the Ionian sea as far as Illyria (Miiller, Dor. i 8 § 3). Periander was deposed probably after the death of the Corinthian tyrant of the same name (B.C. 585). Pol. viii (v) 10, 1311 @ 39, Tlepe- dvipy Te év ’AuBpaxla rupdvvy, and 4, 1304 @ 31, év ’ApuBpaxig ... Teplavdpor awexBarov rots émribendvos é Ojuos TOY tipavvov els éaurdv mepiéornoe Thy ToN- telay. . Ambracia was colonised in the reign of Cypselus (Strabo, p. 452) either by that tyrant’s brother, Torgus, or his son Gorgus. Strabo, p. 328, describes Ambracia as Tédyov (ste) rob Kupédou krloua (Clinton’s Fasti, sub anno 612 B.c.), In the Politics the affair of Har- modius and Aristogeiton is mentioned just before the fall of the Ambracian tyrant, Periander: here it is narrated shortly after a reference to another mem- ber of the Ambracian branch of the pe —QOn Ambracia see Duncker, 4. G. ii 353 E.T. em Tadknvibe} 15 § 3.

exterovra...karéxovta] If Peisistratus married Timonassa on his first usurpation of the government in 560 B.c., Hegesi- stratus may have been either 21, 23, 24 or 26 years of age at the battle of Pallene according as we place that event in 539 (Bauer), 536 (Reinach), 535 (Kenyon) or 533 (Poland). If he married her on his first expulsion, the son may have been four years younger (17 to 22) in the year of the battle. The latter view seems preferable, as his marriage with the ‘ Argive woman’ is more likely to have taken place, when it was to his interest to secure the aid of Argos, than on his first usurpation, when her presence in the palace would not have ingratiated him with his Athenian subjects or with his wedded wife. The beginning of the second tyranny, four to six years later, is out of the question, partly because Peisi- stratus was then in alliance with Megacles, while Timonassa was probably no longer alive; and partly because this would make the son 15 at the most on the occasion of the battle.

Within about eight years of this time Hegesistratus was old enough to be placed in charge of Sigeum (Hdt. v 94). He was ‘ much younger ’ than Hipparchus (c. 18 § 2). Hipparchus, again, was younger than Hippias, and Hippias was an old man in B.C. 490 (Thuc. vi 59 § 5). If Hippias was more than 70 in 490, he was born before 560. Hippias and Hip- parchus were already ‘young men’ (Hat. 1 61) when their father married the daughter of Megacles, ‘either 8, 9 or I1 years after 560. All these considerations are in favour of placing the marriage at the time of the first exile.

XVIII. Harmodius and Aristogeiton,

§ 1. mpeoPbrepos—é “Inmlas] Thue, i

§—2

nr

68

AOHNAIQN

COL. 7, 1. 11—20.

€ a A Inmias kal tH pices ToduTiKds Kal Euppav emeotdter Ths 2 a caves , +2 \ } ,

apis. o €"Immapyos maidibdns Kal épwtixos kal didopovaos qv, Kal Tovs wept ’Avaxpéovra kal Sipwvidny nal rovs adXovs ToinTas ovTOS HY 6 peTamreuTropevos’ BeTTards Sé vewTEpos Tor kai TB Bio Opacds Kal bBpiorys. ad’ ob Kal cvvéBn THY apynv

6—T Oerrahds—iBpiorhs delet Herwerden: defendit Hevaclides infra laudatus.

TESTIMONIA. 4—7 Heraclidis epitoma (Rose, Ar. Frag. 611, 43) “Immapyos 6 vids Tlecwrpdrov mardiwdns mw Kal épwrixds kal Piddpuovcos, Oeacaros Ge

vewrepos kal Opacus. vay Tov ddedgpdv avrod.

Tolrov Tupavvodvra wh Suvndévres dvedeiv “Immapxov dmréxres-

20, 2, ’A@nvalwy yoov 7d rARO0s “Irmapyxov otovras Up ‘Appodlov Kat ’Apurroyelrovos tupavvov byta drodaveiy, Kal ovK toacw drt ‘Inmlas péev wpecBuratos wy Tpxe Tov Tlecworpdrov vidwy, “Immapxos 5é Kat Occoahrds ddehgpol Foav avrod, and vi 54 § 2; 55 §§ 1, 2. ;

In [Plato], Aipparchus, 228 B, Hippar- chus is wrongly described as the eldest son,

uXépoves] Hipparchus is said to have set up in the demes of Attica Hermae inscribed with verses. Mipparch, 229 A, pvjpa 768’ ‘Inmdpxov: o7etye Sikaa ppovav...éore 5é Tay Tomnudrwv Kal dda év dddows ‘“Epuats moda Kal Kaha émvye- ypappéva. The Homeric recitations in- troduced by Peisistratus at the Panathe- naea were improved in certain respects by Hipparchus (2. 228 B, Aelian, VY. Z. viii 2).

tovs wept] ‘Formula of epi rwa...in- terdum ita usurpatur, ut ab ipso personae nomine non multum differat, of wep) "Eyzre- Soxrda kat Anudxptrov de Caelo ii 7, 3056 1 (cf. ’Euredoxdijs kal Anudxptros 305 & 34). ol wept ‘Inmoxparny Meteor. i 6, 342 6 35 (cf. ‘Inrroxpdrys 343 @ 28). 4 Tov wept Té- Awva tupavvls kal viv % Trav epi roy Ato- vicrov, 7 wey T'éXwvos Pol. v 10, 1312 5 10. Cf. de Gener. et Corrupt. 314 425, Pol. v 6, 1305 6 26’, Index Aristotelicus. In such cases the proper name has no article (Eucken, Sprachgebrauch, Praep. p. 66).

*Avaxpéovra kal DipwvlSyv] Mipparch. 228 c, (Hipparchus) ém’ ’Avaxpéovra tov Thiov mevrnxdyropoy oreldas éxduucev els thy wédkw' Dipwvldny dé tov Keiov del mepl avrdv elye, meyddors pucBots Kai Sdpors relOwv.

Simonides (born §56 B.C.) was 29 years of age on the death of Peisistratus in 527. It was probably after the expulsion of the Peisistratidae that he wrote the epi- taph on Archedice, daughter of Hippias, quoted in Thuc. vi 59. Cf. Plat. Protag.

346 B. He also celebrated the death of his patron Hipparchus (7 uéy ’A@nvaloie pbws yéved? hve’ "Apioro-yelrwy “Immapxov xreive xat ‘Apuddios, 134 Bergk). After spending some years at the court of the Aleuadae in Thessaly, he returned to Athens and there commemorated in verse some of the great events of the Persian wars. See also Freeman’s Sicily, ii 258—264.

There is no evidence of intimate re- lations between Simonides and Anacreon, unless we ascribe to Simonides the epitaphs on Anacreon in Axthol. Pal. vii 24, 25, which are assigned with greater probability to a later poet, Leonidas.

Anacreon lived for many years at the court of Polycrates of Samos (Hdt. iii 121, Strabo, xiv 638), who was put to death in 522. The death of his patron and the unpopular rule of his successor would prompt him to accept the invitation of Hipparchus. At Athens he made the acquaintance of various members of noble families, such as Critias, son of Dropides (Plat. Charmides, 157 E) and Xanthippus, afterwards the victor of Mycale and the father of Pericles. On the death of Hipparchus, he probably went (like Simonides) to the court of the Aleuadae.

tovds dAAovS trountds] ¢.g. the founder of the Athenian school of Dithyrambic poetry, and the teacher of Pindar, Lasus of Hermione, one of the rivals of Simon- ides (Aristoph. Vesp. 1410 Schol.). His detection of the forgeries of Onomacritus led to the banishment of the latter by Hipparchus (Hat. vii 6).

§ 2. @erradds] Diodorus Sic., x 16, 1, gives him a character for wisdom: del- Taro Thy Tupavyloa.

ad od] Whether of is neuter or (more probably) masculine, it is clear that the troubles of the Peisistratidae are here ascribed to the U8pis of Thessalus, who is naturally the subject of the next sentence

CH. 18, 1. 3—14. TIOAITEIA

69

avrois yevécOas ravtwy Tév Kaxdv. épacbels yap Tod “Appodiov kal Siapaptavev Tis mpds avdTov didias, ov Kateiye THY opyny, > > a ” > i aA \ \ ~ aN ev TE TOIS aAXOLS evernuaiveto TuK[p]ds, Kal TO TeXEUTAIOY } a A HédXoveav abtod THY adeAg@ny Kavnpopeiv Tavabnvators é[Kw]Av- aev, Novdopycas Te TOV ‘Apyddvov ws paraxov dvta, b0ev cuvéBy mapotuvbévta Tov ‘Apyodtov cai rov “Apiotoyeltova mparrei TH mpakw perexovtwy Tordov. 757 Sé [wapatn]podytes ev dxpoTorer 10 mxp&s K-w (K3, B); éveoquawe 7d mixpdy K1, eveonualvero 7d mixpdv Richards (H-L). 13 rapotvvOévras H-L, sed ‘spatium deest.’ 14 perexdvTwy trodhov

‘satis clare legitur’ Blass: mera modr@v 1roAAGv K; mera modTov od to\dkGv Genna- dios; pera cuver<d6>Twv <ot> roddGv J B Mayor (K-W); mera cvvwyorGy od trod-

Adv Thompson; per’ éAtywr drwy Richards; mer’ [4AAwv ob] roddGv H-L.

épacdels yap xTh, This is so completely at variance with the account in Thucy- dides that Mr Kenyon in his first ed. felt constrained to throw the description of Thessalus into a parenthesis. But the writer does not hesitate to disagree with ‘Thucydides in several of his details, and he may have deliberately disagreed with him in this important point. It does not follow that Thucydides is wrong. The whole of the episode on Harmodius and Aristogeiton is apparently written with extreme care to refute a popular error. It must also be remembered that (accord- ing to Hermippus, in Marcellinus, Viz, Thuc. p. ix, and Schol. on i 20) the historian was related to the Peisistratidae. Cf. vi55 § 1, eldds...xal dxon dxpiBéorepov @\d\wy. On the other hand, the writer of this treatise shews in the latter part of c. 17 that he knows more than Thucy- dides about Thessalus, and Thucydides himself tacitly corrects in book i 20 some of the details in the account in book vi (Weil, Fournal des Savants, avril 1891). épacBels rod “AppoSlov] This is re- ported of Hipparchus by Diod. Sic. x 16 § 2, Plut. Amator. 16 § 27, p. 760, Athen. p. 602 a (Mayor). éveonpatvero muxpos}] On the other hand, Thue. (vi 54 § 4), with greater partiality towards the Peisistratidae, says of Hipparchus, Biarov ev obdev éBovdero épiv. For évonuaiverOa, cf. Isocr. 20 § 22, dvonpwaveiobe...rhy dpyir. ovrav—ekwdAvoev] Thuc. vi 56 $1, ddephy yap adrot Kxdpny, éraryel- Aavres HKew Kavodv olcovcay év rourh twl, dripracav, A€yovres ode éwayyetrat Thy dpxhy bia Td wh délav evar. Ar. Pol. viii (v) 10, 1311 4 36, (the rule of the Peisistratidae was attacked) da 7d mpory- Aaxloat ev Thy ‘Appodlov ddekpiy émrn- pedoat 8 ‘Apuddioy (6 perv yap ‘Apyddcos

dia Thy dderpyv, 6 de Apioroyelrwv dud rov ‘Apuddtov). The text connects this incident with the approaching Pana- thenaic festival, at which Hipparchus was put to death. The Panathenaea are mentioned in connexion with the sister of Harmodius by Aelian V. . xi 8, and Max. Tyr. 24, 2. The year was B.C. 514.

On kavnopetv, cf. Aristoph. Lec. 732, Av. 1851, and Harpocr. s. v. kavy- pdpor,..Birdxopos ev PB *ArOléos pyalv ws "Epixfoviov Bacthevovros mpHrov Karé- ornoav al é&v divmpare mapbévar pépew Ta kava TH Oe@, ép’ ols éréxecro Ta mpds Thy Ouctay, rots re Tlavadnvaios xal rats GdXaus tomas (for other authorities, see Michaelis, Parthenon, p. 329 f.). The Panathenaea had been revived by Peisi- stratus, but even in 566 B.C., six years before his first usurpation, it was attended by a large concourse in consequence of the institution of gymnastic contests at that date (Marcellinus, Vit. Thuc. i). The Scholiast on Aristides, iii 323 Dind., says of the great Panathenaea, Teotarparos érolyce.

padakcy] ‘effeminate,’ opp. to xaprepe- kos in Eth. 1147 6 23, 1150 14, 333; Eth. Lud. 1229 6 7, mpos Tov Odvarov pahaxds 7} tweplpoBos. Cf. c. 31. 7.

perexovrwv modAov] This contradicts Thue. vi 56 § 3, joav dé od modXol of Evvopwpoxdres dopadelas evexa. :

§ éy dkpomdAe] Thucydides (vi 57 § 1) describes Hippias as marshalling the procession outside Athens in the (outer) Cerameicus, and adds that, on noticing one of the conspirators conversing with him, Harmodius and Aristogeiton,

fearing that the plot was discovered,

rushed within the gates (dow T&v TuAGr), found Hipparchus near the Leocorium

and stabbed him to death. Hippias,

meanwhile, had remained outside the

15

20

25

70 AOHNAION COL, 7, 1. 20—-38.

tots Hava@nvaios ‘Immiay (ériyyaver yap obtos wev [Slexouevos, 6 8 “Inmrapyos adroaréddwv tiv tommy), Sdvres Twa TOV Kowov- ovvTwy THs Mpd[Elews piravOpwras evtvyyavovta Té ‘Imria, cal vonicayres pnview, Bovrdcuevot te Spacar mpd Ths cvAr pews, kataBavres nai mpoeEavacrdytes THv [ovrdv], Tov pev” Irrapyov Svax[oc]uotvra tiv moumny mapa To Aewkdpevov adméxrewvay,

[rv & S)Aqv edvujvavto mpakiw. adrdv 8 6 pev‘Appodsos ed0éws 4.

éreredTnoev vd TaVv SLopuPd|pav, o S “Apiotolyelitwv tatepov avAAnPOels Kal moddv xpovov aixicbeis. Katnyopnoev 8 év [Tats dvayxaus ToAXay of cai [TH] dvoe THY emipavav Kat Pidor Tols Tupavvas Hoav. ov [yap é]dvvavTo Tapaypiua AaBely oddey tyvos THs mpabews, GAN 6 AEeyomeEvos Novos ws o ‘Imdias drocTHoas

15 pév dexduevos K-w, H-L (K%, B); merepyduevos K}. 20 Trapa: sepl H-L. 6’: yap invita papyro K-w.

K-W’, H-L; érépwy K-w}. pev otv] K!; @ ri H-L.

19 Aoray B; dddwv K, 21 rhy & K-w (K%, B); [riv

gates, and it was there that he disarmed the citizens. The text describes H and A as waiting for Hippias on the Acropolis. On observing some one con- versing with Hippias, they descend (xara- Bayres) and slay Hipparchus near the Leocorium. The two accounts are im- possible to reconcile. In more than one point our author deliberately differs from the historian (27/f. § 4).

Wovres—ovAAr ews] Thuc. vi 57 § 3, ws lddv twa Tdv Evywporay color da- Aeyduevov oixelws TQ ‘Immig...ddacav kal évoutcay pepnvicbal re Kal Scov odk Hon EvdAAnPOncerOat. mpd Tijs gvAAHWeEws con- firms Thuc. i 21, mply cvdAnPOjvat, sus- pected by Cobet.

mpoctavarravres TOV AowTav] ‘having begun the attack without waiting for their confederates.’

"Inmapxov Staxoopovvra tHy Top] Thue. i 21 § 3, ro ‘Immdpxw repiruxdvres mept 7d Aewxépiov Kadovpuevov tiv Tava- Onvatkiy toprhy SiaxocmodvTe dmréxrevay. In vi 57, the historian mentions Hippias alone as marshalling the procession out- side the gates: (Harm. and Ar.) Tept- éruxov ro ‘Immdpxp mapa 7d Aewrdprov Kadovpevor.

76 Acwxdpeov] The monument of the three daughters of Leos who, at the command of an oracle, sacrificed them- selves for their country, [Dem.] 60 § 29, Cic. Nat. Deor. iii 50. Harpocration places it in the midst of the (inner) Cerameicus. It is mentioned in con- nexion with the d-yopd in Dem. 54 § 7. Cf. Wachsmuth, Stadt Athen, ii 417,

and poeeeen in Flecheis. Fahrb. 1890, P- 750.

§ 4. wodty xpévov alto els] Thuc. vi 57 § 3, od padlws die €On.

kKatynyopycev—ijoayv] The story is told of Aristogeiton and Hippias by Seneca, de Ira, ii 23, and Justin. ii 9 §§ 1—6. Cf. Diod. Sic. x 16 §§ 3, 4. The like story is told of Zeno of Elea, Cic. Zusc. li 52, Val. Max. iii 3 E § 1 (where the tyrant is Phalaris, as in Heraclides Pon- ticus in Athen. 652 B), Diog. Laert. ix 26, 27, Plut. ii 505 D (Mayor). Polyaenus i 22, ’Apicroyelrwy, brd trav SopvPdpwy orpeBdovpevos wept Tay cuvedéruv, Tov pev auvedorwv wyordynoey ovdéva, mdvras 6 rods ‘Immlov Pldrous Kowurica ris éréoews* drére 6¢ TobTous ‘Immlas dreé- Krewe, Tore 6 ’Apioroyelrwy dveldicev abr 7d oTpariynua Tov pitwv.

tats dvdyxats] Hdt. i 116, "Aorudyns 5€ pv odk eb Bovrever Oar en erOuuéovra és dvdykas meydras dmixvéer Oar, dua Te Aéywr raira éojuawe Toior dopuddpoicr AapBavew adirdv. 6 5 dyduevos és Tas dvdyKas otrw dh epawe Tov édvra Abyov. Antiphon, de Chor, 25. Thuc.i 99 § 1, Tpocdyovres Tas dvdryKas.

boa] ‘in birth’, as inc. 5 § 3.

txvos] met. asin Antiphon, Zé¢ral. Ay 10, @avepds dé ra txvn Tis vrovlas els totrov pépovra, and A 6 10, Ta Ixy Tob gpévov. Ar. Hist. An. 8, 588 @ 33, év Trois mal trav torepov tewy eooudvwy éorw lev olov ixvy Kal omépuara, & 19; 9, 608 b 4.

6 Aeydpevos Adyos] Thuc. vi.58, (Hip- pias) éxéAevoev atrovs, deltas Te xwplov,

otk he ag

6

CH. 18, 1. 15 —CH. 19, 1. 2. TIOAITEIA

71 s hig xg x uf b t \ \ i 4 dro tov StAwy Tors TopmevovTas epwpacey Tors TA eyyerpiova éyovtas ov aAnOys éotw ov yap émewrov TO<TEe> pel STrrw?, GAN VoTtepov TodTo KaTecKevacey 6 Ohuos. KaTnyoper Sé THY TOD f- tupdvvov dirwv, ws ev ot Squotixol hacw, éritndes tva doeBn- Ll cay aya Kai yévowTo acbevels avedovTes Tovs dvatTious Kal f- € led t a 4 f > \ ba > \ 2 idous EavTov, WS Oo évioe Aeyoucwy, OVX! TAATTOMEVOS aAAG TOUS auveddtas éunvuev. Kal Tédos ws OvK edUVATO TaYTA TOLBY aTro- Oaveiv, érayyethapevos ws ANAOUS pNVVTWY TOANOUS, Kal Teicas ea \ € t a \ \ t , € wv aire tov ‘Immiav Sodvar thy SeEiav rictews yap, ws édaBev 2 an a i oveidioas Ste TO hovel Tod adeAHod TH SeEvay Sédwxev, o'Tw Tape- 2. € ¢ iva > \ a > lol a a € xX > \ Euve tov ‘Inmiav dof vwrd Ths dpyis od Katelyev éavTov adda

oTacapevos THY waxyatpay SiépOerpev avdTov. 19. pera dé tadra cvvéBavev ToAAG TpaxuTépay eivar Tip tupavvida: Kal ydp Sia To Tysmpely TE ddeAPO Kal Sid Td ToAdOVS ‘

27 EPWPAaCEN B: -ce K etc.

H-L. B); dyevvets K!, évayels H-L, etc.

35 atr@ H-L. 37 KATECXEN correctum in -€1XEN.

XIX 2 TIMWPEIN Timwpdy K-w. K-w.

28 adHOEC. 76<re>correxi cum H-L, K-W, etc. (K°); &reumév rw Papabasileios (B). ACOENEIC, litteris COEN obscure scriptis, super dveAdvres additum (K3, K-w, 33 édtvaro H-L: HAYNATO (K, K-W, B), quod in titulis non nisi post annum 300 A.C. invenitur, Meisterhans, p. 36 TaAEAoy (retinent K-W, B).

TAAEAO)I (K-W, B).

ETTEMTTONTO: @reutrov 31 -cevav

1342, A€AWKE (K, K-W, H-L, B).

kal 6ua 7d secl.

ameOely és adrd dvev TOv bruv. Kal of Hey dvexdpnoay olduevol re épety adrév, 6 6 rots émixovpos Ppdoas Ta drAa wroda- Beiy déedéyero ebOds ovs émyriaro kal et ris ebpébn eyxetplicov éxwy* pera yap domldos kal Séparos eiwPecay Tas woumas moveiv. The conspirators purposely selected the festival of the Panathenaea (about Aug. 13), év 9 pdvov uepa odx Uromrov éylyvero év ros Tods THY Touhy Téwporras dOpb- ous yevéoOar. (The passage in Lysias 13 § 80, cwykodovbe yap AaBwv rd dra Kal owéreute Thy Topmay weTa TOY TodTaY mpds 7d dorv, quoted in Michaelis, Par- thenon, 332, does not refer to the Pana- thenaea, but to the festal procession on the restoration of the democracy, on Sept. 21, 403.) The statement in the text is intended as a deliberate correction of the account in Thucydides, but we have now no means of ascertaining the ultimate authority for the correction. The first line of the famous scolium of Callistratus (pro- bably written not long after the Persian war), implies that Harmodius and Aristo- geiton concealed their daggers in branches

of myrtle (év uuprou Krad ro Elpos popy- ow), but says nothing about spear or shield.

§ 5. doeByjrovev indicates the conse- quence of their destroying the innocent; yévowro dcGevets, that of their destroying their own friends.

§6. mdvra mwovwv] [Lys.] 8 § 5, é¢a- oxere...tdavra mowodvres ovK exe ows dmaddayhré wou. Lys. 12 § 84, mdvra movoovres Olkny rap’ abtav ovk dv Sivacbe AaBet. Dem. 21 § 2, mdvra mowoivTos Tovrou (6 Sfjuos) ok érelaOn.

évedlcas] Cf. Polyaen. quoted on § 4. ‘The narrative of the end of Aristogiton betrays the same liking for sensational stories as we trace, for instance, in Phy- larchus’ (W. L. Newman in Class. Rev. v 161 4).

XIX. Aippias. §1. tpaxvrépav] Hat. v 62 (of Hippias), éuaexpavouévou APnval- oot bia Tov ‘Immdpxov Odvarov. Thue. vi 59 § 1, Tots & "AOnvalos xaherwrépa pera Touro } rupayvls karéory, Kal 6‘Immlas da @bBou Hin waddov ay Trav Te TodTuV ToNovs éxrewve KTh.

om

72 AOHNAIQN COL, 7, 1. 38—COL. 8, 1. 6.

7 a ev

avnpynkévar Kal éxBeBAnkévar Tac Hv amiaTos Kal TiKpos. ere 2

8é TerdpTm pddiota peta Tov ‘Iamdpyou Oavarov, émel Kands y

elyev TA ev TO doer, THY Movuyiav érexelpnoe TeLxife, ws

a . \ éxeioe weOidpvcopevos. ev TovTois & av é&érecev iro KXeopévous

na a ’ an , tod Aaxedaipoviov Bacirdéws, ypnopav yiryvouéver ael Tots Adkwos e ig . kaTadvew THY Tupavvida Sid Toavd afiriav]. of puyddes, dv ot 3 > 4 , > \ y § ? cia > 25 uA Arxpewvidar mpoeotnxecav, avtot wey b0 avToy ovKx édvvayTo \ ta) moiocacbat tiv KaOodov, GN adel mpocérratoy’ || ev Te yap Tos [Col. 8.] Lal 3 Grows ols erpartov Svecpadrrovto, kal Tevyiocavtes €v TH Yopa Aewptdprov 7d brép Tdpynbos, eis 6 cuveERAOOY tives THY ex TOD

3 TrcTo: mxpds K etc. 4 Kax@s: ENKAKWI, postea correctum. T@ a correctore additum abesse propter numeros mavult Blass. passim: Movixlay K-w, H-L (K3, B), cf. Meisterhans, p. 23. Sidgwick (H-L, B): eKel K, K-w. 7 Aaxedalyovos K}!, K-w}, TIN (K-W). ae (edd.). § éd0vayTo K, H-L: HAYNANTO (K-W, B); cf. 18, 33- 10 atel (K, K-w, B); cf. 5, 19. 12,15 AipyyAPIon, idem habet Suidae cod. Mediceus. ytrep: iro? J H Wright, in Herodoto brép Tarovins bard IdpynOos scriptum fuisse arbitratus, f

TESTIM. 3 muxpés. Heraclidis epitoma (611, 43) ‘Immlas 5€ mixpérara érupdyve.

8—18 Etym. M. p. 361, 32 Gaisf. (=Suidas, Eustath.) émt Aewviply pdxn: xwplov qv bard ris Idpyydos 8 érelyioav of puyddes rav rupdvvwy oy ol ’"AXKwat- wrldac mpoearyKxecav. éxmodopknbetuv 8 atrav bro Trav epi Ieotorparov, axddov els abrods Foero “ alat—edrarpldas,” of ré7’(Etym. M. ed. Gaisf.; idem habent Athen. 695 et Suidas; 6767’ Etym. M. codex Dorvillii Bodleianus, et Apostolius vii 70) édeckay olwv warépuy écav. Cf. Rose, Frag. 3567, 3943.

12 *Schol. Arist. Lys. 666: Acwwdpiov: xwplov ris ’Arrixis mept riv Udpvybov (ita codex Ravennas, 76 brép Ildpyndos Suid., td rhv Idpynfov Et. M.), els 6 cuvprOdv rives (cod. L et Suidas) rdv éx rod doreos, ws pyow ’Ap. & °AG. Tod. Lb, 665... (of "AAKmatwvléar) mbrcuov dpdwevor mpds ‘Imray tov ripavvov kal rods

5 elye H-L. MOYNYXION 6 éxetce J B Mayor,

Tleotorparidas éretxicav 7d Aecyvdprov. vndos 6 éretxioavy ’AAkpawvlda.

Hesych. Actydprov: xwplov re brép Idp- Cf. Rose, /.¢.

mukpos] Hat. 2. ¢., éumexparvouévov.

§2. Ure—rerdptw)] B.C. 51170.

tv Movvexlav—rexitew] Plut. Sol. 12, Aéyeras dé (Epimenides) 77 Mouvixiay ldwy kal kaTtapabav moddv xpédvov elmeiy mpds Tods mapovras, ws Tupdov éore TOD Hdd ovTos vO pwros: éxparyetv yap dv’ AOn- vatous Tois abrav dd00cw, el rpondecav, doa Thy mod dvidoet TO xwplov (Diog. Laert. i114). The height of Munichia, which commanded the harbours of Munichia and Zea, is 255 Paris feet above the sea, whereas the highest part of the Peiraeus is only 191. It was an important point in the fortification of the harbours, insti- tuted by Themistocles; and its import- ance is also shewn by the fact that in 411 B.C. we read of the commander rév rept- moAwy Tav Movrrxlace reraypewv (Thuc. viii 92, 3); it was fortified by Thrasybulus in 403 (Xen. Hell. ii 4, 1112; Diodor. Sic. xiv 33, M. Aogov epnuov xal Kap- tepov). In the time of Alexander (325/4) one of the o7parnyol was specially ap-

pointed to guard this point (c. 61 § 1). In 322 it was occupied by a Macedonian garrison (Plut. Phocion 27, 28; Curtius, Stadtgeschichte, p. 222); in 307 the fort was destroyed by Demetrius Poliorcetes (Plut. Demetr. 10), but was soon restored in the Macedonian interest, to be evacua- ted in 229. It was probably destroyed by Sulla. By the time of Strabo (p. 395 Chit was in ruins (C. Wachsmuth, Stadt Athen, ii 42—45).

tad Kvcopévous] Hdt. v 64, 65. XpnoTpGYv] 22. 63 (quoted on § 4).

§ 3. of buyddes—mpocérravov] Hdt. v 62, (the Alcmeonidae) dua roto. dddowe "AOnvalwy pvydor meipwyévoict Kara 7d loxupév ob mpoexwpee Karodos, d\Ad 7 poo- émTatoyv peyddws retpdpevor Kartévat TE Kal éNevOepodv ras ’APqvas, Aecyddprov 7d brép Matovlns recxicavres. Duncker, G.d. A, vi 501, places this incident in B.C. 513. Cf. J. H. Wright, Zhe date of Cylon, p. 54.

eupvSprov] a ‘waterless’ spot on the southern flank of Parnes. The site has

CH. 19, 1. 3—109. TIOAITEIA 73

dorews, €EerrodopknOnoay bro THY Tupavvwy, bOev VaTEpov peTa uA \ ‘ > 3 a 'd ? a TavTny THY cuuopay HOov ev Tots cKorLots [aie/]] aiat ANewpidpuov mpodwoéraipor, ig ba > , A olous dvopas am@decas payerOar aya0ovs Te Kal evrratpisas, nN soo Y t v of tor eetEay olwy matépwv éoav. 4 amotuyyavortes ody év am[alot Tols adXows, gurcO@cavtTo Tov év

13 META: eis K-wW (B) ex Etym. Mag. 361, 33 axédov els adrovs fdero. 14 alel secl. Hude, K-w, H-L, utpote ex dittographia ortum. 16—17 pdxerBal 7’ dyabovs cat Eustathius; 7’ dyadovs, yéve. 7’ Hermann, Z/. D. Metr. 695. kal edrarpldas, idem habent Athenaeus, Suidas et Etym. Mag.: xd edrarpiidy Tyrrell; d-yafovs, kadous, edrarpidas Bury.

19 *Schol. in Arist. Lys. 1153: ’Apiororédyns gyol mera tov ‘Inmdpyou Odvaroy xpnopov yevérOat Tots Adxwow karadvew Thy Tupavvlda, Tis TlvOlas, ws ob ’ANkuacovldac épicOwoavro tov év Aedhots vedy olxodopety, cuvexas Tolro xpwons avrois wavrevopnevors, Ews mpdrepoy mév "Ayxiwodoy (cod. Rav.) éreupav xara Oddaccay, dmoxpovabévros 5¢ airod épytobévres of Adxwves Kreouévyn tov Bacidéa ov pelfove éféreupav ordrdy Kal vixjoas rods Oerradods elofdOev els thy “ArTiKyy kal Tov ‘Imlay ocwdkreoev eis Td Tedapyixdy retxos, ews of ratdes rv Tupdvywy éévdvres

édd\woar (Rose, Frag. 3572, 3953).

not been identified. Leake (Demi, p. 39), placing Paeonidae at Menzdhi, regarded the monastery of St Nicolas at the upper end of a long acclivity three or four miles (drei Stunden, Kastromenos, die Demen, Pp- 95) to the N. as the site of Leipsydrium. The monastery is ‘built in a strong situa- tion upon the summit of a height, backed by the pine woods of Parnes and near the right bank of a remarkable torrent’. But the presence of the torrent is un- favourable to this identification of the ‘waterless’ spot. Kastromenos, /.c., mere- ly says of this torrent that its water ‘has certainly never failed to supply Leipsy- drium,’ but he does not say clearly that this fact goes against the proposed identifica- tion. Mentdhz is now identified as the site of Acharnae, while Paeonidae may possibly correspond to the ruined village of Varz- pompi, two hours north of AMenidhi at the southern edge of Parnes, and Leipsydrium may have occupied the same position as the Pyrgos above that village (Hanriot, Recherches, P- 55 597-, quoted in Bur- sian’s Geographie, i 334).

{Sov év rots oKxoAlots] cf. c. 20 at end. On scolia, see K. O. Miiller’s Lzt. of Ancient Greece, i 249 E. T. ‘The rhythms of the extant scolia are very various, though, on the whole, they re- semble those of the Aeolic lyric poetry; only that the course of the strophes is broken by an accelerated rhythm, and is

in general more animated. This is par- ticularly true of the apt and elegant metre, which occurs in eight Scolia (one of them the Harmodius), and of which there is a comic imitation in Aristoph. Eccl. 938.

aw Doe LS os a= Levee -w ww WIboa Bows

Lew ve Lew - ~~

Here the hendecasyllables begin with a composed and feeble tone; but a more rapid rhythm is introduced by the ana- paestic beginning of the third verse; and the two expressions are reconciled by the logacedic members in the last verse.’ This scolium is quoted with many others in Athenaeus, xv p. 695.

mpodacératpov] a rare epithet appro- priate to an impromptu song. It was afterwards used in late prose by Dio Cassius 58, 14. The only other word exactly parallel to it is mpodwolkoumos of

‘a boaster who breaks his word’. Both words are noticed by Lobeck, Phryn. 770 (L and oy

§ 4. epicOdoavro—AGrjvas}] Hat. v 62, map’ ’Audixrudvey Tov vndv pioBobvrac Tov éy Achgotor.. .eforkodoujoa. ola dé xpnudrwy eB jHKovres Kal édvres dv Spes Sbxiuor dvexadev eri, rév Te vyov ékepya- gavro rod mapadelyuaros KdAdov...(c. 63) ws ofy dh of "AOnvatoe A€éyovet, obra. of

15

AOHNAIQN

74 COL. 8, 1. 6—20.

20 Aeddois vewv oixodopeiv, OOev evrrdpnoayv xpnudtav mpos THY TOV

25

Aaxdvev Bonbeav. 1% 5é IvOia mpovpeper del Trois Aaxedatpovi- tL 3 a A > / > ay ig

ows ypnatnpiavopéevors édevOepodv tas *AOnjvas, ets TOD? ws mpovtpepe Tovs Yraptidtas, Kalrep dvtwv Edvwv avrois Tav Tlecorotparisav ocuveBdddeTo Sé ovK eAaTTw moipay THs opus tois Adxwow % pos Tos “Apyeious tots Tleovetparibdass brrap- ri . \ e a a ft > / ‘

youca piria. To mév ody mpa@tov “Ayxipodov améoteAay Kata 20 olkodoueiy bOev ebrbpyoay xpnudTrwy, K; xpnouav? Wyse; commatis signum

post olkodouety (B) posuerunt H-L (‘gravius vitium subesse’ arbitrati), et K-w (lacuna post xpyudrwy indicata). norépnoay H-L. 21 mpot@epev H-L, cf. v. 23 mpob-

Tpewe: TIPOE (K, K-W, B).

ale (K, K-W, B); cf. 5, 19. TeyOewc: correxit Blass e Schol. Arist. Lys. 1133 (K-W, H-L, K3).

22 eEIcTOY- 24 CYNE-

BaAAeto (K, K-w, B): cuveBddero Richards (H-L).

dvdpes év Aedgotor kariuevor avéreOov TH Tlvdinv, dxws BOovev Zraprinréwy dvdpes elre lily orddw etre Snuooly xpnodbuevor, mpopépew ope Tas ’AOjvas édevOepodr, 2b. ii 180. Schol. Aeschin. 3, 116.

The temple at Delphi was burnt down in B.C. 548; the contract of 300 talents for rebuilding it is assigned by Duncker, G. ad. A. vi 493, to about 535. Pharaoh Amasis, who contributed to its restora- tion, died in 526.

Rose, 4. P., p. 418, observes, on Schoi. Arist. ZLysisty. 1153, that the writer of the ’A@. od; must have closely followed Herodotus. But this is no proof of the spuriousness of the treatise, as Ar. fre- quently refers to Herodotus in his undis- puted works: 123 4 9, 523 @ 17, 736 @ 10, 756 4 6, 1343 @ 20, 1344 @ 16, 1409 @ 27, 1451 6 2 (Heitz, Verl. Schriften, p- 246). ; ;

It appears impossible to take é@ev as= d@’ dv (as proposed by Mr Kenyon). It can only mean: ‘hence it was that they had abundance of money’. Similar uses of 6@ev occur in 6 § 2, 7 § 4, 21 §§ 2, 4. We have here a slight divergence from the account in Herodotus. The historian describes the wealth of the Alcmaeonidae as enabling them to undertake the con- tract for rebuilding the temple, which they carried out in a splendid manner. The text states that, owing to their un- dertaking the contract, they had large supplies of money. These sums were entrusted to them to enable them to exe- cute their contract, but they were (partly) applied to securing the aid of Sparta against the Peisistratidae. This account is confirmed by a subsequent Atthido- grapher, Philochorus, frag. 70, FHG ; 395, ap. Schol. Pind. Pyth. vii 9, Aéyerat, Ore

tov Ilv0ixdv vady éurpnodévra, ws pacw, bmd Tav Tleworparidav of ’Adkpworwvldar puyadevOevres bm’ adrav vrrésxovTo dvot- Kodoujoa, kat deta wevor xpHuara Kal ouvayayévres Stvayuv érébevro rots Tewt- orparldas, Kal vixjoavres jer’ ebyapi- oTnpluv mrebywv davpxoddunoay TY deg 7d Téuevos, ws Piddxopos icrope?. Isocr. de Perm. 232 describes the Alcmaeonid Cleisthenes as having established the de- mocracy, \éyw meloas Tods "Audixrvovas Saveicas ruv Tod Geod xpyydrwv avrod. Similarly Dem. c. A@d. 144 says of the Alcmaeonidae: rovrous dé gdacw brd ruv Tupavvwy brép Tod Sjuou cracidfovras éx- mecev, kal daveccamévous Xpymar ex Aertgav edrevdepaoar rhy modw Kai Tods Tlewcwrrpdrov matéas éxBadelv.

mpotdepev] This defends mpopépew in Hat. v 63, against rpodalvew (preferred by Bekker and Dindorf).

kaltrep dvtov Eévwv) Hdt. 2. ¢., Kai Eewlous ogi éovras Ta wadora.

ouveBddAcro—potpav] Plat. Zim. 47C, (Adyos) peylorny EvuBaddAduevos els ara motpavy, and often with pépos. Ar. de Anima 1%, 402 6 22, cupBaddrerar péya Bépos mpds 7d elddvat, Poet. 22, 1458 @ 343 de Part. Anim. iii 12, 673 6 25, cumBar- Aerar odd wépos mpds vyleav. Pol. iv (vii) 11, 1330 6 13, Tafra wreloTov oup- Barrera mpds Tiy vylevay, ii 9, 1270 @ 14, cupBarrccOal Te pds Thy diroxpyuariav, iii g, 1281 @ 4, cuMBaddovTaL TrELGToY Els—, vii (vi) 2, 1317 6 16, oupBddderar Tavry Tpds—.

4 ™pos “Apyelous—giAXla] c. 17 ad fin.

§ 5. “Ayx(podov] Hat. v 63, réumouer "Ayxuysddtov — kara Oddarrav wdolowe. "Ayxtuodoy is the reading in the Ra- venna MS of Schol. on Aristoph. Zys. 1153.

CH. 19, |. 20—37. TIOAITEIA

75

t a @ddatrav éyovta otpatiav. HTTy[Oév]ros § avtod Kal TedevTH- cavtos, Sia TO Kuvéav BonOjoar tov @ettaddov éyovta yidious imqeis, mpocopyiobevtes TH yevouevw, Kreopevny éFéreprpay tov i ! 4 4 \ n a 2 \ ‘ a a

Baciréa orddov éyovta peta Kata viv, ds érrel Tods TOV OerTadav 30 e a i 7 immets évixneev KwAvovTas avTov eis THY ArTiKny Tapléval, KaTa-

cd % € , ? % - m. a 3 + KAeioas Tov ‘Irrariav els TO Kadovpevov IleXapyiKoy Tetyos éTodop- Kee peta tov “AOnvaiwy. tpocxabnuévov 8 avtod cuvérrecey tmeEvtas addvas Tovs THY IlecctotpaTidav vieiss Sv AnPOévTwV € 4 led oporoytay eri Th Tdv Taidwv cwTnpia Tomncapevol, Kal Ta EauTOY 35

,

év THO jucpats exxoprodpevor, Tapédwmxay THY akpdTroy Tots a AOnvaios él “Aprraxtibsou dpyovtos, Katacxovtes THY Tupavvida

28 OECCAAON (K-W): Gerraddv (K, H-L, B), Meisterhans p. 727. opyobévres (K, K-W?, B): wap- Naber (H-L) et K-wW. Meisterhans, p. 28%: -«Aqoas (K-W, H-L, B).

(K-W, H-L, K3, B). H-L).

29 smpoc- 32 -KAEICAC K, coll. 34 ETTEZIONTAC: Uregtdvras Wyse

< Ts 37 ETTITTAPTTAKIAOY, émi ‘Apmaxridou (K, K-W, B, 颒 ‘Ap7.

Kuwéav] Hat. /.c. Ocooadol...dméreu- pav...xirlnv re trmov kal Tov Baciéa Tov opérepoy Kwénv.

Kncopévqv—aprévar] Hat. v 64, uésw orbdoy orethavres dréreuway emi ras ’AO}- vas, oTparyyov Tis orparifs drobdkavres Bacthéa Kvcouéven ov ’Avakavdpliew, odk- ért kata Oddacoayv oreldavres GAG Kar’ Grepov" Toto. éaBadotor és thy ’Arrixny xapyv } Tv OcccadGy lrros mpwrn mpoc- éuiée kal od wera moAddv érparero. Arist. Lys. 1150—6.

karakdeloas— A @nvaltwv] Hat. 2. c.dua *AOnvaluy rotor Bovdouévoror elvar édev- Gépoict érrodtdpKee Tos TUpdvvous aTrEpy- pévous év TG Wedaoryexg Telxet.

TleAapyixdy retxos] the ancient fortifi- cation surrounding the west end (if not the whole) of the Acropolis ; it had nine gates, and was the chief fortress of Athens until the expulsion of the Peisistratidae. It was thereupon destroyed and its site was left unoccupied (Thuc. ii 17). Even in the second century A.D. the blocks of stone from its ruined walls were still to be seen (Lucian, Piscator 47). Cf. Bur- sian, Geogr.i 305 and Lolling in I. Miiller’s Handbuch, iii 337. Curtius insists on the literal sense of the passages describing it as surrounding the Acropolis, Hdt. vi 137, 700 relxeos Too wept Thy dxpbmroNly more éXphapévov, Dionys. Hal. i 28, Paus. i. 28 3 (Stadtgeschichte pp. LXXVI, 47, and map on p. 61). Cf. Holm, ii 341. After the

Isagoras in B.c. 508/7 (21 § 1).

building of the wall of Cimon, the name was probably confined to the west end of the fortification (Judeich in Fleckeis. Fahrb. 1890, p. 753 f.)-

§ 6. trefdvras] Hdt. v 65, br ex é- Bevo. yap ew ris xadpys ol maides Tur Tleotorparidéwy fAwoav. Spodoylay Krd.] ib. mapéornoay—aare &v rate nyé- poe éexxwpioas éx THs ArriKis.

éml ‘Aprraxridov dpxovros] The expul- sion of the Peisistratidae belongs to the year s11/o B.c., being placed by .Thuc. vi 59 § 5 (wavdels ev rw TeTdprw), in the fourth year of the sole rule of Hip- pias, which began in 514 B.c. It is also the fourth year before the eee a

he name of the archon is now known for the first time.

When Thucydides (/.c.),as observed by Mr Kenyon, describes Hippias as fighting at Marathon ‘in the 2oth year’ after his expulsion, he is using a round number, as the actual interval was 20 years and a few months. Mr E. S. Thompson (C/ass. Rev. vi 181) connects the Plataean al- liance with the expulsion of the Peisis- tratidae, placing both events in B.C. 511/o. Hence, in Thuc. iii 68, where the fall of Plataea is put in the 93rd year after its alliance with Athens, Mr Thomp- son proposes to alter the 93rd into the 84th year.

‘

76 AOHNAIQN COL. 8, 1. 20—42.

38 MeTa THY TOD TaTpos TedXeUTHY ern padLoTa émtaKaidera, TA SE av a aupravta ody ols 6 TaTinp npkev évos Seiv TevTHKoVTa. 20. xatarvbeions S& THs Tupavvidos, éotacialov mpos ar- I a Mnr]ous *Ioayopas 6 Tecavdpov, piros dv Taév Tupavvev, Kai Krecobévys tod yévous ov Trav ’"Adkpewvdav. nTTwmevos Sé Tais i. t uA f ¥ + a 3 \ a erarpelars 6 Krerobévns rpoonyayero tov Sipov, dirodiwWovs TO 4 \ f € \? 4 2 A a if mrHOe THY TodTeiavy. Oo S€ "Icaryopas éridevrropevos TH Suvdper 2 ‘ > U \ J y i4 a 4 i Tarw émixarerapevos Tov Kreouévny, dvta éavt@d E€vov, cvvéres- BS La A w A \ \ > / tad + a cev éXavvew TO ayos, dua TO TOUS "AAKpewvidas Soxeiy eivas Tov

on

39 deity J E B Mayor, Sidgwick, K-w (K%): Aei hic et 27 § 2 (H-L, B).

XX 2 TICANApoy.

3 AAKMEONIAWN hic et v. 20. hrrdmevos Blass coll. Hdt. v 66 (K-W, H-L). cf. 27 § 4, 34 § 3: dmoNevréuevos Richards, Kontos, H-L; to- Haskins.

HTTHMENOC (K): 5 etTiAeITIOMENOC (K, K-W, B), 7—8 ayos

et Wym\arer K et H-L; ceterum cf. Jebb ad Soph. O. T. 402.

39 Schol. Arist. Vesp. 502...doxel dé ) Tupavvls karacrhvar, ws Pyow "Eparocbévys, éml én ¥ (50), TOO axpiBods Siauaprdvwr, ’Apiororédous (Bentley; legebatur ’Apicro- gdvous) wav TeccapdKovra Kal év (per errorem pro évvéa scriptum) ¢4oayros, ‘Hpodérov 62 (v 65) & Kat rpidxavra (Rose, Frag. 358, 396°).

éry pddtora émraxalSexa—évos Setv mevrykovta] In Pol. viii (v) 12, 1315 6 31, the rule of the sons lasts 18 years, while from the beginning to the end of the rupavvis of the father is 33 years, thus giving a total of 51 years. The 49 years of the text include ‘about 17 years’ for the rule of the sons, added to the 33 years assigned to the father inc. 17§$1. In Hat. v 65 the actual rvpavvls of Peisistra- tus and his sons lasts for 36 years. It is probably by deducting from this number the 17 years here mentioned, that the writer gets 19 years as the duration of the actual rule of Peisistratus in 17 § 1.

civ] Rare in Attic prose, except in Xenophon, its place being generally taken by wera with gen. One of the spe- cial uses of avy in Attic prose is to ex- press numerical addition. According to Eucken, Sfrachgebrauch des Ar., p. 29, the following are the only instances of ovv in the genuine writings of Aristotle. Met. 1039 621, adv TH Uy cwverdnupéevos, 1044 515, éay d¢ mpooredy 7d vrd ys udow yiwouevns, 6 adv TH alrlw Ad-yos ovTOos, 1058 5 17, obv TH VA ol Adyor atrav. Meteor, 348 a 24, pepdmeva olv Wigoy jwoarp. Hist. Anin. 490 @ 32, al yap Kaumral rérrapes, 7 do abv Tots wrepvylos, 525 d15—17, wédas 8 ol wev kapaBor ep’ éxarepa exovor wévte adv tals éoxdrars xnrais* dwolws dé Kal ol xapxlvor béxa Tods ravras aby Tals xnrals. De partib. anim, 683 6 3, é&dmroda dé Ta roadra mayr’ earl

avy Tots adrixois poptors. It will be ob- served that in several of these exx. the numerical sense is prominent. In the spurious works near the time of Ar. there is no instance of atv, but it occurs in those of much later date. In the most extensive of the works of Theophrastus it is only found thrice : Hist. Pl. ix 20, 4, Caus. Pl. ii 17, 8, v 6,6 (Eucken, p. 30).

Seiv, not dez, is the right form here, and inc. 27, évds dety revrnxogr@ ret, as well as in Rhet.ii 14 fin. To make dei stand for déov is a barbarism (Kiihner, Gr. Gr. § 50, 11, p. 216 Blass) and cannot be de- fended on the analogy of mhely (‘more than’) which is really for w)efoy, not for whéov. It is remarkable that this numerical expression (=wndeguinguaginta) has es- caped lexicographers and grammarians

(Mayor).

XX—XXII. Zhe Constitution of : Cleisthenes.

XK § 1. trrdpevos—Bijpov] Hdt. v

66, (KAeobérns cal "Ioaydbpns) éoraclacay mept Suvdmios, Eeccovmevos dé 6 Kre- abévns tov Siuov mpocerapltera, 7b. 69 jin. jv 68 rov Shuov mpocbéuevos TOAD Katimepbe Trav dvricraciwréwy. (70) év Te wepet 5€ éccovmevos 6 loaydpys avri- Texvara rade. On éraipeia cf. Pol. 1313 a@ 39 fi.

§ 2. émucaderdpevos—tévov] Hat. v 70, émuxahéerat Kveouévea...yevouevoy éwuTg Eeivov.

Aadvew 7d dyos] Cf. cu. 2.

wm

CH. 19, 1. 38—cH. 21, 1.3. TTOAITEIA 77

3 evayav. vrekeNOovtos dé Tod KrevoBévous per’ drAlywv, rynddree tav “A@nvaiwy érraxocias oixias: tadta Sé Svarpakdpevos, THv Bev Bovdny éreiparo katavew, Ioayopay S& Kal tpraxocious Tov pirov per adtod xupiovs Kabiatavas THs Toews. Tis 5é BovrARs avriotdons Kal cvvabpacbévtos Tod TAnOoUs, of wev mepl Tov Knrcopévny cat loaydpay carépuyov eis tv dxpdrroduv’ 6 88 Shjuos Svo pev juepas mpocKxabefouevos emoddopxes, TH Se Tpitn Kreopé- vnv wey Kal Tods wet adtod mavtas adeicay vroardvdous, Kreu- 4 abévny € Kal rods GAXous Huyddas peteTremrpavto. Katacydvtos Se rod Sywov ta mpdywata, KrevoOévns nycwov Fv Kal tod Siou mpootaTns. aitidtator yap oxeddv eyévovto Ths éxBorns Tov tupavvey of Adkxpewvidat, kal ctactatovtes Ta Todd SueTédecar. ére 5€ mpdrepoy Tav ’AXkwewviddv KiSwv éréOero tois tupdvvors’ 816 wal RSov Kai eis TodTov ev Tols cKoXLoLs* éyxer kal Kydave, didxove, und’ érirnOou, el xp1) Tols ayabois dvSpdow oivoyxoeiv.

21. dia pév ody tavtas tds aitias émiotevev 6 Sijpos TO Kreis béver, tore S€ Tod rAnOous mpoertynKds, res TeTdpTH meTa THY TOV TUpavVwY KaTaAvaL”, ert "Iaayopou apyovtos, mpaTov pdv

8 <dgixduevos 6 Kreoudvys> per’ ddlywv iynhdre add. K-w? ex Hdt. v 7o. aynAare? B, coll. Hdt.v 72. 11 MTOY sc. mera Tov. 15 adiecan: deioav (K-W, B). KAEICOENHN (K-W, H-L, B); cf. 22 § 1, et Kithner, Gr. Gr. i p- 5123, 19 dvrisracidfovres H-L. mpds TovTous vel kara roUrwy desiderat Gen- nadios. 23 el 6%) xpi dyaGois minus bene Athen. 695; el 4% xpy a’ dyadois Bergk.

oO: XXI 1 emicteyen, cf. 35 § 3 éxapov 7 mods. émlorevev 6 Sfuos K, H-L, B: éml-

arevov [[6 dfu0s]] Rutherford, Bury, K-w. 3 én’ H-L.

§ 3. tefeA@dvros] Hdt. v 72, KXecoué- vys 6€ ws méumruv (kypuxa) é£éBadre Krew- obévea kal rods évayéas, Krebévns peév abros bmekéoxe. rPynAdre] 20. dynharée énraxéota érloria AOnvalwy.

ravta 8t—troomovSous] Hdt. v 72, Tatra 5é moujoas Sevtepa ryv Bovddy karahvew éreparo, rpinkocloce dé Toice "Toaybpew craciubryot Tas dpxas évexelpite. avriatabelons 5é Tis BovAjjs kal ov Bov- Aouévns meiPerOar 8 re Kdeouévyns kai o Toayépys kal of oractrat atrod Karahau- Bdvover rhv dxpérokw. "AOnvatwy 5é of Aovrol Ta alta Ppovjoavres érodbpKeov abrovs juépas d0o' rH 6é Tplry brdarovdoe éképyovrae éx Tis xw@pys boo oay abrav Aaxedarudyiot. Isagoras withdrew with the Lacedaemonians (74); the rest of the Athenians who had taken his side were put to death (72 fi2.).

pereréuayro] Hdt. v 73, KAacdévea

kal ra émraxéow émlaria Ta diwxb&ra vd Kveouéveos werareuydevor.

Tov Stjpov mpoordtys] c.z § 2 ad fin. :

§ 5. KySev] Nothing else is known of this person. His ‘endeavour to expel the tyrants was doubtless one of the unsuc- cessful attempts recorded in c. 19 in the general phrase: det mpooémraiov.

kal els totroy] zc. as well as the baffled heroes of Leipsydrium celebrated in the song recorded in c. 19, and quoted by Athenaeus immediately after this couplet. This juxtaposition seems to shew that both quotations were derived from this work.

XXI§1. gra rerdpro...éri Ioaydpou dpxovros] The fourth year after the expulsion of the Peisistratidae (511/0) corresponds to 508/7 B.c. The archon- ship of Isagoras is plated by Dionysius

78

AOHNAIQN COL. 8, l. 42—COL. 9, L 4.

f s > ‘ A ° \ a t > ” cuvévemme travras eis Séxa pudas avtl THy TeTTdpwv, avapei~as 5 BovAdpevos brrws petarywor TrElous THS ToduTElas’ bOev EdéyOn

4 OYNENEIME: cuvévewe Newman, Kontos, Gertz, H-L (K° coll. 41 § 2, B); ot ov &eue K-W, qui lacunam post épxovros indicatam ope Ar. Pol. 1275 4 36 explendam

censent. § 5 ovppergis: ANAMIZAI.

dtéverue Wyse, dvéveue Thompson.

dvapettar K-W, H-L, K%; cf. 3

Hal., Ant. Rom. i 74, in Ol. 68, 1= 508/7 B.C.; and his second mention of the same date, in v 1, shews that it was an Olympic year.

The text implies that the reforms of Cleisthenes were subsequent to the ex- pulsion of Isagoras and Cleomenes. Cleisthenes begins by offering (dmrobd.dovs, 20 § 1) the commons a share in the constitution; Isagoras appeals to Cleo- menes for his assistance against Clei- sthenes, and is defeated; thereupon Cleisthenes carries out his proposed re- forms. Herodotus briefly mentions some of these reforms (v 66 and 69), and describes the calling in of Cleomenes as a counter-move on the part of Isagoras (7o). Hence modern historians, ¢. g. Thirlwall, Grote, Curtius and Busolt, place the constitutional reforms of Clei- sthenes before the calling in of Cleomenes. This appears improbable, for (as justly observed by Mr Kenyon) ‘there was not time to have introduced such extensive constitutional changes before the Spartan invasion; a remark which had already been made by Sauppe, De Demis Urbanis, p. 1. The evidence of Herodotus, when carefully examined, is partly in favour of the account in the text. He begins by describing Cl. as courting the aid of the commons (rdv dfjuov mpoceraiplterat). He then adds that it was afterwards (mera 6€) that Cl. transformed the four tribes into ten. This part of his narrative is a digression, and the story is resumed in c. 69, fv Te Tov Ofwov mpocbeuevos ToAK@ katimepOe Tav dvticracwréwy. In this view, I find myself in agreement with Lugebil, PAz/ol. Suppl. Bd. iv 165.

§ 2. els Seka dvds dytl Tov Tertdpev KTA.] Hat. v 66, pera de rerpadvrAous édvras ’AOnvatous Sexapvrous érolyce xTr. 76. 69, Tas pudrds perwvduace Kal érolyce mredvas é& éhacodvwy* Seka Te OH Puvddpxous avTl reocépwr érolyce, Séxa dé kal rods Syuous xaréveme és tas pudds. In the Politics, Ar, alludes to these reforms as follows: iii 2, 1278 4 37, GAN’ lows exetvo uGddov exe: daroplay, bro. weréoxXov peraBodjrs yevouérns morerglas (cf. werdoxwor...ris modtrelas), ofov ’AOjvnow érolnce Kde-

’

obdvns mera Thy TY Tupdvywy exBodhp* mohdovs yap épudrérevoe E€vous kal Soddous perolkous, 2.e. enrolled (as citizens) in the tribes not only free-born foreigners but also slaves who by emancipation: had already become pérockoe (cf. Gilbert, Gr. St. i 144; Hermann, Staatsalt, § 111, 18). The text, as it stands, makes no direct mention of these, though it incidentally names the veoro\?ra: at the end of § 4. Cf. 2d. vii (vi) 4, 1319 4 20, éru 6 xal Ta Toaira KaracKkevdopara XpHowua mpods Thy Snuoxparlay rhv ro.adryy, ots KrecoGévns re ’AOnvnow éxpioaro Bov- Abpevos adkijoa: Thy Snuoxpariav, Kal mepl Kupyyny ol tov Ofjpov Ka@iordvres. gudal Te yap €repat romnréa wrelous Kal Parplat, Kal Ta Tov ldtwy lepSv ovvaxréov els ddLya Kal Kowd, Kal mdvra cogicréov brws dv ére pddiora dvaucxOdoe (cf. dvapettar) mavres GAAnAo, ai 5é ouv7Pera dia- fevyxPdow al mpbrepar. See Grote, c. 31, ii p. 109—113; and zx. p. 83.

60ev—Bovdopévous] ‘ Hence the advice, not to notice the tribe, which was ten- dered to those who would scrutinise (the lists of) the clans.’ This is the interpret- ation suggested by Mr Kenyon who, in the course of an excellent note, observes that, as the @vAal, after the reforms of Cleisthenes, ‘no longer bore any relation to the -yévy, it was useless to enter onan examination of the tribes for the purpose of reviewing the lists of the yévy... A number of persons were admitted to the new tribes who had not been members of the old, and these were not necessarily entered on the rolls of any of the yévy. Formerly, on any review of the citizen- roll, it was no doubt usual to go through it tribe by tribe, following all the sub- divisions of the old patriarchal system. Now, the tribe-roll had no relation to that of the yévy, and consequently those persons who wished to examine the latter would have nothing to do with dis-' tinctions of tribe.’ In the words of Grote, c. 10, li 273, ‘the gentes had -no connection, as such, with these new tribes, and the members of the same gens might belong to different demes’.

CH. 21, 1, 4—12.,

TIOAITEIA

79

[Col. 9] kal 7d un) puvdroKpweiv, || mpds rods eEerdkew Ta yévn Bovdopévovs.

wv \ 3 érevta Thy BovdAny mrevtaxocilovs] avtl tetpaxociwy Kat |éorncer,

mevTnxovTa €& éxaoTyns puAns’ tore & Floa]y éxarov.

dd TodTo

5é ove els Sei[Se]ua pudrds cuvérakev, ba[ws alvTe pr) cvpBalvyn pepivew Kata Tas mpoimapyovcas TpiTTos’ Hoav ydp éx TeTTApwVv guror dHdexa tpitrves* Bor’ ov [cv ]émumrev <dv> dvapioyerOar 476 TrAHG0s. Sréverme S€ Kal Tv yodpav Kata Snwous TpLaxovTa pépn,

10 Trpoc corr. in KaTa.

TETTAPWr: Xs

11 oyc’ eTrelTITEN? ov« av

owémimrev Richards (H-L); ov pilbwan dv Hude, K-w, K%, B.

TESTIMONIA.

12—15 Michael Psellus rept ray dvoudrwv tov diay, p. 103 Bois-

sonade, p. 1015 § 31 Migne, 4 6¢ rpirrds vewr épwy Broua mapa Trois ’AOnvalos éorl. Knreodévns yap Ts, els TpidkovTa polpas thy Arrichy dracav diaveluas, reid) 7rd wey abris émiBadarrldiov qv, 7d de éml Toi péoov Kabfjoro ris xwpas, 7d 58 mapa 7d dorv ouwvéorpwro, déxa wev polpas TH maparly oyrréreuxe, déxa dé xaréorncev émi rhv peod- yetov, déxa 5¢ doruvduous érolnoe’ Kal 7d rpernudpiov TpirTds wvduacro (attulerunt K-w).

oudoxpuveiv] ‘to draw distinctions be- tween tribes’. The word occurs in Thuc. vi 18 § 2, eye houx dso. mavres f pu- Noxptvoter ols xpewv BonGetv, where, like TamevecOar in § 3, and oropéowper in § 4, it is a vivid metaphor characteristic of the speaker, Alcibiades. Cf. Lucian, Abdicatus, 4, obk és BdOos dpdyrwv, otd’ axptBGs pudroxpwobvrwy (Schol. diaxpovdr- Tw, Soximafdvrwy mepiépyws) Tras vécous, and Phalaris alter, 9, puvdoxpwety Ta dvabjpara Kal yeveadoyely Ta weumoueva, 6Gev kat ad’ Srov Kal dmota (in all these passages there is a v. 2. pudoxpweiv). In late authors we also have gvudoxplvyois, gudokpiyréov, and pudoKpwyrikds (see L and S). Pollux, viii 110, after recounting the names of the Attic tribes, adds dé dé pudGy 7d gudoxpweiy wvoudobn; and Suidas explains @uAoxpwet by diaxplver, xatadoxiwudger meptépyws. Cf. Phrynichus, p. 71, 8 Bekk. An. pudoxpietv* xuplws pev 7d Tas pudas Tas év Tals médeor Staxplverv, onpatver 5é kal rd dAdo Te Giardrrew Kal Staxpivew, id. ‘App. Soph. p. 81, 7, ptdo- kplves (sic)' Staxplver, Bonu mepiepryws,

kareterdge.’, quoted’ by Schmidt on Hesych. @uALA Joxpwelv’ Tas pudas dia- Kplvew,

€erdtew] Dem. 45 § 82, rov qudrepov warépa éijrates darts fv (of one who was once a slave). Cf. note on Dem. Lefz.

§ 5.

§ 3. tiv Bovdrjv] From this time forward the Solonian Council of 400 is superseded by that. of 500, 7 Trav mevra- koolwv Bovdy, or } Bovdy) of wevraxdoro. (Aeschin. Czes. § 2) as it was sometimes called, to distinguish it from the Council of the Areopagus. The institution of the

Council of the Five Hundred has always been attributed to Cleisthenes, in con- nexion with the introduction of the ten tribes ; but this passage is probably the first express statement on the subject in any ancient author.

Sras—pa} cupBalvy] Znf. drws—mere- xp, and ta wh...éferéyxwour,

tpirris] c. 8 § 3.

od cwérimrey dv—mAqGos] ‘quod si fecisset, non contigisset ut multitudo mis- ceretur’ Hude (placing joav—rpirries in a parenthesis).

§ 4. Sréveye—tpidkovra pépn] c. 30 § 3, duavetuat...rérrapa pépy, Xen. Cyrop. vil 5, 3, 76 orpdrevya Karéverme SwbdeKa pépn, Plato, Politicus, p. 283 D diéAwper vi Sto wépn (Kiihner Gr. Gr. § 411,

¢).

Cleisthenes divided the whole of Attica into 30 portions, each of them called a TpirTus. 10 of these were urban or sub- urban, 10 on the coast, and ro in the interior. Each of the 10 tribes had three tptrrs allotted to it, one from each of the above districts. Thus ‘the tribe, as a whole, did not correspond with any con- tinuous portion of the territory, nor could it have any peculiar local interest, separate, from the entire community’ (Grote). In this way the evils that had arisen during the previous century from the factions of the Shore, the Plain and the Mountain, were effectually counteracted.

The number of demes in each rpirrvs is not known. From the passage in Hdt. v 69, déxa 6€ xal rods Sjuous karéverme és Tas puads, ‘Cleisthenes distributed the demes among the tribes by tens’, it has been in- ferred that he ‘at first recognised exactly

80 AOHNAIQN

COL. 9, |. 4—0.

/ A a Séxa pév Tév repli 76 doru, Séea 88 THs Taparias, Séca 88 THs Hecoyeiou, kal Ta’Tas émovoudcas TpLTTOS, exdypwaer Tels els THY

t 15 pudny éxdotny, dws éxdotn peteyn mdvT@Y TOY ToreV. Kal

100 demes, distributed in equal proportion among his 10 tribes’. This is the view of Schomann (Azz, p. 365 E. T.). K. F. Hermann (Staatsa/t. § 111, 12) held that this is what Herodotus meant to affirm, but he does not accept the’ account as true. Gilbert, Gr. S¢. i142, notes that the existence of the Attic demes be- fore Cleisthenes is implied in [Plato], Hipparch. p. 228—9. e also quotes Herodian, rept worvjpous Aéfews, p. 17, 8, ’Apagiy els ray éxardv jpduv. Araphen, one of the Attic demes, is thus identical in name with one of the 100 x7rlorat érwvupot of the demes. He therefore ac- cepts the statement of Herodotus. Others again (e.g. Corsini, Grote in his first ed., and Dietrich, de Clisthene, Halle, 1840, Pp- 32) connect ééxa with és ras pudds and contend that such a collocation is not un- common in Herodotus. Madvig, Adv. Crit. i 305, strikes out d&a dé Bake (Bibliotheca Critica iv 272) alters it into kal 67. Cf. Schémann, Ox Grote, § 6, and Axt. pp. 336, 366 E. T.

Even supposing that 100 demes were recognised by Cleisthenes, that number did not remain unaltered. Early in the and century B.C. (in the time of Polemon, quoted by Strabo p. 396) the number was 174. The number known to us from inscriptions is 182, besides 8 doubtful cases (Hermann’s Sfaa/salt. ed. 5, p. 797). Out of these 182, there are 14 duplicate names, such as ‘upper’ and ‘lower Lamptrae’; so that the number of known names of demes is 168. Landwehr (Philologus, Suppl. v, 1889 p. 161—166) holds that 174 was the original number, and that this remained unaltered. The

_ number of zpirris was evidently constant and it may be fairly assumed that the demes belonging to each tpirrés were, as a general rule, contiguous, If there were 100 demes, each of the 30 rprrris would contain 3 or 4 demes, twenty of them containing only 3 demes each, and the remaining ten as many as 4, (20X 3+10x4=100). Dividing this number by 1o we get for each tribe 2xX3+1%x4 demes, distributed in such a way that each tribe has one rpirrés con- sisting of 4 demes, and 2 consisting of 3. In the case of each tribe, one of these tpirris would be situated in or near the

capital, one near the coast, and one in the interior. The following scheme shows how it would be possible to distribute 100 demes among ten tribes while assigning ten trittyes of 3 or 4 demes each to each of the 3 districts:

urban or the the

suburban coast interior Erechtheis 4 3 Aegeis Pandionis Leontis Acamantis Ocneis Cecropis Hippoontis Acantis Antiochis

ow Dlowwwnwwnae WWHOWPR DROW WY

AP PAWWHWW

3334 Total: 100 demes.

Out of the 160 demes in Smith’s Dict. Geogr., 124 are assigned to certain tribes; no tribe has less than 10, though several have more; Acamantis, Hippothontis, and Leontis having as many as 15, 16 and 17 respectively. sf

Athens itself, with its immediate neigh- bourhood, was divided into several demes and those demes assigned to several tribes, as follows: Agryle (Zrechtheis), Kollytus and Diomeia (Aege?s), Kydathenaeon (Pandionis), Scambonidae (Leontis), Ce- rameicus (Acamantis), Lakiadae (Oeneis), Melite (Cecropzs), Ceiriadae (Hippothon- zis), Phaleron (Aeantis), Colonus d-yopatos (Axtiochis?). The Peiraeus was assigned to the tribe Aippothontis. (Lolling in I. Miiller’s Handbuch, iii 306.) In the case of the demes in or near Athens it would be difficult for them to be contiguous with the other demes in the same tpirrés. It is not impossible that less than 3 demes may in some cases have constituted a rpir- rds. On the distribution of the demes among the tribes, cf. Wilamowitz, Aus Kydathen, i110; Hug, Gemeinden und Biirgerrecht in Attika, 19; Milchhéfer, Erl. Text 2u Curtius und Kaupert, Karten von Attika i 28, ii 39 n. 3 (Busolt, i 614, n. 5).

bras éxdoryn peréxy mwdvrev Tov témwv] Pol. 13302 16, va—duorepwr Tav rétwy wdyres, weréexwow. Plat. Leg. 745 B-E (Newman).

CH. 21, 1. 13—20.

*

TIOAITEIA 81

Snporas éroincey GdAndwy Tors oixobvtTas év éExdoT@ TOY Suwon, iva pn) Tatpdbev tpocayopevovtes eEehéyywow Tovs veoToXitas, G@\Aa Tav Snuwv avayopevwcw' bOev Kai Kadlod]ow "AOnvaios odds avtovs tay Syuov. Katéotnce dé Kal Snuapyous thy adtiv exovTas emeuédecay Tols TpoTEpov vavKpapois’ Kal yap Tods Snpous

18 rpocayopedwow Richards, Kal <viv> K-w.

19—21 *Schol. Arist. Wud. 37 ’Ap. 6¢ wepl KAabévous poi “xaréornce Kal Snudpxous—erolycev” (Rose, Frag. 397°, deerat in ed. 2). * Harp. vavpapicd:...’Ap. & & °AG. wor. pot “Karéornoay be Snudpxouvs—vauxpdpois’ Snulovs (Snualovs cod. A) dv7l Tov vavkpdpwr érolncav” (3597, 3973). * Harp. dhuapxos:... rodrous dé pyow ’Ap.

&v°A@, Tod. bd Krecobévous xatactadqvar Thy alti exovras émipéderay Tols mpbrepov vauxpdpors (2b.). Hesych. diuapxor: of rpbrepoy kadovpevor vatxpapot...

Syporas—Srjpwv] Under this arrange- ment every one originally belonged to the deme in which he lived. His des- cendants, whether they had property in the deme or not, continued to belong to the same deme. It was only through adoption that a member of one deme be- came a member of another, by being en- rolled in the deme of his adoptive father (Dem. Leech. §§ 22, 34; Schémann, Aniig. p. 367, E. T.).

tva prj—veoroAlras] Many foreigners and resident aliens were added by Clei- sthenes to the roll of citizens (Pol. 1275 6 37, quoted on p. 78): Such a newly en- rolled citizen, if called by his father’s name alone, would betray his foreign origin; but, by being designated by his deme, he lost the badge of his alien birth and was put on equal terms with the other members of the deme. Tarpé- Gey] Xen. Oecow. vii 3, Pausan. vii 7 § 4. €edeyxworv] Dem. Zudbul. 57 § 3, Tois bev éSereyxonévors E€vots odot xaderalvey, and 2. § 51.

tay 8ypev dvayopedwow] ‘publicly (or officially) call them by their demes.’ Cf. Tov Showy Teds, trav dyyuwy SOoplxcos (Plat. EZuthyphro, 213, and Dem. 39 § 30), Lys. 23 § 2, drddev Snuorevorro. It may be inferred that before the time of Cleisthenes Athenians were not described by the name of their demes. ‘In Athens, at least after the revolution of Kleisthenés, the gentile name was not employed: a man was described by his own single name, followed first by the name of his father and next by that of the deme to which he belonged’ (Grote c. 10, ii 274).

§ 5. karérryoe—Sypudpxovs] Photius, S.v. vauKpapla, quotes from this treatise (c. 8 § 3), pudal dé joav—xal’ éxdorny. After this quotation should follow the words which have by mistake been placed before

S. A.

it, viz.: Uorepov 6¢ drd KrewsOdvous SFuol elot, kal Snjuapxot exAjOnoav. At the close of his article he cites Cleidemus (év 77 tplry): dre Kyderobévous déxa pudds mov}- cavros dvri Tév Teccdpwr, cvvéBy Kal els mevTyKovTa uépy dtarayhvat’ abrods (radra Miller) d¢ éxdAovv vauxpaplas, Wamep viv eis Ta éxardv pépn Siatpefévra (diarpeOevras Siebelis) kaXofo. ouppoplas (FHG i 361). According to this view, the change in the number of tribes from four to ten in- volved a change in the number of vauxpa- plas from 48 (12x 4) to 50. If the normal number of, demes recognised by Clei- sthenes was 100, it would follow from this that he combined every two demes into a vavxpapla (Schomann, Anz. p. 370 E.T.); or rather that he transferred the duties of each vauxpapla to a pair of contiguous demes. The importance of the Waz- crariae naturally did not remain the same as it had formerly been, and we hear in particular that the business which had once belonged to the Maucrari now passed to the Demarchs (é. p. 370, on the authority of quotations from this passage in Harpocration &c.).

In the passage above cited from Pho-

tius Mr P. Giles (Anglish Historical .

Review, 1892, p. 331) proposes, instead of revryxovra (i.e. N) uépy, to read tpid- xovra (i.e. A) uépy, and to identify these “épn with the rpirris. He also assumes that this sentence was followed by a clause referring to the djuo. He is doubtless justifhed in adding that this treatise gives no direct support to the view that the vavepapla consisted of two OFjuot.

The Peripatetic, Demetrius Phalereus (Miiller, FHG, ii 363), ascribed the esta- blishment of demarchs not to Cleisthenes but to of rept ZdAwva (Newman).

6

23

82

AOHNAIQN

COL. 9, 1. g—12,

avtl TOY vavepaptav érroincev. mpoonyopevce bé THY SHwwv Tors pev amo Tév [Tlom[ wv], Tovs S€ dro THY KTIGavTw@Y’ ov yap aTav-

Tes UmHpyxov ert Tois TOTALS.

Ta dé yévn Kal Tas Ppatpias Kal Tas 6

22 dmavres wariipxyov ers (K, K-W); €N| pro é7¢ Berol. (B, qui etiam in papyro Londin. en legendum suspicatur; certe litteris valde obscuris eT! indicatur): dracw «rd coniecit K (J B Mayor); dracw bafipxev dvéuara Bury (H-L); etiam dmrayres <ol

«tloavres > vrhpxov ere rots Tomois coniecerat Bury.

corr. Berol.

23 maTpiac, idem habet

mTpoonyd pevore—Ke Tir ayTov] ‘Henamed some of the demes from their localities, and some from their founders.’ Demes were already in existence before Clei- sthenes; but they were now recognised as component parts in the new constitutional order, and had their names fixed by offi- cial sanction. Many of them had Jocal designations derived either from natural features (Iloraudés, Kyqgiola, ’Erixngicla, Aeipddes, ‘AAtuwofs), or places in their neighbourhood (Olov AexeAeckév, Ofov Ke- pawexdv), or plants or trees that grew there (Mapadwv, ‘Pauvots, Muppiwois, ’Ay- voos, "Axepbots, “Iréa, "EXaots, "Eplxesa, Opia, IIpagia, IIredda, Pyyods). Among other local designations may be men- tioned Olvén, Broa, Aapmrpal, "EXevats. Cf. Etym. Magn. s. v. ’Eneeis:...7 dad Tay ToT WY, Hard TOV TapaKemevwy avTors, 4 ard r&v év abrois puray, 4 dmd ray év avrois xetporexvav, awd Tw olknodyTwr (oixicdyrwy Leake) dvdpav xal -yuvoixdr, and Schol. Aristoph. Plut. 586.

Other demes were named ‘from their founders,’ z.¢. from one of the ‘ hundred heroes’ or eponymous founders of the demes (Herodian, quoted on § 3). The names of these are collected by Sauppe, De Demis Urbanis, p. 4 ff.; but since many of them are obviously coined from the names of the demes, it is in these cases

, inaccurate to describe the demes as desig-

nated after their founders. Many of the demes were called after distinguished gentes who held property in them (e.g. Butadae, Thymaetadae, Cothocidae, Peri- thoedae, Semachidae, Scambonidae, Col- leidae). There are as many as 30 such demes (25 of them are givenin Grote,c. 10, ii273n.); and it has been suggested that all of these were constituted by Cleisthenes. “It seems that Kleisthenes ’ (says Grote, 2. c.) ‘recognised a certain number of new demes to which he gave names derived from some important ges resident near the spot. It is thus that we are to ex- plain the large number of Kleisthenean demes that bear patronymic names.’ If, under Cleisthenes, the number of demes

was 100, it follows that before his time jo demes were already in existence. (Cf. Smith, Dict. Ant. ». v. Demus.) ‘The demes named after gentes are situated mainly in that part of the country which has been assigned to the Phyle of the , Geleontes, and where accordingly the greater number of noble families and the most important of them lived’ (Sché- mann, Ant. p. 366 n. E.T.). It is not impossible that rw» xricdyvrwy is meant to include the ancestors of these families as well as the ‘eponymous heroes’; but the distinction is immaterial, as a deme might readily regard, as its eponymous hero, the founder of the family from which it derived its name.

ob ydp—rois réots] ‘for (from the time of Cleisthenes) the demes were no longer called in all cases from the lo- calities’ (understanding mpooa-yopevOévres from mpooryépevce) ; z.e. they then ceased to be in every instance designated by ‘local’ names. These old ‘local’ names had often been derived from the vil-. lages or hamlets included within the limits of the deme as constituted by Cleisthenes. Many of these were super- seded by gentile or patronymic or heroic names,—names derived did tay Kriodv- tw. ov yap ére is inconsistent in sense with tarfpxov, unless the latter is made to mean little more than 7. Possibly the sentence implies that (even in the time of Cl.) the demes had already lost their local designations, and had received names derived from persons instead. Cl. gave official recognition to both classes of names, local and personal. Poland translates as follows: Denn nicht alle Gaue entsprachen mehr den alten Namen der Ortlichkeiten, adding in a note, that, in naming the new demes, Cl. availed himself of the old names, but had often, for example, to break up an old deme into several divisions and thus create new names. Blass reads év rots réros, with the following interpretation : nom omnes demi erant inter vicos qui iam exstabant ; ttague multos ab herotbus appellavit.

CH. 21, l, 21—26,

TIOAITEIA

83

t ig a iepewovvas elacey Exe ExaoTous Kata Ta TaTpLa. Tails dé pudais érrolncev enwvuplous] é« t&év mpoxpiOévtwr éExaTov apynyeTav ovs

avethev 4 IlvOia déxa.

24 IEpWCYNAC (K, H-L, B): lepewotvas K-w, Meisterhans, p. 36%

25 e€TTW-

NYMOYC Berol.; idem coniecerant J B Mayor, Richards: érwvup{tas] kK}.

25—26 Etym. M. éravupo (locus infra exscriptus).

§ 6. tad 8 yévn—rdrpia] The parallel passage in the Politics, 1319 4 20, quoted on p. 78, implies that Cleisthenes increased the number of the phratries (and it was so understood by Buermann, Fahrd. fi &l. Phil. Suppl. Bd. ix 1878, 597 s¢q.). The text states that he allowed -every one to remain in his former phratria. It was once held by Busolt (Gr. Gesch. i 394, note 5, after Landwehr, Phzlologus, Suppl. Bd. v 168) that the reference to the phra- tries in the passage in the Polztics did not necessarily apply to Athens, but to Cy- rene, which is mentioned in the same pas- sage ; and with this view Mr W. R. Paton agrees (Class. Rev. v 221 4). See also Duncker, G. d. A. vi 591 note. Busolt, however, has since admitted that the pparplas are those of Athens (I. Miiller’s Handbuch, iv 1, p. 144 note 11); he adds that the present passage (as represented in the Berlin fragment) implies that the principle of the organisation of the phra- tries according to yévy remained un- changed. ‘Probably the phratries before the time of Cleisthenes were larger bodies which, on the occasion of his reforms, were broken up into smaller portions. ‘The number of the phratries is unknown; but they must have been more than 12’ (7.).

The present passage has been held to be ‘somewhat out of harmony’ with that in the Politics, and the question has been asked whether the statement as to priest- hoods can be easily reconciled with the fact that Cleisthenes converted a number of private worships into a few public ones’ (Mr W. L. Newman, in Class. Rev. v 162 a). If we are compelled to choose, one would prefer the definite statement in the text to the inference drawn from the less definite statement in the Politics, not to mention the disturbing influence of the mention of Cyrene in that passage. The two statements may, however, be reconciled. I take the text to refer to those who were already citizens connected with existing yévy and ¢pa- tpia. Cleisthenes allowed all these to continue as of old in their respective yévn and @parpla:, with their religious

institutions intact. Among these insti- tutions would be (1) the sacrificial rites performed by the P@uAoBacrAe?s, who sur- vived the change from four tribes into ten (8 § 3; 57 end); and (2) the here- ditary priesthoods such as those held by the Eumolpidae, Kerykes and Eteobu- tadae. Cf. Lex. Dem. Patm. p. 152, Sakkelion, (of the 30 yevyyral) ay al lepwotvar éxdorors mpoojKkovoa ékd7y- podvro, olov Evpodridae kal Kypuxes xal ’EreoBourddat, ws ioropet év Ty AQ. Tod, Apiarorédys kTr. (Rose, Frag. 385°).

In contrast to the existing citizens there were a number of other persons who had hitherto not belonged to that

body and therefore had no yévy. These are the veorodira of § 4. It was for

these that Cleisthenes provided new ¢pa- tplaz. At the same time he absorbed many of the minor local cults into public festivals held at Athens.

In Class. Rev. v 222 6, Mr W. R. Paton observes that the veorodfrat could not be received into the yévy, all the members of which were allied (or sup- posed to be allied) by blood; but he considers that they could be received into the phratries, each of which was a group of yé&y not claiming a blood-rela- tionship with each other and therefore more elastic. He assumes that Cleisthenes did not increase the number of phratries ; whereas it is not improbable that he did, and there is nothing in the present pas- sage to prove that he did not.

tats St hudats—Séxa] In Etym. M., 5. U. émdvupo, after mention of the érw- vupo. TGV riKt@y (c. 53), we have, con- trasted with these, ol d&ka dd’ wy ai pudal TpoonyopevOnoav, olov "EpexGevs, Alyeds, Tlavdlwy, Aeds, ’"Axduas, Olveds, Kéxpoy, ‘Inroféwv, Alas, ’Avrioxos’ Tatra dé Ta déxa dvduara amd p’ (=éxardv, codices dmrépo.s) 6 [1v@tos etAero, KAevoOévous ob rw Siaratapévou 7d wav TAGs els Seka pudrds. Cf. Lex. Dem. Patm., p. 15, Sakkelion (Bull. de corr. hellén. 1877), ...70d Geod Tolro xpyoavros...rovTous, yap é& dvoud- tov éxarov 6 Oeds é€edéEaro, and Schol. Aristid. iii 331, 20 Dind. This is one of several instances in which the influence

6—2

is)

5

84 AQHNAIQN

COL.'9, 1. 12—19.

22. tovtwy dé yevouévwv Snuotixwtépa Tor[d THs Z]éXewvos éyéveto 4 TodTela’ Kal yap auvéBn Tors mev Lrwvos vopous adavicat tiv tupavvida Sia TO wy xpHTOat, Kawods 8 dddovs

56 Tepl ToD doTpaKicpod vopLos.

a 4 « Oeivar tov Kreva Oévnv oroyatopevov tod mryGous, év obs éréOn cal mparov pev ovv eres tréurtot 2

‘ f ‘ a 347 4 y a peta tavTny thy Katadotacw ép “Eppoxpéovtos dpyovtos TH i a a t \ 4 , -Bovny Tots mevtaxocioss Tov SpKov éroinaay, bv ers Kal viv opy-

XXII 3 K(al)Noyc? (kal...Berol.), K-w, K3, B: [véuJous H-L. 5 treumryt, an dyddy? K.

(K, K-W, H-L, B).

TESTIMONIA. XXII 5—39 Heraclidis epitoma (Rose, Frag. 611, 4°): mept dorpaxicpod véouov elonyncaro, 6s éréOn dia Tovs TupayyiewTas. eotpaxloOnoav Kal BdvOurmos xa "Aporetdys.

4 KAEICOENH 6 Epmoy|KPEONTOC (K).

kal roy kal dAdow Te

of the Alcmaeonidae with the oracle at Delphi was of important consequences to Athens.

dpxnyetav] The émrdvuuo are them- selves called adpynyéra: in Aristoph. Frag. 186 Dind. (mapa rods dpxnyéras), ap. Bekk. Anecd. i 449: dpxmnyérac’ iryeus- ves ol érdvupot TGV pudGy.

XXII. Ostracism.

§ 1. oroxafspevov Tov wAOovs] Pol. vi (iv) 12, av...ddvyapxexovs rods vduous 7TiOn oToxaverbar xp Tov péowy.

é6orTpaktopod] Our knowledge of the procedure in cases of ostracism is founded on a fragment of Philochorus 79 4 (FHG i 396), in the Appendix to Photius, p. 675 Porson: mpoxeporovet uev 6 Simos mpd Ths 7 mpuravelas (see c. 43 § 5), ef Soke? Td dorpaxov elopépew* bre 5é doxe?, éppdocero cavicw jy dyopa Kai kareXelrovTo eoodo. déxa, dv wy eloidyres KaTa udds érlBecav Ta dorpaxa, orpépovTes THY ert- ypagiv. émecrdrouy 6€ of re évvéa dpxovres Kal) Boudy’ StapOunOévrwy 6€é rw Tretora yeoro Kal ph dAdtrw é~axioxirlwy, Todrov ea ra Sixara dévrTa cal NaBdvra brép Tov tStwy cwadrayudrwv' év déxa huépaus wera- orivas ris worews ern béxa (Uorepov Se eyé- vovro wévTe) Kapmovbp.evov Td EavTod wy émt- Balvovra évrés Tepatorod (Dobree’s cor- rection of wépa rod) EvBolas dxpwrnplov* pdvos bé ‘LrépBodos éx Tay dddéwy Soxet ékoorpaxiOjvar dia poxOnplay rpdrwv, ov Ot trowlay rupavvldos* wera rodrov dé Karedvdn 7d bos, dpiduevov vouoberyoavTos Kretobévous, bre rods rupdvvous xaréducev, Srws cuvexBaddy Kal rovs lous avrav. According to Ephorus and Theopompus the object of ostracism was to check brepoxy (cf. Diod. xi 55, Nepos, 7hezz. 8, Cimon 3; Plut. Arist. 7, Them. 22, Nic. 11, Alcib. 13). This opinion is shared by Ar. Pol. tii 13, 1284 @ 17 and

36, and viii (v) 3, 1302 4 15. The checking of tarepox7# may well have been its original purpose, but in process of time it was made the means of preventing mischief arising from ordoes by suppress- ing the leader of the opposition and leaving the majority free to carry out their wishes without hindrance. See Grote, c. 31; Busolt, i 620, and in Miiller’s Handbuch, iv 1, 121; Lugebil, Das Wesen und die historische Bedeutung des Ostrakismos in Athen, in Fahro. f. cl. Phil. Suppl. Bd. iv, 119g—175; Gilbert, Gr. St. i 446-6; Abbott’s Ast. of Gr. i 481-3; and Smith, Dict. Ant. s. v.

§2. traméprrw] The text, as it stands, implies 504/3 B.c., four years after the archonship of Isagoras, 508/7. But the archon of 504/3 is already known, Aces- torides (Dionys. v 37), and not Hermo- creon. ‘The year is the 12th before the battle of Marathon 490/489, and must therefore be 5o01/o, the archon of which year has not hitherto been known. It is just conceivable that the reforms of Cleisthenes may have taken three years to get into complete shape, but nothing is said to this effect in the text, and it seems therefore necessary (as suggested by Mr Kenyon) to alter the sth year into the 8th (é into 7).

tots amevraxoclots] So called to dis- tinguish it from the Council of the Areopagus. The addition of these words is not inappropriate here, as the establish- ment of the Council of 500 was one of the recent reforms.

tov Spkov] Xen. Mem. i 1 § 18, rov Bovdeurixdy Spxov dudoas, év @ Fv Kara Tovs vouous Bovdedcew. Lys. 31 § 1, éudoas elofdOov els 7d BovdevTyproy Ta Brita cupBovretoay ry mode, eveorl re év TQ Spxw dropatvay ef rls Twa olde

CH. 22, |, I—13.

TIOAITEIA

85

* of

ovow' émrevta Tos oTpaTHyovs HpodvTo KaTa duAds, é& ExdaTns

a a oe A , £ / fal e ‘ > La t <Ths> hdres eva, rijs S€ amrdons orpatids nyeuov Hy 6 Tod papxos. érev O€ peta Tadta Swdexat@ viknoavtes THY év Mapabaw paynv ért Dawinrmov apyovtos, Svadurovtes ern SVo0 peta THY vixny, Oappodvros %6n Tod Sypov, TOTe mpaTov expyoavTo TH voww TO

x J Fs a a mepl Tov dotpaktopov, Os éTéOn Sid THY UTroWiay TAY év Tals duVd-

8 éxaorns <rys> pudgys B, [...gu]Aqs éxdoz[ys] Berol.

K-W.

13 rob éorpaxicpuod

12—17 Harp. “Immapxos (locus infra exscriptus).

Tov Naxdvrww dverirHdeov dvra Bovdevew. [Dem.] 59 § 4, duwmoxas ra BéATLoTA Bovredoew Te Shuy tov "APnvaluov. In Solon’s time the Sov} swore rods Dékwvos vouous éurredicew (Plut. Sol. 25).

The oath included a clause, ovdé iow "AOnvaiwy oddéva, bs av éyyunras rpeis xabiory 7d abrd Tédos redobyras, wAnv edv tis émt mpodocla THs moNews 4 él KaTa- Age Toh Shyou cuvidy ad, q rédos Tt tpidpevos 4 eyyunoduevos 4 éxrAéywv wh xaraBdéddy (Dem. 24 § 144). Arist. Thesm. 943, ok 77 Bovdy oe detv. Dem. 7b, 148 refers the 8pxos Bovdevrixds to Solon; but it was the Areopagus that had cognisance of high treason assigned to it by Solon (c. 8 § 4), and presumably did not lose it until B.c. 462/1 (c. 25 § 2). The statement that the oath in the times of Cleisthenes was the same as that in the times of the writer seems inconsistent with the account in c. 45, where we are told that the Bovk had meanwhile lost the right of imprisoning, &c. (Wyse).

oTpatnyos ypotvro] Grote observes that ‘there were now created, for the first time, ten stratégi or generals, one from each. tribe...The ten generals, annually changed, are thus (like the ten tribes) a fruit of the Kleisthenean con- stitution’ (c. 31, iii 116). Plut. Avis¢éd. 5, Tov déka Kadecrmrwv Tots "AOnvatos emt tov médeuov otparnyav. Them. 6 § 1, trav ’A@nvalwy Bovrevonévew trepl oTparn- ot, where mention is made of xeupo- rovla, (Busolt, i 616, n. 3). Unless we are prepared to accept the ‘Draconian constitution’ of c. 4, there is no reason for departing from the ordinary view that the institution of the orparnyol dates from the time of Cleisthenes. :

THS ardons oTpatias Hyepolv—rrohe- papxos] ‘Even after the stratégi had been created, under the Kleisthenean constitution, the polemarch still retained a joint right of command along with them —as we are told at the battle of Marathon,

‘where Kallimachus the polemarch not

only enjoyed an equal vote in the council of war along with the ten s¢rategi, but even occupied the post of honour on the right wing’ (Hdt. vi rog—111; Grote, Z.c.). In still closer accordance with the fresh evidence of the text, Busolt, i 616, observes : der Polemarchos zog nach wie vor an der Spitze des Heeres aus der Stadt.

§ 3. Stadvmrdvres Urq Sto] i.e. in B.C. 488/7. Pol. 1299 @ 37, Tous wey Stadelrew modvy xpbvov, Hist. Anim. 523 uw 8, 6. &y ros.

Oappotvros—rov Sxjpov. The con- nexion here and elsewhere established (cc. 24, 27) ‘between moments of elation and self-confidence at Athens and con- stitutional changes for the worse’ may be compared with Isocr. Aveop. § 3 sgg. and Panath. § 133 (W. L. Newman, Class. Rev. v 161 a).

mepl Tov éGo7p.] c. gen. in § 1. ‘Ad significandam eam rem, de qua agitur ac disputatur, sep! etiam c. acc. ita usurpatur ut ab usu praep. epi c. gen. non videatur discerni posse, veluti...Po/. 1300 @ 8, 9; 1322 6 30, 31, 1286 4 34 et 1287 a1; Rhet. 1414 2 28, 1418 | a2’ Ind. Ar.

éréOy Bid viv vroplay—Tmmapxos Xdppov] Archon in 4096/5. Harpocr. s.v. "Immapxos...ddos dé éore “ ‘Imm apxos 6 Xdpmov, ws pce Avxofpyos é&v Te Kara Acwkpdrous ($117,"Lrmapxov Tov Trudpxov, who, in his absence, was condemned to death for rpodoota ; nothing else is known of him and it is not impossible that Tyidpxov in Lycurgus may be a mistake for Xdpyov): mept dé TovToU *Avdporioy & tn B’ (frag. 5) gnoly ére ouyyevhys wer Ww Tleotsrpdrov rod rupdyvov Kal mpuros eworpaxicby Tod mepl tov dorpakirpov vowou rére mpwroy TeDévros 54a THY UTr0- play ray rep Meolorparov, Bre Snpa- yoryds dv calaotparnyds érupdvyncer.

It will be observed that language almost identical with the text is quoted

15

20

86 AOHNAIQN COL. 9, 1. 19g—25. peow, btt Tlewciotpatos Snuaywyos kal otpatnyos wy TUpavvos katéotn’ Kal mpatos ootpaxiaOn tap éxeivou cvyyevay “Irrarapyos 4. Xadpwov Kodndutevs, 0 dv cal padiota Tov vopov eOnxev.o Kre- obévns, éEeXdoat Bovdopevos avTov. of yap “AOnvaios tods Tar Tupavvev didrous, boo. wn cuveEnudpravov év Tais tapaxais, elwy oixely THY ToALW, Ypwuevor TH eiwOvia Tod Syuou mpadryt.’ dv nyEHev Kal Tpoctatns jv “Immapyos. evOds 8 TH voTépw ere ert TedXecivov dpxovtos éxuduevoay Ttovs évvéa apyovTas Kata

14 oTe: Gre (K, H-L, B); 6 yap K-w. 16 KOAYTTEYC. 18 cynez- AMAPTANON: cuvegnudpravoy K, K-w!, B; ouvetauaprdvocey Poste (H-L, et omisso év

K-w’), cf. 34 § 2.

19 TIPAOTHTI (K); cf. 16, 5 et 35.

20 YCTEPWI: Uorepov K-W, B;

by Harpocration from the ’Aréis of Androtion. The historian of that name is almost certainly identical with the orator attacked in Dem. xara ’Avdpo- tlwvos, in 355 B.C. He had then been a prominent politician for 30 years (Dem. 4. c. § 66). The authorities in favour of this identification are Westermann, and Arnold Schaefer; against it are Ruhnken, Dindorf and C. Miiller (FHG, i p. Ixxxiii) and recently M. Weil, Fouxnal des Savants, 1891, p. 203. All the extant quotations from the ’Ar@ls (except the present) ‘just cover the period of Androtion’s political career, and a few more years which he may have passed in exile: the latest event noticed is the Ssayyjqpiors .. in B.C. 346-5.’ He probably left Athens soon after B.C. 355, retired to Megara, and there wrote his ’A7is in the enforced leisure of banishment, Plut. de exd/. 14, P: 605 C, (cuvéypawer) ’Avdporiwy ’AOnvaios év Meydpos (Wayte, Dem. Androt. p. xlix, 1). If the present work was written about 325 B.C., the passage in the text may well have been borrowed from Androtion, who was probably no longer alive at the time. If he began public life at 30, he must have been born in B.C. 415 (355+30+30) and, if alive, would have been go at the date assumed for the present work.

Sypaywyds] Pol. 1305 @ 7, éwl b¢ ray dpxalwy, dre yévorro 6 abros Snuaywyos kalorparnyés, els rupavvlia weréBardov" oxeddv yap ol mreiaro Tw dpxalwy Tupdv- vow éx Snuaywyav -yeydvacw, and (on Peisistratus in particular) 26. 1310 4 273; Isocr. Panath. 148; Dio Chrys. i 303, 13 D.

§ 4. mporos dotpakle by «rA.] Plut. Nic. 11, tpdros 8 (e&worpaxleOy) “Imrap- xos 6 Xodapyebs (probably a mistake for

Kodndurevs, or for Xdppov) cvyyevis res dy Tod tupdvvov. According to Cleitodemus, ap. Athen. 609 c, Hippias had married a daughter of Charmus.

Tq clwbvulg Tod Sijpov rpadryTt] Dem. Timocr. 51, 6 Tov vépov rotrov...fels Gdec Thy prravOpwriav kal mpgdryra Thy bueré- pay. It may be doubted whether any such praise as that of mpaérys is ever ascribed to the dfos in the extant works of Ar.

§ 5. To torépw tra] In 34 § 2 we have 7@ Uorepov éret. In 42 § 4 Tov tore- pov (évcavrdv) is contrasted with rév mpwrorv and the former is found in 45 § 3.

éml Tedeolvou dpxovros] The last date mentioned having been 488 B.C. (i.e. ‘two years after Marathon’), the ar- chonship of T. may be placed in 48y/6. The only years after B.c. 496 (down to 292) for which the archons are not already known are 487 and 486. 482 may be assigned to Themistocles, and 481 to Hypsichides (c. 22 end).

ékvdpevrav tods évvéa dpyovras xr). ] Under the Solonian constitution (c. 8) the archons had been appointed by lot out of forty candidates nominated by the four tribes. From the close of the rupavvls the archons had been elected (of 6¢ mrpérepor mévres yoav aiperol), by whom we do not know, possibly (as Mr Kenyon suggests) by the éxxAnola. The general principle of the Solonian system was now revived by introducing a combination of selection and sortition.

The successive changes in the method of election to this office (as summed up by Mr Kenyon) were as follows: (1) the archons were originally nominated by the Council of the Areopagus, c. 8 § 2; (2) under the ‘Draconian constitution’ they were elected by the general body of

CH, 22, lL. 14—24.

TIOAITEIA 87

t 2 fal Z ¢€ \ a a ts , i. guavas, é« Tov mpoxpiOévtav vd Tav SnwoTtay Tevtakoclwy, TOTE \ meta THY TUpavvida TpaTor, (oi Sé mpoTepos TavTes Hoav aiperol):

6 kal dotpanicOn Meyardijs ‘Immoxpatous “AXwmennOev.

22 trav Snwordy mevrakoclwy (K, K-W, B): J W Headlam, rod dypov revraxociomed{uvwy H-L.

Weil): rére Blass, K-w, H-L, K

DS €ML LEV 24

Tov Shou éx Tov TevraKxociopediuywr TOIC (revrexaserkoorg ere

citizens (c. 4 § 2); (3) under the Solonian constitution, they were in ordinary course appointed by lot from forty candidates selected by the four tribes (c. 8 § 1); (4) under the rupayyis this system was perhaps practically in abeyance, though nothing had been formally done to repeal appointment by lot (Peisistratus, son of Hippias was archon, Thuc. vi 54, and there was always one of the ruling house holding office); (5) under the constitution of Cleisthenes they were elected by the ecclesia (ol 6& mpérepo. mavres qoav ai- perol); (6) from 487 B.c. they were ap- pointed by lot from roo (or §00) candi- dates selected by the tribes; (7) subse- quently, from an uncertain date down to the time of the writer, the lot was applied to the preliminary nomination by the tribes as well as to the actual appoint- ment (c. 8 § 1).

As appointment to the archonship by lot was apparently done away with by Cleisthenes in 508, and was re-introduced in 487, it follows that the archons in 490 were not appointed by lot, and that He- rodotus was therefore mistaken in de- scribing the polemarch of that year as 6 TO xvauy Naxdv (vi 10g). This had already been maintained by Grote (c. 31, iii 126), Busolt (ii 338) and others, and their opinion is now found to be correct. Cf. Lugebil in ¥ahkrd. f. class. Philol., Suppl. Bd. v 564—699; Holm, Gr. Gesch. ii 140, note 18.

Aristides was archon in 489 when the office was still elective, yet Demetrius Phal. makes him archon in 478, and, consistently with this, describes him as xuduy Aaxay (Plut. Avis. 1, 5). On the other hand, Idomeneus (fl. B.c. 310— 270), having in view the archonship of 489, as it appears correctly, speaks of him as having held office o} xvapevrdy GAN’ Edopévey 'AOnvaiwr. It was Aristides who, shortly after the battle of Plataea, carried a proposal that they should thence- forth choose (aipet@ar) the dpxovres (in the widest sense of the term) from all the Athenians alike. Duncker, G. d. A. vi 593, holds that it was on this occasion that appointment by lot was introduced :

before it, we find the office of archon filled by leading statesmen; not so, after- wards. He also holds that the reforms of Cleisthenes did not touch the method of appointing the archons.

There is a difficulty as to the persons by whom the preliminary selection was made. The text, as it stands in the ms, speaks of them as g00 selected by the members of the demes. The practice down to the writer’s time was for each tribe to nominate ten by lot, or roo in all (c. 8). Now if each tribe ever nominated 50, it is improbable that its privilege would be reduced to that of nominating 10. Hence Mr Kenyon proposes to alter 500 (¢’) into 100 (p’).

‘It seems possible that Demetrius Phal. accepted this date (B.C. 487) for the in- troduction of the lot: he placed the archon- ship of Aristides the year after Plataea (Plut. Arist. c. 1 and §) and spoke of n ereyuj.os dpxh Kd Tipte T@ Kudum Aaxdy éx Tay yeveiy TOV Th péyloTa TiuAMaTA KexTnuevev ots mevrakoctouediuvous mpoc- nyépevoy (7d. c. 1): the admission of immeis then, according to Demetrius, is after 478. We see now that there is not necessarily any conflict between Idomeneus of Lampsacus and Demetrius, except as to the year when Aristides was archon. Idomeneus, like Plutarch, may have as- signed Aristides to the year after Marathon (2. c. 5): in which case his statement (%. c. 1 dpEac ye Tov "Apia relSap ov Kua- peurov add’ éhoydv wy *AOnvalwy) agrees with the 'A@. Tod.’ (Wyse).

MeyarArs] son of Hippocrates (Hdt. vi 131), grandson of Megacles (the op- ponent of Peisistratus c. 14 and 15), and nephew of Cleisthenes. Through his sister, Agariste, he was the uncle of Peri- cles. There was another Megacles in the same generation (victor in the Pythian games, Pind. Pyth. vii 15), a son of Clei- sthenes, and grandfather of Alcibiades. The ostracism of this second Megacles is mentioned in Lysias, d/c. 14 § 39. Ac- cording to Pindar (/. ¢.) the house of Megacles was subject to @8évos on account of its edrpayia.

It is remarkable that an institution

88 AOHNAIQN

COL. 9, 1, 2528.

a BA a ‘ 25 ovv éTn Tpia Tos TaY TUpdvyar Pirous waTpaxiloy, BY Yap 6 iy 274 \ \ a a t 4 \ fel - vopos éréOn, pera S¢ Tabra TO TeTdpTw erer Kal THY aArwD el Tis Soxoin peitwv eivar peOlorato’ Kal mpetos wotpaxiaOn Tar yo 6 a ‘8 ¥ 6 © 4 wy be t amrwbev ths Tupavvidos EdvOirmos o “Apippovos. eres dé Tpit

N

27 MEGICTATO: “eEOloraTo B, -loravro ceteri.

founded by Cleisthenes should have thus been brought into play against his son and his nephew. According to Aelian, Var. fist. xiii 24, Cleisthenes himself was ostracised, but of this there is no proof. As to the ostracism of the nephew there is no doubt. Even one of the pieces of pottery used in voting on the ques- tion has been found. It bears the name of Meyakdfjs [‘Inmo]kpdrous "Ahwirexfbev (published in Benndorf’s Gr. u. Sic. Vasenbilder p. 0, pl. 29, no. 10). It is a fragment of black-glazed ware, ap- parently cut into a circular form for the purpose. It was discovered in the pre- Persian stratum to the E. of the Par- thenon (Class. Rev. v 278 a). CIA iv 3 no. 569.

§ 6. rm tela] Mr Kenyon holds that the three years are B.C. 489—87, ze. the two after the battle of Marathon and the year in which Hipparchus son of Charmus was ostracised; but, unless we press the meaning of the imperfect werpdxifov, and apply it to the purpose and desire of the people, rather than to their acts, it seems better to consider the period of three years to begin with that in which Hippar- chus was banished, z.e. 488/7. Thus the three years would be B.c. 488/7, 487/6 and 486/5. Then the ostracism of Xanthippus, TQ rerapry ret, would be in 485/4 and ‘the third year after this,’ 483/2, the archonship of Nicodemus, which is in accordance with the chronology adopted in Clinton’s Fasti. éy rovrots Tots Katpois (z.e. not necessarily under Nicodemus, but in the previous year 484/3) Aristides was banished; and, in the ‘fourth year after,’ he was recalled, 481/o (Bauer, p. 9).

TO Terdptw tre] 485/4.

et tis Soxoly pelfwy elvar] Pol. 1302 5 15, ordows arises drav Tis HTH Suvdwer welfwv, and the correction of this (says Ar.) was the object of ostracism.

dmabey ris TvpavvlSos] Pol. ii 3, 1262 @ 29, dv ovdév Bordv eort ylvecOar mpds marépas kal pnrépas kal Tods uh moppw Tis ovyyevelas byras, domep mpds Tods dirw- Oey (distant in relationship), iii 9, 1280 bg, ylverat yap ) kowwvla cuppaxla tov

adrwv rérw dtapépovoa pdvov TSv dw bev cuppaxiay (alliances, of which the mem- bers live apart), 2b. 18, ef rwes olxotev xepls per, wy wévror TooolTov arwbev (so far off) wore uy Kowwvely. ‘ol dirwOev, syn. ol dyvGres, opp. of yvuspipor, ‘ol cvv7]- Gets, of cuyyevets.” Rhet. i 11, 1371 a 12 of cuvybers Kal of modtrat (uaAXov) Tov drwdev: c. gen. in Thue. iii 111 § 1, drodev ris "Odrys, Aristoph. Plut. 674 dmrwbev ris Kepadis.

Eidv0urros 6 *Aplppoves] During the excavations on the Acropolis in 1886, a fragment of a late black-figured vase was found in the pre-Persian stratum E. of the Parthenon, with the following inscription clearly incised upon it.

X$AN@INMOS ARRIDPONOS

The fragment was published by Stud- niczka, Arch. Fahrb. 1887, p. 161, who observed that the position in which it was found proved that the ostracism of Xan- thippus took place before B.c. 480 (Class. Rev. v 277 4). CIA iv 3, 568. In March, 1891, after the first publication of this treatise, another fragment was found at Athens in the 66s Iepards with the first five or six letters of the father’s name written (with the double p) above that of the son (cIA iv 3, §71).

Xanthippus impeached Miltiades in 490/89 (Hdt. vi 136; Grote, c. 36, iii 312). The present passage shews that his ostracism falls in 485/4, Jefore that of Aristides (484/3). Of its causes we know nothing; but it is natural to suppose that the friends of Miltiades had something to do with it. In 480 Xanthippus left Athens with the other inhabitants at the approach of Xerxes: Plutarch, 7hem. ro, tells the story of his dog, which could not endure to be left behind on this occasion, Xan- thippus was the archon of 479 (Diod. xi 27). He commanded the Athenians at Mycale (479, Hat. ix 114) and at the siege of Sestos (ix 121). By Agariste, daughter of Hippocrates, and sister of the Megacles mentioned above, he became the father

CH. 22, 1. 25—209.

TIOAITEIA 89

peta tadta Nixodnuou dpyovtos, bs épavn Ta wéTadra TA ev 29

29 NIKOMHAOYC (K-W, H-L, B): N(1KO)AHMO(Y) Berol. et Dion. Hal. viii 83 (K). EPANH: an dreypdgn? Wyse (Class. Rev. v 112); <duatredeorépa> épdvyn Richards

(2b. 226).

of Pericles (Hdt. vi 131) and Ariphron (Plut. Ad. 1, Plat. Protag. 320). The elder of the two legitimate sons of Pericles was named after his grandfather, Xan- thippus (Plut. Per. 24, 36).

§7. tre...rplrw after 486, would bring us to 484/3 for the archonship of Nico- demus. It was €v rovrots rots katpots that Aristides was ostracised, and in 481/o all the citizens who had been ostracised were recalled dia thy Héptov orparelay (§ 8). But Nicodemus, according to Dionysius Hal. viii 83, p. 1711 Reiske, was ar- chon in the consulship of L. Aemilius Mamercus and K. Fabius, 270 A.U.C. (Cato). In Baiter’s Fasti Consulares this is identified as A.U.c. 269=B.C. 484. This would support Mr Kenyon’s view. See, however, note on § 6, éry zpia.

Nixoujdous is the reading in the papy- rus; N(tco)AHMO(v) that of the Berlin fragment, and similarly in Dionysius. Mr Kenyon, perhaps rightly, holds that, in this conflict between the two ss, ‘ the au- thority of Dionysius may turn the scale.’

The name Nixouidns (‘victor in coun- sel’) is formed from yjdoua on the analogy of ~Ayauydns, “Adiujdys, “Audyundns, *Avépounons, Apisrouydys, "AoTuuHdys, Adroujdns, Acoundys, Evundns, Evpuundns, Gcounins, Opacvyndys, Kadrdcundns,’ Krec- (=Kyeo)undys, KaAvrouhins, Aaouhdns, Avounéns, Neoundns, Revoundns, ’Ovacor- (i.e. ’Ovact-)undns, Madrauydns, Tepemndys and ToAvpjins (Pape-Benseler, Zigen- namen, p. Xxx). It cannot be interpreted as ‘conqueror of the Medes,’ which would be Myédvixos. Similarly, the alternative name Nixddyuos means ‘ with victorious army or people’ zd. s. v.

ds épdvy ta péradAa x7d.] Hat. vii 144, "A@nvatoe yevoudvwy xpnudrwr heyddwy év rq Kow@, Ta ex TOY peTddrwY op: tpooHOe Tay awd Aavpelov, éuedrov AdtecOar dpxnddv exacros déxa Spaxpds. Tore OemicroxAys avéyvuce "AOnvalous ris Siarpéovos ravrys mavoapévous véas ToUTwY Tov xpnudrov wojoacba és Tov modenov, rov wpds Alywhras héywv. (Plut. Them. 4, tiv Aavpewrixhy mpboodov amd ray dpyu- pelwv perddwv eos éxdvtwv *AOnvalwy diavéwer Pas xr.) This account, esp. the word ravoauévous, implies that the revenue for the mines had Aitherto been distributed among the people (to the extent of 10 drachmas a head).

é¢dvy can only mean ‘ were discovered,’ which may possibly be supported by evpé0y in Bekker’s Anecdota, p. 279, Mapwveia: réres qv ris ’Arriucfs, drou Ta wéradda evpéOn. The mention of the revenue of roo talents from the works comes somewhat suddenly after the first announcement of the discovery of the mines, and possibly some other word was really written by the author. The author of the tract epi wépwv implies that they were of immemorial antiquity, but there are indications that they had only recently come into prominence. Aeschylus in the Persae, 238, the dramatic date of which is 480 B.c., makes the chorus answer an enquiry of the wife of Darius as to the wealth of Athens by the reply dpydpou any Tis avrots éort, Oyoaupds xAovds. “At what time they first began to be worked,’ says Grote (c. 39, iii 406), ‘we have no information; but it seems hardly possible that they could have been worked with any spirit or profitable result, until after the expulsion of Hippias and the establishment of the democratic constitution of Kleisthenes.’ It is quite conceivable that a very recent discovery of a very productive mine at one parti- cular place, Maroneia, may have given a new importance to the question of the best disposal of the revenue.—It has even been suggested that the mines had originally belonged to Aegina and had been wrested from her by Athens (Ma- haffy, Rambles and Studies in Greece, p. 163); but neither the text nor the parallel passages in Hdt. and Plut. lend any support to this. The Athenians had to rely on the revenue from the mines to make way against the Aegine- tans.

ta évy Mapwvela] ‘The mining dis- trict, besides the dem Anaphlystus, Besa, Amphitrope, and Thoricus, contained several places which were not dem, as Laureium, Thrasyllum [ér! OpacvdAdy, Dem. 37 § 25, Aeschin. 1 § ror], Maroneia, Aulon [Aeschin. /. ¢.]’ (Leake’s Demi, p- 274). Laurium may have been the general term for the district, derived from its numerous shafts and tunnels, AaGpax, lit. ‘narrow passages’. Maroneia may per- nape identified with some ruins five miles "N. of Sunium. In Dem. Pant. 37 § 4, Nicobulus and his partner Euergus

4,

%

go

AOHNAIQN

COL. 9, 1. 28—34.

30 Mapwveig rai TepveyéveTo TH TOdEL TaAaVTA ExaTOV ex THY Epywr, a t ? oupBovrevdvtwy twdv Td Snuw SvaveiwacOar TO apyvpiov, Oeui-

80—31 [mepieyévero] | ex t[Gv epywr] (vel 1. rots | Kexrn[udvocs]) éxar[dv Tddavra, oupBovrev]|dvrww r[wwdv] TH wo[Aee SiaveluacOae 7d dp]iydpiov Berol.

30 Bekk. An. p. 279 Mapévea: réros qv ris ’Arrixis, 6rov ra wéradda ebpedn. Harp. s.v.: (Dem. Pant. § 4), rémos éorl ris ’ArriKijs.

allege that they lent to Pantaenetus 105 minae, én’ épyacrnply te &v Trois epyous ev Mapwvelg cal rpidkovra dvépardioas. On the silver mines of Laurium, see Boeckh’s Dissertation, pp. 615—678, printed as Appendix to Boeckh’s Public Economy, trans. Lewis; K. F. Hermann, Privatalt. § 14, 173 Biichsenschiitz, Besitz und Erwerb, pp. 98—103; Select Private Orations of Dem. ed. 2, ii p. 89.

tddavra ékatoy xTA.] Polyaenus, i 30 § 6 (5), Geusoroxdyjs év TG mpds Al-ywriras Toddum pehrdvrwv ’AOnvalwy rhy éx Tov dpyuplwy mpbcodov, éxardv tddavra, dia- véperOa, kwricas erecev éxardv dvdpdot Tots move wrdrous ExdoTw Sobyat TdAaYTOV' kay ev dpéoy Td mpaxOnobpuevor, TH woe 76 dvddwya AoyisOFvar, éav d¢ uy dpérp, Tovs aBdvras dirodotyar. Taira pev fdogev. ol dé éxardv dvdpes Exacros play Tpinpy KaréoTnoay, orovdy xpnodpervor Kéddous Kal Tdxous. "AOnvaioe xawdy orovov trojoavres HoOnoay, Kal ob pdvov kara Alywyray tals rpujpect Tavrats, GANG kal kara Ilepoav éxpyoarro.

In Hdt. vii 144 the amount available for distribution is stated as 10 drachmas ahead. Elsewhere (in v 97) Hdt. reckons the citizens at 30,000. This gives us 50 talents for distribution. He also speaks of 200 ships. But 50 talents is far too small a sum for a fleet, even if only 100 ships were built at the cost of only one talent each. It has accordingly been suggested that Hdt. founded his calculation on the diminished returns of the mines at a later date, about 430 B.C. (Stein ad doc:). Boeckh considers that the population was probably 20,000 at the time meant by the historian. The amount to be distributed, at ro dr. a head, would in that case be 200,000 dr. = 33% talents.

It was Boeckh’s opinion that all the

ublic money arising from the mines was fenanally) divided among the members of the community (Dissertation, § 8, p. 652 Lewis ed. 2). Grote himself held that the sum for distribution only formed ‘ part of a larger sum lying in the treasury, arising from the mines. Themistokles persuaded the people to employ the whole sum in

ship-building, which of course implied that the distribution was to be renounced. Whether there had been distributions of a similar kind in former years...is a matter on which we have no evidence’ (c. 39, iii 407 n.). The evidence of the text supports Grote’s view. The date of the building of the fleet is discussed by Busolt, ii 123 f., but the text was then represented by the Berlin fragment only.

OepicrokAns was evidently not in the position of archon epfonymus in the year of the proposal to distribute the revenue from the silver mines. The archon of that year was Nicodemus (483/2). He was in office, however, at the time when he proposed the fortification of the Peiraeus, Thuc. i 93 § 2, Urfipxro 8 adroit mpbrepov él ris éxelvou dpxis ys Kar’ éviaurov ’A@nvalas Fptev, and he may have been archon eponymus at that time. The archon for 481/o is Hypsichides (nfra § 8). We may therefore place the archonship of Themistocles in 482/1.

Dionysius Hal., Ant. Rom. vi 34, p. 1117 R, makes Themistocles archon in 493 B.C., but (as Mr Kenyon shews) this is very improbable.

The chronology suggested by Bauer is as follows: according to Plutarch (7hem. 31 and Cim. 18) Themistocles died at the age of 65 -at the time of Cimon’s expedition against Cyprus (448/7). This would give us 513 for his birth. He would be 30 in 483/2, and this was the year in which he brought about the formation of a fleet. His archonship should probably be placed in 482/1, a year that is not yet filled by any name. This is supported by the scholiast on Thuc. mpd d¢ réy Mndikdv jptev ©. eviaurdv eva. Hidt. vii 143 describes him as dvtp és mpwrovus vewor! mapwyv, which is unfavourable to placing his archonship as far back as 493: vewort is more likely to denote an interval of two, than of 13 years. The Themistocles of 493 (Dionysius) would in this case be another of the same name. But there is more probability in Mr Kenyon’s second alternative, that Dionysius has simply made a mistake.

In 480/79 he was orparnyés of the

CH. 22, 1. 30—41. TIOAITEIA

gI aroKAns éxddrucev, ov héywv 6 TL xpHoETAL TOs YpHuacw GANA Savetoas Keredav Tois TrovoLwTaTors "AOnvaiwy éxatov éExdoTw x Tt 8% 4. F ? , % 2 Ps a ¥ “ \ Taddavtoy, cir day ev dpéckn TO dvddopa, THS ToAEwS eivat THY Satrdvyy, ei Sé un, Kouicacbar Ta ypjuata Tapa Tov Saveca- Hévov. AaBov S emi rovtos évalv]mnynoato tpinpers éxatov, éxdoTouv vavirnyounévou Tay éxaTov piav, ais evavpaynoay év Zarapive mpds tovs BapBapovs. waotpaxicOn § év tovtous Tots x 5 4 e ra a eT y f katpois “Apioteiins 0 Avowdyov. tetdptm 8 eres xatedéEavto Ed A ? L ” ¢ / wy \ i mdvTas TOs WoTpaKLGmévoUs, apyovTos ‘Tyriyidou, dia tHv Fép- fou otpateiav: Kal TO NouTrov Wpicay Tois datpaxiLouévoss éxTos 34—35 dav pev dpéoxy, 7d dvddwua Ths wédews elvat, deletis riy Samdyyv, H-L, B, coll. Polyaen. i 30 Kav pev dpéoy 7d mpaxOnoduevov, TH wéder Td dvddAwua oyioOfva. 39 rerdprw: Tpitw ‘corr. e Plut. Av. 8’ K-w? (B). 40 yyHyxIAoy ante corr. (H-L): “Lyuyldov (K, K-W, B). 41 CTPaTIAN: o7parelay (K-w, H-L, K%). In titulis (velut etiam in codicibus) et orpareia et orparid expeditionem significat (orpareverOar—

Tas orparelas, B.C. 325;—Tds orparias B.C. 330) Meisterhans, p. 437. E€NTOC K, K-W, H-L: éxrds Wyse (B), quod egregie confirmat Philochorus in Lex. Rhet.

Cantab. édorpaxicpod tpbiros:

Bh émBalvovra évrds Tepalarov.

Athenian troops that marched to Tempe (Hat. vii 173).

t) T™ Xpyoerar] Plat. Crit. 45 C, ovk exw 6 Ore Xphoonae Te dpyuply.

éy tovrois Tots Katpois] Jerome has, under Ol. 74, 1 (=484/3), Aristides cum ignominia eicitur. On the ostracism of Aristides, cf. Plut. Arist. 7. §8. rerdptw ere] 481/o. This fixes the date of the archonship of Hypsichides, a name that is now known for the first time. Plut., Arist. 8, says that the Athenians recalled Aristides, Héptov 6c Oerranlas kal Bowwrlas éAavvorros, 7.e. in the spring of 480 B.c. He adds that the vote for the recall was passed in the third year after the banishment. This note of time may be explained by the fact that, if the vote for ostracising Aristides took place at the 6th (or 8th) rpuraveta (c. 43 § 5), this would fall early in B.c. 483, and the corresponding date in 480 would be the end of the third year after.

karedéfavro] Andoc. 1 § 107 (of the same incident), éyywaav rovs re pevyovTas karadéfar dat kal rods driwous émcripous Tovfoas.

76 dowdy] [Dem.] 26 § 6, "Apirreldnv Mev yap pacw ord Tav arporyévey peTacra- bévra & Alylyy diarplBew ews 6 dijuos atrév xaredéEaro. Hdt. viii 79, é& Al- ylvys déBn. Suidas, s. v. ’Apioreldys, Serppev év Alyivy puyuv. Féptov 5é ws abrév dv Ty puvy7n mpecBevoapévov Kal Tpic- xtAlous dapecxous...dcd6vros, ovdév émtarpe-

pecbat py Tob Tepoixod rdovrov xrvA. The fact that Aristides remained in Aegina explains the provision that henceforth persons ostracised were to reside outside Geraestus and the Scyllaean promontory. According to Plutarch (Czm. 17), Cimon when ostracised appeared at Tanagra (Wyse in Class. Rev. v 274 6).

éxtés] Mr Kenyon, retaining évrds, suggests that the object of the regulation was to keep the ostracised person ‘ within very narrow boundaries,’ so as to obviate the danger of a banished citizen entering into communication with Persia. But, as Aristides had remained within these limits, it is more reasonable to suppose that the line deyond which the ostracised person was to withdraw was thencefor- ward made the subject of special regu- lation. Banishment had in. fact to be defined more strictly. Otherwise the exile might remain within a very short distance of Attica and carry on intrigues against his opponents.

Themistocles, while under ostracism,

lived at Argos, Thuc. i 139, éxwv dlarray uev ev “Apye (Plut. Them. 23 § 1), éme- gorwy dé cal és rHv GAAnv Tedordvvn- cov, and afterwards went to Corcyra, and Epirus, to Pydna in Macedonia, and thence to Naxos and Ephesus. He clearly kept outside the limits described in the text as emended. Hyperbolus, again, lived in Samos (Thue. viii 73 § 2). Both these cases exemplify the rule. According

40

92 AOHNAION COL. 9, 1. 34—43.

hk

42 Tepasotod kat XKvdAdalov xatouxely aripovs elvar xKao- amaé.

23. tore pev ody péyps TovTov mponrAOev 7 modus, Gua TH Snpoxparia Kata pixpov avéavopévn: peta S& ta Mndixa maduy ioyuoev 9 év “Apeiw mayo Bovdy) Kal Sudxet THY modu, ovdevi Soypats NaBodcoa THv Hylepolviav, ddrAa Sia TO yevérOas THs rept

5 Sadapiva vavpaylas airia. tév yap otpatnyav ékamropnodvrey Tois mpaypact Kal knpukdvtwv o@lew Exaotov éavTov, Topicaca Spayuds éxdore dxro SiéSwxe Kal éveBiBacev eis Tas vats. Sid tavtTny 8y THY aitlav Tapexopovy adTH Tod aEwparos, Kal éroN-

XXIII 1 tote: 7d Poste (H-L). 5 dtamropyodvrwv Richards, coll. Cobet Y. Z.

Pp: 219—220. 6 CWZEIN: ote (edd.), cf. Meisterhans, p. 142”. 7 inter éxdorw et éxr% lacunam indicat B, coll. Plut. Zhem. 10, éxdorw r&v orparevouévwn,

8 AYT(HN)TWIAZIWMATI: adrA 7G déudwart K; adris dgdpare Rutherford; adbris rG déubpart Blass (H-1.); airy rod dédparos J E B Mayor, K-w. :

TESTIMONIA. XXIII 5—7 *Plut. Zhem. 10 ox évrwv Se Snpoolwy xpnudtwv rois ’"AOnvalos Ap. pv pnoe tiv é& ’Apelou mdyou BovAtyy moploacay exdoTry Tov oTpa- Tevopevuw dxrw Spaxpuas airwrdryy yevécOar ToD TAypwOfvat Tas TpLApers.

to the Schol. on Aristoph. Vesp. 947, one of the differences between those who are banished for life and those who are ostracised is that the former ‘have no fixed place of abode, no time of return assigned, but the latter have’ (kal rémos aredldoro Kal xpdvos).

Teparrrotd] The cape at the s. w. extremity of Euboea. (Hdt. viii 7, ix 105, Thue. iii 3 § 4.) ZkvAralov] the cape at the eastern extremity of the territory of Troezen (Thue. v 53), the most easterly point of the Peloponnesus, and forming (with the opposite promontory of Sunium) the entrance to the Saronic gulf.

drlwovs—kadmaf] The penalty is that of perpetual driula. For xa@drat in this connexion cf. Dem. Afid. §§ 32, 87, Aristog. i § 30. The various disa- bilities in such a case are enumerated by Aeschines, c. 7imarch. § 18 (see Smith, Dict. Ant. i 242 a).

XXIII, XXIV. The supremacy of the Areopagus. Aristides and Themistocles.

XXIII §1. perd tod MnSixd—Povd] Pol. viii (v) 4, 1304 @ 20, 9 év "Apel may Boudh edSoxiujoaca év rots Mydrxois Soke cwvrovwrépay tTovfjoat Thy Todcrelay,

ovdevt Séyparexrd.] This is said of the Areopagus to contrast it with the Four hundred (c. 29) and the Thirty (c. 34 end, and Isocr. Aveop. 67, ol...Wnglopare mapadaBdvres THY TOAL).

vis wept Lodrapiva vavpaxlas] Pol.

1304 @ 22, 6 vaurikds OxAos “yevduevos airwos THs wept Zarapiva vixyns Kal ba radryns (radrnv? Susemihl) rijs iye- povlas ia Thy Kard Oddarray Sivayw Thy Snuoxpatlay laxuporépay érolycev.

&amropycavreyv rots mpdypact] Isocr. Paneg. 147, &wophoas Tots mapodor mpdy- wacw. For the general sense of the context, cf. Cic de Off. i 75, e¢ Themistocles quidem nihil dixerit, in quo ipse Areopagum adiu- verit, at ille vere a se adiutum Themis- toclem; est enim bellum gestum consilio senatus eius qui a Solone erat constitutus.

roploaca Spaxpds] Probably from the sacred treasure on the Acropolis; cf. Philippi, <Aveopag. 293; Oncken, Staatslehre, 468.

§ 2. mapexdpovy airy Tod déidparos] The most common construction of srapa- xwpelv is c. dat. pers. et gen. ret vel loci. Isocr. 118 D, 7. Tots éxOpots rijs nuerépas. Aeschin. 54, 21. Polyb. iv 5, 1 etc., 7. Twi ris wodrelas, THs dpxfs (L and S). Similarly etkew twt ris 6509 (Hdt. ii 80). For délwua, cf. Thuc. vi 15 § 2, dy & diwpare bd Tov doray, andi 130§ 1.

Mr Kenyon prints rapexdpouv airy Tg diusuart, ‘gave place (or ‘precedence’) to it in rank’ (or ‘reputation’). The simple dat. may here be equivalent to év—. The latter is found in Magn. Mor. ii 1, 1198 4 28, 6 & rovros rapaxwpav émeueys, but I can find no exact parallel for the dative alone.

érohtrevOyoav—kados] With the sub-

CH. 22, 1. 42—CH. 23, 1.17. TOAITEIA 93

. a fal tevOnaav “AOnvaios kad@s Kai Kata TovTOUS TOvs KaLpovs. cuvéBn 2 aA 7 a yap avtois trepl Tov xpovoy TovTOY Ta TE Els Tov TOAEMOV aoKHaaL \ N ald ? al \ \ a / ¢ Kal Tapa Tos" EXAnow evdoxtunoa Kal tiv THS OadaTrns rHryeuo- ft tal ha ‘a a x 7 \ f fa 3 viav NaBetv axovrav tay Aaxedaipoviav. joav dé mpoctatar Tod , Snpov Kata TovTovs Tovs Katpovs ’Apioreidns 6 Avowpayou Kai OcusotoKAns 6 NeokAé€ovs, 6 pwev Ta TrodewiKa Soxev, 6 dé Ta TroN- Tuna Sewos elvat, Kat Sixatocivyn Tdv Kal? éavtdv Siadéperw: 810 4 kal éypavTo TS pev otparny@, TO dé cuUBovrA®. THY pev OY THY ‘ i i TELYOV avoLKoddpunow KoiVH Si@knaay, Kaimep Siahepopevot pos

9 «alt (ante xara) secl. K, K-W; retinent H-L (B), coll. 33 § 3. 10 K(aTa) supra scripto Trep! (B). Kara Tdv xpdvoy Todrov secl. K-W. 12 AKONTWN (K, K-w, B): éxévrwy J B Mayor (Class. Rev. v 112 6), Gennadios; elxévrwy Naber (H-1). 14 TTOAEMIA (kK, K-W, H- L): mone mints Blass, Richards, Thompson ; movdua defendit K coll. Thuc. i 18 e& wapecxevdcayro ra modguta, et iv 80 év Tots wodeulos yeyer joa

aglow apiorot. ACKWN (retinent (K, K (H-L, K-W?, B); doxdv doxety conicit K. corr. K. dewds elvac <doxGv> K, K-w),

-w!): dox&v Richards, Thompson, Kontos 14—15 TTOAEMIKAAEINOC per errorem,

sequent context, cf. Isocr. Aveog. 51 (of the Areopagus), 7s émirarovaons ov dixay obd? éyxAnudruv ot5’ elrpopwy ovdé trevias ode rohguwy 7 mores &yeuev...Tapelxov yap opas abrods Tots wev"EAAqoe tisTovs, Tots 5é BapBdpors poBepods* Tovs wev yap ceTw- kéres Hoap kTX., and §§ 80,82. Panath. 151, Tas mpdées Tas ék ToD Kahw@s TodTeberOat 152, mapa rots "EdAnowy evdokl uy- cav. De Pace, 75—77, esp. Tis wodtreias Ths Tapa maow evdokimovons.

kal kata TovTous rods Katpovs] Kal is perhaps added because Athens had been well governed when the Areopagus was in power before, cf. § 1, mdAw toxvoev (Newman).

viv THs Sardrryns ayepovlav Krd.] Isocr. Paneg. 72 (after the Persian wars), od TodA@ 5’ borepoy THY dpxhy Ths Oadar- Tns €haBov, SévTwy mev Tap dddwy ‘ED- iver, obK dudisBynrovvrwr dé ray viv udis dpapeicbar fyrovvrwy, de Pace 30, wap’ éxdvrwv Tov ‘EANivwr thy fyeuoviay édd- Bouev, Panath. 67, ol cvppaxor Thy trye- povlay juiv Thy xara Oddarray ebocar. Thuc. i 96, mapadaBévres of °AG. Thy trye- poviay ... éxdvrwy Tov ivupdxwy dia 7d Tavoaviov pioos. In Xen. Aedl. vi § 34 a Spartan declares that the Athenians were chosen leaders at sea wv Aaxedatpo- view guuBovrevonévwv. None of the above passages shews that the Lacedaemonians were really willing to surrender the su- premacy; and in Thue. i 96 the reference is not to the Lacedaemonians, but to the allies of Athens who smarted under the

overbearing conduct of Pausanias. Hence axévrwv should be retained.

§3. wpoordrat Tot Sijpov] c. 2 § 2, and c. 28. Holm, Gr. Gesch. ii 43, 110.

Neoxdéovs] Plut. Zhem. 1, N. od trav dyav érigavwv ’AOQrnat.

Ta Todewika] Pol. 1305 @ 14, drepla Tov TodeukGv, 1285 6 18, 7ryeuovla Trav moveuixav. Ind. Ar. On the other hand, modéuwos israrein Ar. Cf. c. 31. 7.

Stkatordvy] Plut. Arist. 3 fix., and 7, rov Sikacov.

TO piv orparnyd, Te 8 cupPotrdo] Aristotle obviously refers to the rival claims of Themistocles and Aristides in Pol. viii (v) 8, 1309 @ 39, exer 8 drro- play, érav ph cupBaivy traira wdvra (pirlav wpds THY Kabeorwoay TodrTelar... Oivauw peylorny Trav epywr THs apy7s... dperhy Kat dixacoodvny) mept Tov avrév, was Xp ToetcOa THY alpeow... év o7pa- tHyla bey (Sef Brérew) els rH eumetplay MGddov THs dperys...€v dé gudakgy cal ra- pucta Tovvayriov. On the other hand Isocr., Panath. 143, strangely maintains that the best cvuBovdos will also prove the best general (Class. Rev. v 161 a).

§ 4. Texavdvorkodépnow] Thuc. i 89 § 3, Thy Tod dvotkodomely TrapeckevafovTo kal ta teixn. Themistocles went as envoy to Sparta to gain time while the walls were being built (24. 90), while Aristides was one of the éuumpécBets who after- wards announced to Themistocles éxew ixavds 7d refxos (g1 § 3). Cf. Busolt, li 321—9.

wm

AOHNAIQN — COL. 9, 1. 43—1I0, 1. 12,

94

adAndous: él 86 Thy amréatacw THv TéV "loveY amo THs TOY LA , i AaxeSatpoviov cuppaylas Apioteldns jv 0 mpotpeyas, THpnoas ‘ , a \ \ tos Adxwvas SiaBeBrnpévovs bia Ilaveaviay. 610 Kat rovs 5 , a wy rd popous ovTos Hv 6 Takas Tais TodEow Tos mpeToUS ETEL TPITH ral i \ peta thy év Larapive vavpayiav éml Tipoabévous apxovtos, Kat * Uy, v a. ef \ : & + 0 \ 2. % Tovs bpKkous Booey Tois "Iwow || dare Tov avTov éyOpov eivat Kat [Col. 19 pirov, éf ols Kal Tovs piSpous ev TH redayer Kabeioay. \ x na , wv od 5 \ f 24. pera cé radta Oappovons 46n THS TOKEwWS Kab YpnLaTwV z mee jOpoopévav ToAAGY, cvveBovArcvey avTiauBaverOas THS TYyEMo- vias nal karaBavras éx THY aypdv oixely év T@ darter’ Tpodny yap écecOar mat, Tois pev oTpatevopévors, Tots 5é Ppoupodor, fal MW A € ca Tois 8€ Ta KoWa TpaTToUaL, EO OTM KaTaTYHTEW THY NyELoviay. fel ‘ aA t _weabévres S¢ Tatta Kal NaBovTes THY apyny Tots [Te] TUMpayors 2 18 1WNWNK(AI)T(HN)T(GON)AAKEA—MAYXION 3470 7Hs—ounpaxlas Blass, H-L, K-W, K3, 21 wédceou H-L. 23 duoce H-L, B.

B a XXIV 2 TOAAWNHOPOICMENWN: TOAAGY HOpocuévwv H-L, B; AOporfouevew mr. K-W. 5 mpdrrovow H-L. 6 Tots Te: Tots B.

dnéoctacw tHyv tov Idvev] Thuc. i 95 § 1, é rHde TH Hyeuovig 7dn Bralov vos avrod (Pausanias) of re dAAow” EAAnves 4xGovro Kai odx HKioTa ol “Lwves...porrwv- ré Te mpds Tos "AOnvatous jélovy avTovs tyyeudvas gay yevéoOar kara 7d Evy-yeves cal Tlavoavia uh émerpémev. Plut. Arist. 23. On the other hand Hdt. viii 3, wpé- gacw Tv Tlavoaview UBpiw mpoioxopevor ameldovro Thy fryenovlay rods Aakedarpo- vious. On Pausanias cf. Pol, 1307 @ 2, 1333 4 32.

§ 5. rods ddpovs] ‘tributes.’ Thuc.i 96, éraiay ds re ee wapéxew Tov mbdewy xXphuara mpos Tov BdpBapor kal ds vats... cai é\dnvoraulae Tore mpOrov *AOnvators Karéorn apxy, ot édéyovro roy Pbpov' obrw yap woudodn Tay xpnudrwv h popd. v 18 § 4, Tas wédes Pepovoas Tov Pbpov Tov ém’ ’Apioreldov. Plut. Arist. 24. Schol. Aeschin. 3 § 258, Apuoreidns 6 rovs pépous raias Tois"HAAnot. The pédpos was fixed in the first instance at 460 talents.

éml Tipo bévous] B.C. 478/7.

The commencement of the Athenian ascendancy is placed by Diodorus (xi 41) in the year of Adeimantus (477/6). This is the date accepted by Clinton. Ephorus appears to have placed the first payment of tribute in the spring of 476 (Busolt, Rhein. Mus. xxxvii 313), and accordingly this has been the date usually assigned to the formation of the Confederacy of Delos.

Dem., Phil. iii 23, makes the Athenian

- ascendancy last 73 years, and the Lace-

daemonian 29. The 29 years are reck- oned from the battle of Aegospotami (July 405) to the battle of Naxos (Sept. 376). As the first of these battles marked the end of the Athenian empire, it follows that Dem. reckoned the beginning of the Athenian empire from 478, the first year after the Persian wars. For further de- tails, see Clinton’s Aas¢7, Appendix, c. 6; and Busolt, ii 345.

tovs Spkous dporev] Plut. Azvist. 25, 6 8 ’Aptoreldns wpxice pev rods “EAAqvas kal wuooey brép Tv ’APnvalwy, pidpous éuBarov emi rats dpais els riy Oddarray. The same symbol of an irrevocable oath is recorded in Hdt. i 165, of Swkasées érojcavro loxupas Kardpas 7@ UroderTo- Lévy éwurGy Tod orddou* mpds 5¢ ravryot kal pvdpov odypeoy xaterbyTwoay kal Gpooavy wh mplv els Bwxalyy ykew, mply } Tov wwdpov Tovrov dvapjvat, and in Horace, Epod. 16, 25.

XXIV §1. Sappotons] c. 22 § 3.

karaBdvras é Tov aypav KrA.] In contrast to Peisistratus who encouraged agriculture with a view to preventing his subjects from living in Athens (c. 16

§ 3).

§ 2. AaPdvres rv dpxav] The simple verb is similarly used in Isocr. 4 § 72; 5 § 61; 78 73 8 §§ 30, 69, 74, 1045 16 § 103. He has mapadaBety Thy dpxny

CH. 23, 1. 18—CH. 24, Lr. TIOAITEIA 95

Seotrotikwtépws eypavTo mAnv Xiwv cal AecBiwv cat Lapiov: TovTous O€ PUAaKas elyov THs apyns, e@vTes Tas Te ToNLTELAS Tap avtois Kal apyew dy étvyov apyovtes. Katéotnoav Sé Kal Tots

Lal oJ t a ¢ + 14 2 t / TodAois evtropiay Tpopns, datep Apioteions eionyncato. cuve- Bavev yap amo taév dopwy Kal Tov Teddy [Kal TOV. cuMpayor]

8 <ras> map’, Richards, K-w. ‘dictum erat de cleruchis’ K-w.

elagpopdv Whibley (H-L).

9 dpxovres <avrols érirpérovres, kal — —> 10 cuvéBawe H-L. tentiam non praebent...certe ipsi auctori tribuenda non videntur’ H-L. kal Tov cuypdaxwy secl. K-w, B.

10—22 ‘idoneam sen- 11 POpwn:

ing § 100; 8 § 101; Karacxel in 4 § 102, 8 § 126.

Seomotikwtépws}] This comparative of the adverb is notin LandS. ol. iv 10, 3, TO deororeKds dpxew.

wryvy Xlov kal AcoBlov kal Daplov] Thue. i rg, (in the interval between the Persian and Peloponnesian wars) ’A@nvator 5é (rods Evpudxous iyyodvro) vais re Tov modew TO xXpbvwy taparaPbyres, TAY Klwy cai AeoBlwv, xal xpyuara rots waot Tagavres Pépev. Even when (under Pericles) the confederacy of Delos was transformed into an empire on the part of Athens, with her former confederates degraded into tributary dependencies, Chios, Samos and Lesbos alone remained on their original footing of autonomous allies.

It was after the revolt of Samos in 440 B.C. that that state was conquered by an armament under ten generals, in- cluding Pericles and Sophocles, and after a prolonged contest disarmed and dis- mantled (Thuc. i rrs—r17). Lesbos and Chios still remained in a privileged position (Thuc. iii 10).

Mitylene and the greater part of Lesbos revolted in 428 (26. a one of the reasons being that the Mitylenzans ‘had no security that Athens would not degrade them into the condition of subject-allies like the rest’ (2d. 10 fiz.). The fortifi- cations of Mitylene were razed, all her ships of war captured, and the greater part of the island allotted to Athenian settlers (2b. 50).

In 425 CAzos incurred the suspicion of Athens by building a new wall, which implied an intention to revolt (Thuc. iv 31). The Athenians insisted on the de- struction of the wall (52). Chios actually revolted in 412 and was much harassed by the Athenians (Thuc. viii 14—61).

It is to the result of these revolts that Aristotle refers in Pol. iii 13, 1284 @ 39, where, after speaking of ostracism as a means of suppressing undue prominence,

he adds: 7d & av’rd kal wept ras médeus kal ra €0vn trootow ol KUpior THs Suvduews, oloy "AOnvato. uev wept Daulovs xal Xlovs kal AeoBlous (érel yap OaGrrov éyxpards éoxov Thy dpxny, éramelvwoay avrovs Tapa Tas ouvOyxas). But (as observed by Schlosser) the remark in the Politics is untrue of Lesbos, and barely true of Samos and Chios. The account in the text correctly describes the position of privilege at first enjoyed by these three islands. The passage in the Politics refers to a later time and is therefore not in- consistent with the text (cf. W. L. New- man, Class. Rev. v 162 6).

édvres] The two constructions of éév are here combined, (1) the acc., as in Pol. v 7, 1307 6 16, xevjoavras tov vdpov édoew rhv AhAnv rodirelay, and (2) the inf., as 24. 3, 1302 6 20, édoavras yevérOar lao @ar Yorepor.

dv eruxov dpxovtes] For Chian pos- sessions on the mainland, cf. Hdt. i 160 (Wyse). On the relations of Athens to Chios, Lesbos and Samos, cf. Wilamowitz, Aus Kydathen, pp. 11, 12.

. @omep TRoureetin donyioaro] ‘If the policy of Aristides is placed in a less favourable light than we should expect, inasmuch as he is said to have converted a citizen-body largely consist- ing of peasants into an urban citizen- body subsisting on pay and exercising a despotic authority over the subject states, and thus to have contributed to the establishment of an extreme democracy, we remember that we are taught in the Politics (iv 6, 5, 1292 & 41 sgg.) to con- nect the establishment of a redevrala Snuoxparta with a large increase in the size of the city and with the provision of pay, and also that Theophrastus’ opinion of Aristides was not an altogether favour- able one (Plut. Avist. c. 25). (W. L. Newman in Class. Rev. v 162 4. )

Tav dépwv] See note on 23 § 5.

Tév teAav] ‘taxes.’ With the ex- ception of the produce of plunder in war

14

96

AQHNAIQN

COL, 10, |. 12—16.

Trelous 7 Sispupious dvdpas tpépecOas. Sixactal pev yap Al ca]v £ L , > € t ‘ } \ U

éEaxuoxirvor, to&dtar 8 é€axdowor Kai yYidwot, Kal mpds TovToS immeis xiduot kal Staxdcro1, Bovry Sé revtaKdator, Kai ppoupol

12 AlkacTal: éaAtrac? van Leeuwen, Gennadios.

and sale of prisoners, the @épos was at this time the only source of revenue from foreigners. (The duty on merchandise passing to or from the Euxine was not levied until 409.) Hence the reference in reddy is to taxes imposed by the Athenians and levied at home, whether (1) ordinary taxes, such as harbour-dues, market-dues, court-fees, and payments made by resident aliens, or (2) extra- ordinary taxes. The latter were levied for special purposes, viz. the property- tax (elopopdé) which was practically a war-tax, and the Ayroupyla:, or compul- sory services. These last did not contri- bute towards the support of the citizens except by relieving them of expenses which might otherwise have fallen on the public chest. Lastly, there was the income derived from rents of public lands, and from the mines at Laurium.

In Thuc. vi gr, 6, Alcibiades enu- merates some of these sources of revenue, viz. the mines, the public land and the law-courts and the tribute paid by the allies (rs dad rOv Evupdywv mpocddov). There is a fuller enumeration in Aristoph. Vesp. 656, kal mpGrov péev doyloat pavrus, wh Whos, aN’ dard xeupds, TOY Pbpov huiy ard tev worewy EvAAHBSnv Tov mpoo- tdvra* xdtw rovrwy Ta TéEXn Xupls Kal Tas moNNas éExaToords, MpuTavela, UETAAD’, ayopas, Auudvas, pucOods Kal Syurdrpara (making a total of nearly 2000 talents, of which the 6000 dtxasral received 150).

As the odupaxo: contribute no payment except the @épos, it is clear that the mention of them in the text is super- fluous.

‘ The text, as it stands, appears to imply that the citizens of Athens derived main- tenance from the allies over and above the dépor and the réAn paid by them; cf. [Xen.] ep. Ath. i 16—18, Fees paid by the allies in lawsuits may be included in the reference, for these helped to main- tain the dicasts (Gilbert, i 382, 4). There was also an émipopd (2b. 397). The visits of the citizens of the allied states to Athens would be another source of profit’ (Newman).

mdelovs 1} Stcpuplovs] The numbers actually specified amount to 15,750. If to this we add (with Mr Kenyon) ‘4000

men for the 20 guard-ships at the usual rate of 200 men to each ship,’ we obtain a total of 19,750, not including the orphans and other privileged persons mentioned at the end of the chapter.

Sixacral] As these were not paid until the time of Pericles, this must be (as Mr Kenyon notices) an anticipation of the results of the policy initiated by Aristides. axuo-x(Aror] z.c. 600 for each tribe. This is apparently the number of the dicasts in the times of the democracy after Cleisthenes. The edéastae were instituted by Solon; but their number in his days is unknown, though it was probably not very small.

toférat] The context shews that citz- zens serving as bowmen are meant. The figures in the text are partly borrowed from Thuc. ii 13 § 7, where Pericles, on the outbreak of the Peloponnesian war, estimates the number of the roféra: at 1600, and the lame?s at 1200 édv lamoro- gérats. In Thuc. vi 25 Nicias requires for the Sicilian expedition rotoréy ray avréfev kai ék Kpyrns. Gilbert, Gr. St., 1 305, quotes CIA i 79, Tokéra: of dorikol; i 45, (kara) puAds rox(cdra 6é)ka; and i 55, 433, 446; 2. i 79, of toéapxo.. The 1600 freeborn bowmen in the text must be distinguished from the 1200 Scythian bowmen of Andocides (de Pace, 7) and Aeschines (/. Z. §§ 173—4). The latter were a police force instituted in 480 B.c. when 300 were purchased for this purpose by the state (Andoc. /. ¢. 5).

iets] The same number is found in Thue. ii. 13 § 7, and in Andocides and Aeschines (/. ¢.) In 490 Athens had no cavalry (Hdt. vi 112). The number gra- dually rose to rooo, Arist. Zg. 225, Phi- lochorus éy rerdprw (B.C. 456—404) ap. Hesych. s. v.; and this number was main- tained in the fourth century (Xen. A7zp- parch. 9,3; Dem. 14 § 13). The number 1200 in Thue. includes the lrrorotéra. As the latter were Scythian slaves, it was a discredit to an Athenian citizen to serve in this force (Lys. 15 § 6). The fact that only 1000, out of the total 1200, are really citizens is apparently overlooked in the text. Gilbert, Gr. S¢.,1 305, n. 5, quotes Philochorus, /. ¢., didpopa yap tv lrméwy wrAHOn Kara xpdvov ’A@nvatos, but holds

CH. 24, l, 12—16. TIOAITEIA

97

vewpiwy TevTaKdatol, Kal Tpds TOUTOLS ev TH TOAEL poupol TevTH- 15 kovta, dpyai & évdnuor pév eis éwtaxociovs avOpas, vrepdpios 8

15 rf secl. K-w?, B.

16 M(EN) HCAN eIc.

that little credit can be given to any statements giving 1200 as the total num- ber of the tres alone.

dpovpol vewplwv] I cannot find any other passage in which these are ex- pressly mentioned. In Thuc. ii 13 § 6 half the circuit of the Peiraeus and Mu- nichia is described as év @vAaxg, and the total number of éwAira: Trav év rots ppov- plows al ray map’ éradtw is 16,000 (75. § 3). This number is the force employed on the outbreak of war.

év TH woAde. dpovpol] The mention of the vewpia in the previous clause might at first sight suggest that these Ppoupoi were concerned with the upper wéMs in contrast with the Peiraeus: but, if so, we should expect év r@ dorec as the normal term to express this contrast. It is there- fore probable that 77 méde refers to the Acropolis, and it is so translated by Th. Reinach. This view (as Mr Wyse sug- gests to me) is supported by an inscr. of the sth cent. published in the Budletin de Corr. Hellénigue, 18y0, 177—180, and ascribed to 447 B.C. in CIA iv 3, 264, [Tr] mow .. uv ..ee [olikolSloufoo d[rws] av Sparérns ph e[ol]y muydé Awrodd7[ys]* raira dé guvyp[d]wac udv Kadduxp[d]rn(v) bres dpora Kall] edreddorara ox[elud- [cJar[r]o, prc OGoa[e] 6¢ rods rwAnTas drrws dy évrds ékj[xlovra juepav émiox[e]vacby, gtdaxas dé [elvar rpets uev rofd[r]as éx Ths pudfs THs [wlpuravevotons. M. Fou- cart understands the three roférac who are to act as @UAaxes to be trots Scythes, on the ground that the police was not re- cruited from the citizéns, but it will be observed that they belong to a @vAy and are therefore citizens. They are appointed to guard the approach to a particular part of the Acropolis and to prevent runaway slaves from seeking sanctuary in the tem- ples. éds, or 4 76Xs, is regularly used of the Acrogolis in the 5th century. Thuc. il 15 five. (kadetrar) 4 dxpbmrods wéxpt TODSE ért Ur’ "AOnvalwy moms. Cf. c. 8 1. 24.

‘ Aristophanes always uses év mé)e, eds wé\w (without the article) when he means the Acropolis. In prose writers, how- ever, there are places where the Mss give the article: Xen. Azad. vii 1, 27, brap- XovTwy Today xpnuatwv ev TH Tore, Aeschin. 1 § 97, olkiay dmoOev rijs médews, Antiph. 6 § 39, dunddAayqv Tovros ev 77

S.A.

mode évavtiov wapripwy,. [Xen.] de Red. 5 § 12, ToAAG xXphuara els Tay TokW dveve- xGévra, Phil. Per. 32, brrws...o8 5€ dixa- oral Tiy Wipov ard Tod Bwuod péportes év TH wonder kplvocev. és mode is no doubt the normal form in CIA i’ (Wyse).

dpxal...gv8npor] The total number is large, and there is nothing to shew that the higher officers of state are excluded. Schémann (Azz. p. 147, E. T.) says: ‘so far as our knowledge extends, the offices of government were unpaid.’ Again, on p- 402, ‘official functionaries,’ as con- trasted with subordinates, ‘served with- out pay’ (cf. 26. 436). But in c. 62 the archons receive for maintenance 4 obols a day each, and inc. 29 (under the con- stitution of 411) the archons and mopvu- tdvets are excepted from the rule that all offices should be without pay.

tmepdptot] In Pol. iii 14, 1285 4 14, we have ra kara modu kal Ta &vdnua Kal 7a Umrepbpia cuvexws Toxov, and the term bmepépios occurs again in 1. 18. Cf. law quoted in Aeschin. c. Zimarch. 47, un6é dpxiv dpxérw undeulav, unre évdnuov pjre trepbpiov. Mr Kenyon’s translation dis- tinguishes between magistrates ‘within the city’ and ‘those whose jurisdiction lay outside it’; Mr Poste (more satisfac- torily) between ‘home’ and ‘foreign’

magistrates. The latter would naturally include the officials in the Athenian KAnpouxla. The first kAnpovxla was that

settled near Chalkis in 510 B.c. The number of cleruchs sent out between 460 and 427 amounted to 9,450, not includ- ing those sent to Lemnos, Imbros and Aegina (Gilbert, Gr. St. i 421, note 4).

The cleruchs were subject to military orders, and we sometimes hear of civil magistrates being sent out by Athens, e.g. dpxovres sent to Lesbos (Antiphon, de Caede Her. § 47). Cf. the érloxora of Aristoph. Av. 1022, 1050 (see Wilamo- witz, Aus Kydathen, p. 75), and the ém- pednral sent to Miletus (Cia iv 1, 224) and in later times to Delos, Haliartos and Paros (Boeckh, i 508 a, and n. 709 Fran- kel).

The dpxal viepéopto would also include the ¢povpapxo, as at Erythrae, cia i 9 (Ditt. no. 2), and ro. gpoupapyxla is mentioned in Xen. Mem. iv 4, 17, and ppovpapxo. possibly in [Xen.] de Rep.

7

98

AOHNAIQN

COL. 10, 1. 16—24,

/ 4 eis Ertaxocious: mpds dé TovTous, eel cuverTHaAYTO TOV TOELOY ae e a \ 8 i \ ia a be is borepoy, orditar pev Sioxidwoe Kal wevtaKkocrol, vijes Sé ppoupides y Le \ a € AY Bt y \ 2 ‘4 a 19 €ixoot, GrAaL Se vies ai Tos Ppoupods ayouvcar Tods ard Tod

17 érraxoclovs e v. 16 male repetitum putant K-W (8). pov?’ K-w; xaréornoav és roy médeuov Richards.

‘an <7a els> Tov méde- 19 dopoyc kK, et (lacuna post

dryovra indicata) K-w: gpovpo’s van Leeuwen et Blass, coll. 62 § 1; @édpous ‘vox aperte corrupta,’ H-L; soGopédpous? Herwerden.

Ath.i 18, rods éxmdéovras "AOnvaluy érl- fwy av wovous, Tovs Te oTpaTrpyovs Kal TOUS Ppoupapxous (MSS Tpinpapxous) Kal rods mpéoBes (Wilamowitz, Aus Kydathen, pp. 73—76). Cf. inscr. ascribed to the beginning of the Peloponnesian war (CIA iv 3, 27¢), olrwes ’AOnvalwy dpxovar ev TH vmepopta,

Tvverr|cavto Toy roAenov] The phrase ovoTnoae or cvaTrhoacGat méAW OY TrOAL- telav is found in the Polztics and r& mpdy- para owloracba (of tragic poets) in the Poetics 6, p. 1450 @ 37. Again, in Thuc. i 15 § 2 we find xara yfy 6& modemos... ovdels Evvéorn, and Hdt. vi 108 has ow-

. egteGras Bowrotot for ‘engaged in conflict with’ the B. Here, if 7a els were to be inserted, it might mean ‘ organised,’ as in Xen. Anad. vii 6 § 26 immxdy ovv- eornxds, cf. 7d orpdrevpa ovveorynKds, of ‘a standing army,”in Dem. p. 93 7.

6mdirat}] The number 2,500 is difficult to reconcile with the figures mentioned elsewhere. The number of Athenians who fought at Marathon was 9,000 (Pausan. x 20, 2) or 10,000 (Justin. ii g); at Pla- taea, 8,000. In Thuc. ii 13 § 2, Pericles estimates the number of hoplites at 13,000 fit for service in the field, and 16,000 (of the oldest and the youngest of the citi- zens) as fit to serve on garrison duty and to man the walls. In Thut. ii 31 § 2, the Athenians march into Megara with a force of not less than 10,600 hoplites who were citizens, and not less than 3,000 who were wérotxot. Acharnae (the largest of the demes) could put into the field 3,000 hoplites. Possibly these numbers are exceptionally large and represent the maximum number of hoplites available on an emergency; but the number in the text professes to be that of the hoplites on the outbreak of war. The armament for the Sicilian expedition included not less than 4,000 hoplites (Thuc. vi 31, 2). In Thue. vii 20 the hoplites éx carahé-you number 1,200.

It seems certain that these 2,300 hop- lites (as partly implied in mpds rodros) are in addition to such of the citizens who were available in time of war. Most of

these have already been enumerated under previous headings. Thus, if we add to the 2,500 hoplites the 6,000 dicasts and the 500 members of the Bovdy, we obtain a total of 9,000, the exact number of Athenians who (according to Pausanias) fought at Marathon. Again, if we further add the 700 home officials, we get a total of 9,700, only 300 less than the 10,000 Athenian hoplites who marched into Me- gara early in the Peloponnesian war.

Blass understands by émAtrau gui con- tinuo in praesidits erant.

viyes—povplSes] ‘guard-ships.’ In Thuc. iv 13 § 2 the Athenian fleet at Pylos includes ray Ppoupldwy rivés Trav éx Navrdxrov: the ships from Zacynthus are 50inall; of these 35 were already at that island in c. 5, and 4 ships came from Chios, leaving eleven as the number of guard-ships from Naupactus, which had been an Athenian naval station ever since its capture in 455 B.c. (Thuc. i 103). The only other passages in which ‘guard- ships’ are mentioned are Xen. Hell. i 3, 17, where they form part of the Spartan fleet in the Hellespont, vais at qoav év 7G ‘EdAnorévry Kxaradedeupevac ppouplies, and CIA iv 22 @, at Miletus, [dao]oreAdv- twv [vo] ppovpiée. Cf. Wilamowitz, Aus Kydathen, p. 73 f.

The Athenian triremes were generally manned by about 200 each (Boeckh 11 xxii p. 376 Lamb; Gilbert, i 3r0).

Tovs—dyourat] Pépous raises a serious difficulty. It has hitherto been supposed that the ‘tributaries’ of Athens paid in the money themselves to the Council (Boeckh It vii, p. 177 Lewis; Gilbert, i 398). Pollux (viii 114) inaccurately says that the é\Anvorayla: collected the tribute, but this duty (when necessary) was (after 446 ?) performed by the éxAoye’s. It was only the collection of avrears or fines that was enforced by means of vijes dpyupodbyot (Thue. iii 19; iv 50, 75) under the com- mand of one or more orparyyol (Gilbert, i 398, and ettrége, p. 67). Further, unless we suppose a lacuna, rods dvdpas cannot be construed. Hence the sug- gestion ¢povpo's, which follows naturally

CH. 24, 1.17—CH. 25, 1.4. TITOAITEIA 99

, , Ld wv a kvapov Sirxtdious avbpas, érs 88 rputaveiov Kal dpdavol Kat Sec- 20 n , tA a poTov piraKkes* amace yap TovTos amd TaV KoLWev 4 SLoiKn-

bd ols HV.

25. 7 wey ody tpodn TH Syuw Sid TovTwy éylyvero.

érn 5é

2 \ t + énra Kal déka padiota peta Ta Mndixad Siéuewvev 1) TodTEela Tpo- , > eotwtwv Tay ApeotrayiTey, Kaimep Urropepopevn KaTa wLKpOV. av- rg \ lel t nw Eavopévou Sé Tod rH Oous, yevopevos Tod Sywov mportarns Edudd-

20 ‘mpuravetoy vix verum’ K-W. Thos H-L. XXV 1 €fiIN (K-w). 4

21 dmacw B. AIOIKHCIC: deacl-

TESTIMONIA. XXV 4 Heraclidis epitoma (Rose, Frag. 611): ’E@udaArns.

after ¢poupldes and enables us to take vous dvdpas in apposition with it. In addi- tion to the guard-ships stationed at places like Naupactus, there would be transports to take the ¢povpol to the places where they were to be stationed. These ¢pov- pol were appointed by lot by the demes, Even when changes were made in other appointments, the Bovdeural and the ¢povu- poi still continued to be thus appointed (c. 62 § 1).

mputavetoy] z.c. the persons maintained in the prytaneum, e.g. citizens who had done good service and were entertained at the public expense, either on a special occasion or for life. Among the latter were victors in the panhellenic games, dis- tinguished generals or statesmen, and the representatives of Harmodius and Aristo- geiton. The archons and other officials are not included in this list, as they have already been included in the dpyal é&- Snot; and besides, in historic times, the archons probably dined in the 7hesmo- thesion and the prytanes and certain other officials in the 7holos (see Dict. Ant. s.v.). Cf. Hermann, Staatsalt. § 127, 17f.

6ppavol] The sons of citizens who had fallen in war were maintained during their minority at the public expense. The regular phrase for this was dypoola rpé- gew. Cf. Thuc. ii 46, rods atdas dd Tobde Onpoola 7H ous mexpL HANS Opéper. Pol. ii 8, 1268 @ 8 (roils macl ray & Ty modéuw TeredeuTnkdrwy é€x Syuoalov ~yl- veoOar Thy rpopyy)...2ore 5é kat év ’AOHvas otros 6 vouos viv. Plat. Menex. 248 E. The institution is said to have gone back as far as the time of Solon (Diog. Laert. 1.54). Cf. Schulthess, Vormundschaft, Pp. 13—26. ‘éppavol are mentioned in an inscr. said to be not later than 460 B.C. (Dittenberger, no. 384, 1. 120), but the latter part is much mutilated’ (Wyse).

Serpwrav pidakes] The Eleven had the management of the prison and had under them subordinates, such as jailers, executioners and torturers; but as these were dnudotor, or public slaves, the refer- ence may possibly be to the Eleven them- selves, who are called despoptdaxes in the Schol. on Dem. Azdrot. § 26, Timocr. § 210, and on Aristoph. Plut. 1108 where the term is corrupted to OecpopvaAakes.

Btolkyots] lit. ‘administration.’ Pol, iii 16, 1287 @ 6, movey eva Kipiov Tis Stoxjoews, and 1331 4 9, mept ypadas Suxay Kal rhy ddXny Thy Toadryv Siolknow. iv (vii) 10, 1330 @ 7 (it is not easy for all the citizens to pay their share in the ovoctria) kal Scorxety Thy aAyv olklay. The word is often used in the Politics, of management or administration. The primary meaning is ‘to keep house,’ as in Plato Meno gi A, Tas Te olxlas kat rds modes Stocxety. Stolknots means ‘house- keeping’ in Dem. Steph. 45 § 32, Tis Kad’ jcpov Scoxjoews. In the text it in- cludes maintenance (airyois) and payment of money.

XXV. L£phialtes.

§ 1. ery Grrd Kal Séka pddtora] From 478/7 B.c., the date of the Con- federacy of Delos (23 § 5), in the first year after the Persian wars, to 462/1, the archonship of Conon. :

Tmpocarotav tav "Apeotayitav] See c. 23 § 1, and Polztecs there quoted. Isocr. Areop. 51 Hs émisrarovans KT).

trrodepopévy] c. 36 § 1.

Bgidkens 6 Zodwv(Sov] The father’s name is given (Zo@-) in Aelian Var. Hist. ii 433 iii 17; xi 9 (wevéoraros qv). The last of these passages illustrates dSpod6- kytos. He declined an offer of ro talents from his friends, saying: radrd pe dvay- kdoe. aldovpevov bpas xaraxaploacGal re Tov dixalov, wy aldovpevor 6é unde xapifo-

]—2

100 AOHNAIQN COL, Lo, 1.24—COL. 11, 1. 3.

5778 6 Lopevidou, || kat donady aSwpoddunros elvat Kat Sixasos [Col. 11] ; mpos THv TodtTelav, éméOeTo TH BovdrAF. Kab mp@rov fev avetrev 2 ToAAods Tv Apeorrayitay, aydvas eri plépwov wept THv Supknue- vov' érevta Ths BovAns emt Kovevos adpxovtos arravra mepteieTo

5 [kat] doxay H-L, K-w?. K-W, K3, B; aapelAero H-L.

6 dvethe H-L.

8 TrepieiAe: mepteldero Richards,

pevov ipiv axdpiorov dbtar. Cf. Plut. Cim. to. On Ephialtes, see Duncker, G. ad. A. viii; Holm, Gr. Gesch. ii 176 —7.

Slkaros mpds tHv mwodtrelav] The phrase reminds us of the Politics; v 9 § 1, 1309 @ 36, Tplrov & dperhy Kal duxacocdvny év éxdorn wontrela THY mpds Thy modrelav (Class. Kev. v 160 a). Aelian Var. Hist, xiii 39, "Ed. orparryyob éveiloavros abr twos mevlay ‘7d dé Erepov’ eon ‘did Th od Aéyets, ore Sixacés elues’

§ 2. dydvas émupépwv] Plut. Per. 10 § 6, *EgidArgy...poBepov bvra Tots oheyapxexots kal mepl ras evOtvas kal Sudtes Tay Tov Sjuov ddixovvrwv arapalrnrov. Ephialtes had made himself feared by his opposition to Cimon in particular; Cimon’s party was in a minority, as may be inferred from his being ostracised, probably in the spring of 462 (Busolt, i 454 n).—Cf. Oncken, Staatslehre, pp. 492—505, ‘Ephi- altes und die Gerichtsreform.’

él Kévevos] B.c. 462/1, Diod. xi 74. Hitherto the date of this attack on the Areopagus has not been accurately known. It has sometimes been assigned to B.C. 460 (Diodorus xi 77, followed eg. in Peter’s Zetttafeln) or about 458 (e.g. in Smith, Dict. Ant. ». v. Areopagus). Cf. Philippi, Aveop. p. 256—9.

tepret(dero] Jif. § 4, Tepteldovro. See note on mapatpetoOar and sepiarpeto Oar in 27 §1.

On the overthrow of the Areopagus by Ephialtes, cf. Pol. ii 12, 1274 @ 7, Kal Thy wev ev Apel méyw Bovdny 'E¢iddrns éxddovee kal Tlepexdijs (kat II. bracketed by Sauppe). It was not until a later date that Pericles deprived the Areopagus of some of its remaining privileges, c 27§1. The text implies that he was not the leader of the present attack. Philo- chorus (FHG i 407), "Ed. udva xard\ure wh ¢& ’Apelov mayou Bovdy Ta vrep Tod owuaros. Theopompus is supposed to be the authority followed on this point by Plutarch: Pericles 7 (Eph.) xarédvce 7d kparos Tis é& ’Apelov mdryou Boudfs, 3oANTY (xara Tov Idkdrwva, Rep. 562 C, D) kal axparov Tots mrovlracs éNeveplar olvoxodr,

and 74. 9 (of the Areop.) Wore rHy bey dpatpeOfjvar Tas mreloras xpioes 6.’ ’Equ- adrov. Cimon 10, (Cimon) mpos "Equan- THY iorepov xdpere To} Syyouv Karadvovra Thy é& ’Apelov mdryou Bovhyy SinvéyOn, i. 15, "Epua\rou mpoestwros ddelhovro ris é& "Apelov _mayou Bouhjjs ras Kploecs Any OAL ywv amdoas, kal Tov , Buxaornplow kuplous éavrovs rojoayres els dxparov Syuoxpartay évéBadov rHv rodkw. Praec. Ger. Reig. 10 § 15 (11 805), Bovdy riwes éwaxO7 Kal ddvyapxiKyy KoAotcayres, Worep "Egiadrys "AOhvyot..., Sivauw dua xal dofay érxov, ib. 15 § 18, ws Tlepurdfjs...80’ *Egiadrou Thy é *Apelov mdryou Bovdiy érarelvwoe. Pausan. i 29, 15; "Ed. bs Ta vouema rae ev *Apelw mdyy partora édvphvaro. Cf. Philippi, Der Areopag, pp. 256—271; Busolt, ii 460.

In the Zumenides (681—706) we have a well-known defence of the jurisdiction of the Areopagus in matters of homicide, the main point which was left un- touched by the reforms of Ephialtes. The date of the play is fixed by the hypothesis to the Agamemnon as the archonship of Philocles, Ol. 80, 2= 459/8; and the list of vikac Acovvoraxal found on the Acropolis in 1886 describes Aeschylus as exhibiting in that year, z.e. in March, 458: ’E@. ’Apy. 1886, p. 209, quoted in Haigh’s Attic Theatre, P. 322, [émt Bidro]kdéovs.. Tparywidy, evoxAfs ’A- gprdvailos] exopi[yec], Aloxvdos dldackev. It was held by Meier, Boeckh and K. O. Miller that even the cognisance of cases of homicide was taken away from the Areopagus by Ephialtes and not restored until after the expulsion of the Thirty. Miiller (Dissertation on Eum. § 36) went so far as to affirm that the motion of Ephialtes was carried after the represen- tation of the Ewmenddes, whereas Dio- dorus places it two years earlier (460) and the text four years earlier. The fact that they retained their jurisdiction in cases of homicide is clearly stated by Philochorus (2.c.) and has been conclusively proved by Forchhammer (1828). The very privi- lege that the reformers left untouched is prominently brought forward by the poet.

CH. 25, 1. 5—1I. TIOAITEIA 101

, an ta éridera ou’ dv hv 4 THs wodTElas pudaKn, Kai Ta pléev Tlo%s mevtaxocioss, Ta 5é TH Onaw Kal trois Sixactnpious arédwxev. émpake S€ tabta cuvaitiou yevouévov @emsotoxréous, Os Hv cv

11 empa-e?, érpate B, érparre K etc. TEN: yw- Richards, yeyy- H-L.

11 *Isocr. Areopagitici argumentum (ed. Benseler, p. viii; Schol. in Aeschin. etc. Dind. p. t11; Orat. Att. ed. Turicensis, ii p. 6): "Eqiddrys ris kal OeuicrokdAs ypew- orodvres TH WOE Xphuara Kal elddres Ort, dav SixacPGow (dixdowow Bens.) oi ’Apeo- mayira, wavTws drodwoovet, KaTadtoa avrods érewcay Thy TodW, oUTws obmrws Tivds Hédovros KpiOfvar. ‘6 yap Ap. Adyer ev 7H Tod, Tay ’AG. bre Kal 6 OemroToKAFs alrios qv wy mdvra (advrws cod. Mustoxydis) dixdtew rods ’Apeotaylras” (Rose, Frag. 3667, 4043)' d90e wey, ws 8° abrods Trofro movodyres, Td 5 addyOes bid ToOro

wavTa KaTaoKevdforrTes. xaréhucay avrods.

efra of "A@nvaion dopévws dxovoavres THs ToLavTyS oUUBoUATS

Cf. Philippi, Aveop. pp. 264, 290, and Grote, c. 46 (iv 112 n).

vd, ém(Bera] These ‘additional privi- leges’ include almost everything except the ancient prerogatives of the Areopagus in connexion with trials for homicide. The legend of Orestes and the history of the first Messenian war (B.C. 743) alike imply that it had jurisdiction in such cases ‘from of old,’ Pausan. iv 5 § 2 dlxas Tas ovixas...dixagew xk madaod. Cf. Meier and Schémann, Azt. Process, ed. Lipsius, p. 11.

Harpocr. s. v. émi@érous éoprds defines them as ras wh marplous (cf. c. 3, 16—18), and adds: éhéyero dé rap’ avrots xal dAda ériderd Twa, oréca wh mdrpia dvra q éf *Apelov md-you BovdAy édikagev, ws capes

mote? Avotas xrd (cf. Philippi, Areop. 157). °

The reference to Lysias shews that the énifera meant by Harpocr. are after the time of the Thirty and are not the same as those meant in the text.

gudaky] c. 4 § 4 pvdad, and 8 § 4, éricxoros. SchOmann’s Anz. pp. 332 and 493, E.T. Among the privileges now taken away from the Areopagus would be the general superintendence of educa- tion and of public morals, e.g. the en- forcing of the ancient véuos dpylas. Grote, c. 46, iv 1123; Schémann, p. 498; Philippi, Aveop. pp. 162—170, 268—272.

To Sipw] Cic. de Rep. i 43, ‘ Atheni- enses quibusdam temporibus sublato Areopago nihil nisi populi scitis ac decre- tis agebant.’

tots Sixacryplois] Thus, the jurisdic- tion in cases of dcéBera seems in general to have been transferred to the law- courts; but certain forms of doéBea con- tinued to be tried by the Areopagus, esp. the offence of doing damage to the sacred olive-trees (Lys. Or. 7). Schémann, p. 498. On the general question, cf. Phi- lippi, Areop. pp. 242—289.

:

cuvaitlou yevouévou Oenro-roké- ovs] Hitherto, the attack on the Areopagus has been generally attributed to Ephialtes and Pericles (Fol, 1274 a 7); the present passage assigns a prominent part to. The- mistocles. The only other authority for associating Themistocles with Ephialtes on this occasion is to be found in the argument to the Aveopagiticus of Isocrates (see Zestimonia), probably due to a Chris- tian writer in the sixth century (Rose, A.P., p. 423). Duncker, G. d@. A. viii 258—260, discusses the account just men- tioned. He attributes the attack on the part of Themistocles to a change of policy in the Areopagus due to its now containing a large number of ex-archons who had been merely appointed by lot and not by open election.

The text implies that Themistocles was still at Athens in 462 B.C., whereas, ac- cording to the current view, he was ostracised in 471 B.C. (Diod. xi 54) and fled to Persia about 466 B.c. In his flight he passed through the Athenian fleet which was besieging Naxos (Thuc. 1137 § 2, and Plut. Them. 25 §1). The reduction of Naxos took place before the battles at the Eurymedon (Thuc. i 100 § 1), which are assigned to 466. Xerxes died in 465 and, according to Thuc. i137 § 3, Themistocles on his arrival at the Persian court found Artaxerxes vewort Bacrredovra. Besides Thucydides, Charon of Lampsacus, one of the Adoyoypado. prior to Herodotus, is quoted by Plutarch, Them. 27 § 1, as making Themistocles reach the court after the death of Xerxes. The authorities there quoted, as making him arrive before the king’s death, are Ephorus, Deinon, Cleitarchus and Hera- cleides; but the account of Thuc. is accepted as ‘agreeing better with the dates, although these again have not been firmly settled beyond dispute.’

12

102

AOHNAIQN

COL, 11, 1. 3—6.

tov Apeotrayitav, épedre S€ xpiverOar undicpov. Bovddpevos dé

If the narrative in the text is accepted, Themistocles was at Athens in 462, a- waiting his trial on the charge of Medism. This must be the first accusation, prior to his ostracism, and on this charge (ac- cording to Diod. xi 54) he was acquitted (Grote, c. 44, iv 36, 37). The second accusation, which is the only one men- tioned by Thuc. (i 135 § 1), and Plut. (Them. 23), was not brought forward until after his banishment. We should then be compelled to place his ostracism not earlier than 461, and his flight to Persia about 460, when Artaxerxes had been on the throne for about five years. To reconcile this with veworl in Thuc., Mr Kenyon suggests that ‘the fifth year of a king who ruled for forty might well be spoken of as in the beginning of his reign.’ But the incident connected with the siege of Naxos makes it impossible to make the narrative in the text agree with the account in Thuc. Mr Kenyon pro- poses two alternatives: either (1), the story of the flight of Them. should be connected with some operations about 460 B.C. and not with the siege of Naxos; or (2), there were two inconsistent accounts of the latter years of Them., that adopted by Thuc. and that in the present text. We can hardly hesitate in choosing the second alternative, and in following the authority of Thucydides. Cf. Abbott, Hist. Gr. ii 386—8.

The chronology of this period has been investigated anew by Bauer, who im- plicitly accepts the statement in the text, and accordingly alters the date of the siege of Naxos. His dates as compared with those of Clinton are as follows :

Clinton Bauer

Siege of Naxos 466 460 ae battle of Eurymedon +», (autumn) revolt of Thasos 465 459 ree) third Messenian ‘war 464 ,, (summer?) defeat at Drabescus 465 ,, (autumn)

Thasos subdued by Cimon 463 457 (spring)

expedition to Egypt 460 456 (spring ostracism of Cimon 46x 455 (spring, recall of Cimon 456 452 (winter end of Egyptian war 455 450 (spring) death of Cimon 449 448

These dates involve setting aside the text of Thuc. iv 102 in two points: in § 1 we are told that the defeat at Dra- bescus was 32 years after the failure of Aristagoras to establish himself on the Strymon, and (zd. § 2) 28 years before the founding of Amphipolis (in 437 B.c.), Schol. Aeschines ii 31. It is more in accordance with the narrative in Hdt. v 126 to place the failure of Aristagoras

in B.C. 497 than in 491. Again, the alliance with Argos is placed late in 457, whereas the Zumenddes of Aeschylus, which contains a clear reference to this alliance (1. 290, 757-766), was performed in March, 458, more than a year earlier (Athenaeum, 1891, p. 317). See also Mr E.M. Walker in Class. Rev. vi 95—99.

It is remarkable that in Plutarch’s Life of Themistocles not a word is said as to his having taken any part in the attack on the Areopagus. In this connexion Plutarch mentions Ephialtes and Pericles alone (note on § 2, weptelAero). We must infer either (1), that Plutarch had no first- hand acquaintance with this treatise; or (2), that he carelessly omitted to notice this narrative; or (3), that he had no such narrative in his copy.

Against (1) we may set the fact that in 10 § 3 Plutarch quotes Aristotle as his authority for a statement found in c. 23 § 1, and also for the murder of Ephialtes mentioned at the end of this very chapter. But this makes Plutarch’s silence on The- mistocles all the more singular. (Cf. Abbott, Hést. Gr. ii 518.)

Against (2) it may be remarked that the story would have admirably illustrated the duplicity of Themistocles, and as such would naturally have been welcomed by the biographer. Mr Kenyon suggests that the omission ‘can hardly be explained except on the theory that in actually writing his lives he used the notes and extracts he had previously made without having the complete work before him’; but this puts the difficulty only one stage further back, and compels us to ask how Plutarch came to omit to make any note of this narrative. He accepts the state- ment in Thucydides that Themistocles reached the Persian court after the death of Xerxes as in better agreement with the dates. This implies that the biographer had paid some attention to the chronology of the time. It seems possible therefore that he rejected the narrative on the ground that it did not fit in with the date of the siege of Naxos, which Plutarch, following Thucydides, mentions in connexion with the flight of Themistocles. But even sup- posing he deliberately rejected the narra- tive, it is strange that he says nothing about it. His treatment of his authorities is, however, by no means systematic and uniform. In his Life of Themistocles, he quotes no less than 30 different authorities of very various degrees of importance. Even Thucydides does not command his

CH, 25, 1. 12—18.

TIOAITEIA

103

katarvOjvar thv Bovdny 6 OemscrokdHs mpos wev Tov "Equddryy reyer Ste cvvapTatew avrov 7 Bovdn pédret, mpos Sé Tovs ’Apeo- mayitas OTe dei€es Twas cuvictapévous éml KaTadvoeEL THS TOAL-

Teas.

aGyayov dé Tovs aipeBévtas tis BovArs ov SétpiBev 6

"Equdarys, iva SetEn tLod]s dOpovfouévous, SuedéeyeTo peta orovons 4 avtois. 6 8 "Equddrns ws eldey xatardayels xabiter povoyitwy

16 adalpeGENTac (K): alpeOévras? K (K-W, B); alpeO&ras vrd Richards; épai-

pedévras H-L, coll. Thuc. iv 38; é&- Poland.

oY: of H-L.

undivided allegiance. With regard to the

,adventures of Themistocles in Asia, while respecting the chronology of Thucydides, Plutarch disdains to reproduce the his- torian’s account of those adventures, fol- lowing by preference the untrustworthy romance of Phanias of Eresos (Holden’s Introd. 8§ 17, 22). Such a fact detracts considerably from his authority as a judi- cious critic of the materials which he had before him.

As to (3), Prof. Tyrrell in the Quarterly Review, 1891, p. 344, infers from the silence of Plutarch that he ‘never read the work before us. But he had certainly read some other treatise ascribed to Aristotle on the Athenian Constitution; therefore there must have been other editions of the Athenian Constitution cir- culating under the name of Aristotle.’ Yet both the passages, which Plutarch in his Zhemzistocles quotes as from this trea- tise, are to be found in the edition which we possess. Prof. Tyrrell regards the description of this attack on the Areopagus as ‘very bald and feeble.’ Such a con- sideration might point to its not being by the same hand as the main bulk of the treatise ; and suggest that, without our assuming that it was absent in Plutarch’s copy, it might on this ground alone be regarded as an interpolation. But the style of the narrative does not appear to me to differ materially from that of the context, and I should therefore prefer to attribute it to the same author as the rest of the treatise. But, while the narrative may be genuine, we can hardly regard it as authentic. The celebrated story of the proposal of Themistocles to burn the Hellenic fleet at Pagasae is described by Grote (v 27, note 2) as ‘ probably the in- vention of some Greek of the Platonic age’; and the present narrative has pro- bably no earlier origin.

qv tav “Apeorayitav] He owed this position to the fact that he had been archon in 482/13; see note on c. 22 § 7.

cvvaprafev] The object of Themisto-

cles perhaps was to inveigle the Areo- pagus into exposing itself to a charge of attempting to ‘pounce upon’ an influen- tial citizen. It was one of the things remembered against the Thirty that they ‘pounced on’ citizens in this way, Lys. 12 § 96 (Newman).

Tovs aipeQévtas] rovs dpatpedévras, if retained, means not ‘the persons de- spatched by the Areopagus,’ but ‘mem- bers of the Council of the Areopagus selected and set apart for the purpose.’ Hist. An. 6, 22, 576 4 23, wpa do ovk

dpapetrac ovdeuia dgdwpiouévy (Class. Rev. v 1644). dpatpeiobar, however, is

very rarely used in this sense.

‘In Lys. 13 § 23 the Codex Palatinus has of diapebévres Tov as bed where Reiske’s correction ol aipe@évres has been generally accepted; Weidner, however, yy ol déxa alpebévres’ (Wyse).

ov SrérpiBev] usually understood as ‘the house of’ Ephialtes. In c. 16 we have év7@ dore duarpliBwow. It need not im- ply anything so definite as a ‘house’: it may refer to any public place, such as the precincts of atemple. Ephialtes, on receiving the hint that the Council was intending to arrest him, may well have taken the precaution of being not only in the company of his friends but also within reach of sanctuary in the neighbourhood of a Buys.

§4. Kadl{a—émi rovBopdsy] On altars as places of refuge, cf. Eur. fon, 1257— 1260, Tot pi-yw dij7’ ;...mot 8’ dv addoo’, 7 al Buydr ; povox(rwy] ‘wearing his tunic only,’ instead of the ludriov as well. Such a guise would be appropriate to his position as a suppliant. The word is formed on the analogy of jpovdémemos ‘wearing but one robe,’ ‘wearing the tunic only,’ Eur. Hec. 933 =dmemdos, ‘ without the upper garment’; Pind. V.i74. But, hitherto, it has not been found earlier than Polybius (fragm. xiv 11, 2). It was also quoted from Pythaenetus, af. Athen. 589 F, Mé€tooa dvapmréxovos kal povoxlr wy 1. tov Powpdv] The article is

20

104 AOHNAIQN COL. 11, 1. 6—13. éml tov Bopov. Oavpacdvrwv Sé rdvtwv To yeyou[os] Kal pera tadra avvabpocbeions THs BovAns TOY TevTaKoTioy KaTHYOpoUY tov Apeorayitév 6 T Eduadrns kal <o> @ewsotoxdys, kal wadwv év TO Syuw Tov avtTov TpoTrov, Ews TrepieidovTo abTay THv divamy, Kal <o pev OewcroKrAHs — —>, avnpéOn Sé Kal 6’Ediddrns S0d0- dovnbels per’ od trordvv xpovov Sv "Apiorobdikov [T]od Tavaypaiov.

26. wey odv Tov “Apeorayiray Bovdy TodTov Tov TpdTroy amectepnOn Ths émtpercias. peta b& Tadta ovvéBawwev dvierOat BGAXov Thy TodTEtay bid Tos TrpOOvpws SyuaywyodyTas. KaTAd yap Tovs Katpovs TovToUs ouvérrece pnd Hryewdva Eye Tods éruet-, KEeoTépous, GAN avTav mpoeatavar Kiuwva tov Mirriddov, tvedre-

21 <é> Qeu. K-w, H-L, B, 22 TIEpEIAON™: epiethovro K, K-W, B; mrapel- Aovro H-L. 23 Kai <6 wev OemoroxrARs — —>, dvypéOn 6é krA K-W. kal om. J B Mayor, Blass, (H-L).

XXVI 4 Post iyyeudva adiectivum (velut gumepov) desiderat Richards, oovdaiov Gennadios; an jyyeudva exew ixavdv? 5 vewrepov: vwOpérepov? Kontos, K-w; idem mavult Herwerden qui dvotorepov coniecerat; ‘fort. vwpdv’ Bs vwhéorepov vel évewrepov Weil (Journal des Savants, Avril, 1891); aliquid eiusmodi desiderabat Wyse;

uondam aBéArepoy conieci; orpariwrixwrepov (coll. Polyb. 23, 10, 4 oTpariwrixwrepos q jodurixwrepos) vel modemKwrepov Richards, cf. Plut. Praec. Ger. Retp. c. 16 § 22

hv yap 6 wev (Ilepuxdfs) pds roderelay, 6 d¢ (Kluwy) wpds mbdenov evpvéorepos.

TESTIMONIA.

XXV 23, 24 * Plut. Per. ro (infra exscriptum).

peculiar. If the ‘house’ of Eph. is meant, it implies ‘the family altar.’ Otherwise, some notable altar may be intended, such as the ‘altar of the twelve gods’ (so Milchhéfer in Curtius, Stadz- geschichte, p. cxxi), or that of Zeds d-yopatos. The latter was near the orod Bacteos where meetings of the Areopagus were sometimes held (Dem. 25 § 23). Cf. Lys. 13 § 4 Kaélfovow éri rov Bwydy Movn- xlacw and § 54, érl rol Bwuod éxdOnro.

Tay TevTaKkoolwy] added to contrast the Bovdy of the Five Hundred with that of the Areopagus mentioned in the context.

Gvypé0y] Plut. Per. 10 ad fin. ‘Eqiddrnv .. émiBoudedoayres ol éxOpol bv ’"Apiorodlkov 700 Tavaryptxod (v.2.-alov) kpupalws dvetdov, as ’Apiororédns elpnxev. In the same chapter Plutarch quotes and rejects the account of Idomeneus, xarnyopoyr: Tot Tlepixdéous, ws rov Syuarywyor ’"Eqdiddryy plrov yevduevov kal Kowwvdv dvTa Tis év TH monTrela mpoatpécews Sodopovicavros dua tnrorurlay Kal POdvov ris dns. Diod. xi 77, 6, THS vuxrds dvatpebels dinrov eoxe Thy rob Blov reXeurqv. [Plat.] Axioch. 368 D, mod 6° ’E@udArys (réOvnxe) ; Antiph. 5 § 68, ovdérw viv eVpnvra ol droxrelvayTes.

XXXVI. Cimon.

§ 1. dvler@ar.—rodtrelav] The meta-

phorical use of dvlec@a: is common in

Ar. ag. Rhet. i 4, 1360 a 24, Toderetae kal dvduevac kat émcrewdpuevar POelpovrat (with Cope’s note), Pol. v 1, 1301 4 17, ta émiradGow 4 dveOGow al srodiretat, vi (iv) 3, 1290 @ 28, moderetar dvepuévar kal wadaxal (opp. to cvrovwrepan), iv (vii) 4, 1326 @ 28, mwodirela avecmévn mpds 7d wdHG0s. The origin of the metaphor (from the strings of a musical instrument) may be seen in Pol. v (viii) 7, 1342 6 22, apuovlar dvemévar opp. to ctvrovor.

For the facts, cf. Plut. Cimon 15, os 6é madw éml orparelav eéérdevoe, TeAEws dve@évres of moddol kal ovyxéovres Tov Kkabecr&ra THs wodirelas Kbopov Ta TE Ta- Tpia vourpa, ols éxpavro mpbrepov,’E@edhrou tmpoeoT&ros deldovro ris €E Apelov mayou Bovdjs ras xploes An édlywr ardoas, Kal T&v Sixaornplwy Kxuplovs éavrods movy- cavres els Axparov Syuoxparlay évéBadov tiv mwédw, Hon Kal Tlepexddous duvapyévov kal ra T&v modkdGy Ppovoivros. The time to which Plutarch refers is later than Cimon’s subjugation of Thasos (463 Clin- ton; 457 Bauer). He is following those who place the beginning of the influence of Pericles at an earlier date than that assumed in the present treatise.

tTots—Bnpaywyotvras}] Fol. 1274 4 14, Onuaywyovs tAaBe Pavdovs.

vedtepov] possibly means ‘rather young’

CH. 25, 1. 19—CH. 26, ]. 11. TTOAITEIA

105

pov dvta Kal mpos tiv Todw owe mpocedOovTa, pos Sé TovToLs €fOdp0at Tovs ToAAOds KaTa TWOAEMOV* Tis yap oTpaTElas yuyvo- pévns ev Tois TéTE ypovols ex KaTAAOYoU, Kal oTpaTHydv édia[Tla-

; 3 t 5 fol nw = * \ 7 \ Hevov arreipwv pév Tod TrodEuElY TLuwpevav Sé Sia Tas TaTpLKAaS f b. n Sofas, dei cuvéBawer tdv éeEvovtwv avd SicxiALous 7} TpLayiALous amodnva bat, [Blote dvaricxer Oar rods érvetxeis Kal Tov Sipov Kal

7 TIN (K-W).

10 ale! (K, K-w).

to be the leader of a great political party. But, as Cimon had fought at Salamis 18 years before (Plut. Czm. 5), he could hardly have been less than 36 in B.c. 462; and was probably more than 40, if we place his birth in 504 (the date given on p. 39 of Ekker’s ed. of Plut. Czm.). His birth should probably be placed earlier, as he was orparnyds (and there- fore over 30) at Eion in 476 (Thuc. i 98). Again, Pericles, who was probably born in B.C. 493, is described as a young man (véos wr, 27 § 1), when he made his repu- tation by accusing Cimon, presumably after the expedition to Thasos, 463. How then can Cimon, who was obviously older than Pericles, and who had won the battle of Eurymedon three years before, be de- scribed as ‘rather young’ shortly after B.c. 462? vedrepov has therefore been generally regarded as corrupt, and various emenda- tions have been suggested, expressive of Cimon’s inadequacy for the position of a political leader. The fact that his intel- lectual development was somewhat tardy is implied in the story preserved by Aristides, ii 203 Dind., according to which his guardians did not allow him to manage his own property until some time after he had come of age (uéxpe méppw THs HAixlas), while in Plut. Cz. 4 he is said to have resembled his father in evjOea. (Cf. Wyse in Class. Rev. v 274 6.) The com- bination of vedrepov and dyé mpooedObvTa is in itself open to suspicion.

vwOpsrepov (which has been suggested) is found in Ameipsias, frag. 16, Pollux ix 138; cf. the description of Chares in Theopompus, frag. 288, vwOpof 7’ dvros kal Bpadéos. See also Schol. to Aristides in ili 515, 8—10 and 517, 28—30 Dind.

vewrepov is, however, retained by Bauer (p. tor), who suggests that, under the influence of the Areopagus, the leaders of the political parties had generally been elderly men. Mr E. M. Walker (Class. Rev. vi 98) holds that the epithet is con- sistent with c. 25 which implies that Themistocles was at Athens in 462: ‘it

is only when we recognise that the author ...put the battle of Eurymedon some eight years too late, and that the interval be- tween Tanagra and the five years’ truce found no place in his historical retrospect, that we can understand how he came to apply to Cimon in the year 462 those much discussed words vewrepov évra Kal mpos Thy Tod de mpocehOovTa.’

Tpds tiv mod dt mporedOdvra] ‘having been rather late in entering on public life.’ I am not aware of any exact parallel to this phrase; but we have some- thing like it inc. 27 $1, rpos 76 Snuaywyet €NO6vT0s.

ék Kataddyou] ‘from the roll of hop- lites,’ as contrasted with the mercenary troops that came into vogue at a later date.

mwartpikds] here ‘ancestral.’ See c. 28

8 5;

dvd Sry Alovs—dardAAvoGat] Isocr. De Pace § 87 (of the losses sustained by Athens in her pursuit of supremacy at sea), Tovs Kara xAlous kal deaxtAcous drobvycKxovras tis av apiOuhoeev ; Pol. viii (v) 3, 1303 @ 9, kal év A@jvais dru- xouvray ren ol -yudpiuor hdrrous éyévorro Oud 7d ek Karadbyou orparever Oat 1rd TOY Aakwvixoy médeuov.

dwédAvo8at] Between 462 and 457 B.c. the Athenians were defeated by the Corinthians at Halieis (458; Thuc. i 105, 1), and by the Lacedaemonians at Tanagra (457; 2d. 108, 1). The opera- tions in Egypt, which had been begun in 460, came to an unsuccessful conclusion in 455 (2b. 110, 1). On the other hand, they were victorious over the Pelopon- nesians on the sea at Kekryphaleia, and over the Aeginetans in a naval engage- ment in 458 (Thuc. i105, 1—2). During the absence of the main body of the Athenian soldiers in Egypt and Aegina, Myronides defeated the Corinthians in the territory of Megara (458, i 105, 4). In 456 the Athenians defeated the Boeotians at Oenophyta, and in the same year Aegina yielded to Athens.

_

°

106 AOHNAIQN COL. 11, 1. 13—20.

TOV eUTépwv. Ta wev odv Gra TdvTa Su@KouY oy dpuoiws Kal 2 mpotepov Tois vouows mpoctyovtes, THY Sé TaY évvéa apydrToV aipecwy ovK éxivovy, GAN éxt@ eret peta Tov "Eduddtov Odvarov éyvocav Kai éx Cevyurav mpoxpiverOas Tos KAnpwoopévous THY évvéa apydvrwv, kal rpaetos npev €E adtav Mvyaibeldns. of 8é ™po TovTou mavres é& imméwy Kal TevTaKoclomedipvey jaoav, ot <0e> Ceuyiras tds éyxuKAiovs Fpyov, e¢ pj TL TapewpaTo Tav év Tots vowous. eres dé wéuTT@ peta Tadta él Avoikpdrous dpyov- 3 ToS ot TpLdxovTa SiKacTal KaTécTnTaY TaALY Of KaNOUMEVOL KATA SHpmous* Kal Tpitw peta TodTov éml Avridotov Sid TO TAROOS Tov 4 ToAtTa@v, Ilepixdéous eimrovros, éyvwoay pn petéyey THS TOEwS Os dy pwn é& duoty actotv 4 yeyoves.

12 odx quondam delebat Wyse.

14 dd’ 7 Blass (H-L). (edd.).

post wapewpéro deletum trd rGv Sjuwy retinent H-L.

18 6é add. K

TON ante corr. (K!, H-L, B); “eva Tofrov post corr. (K-W, K’).

21 METAY- 23 HN: corr. K.

§ 2. otx dpolws—mpocéxovres] The main change was the reduction of the power of the Areopagus. But while, in this and other respects, Athens departed from her previous constitutional arrange- ments, she retained the limitations under which the archons were appointed from among the first and second classes of citizens. It was not until 457 that the archonship was thrown open to members of the third class.

ékrw ere} It was in 462 B.c. that Ephialtes overthrew the Areopagus; and 457 is the date of the change in the archonship immediately before the ar- chonship of Mnesitheides. The latter event is 5 years (or in the sixth year) after the former. The change in the archonship is here described as happen- ing in the sixth year ‘after the death of Ephialtes.’ It follows (as observed by Mr Kenyon) that Ephialtes was put to death in the year in which he overthrew the Areopagus.

ék fevytrov] Originally the office of archon was open to members of the first class only (cf. c. 7 § 3 and Plut. 47¢sz. 1). In course of time it became open to the second class, possibly after the Persian wars, when, according to Plut. Arist. 22, the archonship was made accessible to ‘all the Athenians,’ on the motion of Aristides, who (after the battle at Plataea) yeddea Widicua Kowhy elvar rhv wodkcrelay

Kal Tovs dpyovras é& AOnvalwy mévrwy

aipetoOa. Lastly, in 457 we here have the office open to the third class. It was

never /egally open to the fourth class (c. 7 ad fin.). Cf. Abbott, Hist. Gr. ii 385—6.

mpokplver Oar] 8 § 1; 22 § 5.

KAnpwcopévous Tay évvéa dpxdvTov] sc. dpxjv. Lysias 6 § 4, ev 2XOy KAnpwod- pevos Tv evvda dpxdvruv Kal Adxy Bacr- devs, and 2b. 24 § 13, Th me KwAVEL KAnpOd- cba Tov évvda dpxdvTwv ;

MvnowbelSqs] B.C. 457/6.

tas éykukAlous] sc. dpxds, ‘the ordinary (z.e. inferior) offices.’ Pol. i 7, 1255 6 25, Ta CyKicAa dtakovypara, ii 5, 1263 a 21, Tas dtaxovias Tas éyxuKAlous, li 9, 1269 & 35, xpyolpou & ovans ris Opacdrytos mpos ovdev Tav éyxuxAlwy add’ elrep mpds Tov médcuov. The term had already been similarly used by Isocr. 3 § 22, & Tois éyxu«Alos kal rots xa’ jucpar éxdorny yryvopévas, and de Pace 87. Inf. c. 43, 1. 3.

el pr Tt wapewparo] ‘assuming the laws were strictly observed’; in other words, the members of the third class were, strictly speaking, eligible for the ordinary offices alone; but occasionally by an oversight they were elected to the office of archon. Similarly, in later times even members of the fourth class became archons, although not legally qualified.

§ 3. éml Avoikpdrous] B.C. 453/2-

ot tplaxovra] 16 § 5.

§ 4. él’ Avriddrov] B.C. 451/0.

Tlepuxddous elrévros—yeyovas] Pol. iii 5, 1278 @ 34, Tédos ¢ pbvov Tous cé dy- gotv doray moXlras twowotow. Plut. Peri- cles 37, dxudtwv 6 Tlepuxdfs év rH Tokcrelg mpd wavy TodAwy xpdvev Kal matéas exw

CH. 26, 1. 12—CH. 27, 1.5. TIOAITEIA

107

27. pera 5€ tadra mpds To Snpaywyeiv éXOdvros Iepsxdéous, kal mp@rov edvdSoxipjnoavtos bre Katnydpnoe Tas evOtvas Kiuwvos otpaTnyodvTos véos dv, Snuotixwtépay ers cvveBn yeveoOar TH modTelav' Kai yap Tay Apeotrayitav évia TapeideTo, Kal pdduoTa mpovtpepey THY Todw eri THY vavTiAHY Sivau, EE Hs ouvéBn 5

XXVII 2 trpwtoy: mpd rod Jackson, van Leeuwen; mp&rov Blass, alii (K-w,

H-L, K%). Tpewe H-L.

4 TrapeiAeTo (K, H-L, B): mepielhero K-W, cf. 25 vv. 8, 22.

5 mpov-

..yrnalous, vouov &ypawe povous ’AOyvalous elvat rods éx duety "AOnvalwy yeyovéras. Aelian Var. Hist. vi 10, xiii 24, frag. 68. Cf. Isaeus 8 § 19; 12 § 9; Aeschin. 1 § 39. Philippi, Bzirgerrecht, p. 69 seq.

The text places this event early in the public career of Pericles: Plutarch places it later. It has been argued that no such law could have been proposed by Pericles (see Buermann, ¥ahrd. f. cl. Phil. Suppl. Bd ix 624-, 1878; Gilbert, Gr. St. i 179; Schenkl, Wiener Studien, ii 171; Duncker, Bericht d. Berl, Akad., 1883, p. 9353 Busolt in Miiller’s Handbuch iv 1, 141). According to these, the ‘law of Pericles’ was really a revision of the list of citizens in 445/4 (Athenaeum, 1891, 435 ¢). See also Westermann’s Introduction to Dem. Eubulides.

XXVII. Pericles.

§ 1. karnyspyoe—Klpwvos véos div] Plutarch, Czm. 14, states that Cimon was put on his trial on his return from the re- duction of Thasos on the ground that he had been bribed not to follow up his suc- cess by an invasion of Macedonia: di«yy epuye (epevye? cf. Plut. Per. 10, 8re—dixnv épevye) Tav éxOpav ovordyrwy ér’ abrov. He also quotes from Cimon’s contempo- rary, Stesimbrotus, the story of Cimon’s sister Elpinice appealing to Pericles (obros yap qv Tay Karyyopwy 6 opodpe- taros) in favour of her brother. The re- sult was that Pericles é ye r7 dixy mpqo- tarov yevésOac TG Kiwwve xai mpds ri karnyopiay arat dvacrivat uovov, womep adoctotuevov. In Plut. Perecles 10, he is described as els ray xaryydpwr...0md Tod Shou mpoBeBAnuévos, and as having done less than the rest of the prosecutors to damage the cause of Cimon. Cimon’s expedition to Thasos has generally been placed in B.c. 46s—3. The date sug- gested by Bauer for the revolt of Thasos is 459, and for its reduction (rplrw ére:, Thue. i ror) 457. :

eWOivas] 59 § 2, orparnyois edOuvas.

Tov “Apeotayiray evia mapeldero] Plutarch, Pericles g, describes Pericles as

attacking the Areopagus after he had instituted pay for the law courts at the instance of ‘Damonides.’ He also states that it was by the aid of Ephialtes that he deprived the Areopagus of the greatest part of its jurisdiction. In the text, which Plutarch professes to follow, by quoting Aristotle as his authority for ‘Damonides,’ the present attack on the Areopagus is placed defore the account of the payment of the law courts; and Ephi- altes is no longer alive (c. 25 § 4). mapatpetoOat, in mid., is used of ‘dis- Sranchising persons’ in Pol. iii 5, 1278 a 32, evrropoiyres 6 GxAoU KaTe puLKpdv Trap- acpodvrat rods éx dovAov mpOrov 7 Sovdns, 14, 1285 6 16, Tav bxyAwWY TapapoumevwH (of the withdrawal of royal privileges on the part of the people), viii (v) 10, 1311 3 6, ywatka mapedéoOa, to seduce, In Hadt. ii 109, 7. 7i twos is used in the general sense of ‘taking away from,’ ‘stealing away from.’ Inc. 15 §§ 3, 4, and twice in 37 § 2, it is applied to érha. mwepiaipetc Oat is similarly used of ‘strip- ping off’ and ‘taking away,’ e.g. Dem. p. 246, 23, amrdvrwy...éhevOepiay mepielreTOo, Fol, vii (vi) 2, 1318 @ 1, (ra ToLatTa Snpo- rixd)...dav d& Tis xararepOy é& dpyatas MeraBodfs, Tore weptarpetobas Ti Su- vou avris Kat é& aiperay KAnpwrods moteiy. Both words are equally defensible and the MS reading may therefore be re- tained. We have repiaipeto Oa ra érldera in 25 § 2, and ryv dtvauw in 25 § 43 we also have mwepiarpetoOae orépavoy in c. 57 § 4. vaurixyy Sivapiv] Pod. vii (vi) 7, 1321 a 14, ) O€ Wry Odvapes Kal vauTiKH Onuotixh mautrav. viii (v) 4, 1304 u 22 (immediately after mention of the in- fluence of the Areopagus), kal mdédw 6 vautixds dxAos “yevduevos airtos Ths mepl Zarapiva vicns cal dad radrys (Tabrny cont. Susemihl) ris Hryemovias bia THY Kara Oddarray divauw Thy Snuoxpatiay loyxupo- tépav émolycev, The inhabitants of the Peiraeus, consisting mainly of the vaurixds 8xdos, were distinctively democratical.

1o

108 AOHNAIQON COL, 11, 1. 20—26.

# : ray Oappycavras Tovs ToANOdS Amacay THY TONTELav MAAXOV dryeLY > € / \ \ \ 2 a , ON, a. eis avTous. peta dé TH év Ladrapyive vavpayiav évos Seiy revry- koot@ érev émt IvO0deép[ov] dpyovtos 6 pos IeXozrovyncious Lae I > e \ ¢ n 2 a ‘3 evéoTn ToAELOS, ev @ KaTaKNyabels o Shpuos ev TO doTEL Kal cuv- eOiaGeis év tals otpateias prcOodopeiv, Ta wev Exwv Ta bé dKov mponpeito THY TroNTeLav SioLKeiv adtds. éroinae 6& Kal picOoddpa \ na a na Ta SixactHpia IlepixrHs Tp@Tos, avridnwaywyav mpos THY Kiwo-

vos evtropiav.

Lg A - iA \ 4 > a n 0 yap Kiev, are tupayyinny Eywv obciav, tpaTov

Mev TAS KoLVaS AnTOUpyias éEXnTOUpYEL NawTpas, emerTa TOY Snuo-

oe 6 TIACAN: wacay B, aracap ceteri. K3,

-KAnoOels K-W, H-L, B. TESTIMONIA.

(infra exscriptum).

7 el (H-L, B): detv J E B Mayor, k-w,

9 ENECTH: ouvéorn H-L: confert K c. § VV. 11, 223 17 V. 153 41 Ve 2, quibus omnibus in locis H-L suvéory malunt. 10 cTpaTiaic.

-KAICOEIC: -KAEoBels K, cf. 19, 323

14—18 Heraclidis epitoma (Rose, Ar. Frag. 611, 5%): rods idlous dypovs érwplfew mapetxe Tots Bovdouevors, & Gy woddovs edeimufe.

*Plut. Cim. 10

Oappricavras]c. 22 and 24 § 1.

§ 2. Seiv] c. 19 end.

émt IIv@o8dépov) B.c. 432/1, 48 years after 480/79. Thuc. ii 2, § 1 fixes the date of the beginning of the war as the Spring of 431, [Iv@odwpou ére Sto pivas dpxovros.

évéory] cuvéorn has been proposed, on the ground that évéorn refers to a bellum instans, and ouwvésryn to a bellum ortum. Thuc. i 15 § 2, xara yy dé médepos... ovdels Evvéotyn. It is true that in Isocr. p- 82 B Tov médeuov Tov evordvra...77 médec refers to an imminent war, but it is equally true that in Dem. 255, 10 (cf. 274, 6) the beginning of a war is expressed by 6 tore évoras méAenos. Cf. Aeschin. /.Z. 58, ért Too ToAduov...é€verrnxoros. The latter phrase is contrasted, in the Rhet. ad Alex. 3, 1425 @ 36, with ylyvecOar wéddov. Ar. Rhet. i. 9, 1366 6 23, Kara rov év- eorOra Kapdy. Puoikh ’Axpbacis, iv 13, 222 b 14, 6 xpdvos éyys Toi éveoraros vuv.

katakAyoGels—dorrer] Thue. ii 13 § 2, (Pericles) rapyve: thy modw eloedOdvras gpuadocev, 2b. 14—17-

§ 3. erolyoe—pirboddpa ta Sixac- typia] Pol. ii 12, ra 6€ dixagrHpia pic8o- gpopa xaréornoe Tepixdjs. Plut. Per. 9. Aristides, ii 192 Dind. Boeckh, 11 xv; Grote, c. 46, iv 103; Gilbert, Gr. St. i325.

TvpavyiKyv—ovelay] Cimon, son of Miltiades, was (on the side of his mother, Hegesipyle) grandson of the Thracian king Olorus (Plut. Ci. 4). The fine of 50 talents inflicted on Miltiades was paid by Cimon.

a

Aproupylas éAyrodpye] Anroupyely and AnToupyés are quoted as Attic forms by ancient grammarians (Ammonius 89; Moeris 202; Bekker’s Anecd. 277, oi madatol "Arrikol dia Tod 7 édeyor AyToup- yeiv) ; and the forms in \y- are found in inscriptions of the fourth century. In 386 B.C. we have [A]ycrovpy:ay, CIA ii add. 554 4 14; in the time of Demo- sthenes and Aristotle, ra[s &]JAAas An- [rovpy]las kadGs Anerov[py]et..., 2b. 557, 53 in 340—332, Amrov[py]ncav, 2b. 172, 4. Meisterhans, Grammatik d. Attischen Inschrifien, ed. 1888, p. 29, note 174 (Introd. to Dem. Lez. p. iii).

tay Syporav erpede roAdovs xTh] Plut. Cim. 10, rév Te yap ayp&v rods pparyyods ddeirer, va Kal rots Zévors kal Twy Tokura Tots Seopevors ddews Urdpxy NauBdveww Ths érdpas, kat Setrvoy olkor wap’ a’r@ duTdv Be, apxobv bé wodXois, éroteiro Kal? qyé- pay, ép & Trav Tevirwy 6 Boudopevos elope. kal Siarpopiy elxev dmpd-ypuova, povots Tots Syuocios ocxodatwr. ws 3 *Apiororédns pyolv, obx amavTwy ’AO4- valwy, adda Tav Snuorwy adrod Aaxia- dav mapeckevagero Bovdouév 7d Seirvov. Pericl. g, ev dpxy...mpds riv Kipwvos dota dyrirarTopevos Yremoetro Tov Sfjuov* édar- Tovmevos € mAovTw Kal Xpyuacw, ad’ dv éxeivos dvedduBave rods mévynras detrvdv Te Kad’ tyépay To deoudvy mapéxuv ’AOy- valwy Kat Tods mpecBurépous dudevviur, Tav te xwpluv rods Ppaypyods adaipuy, bus dérwplfwow of Bovdduevor, TovTos 6 Tlepixdjjs xaradnuarywyovmevos rpémrerat mpos Thy Tov dSnuociwy diavopjv, The

CH. 27, 1, 6—10.

TIOAITEIA

109

Tov étpede TodAovs: é&fv yap Te Bovroperm Aaxiaddv nal? € , \ € 4 2 t ? * BA + 4 x 4 1 seer tyy 7yP Huépav édOdvre wap wunoy axel ma BeTpuy, ET bé Ta xopla wavta dppaxra Dy, bras é&f TH Bovropév@ Tis drraéspas

4 dtroAaven.

mos by TavTny THY xopmryéay emrideuTrOpMEVvOS 6 Tlepe-

Ks TH ovaia, cupBovretcavTos av’T@ Aapwvidov tod Oindev (ds

15 ToyctTroAAoye, deleto Toyc. A€ltT: darodevrbuevos Richards (H-L).

(Class. Rev. v 227), cf. Wilamowitz, Hermes xiv 320.

45°); OlnOev K-W, B.

17 EZHN: é&7 (K-W, H-L, K3, B).

18 eTTI- 19 <Adpwros > Manion “Oabev Wyse OlfGev H-L, K® (Meisterhans,

19 *Plut. Per. g (Ar. Frag. 3657, 403%), infra exscriptum.

story of Cimon’s generosity appears in an exaggerated form in Theopompus, Phi/ip- pica x (FHG ii 293, ap. Athen. 533 A), Kiev 6 ’A@nvaios év rots dypots kal rots kehrrous ovdéva Tod kaprod kablora pvdaka, dws ol Bovrdpevoe THv TodtTav elacévTes druplfwrrar Kat DapBdvwow el twos 6é- owro Tw év Tots _xeplois, éwerra Th olklay mapetye Kowhy dace’ Kal detrvov dei evredes mapackevaterOat moddois dv- Opwros, Kal rods dmépous mpogidyTas Tw "AGnvaluy elaidvtas Semvetv. This exag- gerated account is recorded by Plutarch to be corrected on the authority of the present passage. Aristotle’s pupil, Theo- phrastus, was no less careful in adhering to the truth, Cic. de Off ii 64, ‘Theo- phrastus scribit Cimonem Athenis etiam in suos curiales Laciadas hospitalem fuisse: ita enim instituisse et vilicis im- peravisse, ut omnia praeberentur, qui- cumque Laciades in villam suam dever- tisset.” The excerpts ascribed to Hera- cleides tell the same story of Ephialtes: "Ed. rods iSlous dypovs émwpitew mapetye Tots Bovdopévors, éf wy woddovs edelavife. The text is apparently the authority fol- lowed by the Schol. on Aristides, i iti (BY 1. 30 Dind., rods yap pparyuovs dravegyvu Tots Bovhouévors érwplfecbat Tov adrod Kal Thy olkiay dpiorotow alpetoOa (2), and 2d. p- 446 1. 18. Cf. Nepos, Cimon 4 § 1.

The various forms which the story of the generosity of Cimon assumed have been examined in Mnemosyne, ix 58.

Aaxvasev] The dnudrac of Cimon, Plut. Cim. 4. The deme itself was also called Aakiddac.

+d pérpia] ‘moderate provision,’ Xen. Lac. 1 3, ciros werpusraros, Mem. ii 6, 22, Td jt. KexTHOOaL, Cyr. V2, 17, meTpLoTyS téav olrwv. Supra 16 § 3.

8res ey] This implies that Cimon caused his fences to be pulled down zz order to allow his fellow demesmen to enter his orchards. This constr. is sup-

ported by 8rws drwpl fwvratin Theopompus and drws érwplfwow in Plut. Per. 9. darws ééjv would be quite out of place here (Goodwin, Moods and Tenses, § 333°).

§ 4. éartAevrdpevos] émidelrecOae in pass. c. gen., ‘to fall short of,’ is found in [Plat.] Zpzwomis 978 a. émedelrecy is far more frequently used in act. in the sense of ‘to fail.’ In Ar. we have Eth. iv 3, 1121 a@ 34, 17, Taxd émirelWe avrods Ta bmdpxovra, and there are several exx. of its intransitive use. daoAemduevos does not appear to be supported by the usage of Aristotle, as shewn in the /udex Aris- totelicus. More probable than either is brodevréuevos. Cf. Pol. iv (vii) 16, 1334 6 39, det obre Alay WronelrecOat Tats HAiklass Ta Téxva Tov Tarépwy otre Nav mdpeyyus elvat, and i §,. 1254 & 38, el rocovrov yévowTo dudpopor 70 cua bocov ai trav Oey elxdves, tovs vrodecToucvous (in- Seviores) wavres gaiev dv délovs elvas Tovrots SovAevew.

Aapwv(Sov] Damonides is mentioned in Plut. Per. 9, rpémera: mpds rip Toy Onuoclwy Savoury oupBovretoarros adr@ Aapwridov toi Otndery ("Oadev Sintenis, collato Steph. Byz. 5. 0 “Oa: Anuwvidov 700” Oader vulg. )¢ as “AptororéAns: iorépnke. Damon, 76. 4, 6 6¢ Adwwr...rq Tepucde? owhy xabdwep dOAnTy TeY ToditiKGY adelrrns Kal dcddoKados...dAN ws meyadd- gpwv Kat diroripavvoes éEworpakloOy, 7d. 14, Mic. 6, and Avist. 1. Plat. Ale i 118 c, Lach. 180 D, Rep. 400 B, 424 C. Duncker, G. d. A., ix c. 8; Busolt, ii 4433; Holm, ii 345, 17-

Aduwv and Aapwvrldns appear to be two forms of name belonging to one person (cf. Duncker, Gesch. des Alt.ix p.12,n. 1). As other exx. of double names we have Kneaviplins and Kvdavdpos, PpaccxAelins and @pactkAfs, EvBovdidns and EtBovnos, Tevrauldns and Tevramos, Ziyueyldns and Liusixos, Maravdplins and Matavédpos, Gcoriddns and Odors (Hemsterhuys on

110 AOHNAIQN COL. 11, 1, 26—36,

20 €Odker TOV TOANDY ELonynTHs evar TO Ilepuxrei, 51d Kal woTpdxt-

25

cay avtoy tarepov), émel Tots iSious HrTaTo, Suddvat Tots ToANots Ta avTOY, KaTecKevace pcOopopay Tois Sixactais: dd’ av aitidv- tal Tues yelpous yeverOar, KAnpovpevay émiEed@s del maGANov Tov TUXOVTMY 7) TOV eTLeKaV avOporav. Hp~aTo bé peta TadTa Kal To Sexdfew, mpwtov KxatabeiEaytos “Avirou peta thy év Ito

20 TTOAAWN (K-W, K3, B): TOAEMWN (K}), mohurixdy Wyse (H-L). 22 dixa- ornplos Blass, Richards (H-L), propter x€ipa) in versu proximo positum. ad’ ob

Richards (H-L). 23 yeEIpw (K, H-L): xelpous Newman, Hude, K-w; 74 mpd-yyara Ta KaTd Thy modtrelav, vel ry wédw, excidisse putant J B Mayor et Rutherford; 7a

kara Ta Sixaoryjpia desiderat Bury.

25 ’Avirov: AYTOY corr. K.

25 * Harp. dexdtwr:...’Ap. 8 év "AO. mod. “Avurév dno xaradeltar 7d Sexdfew ra

Stxacrypia. Bekk. Ax. deter, Tod rovovrov mparos “Avuros.

P- 21, 31 "Avuros: ovros mp&ros Sikacripiov <dexdfew> Kxaré- Schol. Aeschin. i 87 éd€éxagev oby diépOerpev dpyuply rods duxaords’ ypkaro dé Bekk. Ax. p. 236, 6

(=Etym. M. p. 254, 31) mp@ros &”

éd6xer Sexdoat Médys (leg. “Avuros) Tas evOdvas didods ris ev IlvAw orparyylas qv

Kakes éorpariyncev.

Cf. Rose, 3717, 409%.

Lucian, Zion, p. 157), Kadderléns and Kdaderros, "Ayvwvldns and Agnon, BEn- xeorldns and ’Héjxeoros, Evdpovléys and Evdpévios, Mevyaxdeléns and Meyaxnijs, Mvnoapxldns and Mvjcapyxos, Rav Ourmlins and EdvOrmos (O. Crusius in VM. Fahzb., 1891, pp- 385—394, ‘ Die Anwendung von Vollnamen und Kurznamen bei derselben Person’). Plutarch, Per. 4 iniz., tells us that certain persons said that the first syllable of Aduwy was pronounced short.

Mr Kenyon suggests that Plutarch con- fused two persons, the musician Damon, son of Damonides of”Oa, and the politician Damonides of Oty, and transferred to the former some of the attributes of the latter. The demonymic of the former would be “Oadev ; of the latter, Olj@ev. This has also been suggested by Gomperz, Deztsche Rundschau, May 1891, p. 232, and is pro- bably the best solution of the discre- pancy.

elonyqm|s] apparently not found in Ar. Thuc. viii 48, 7ods Kadovds Kayabods — mopicTas ovras Kal elomyynTas TwY KaKG 7 dnuw. Lol.ii 8, 1268 4 30, elonyetoOar (advise, propose) véuwv Avow, and vi (iv) 1, 1289a@ 1, roadryy elonyetoOu rdiiv, and several times in [Ar.] Ahet. ad Alex. Thuc. iv 76, éonyouuévou (rwds), ‘on his proposal.’

Si8dvar tots moAAots tA atrav] ‘to offer the people what was their own’ —an easy piece of liberality. In epi- grammatic point this phrase is somewhat of an exception to the ordinary style of the treatise and reminds one of Aristotle’s manner; but the epigram is ascribed to Damon and the writer does not necessarily

claim it as his own. ‘The dry way in which the sarcastic counsel of Damonides of Oea, the Ahithophel of his time, is repeated is not unlike Aristotle’ (W. L. Newman, Class. Rev. v 159 4).

xelpous yevéoOar] The writer is possibly referring to Plato’s Gorgias 518 E, ravrt yap &ywye dxovw, Iepixkéa rerounnevar "AOnvatous dpyovs kai Setdovs Kal AdAous Kal pirapyvpous, els utcPopoplay mpwrov Kara- orjoavrTa. Aristotle often refers to Plato in the Politics as rwes, e.g. in iv (vii) 7, 5, 1327 4 38 (W. L. Newman in Cvass. Rev. v 160 8).

§ 5. Sexdfewv] Lys. 29 § 12, dedexac- pévot, Isocr. 8 § 50, Gavdrou ris gnulas emuxemevys, édy Tis GA@ dexdgwv, Aeschin. 1 § 87, waprupeiy Tov wey ws édéxage Tov be ws édexdgero, Cf. note on Dem. 46 § 26, édy tis...cudexdgy thy pralay in Select Private Orations, ii 139, ed. 1886. Plut. Pericl. 9 § 3, cvvdexdoas 7d TAGs.

*Avirov] In 409 B.c. Pylos, which had remained an Athenian post since 425, was retaken by the Lacedaemonians. The Athenians had sent to its relief 30 triremes under Anytus, who however came back without even reaching the place. On his return he was put on his trial for having betrayed the trust confided to him. Diodorus xiii 64. Plut. Cordolanus 14, *AOjunar be Néyeras pros dpytpiov Sova Sixacrats “Avuros 6 ’AvOeulwvos mpodocias mepl Ivdov xpwéduevos (Grote c. 63, v 465). He is mentioned in c. 34 § 3 as one of the leaders of the moderate section of the oligarchical party. He was afterwards notorious as one of the prosecutors of Socrates (Azyti veus).

CH. 27, 1]. 20—CH. 28, 1.15. TIOAITEIA

oTpaTnyiay.

28.

Ill

f \ \ Kplvomevos yap dire Tivwy dia 76 adroBareiv I1vXop, *% Sexdoas TO Sikact prov amrépuyev.

&ws pév odv Tlepixdts mpoevotyxer Tod Sywou Bertio Ta

> Kata THY ToNTElaY HY, TeNeUTHTAaVTOS Se TlepiKdéous TodAD yYeipa. Lal \ a wv. a Tp@Tov yap ToTe mpooTaTnyv EraBev o Shyos ovK evdoxipodvtTa mapa Tots émueikéow év dé Trois mpoTepov yxpovors det Sverédouy of

2 érvetxets Snuaywryodrtes.

J x na \ * + ~ | 4 e& dpyns méev yap Kal patos éyéveto

mpoatarns tov Syuov Ldrwv, Sevtepos Sé leciotpatos, trav > nm \ 4 , \ n , ,

evyevOv Kal yvwpiwwv: Katadvbeions dé THs TUpavvidos KrecoOEvns, Tov yévous av Tav "AAKpEewvidav, Kal TOUT pev Ovdels HY avTE-

ua © 2¢/ € \ \? A oracwwrns was éEérecov of rept Tov “Ioaydpav.

peta 8 TavTa ToD

pev Siouv tpoeornxes RavOimmos, trav 8¢ yvwpiwov Mirriddns: érevta BewioroxAHs Kal “Apioteidns: peta S& Tovtous “Eqiadrns hey Tod Srjpov, Kivwy & 6 Midriddou trav evrropwv: eita epuxdijs E) a ba " # X ll © Ff \ x Ze pev Tod SHpov, Bovevdiins S¢ Tav érépwv, endeotyns dv Kipovos. 3 Ilepexrgous 8€ terevtHcavTos Tov péev emupavadv TpoeaTyHKes Nixias, 6 év Lumera TedeuTHcas, Too dé Sipou Kréwv 6 Krear-

XXVIII 6—7 rév ebyevav Kal youwpluwy secl. K-W; Tay eyevdy <dy> KTr

Richards (H-L, B).

TESTIMONIA. XXVIII 15—18 *Schol. in Luciani Timonem 30 (i Pp. 100 ed. Bipontinae, p. 47 Jacobitz): 6 6¢ Krdwy dnuaywyds jv "APnvalwy mpooras alray éxTa

XXVIII. Zhe successors of Pericles.

§ 1. ILepudrs mpoctoriet rod Sijpou] From about B.C. 450 (c. 28 § 1) till his death in the summer of 429. The writer’s praise of the policy of Pericles is so briefly expressed, that it hardly arrests our atten- tion. The text implies that the excellence of that policy was not absolute, but re- lative :—BeAriw, as contrasted with that of his successors, which was xelpw. The merits of Pericles are here recognised with far less generosity than in the pages of Thucydides. In the text, Pericles is the last leader of the popular party who, owing to his high birth, was acceptable even to his opponents: the decadence begins with his successor, Cleon, who had no such advantages.

mpdrov—ovK evSoxtpotvra] Fol. 1274 a 13—I15, 6 Sfpos.. -Onuaywryoos @\aBe pavrous avrimodirevopévw Tay émerkwv.

ot émuetkets Snpaywyotvres] Schol. Arist. Pax 681, _mporepov SnpaywyobrvTwv TOY Tapu Raum pay mohray.

§ 2. «mpoordrys Tov Srjpov] a purely unofficial title, applied to the leader of the popular party. Cf. 2§ 2, and see Whibley’ s Political Parties, p. 51.

Tov evyevav kal yvwplnwv] We must

either insert wy after evyevay, or under- stand the words to refer to Solon and Peisistratus, or remove them from the text. In any case Peisistratus, who is described as Syyorixdraros in 13 § 4 and 148 1, is to be regarded as a Tpoordrns rod Syjov and not as a mpoordrys Tov edyevay Kal yrwpluwr. Below, TeV yvw- pluwy is contrasted with rod Sjuov.

dvriotacuitys| Hdt. i 92, iv 164, v 69. Not found in Ar.

euuorroK Aris kal ’ApuorrelSys] joint

leaders of the popular party, c. 23 § 3.

@ovkv8(5ys]son of Melesias, of Alopeke, mentioned below (§ 5) with Nicias and Theramenes. He was ostracised in 444 B.C., and it has been considered worthy of note that the writer says nothing of this fact (Rhein. Mus. xlvi 455), but to mention it here would only impede the natural course of the narrative.

tay érépwv] ‘the opposite party,’ used here, and below, to avoid the too frequent repetition of rv ywpluwy, Tav ebmopwr, or Tay émupavav.

§ 3. Nuxlas—reAevtyoas] Thuc. vii 86 § 1

KXéov] Gilbert, Bettrige, pp.

127— 146.

wo

_

°

20

AOHNAIQN COL. 11, 1. 36—39.

112

vérov, ds Soxei udrtota SiapOeipas tov Shwov Tais opuais, Kal mpOtos él Tod Bryuatos avéxpaye kal édovdopycato Kat Trepitw- odpevos ednunyopnoe, TOV GdNwv ev KoowM AEYOvT@Y. ElTA peTA TovTous TaV pev Erépwv Onpapévyns 6” Ayvwvos, Tod 5é Sipou Kreo- fav Oo dupotroios, bs Kal THv SiwBediav émopice TpdTOs’ Kal

16 OpMaic, éxdorore xaptsopuevos vel aliquid eiusmodi desiderat J B Mayor. Scri- bendum fortasse d:avouais, coll. Plut. Arist. 24 (de demagogis post Periclem) rév Sfjuov els Stavouas mpoayaryivres, Per. g uocbav Stavouds, Aeschin. /. L. 76 Kreopay StepOapkas vouy xpnudrwv Tov Siwov, Eth. 11306 31 ev tals diavouats rinfs h xpnudrav, 1131 6 30 ard xpnudrwv Koway day ylyvnrat % Siavopy, 1131 @ 25. 20 AlwBOAIAN.

érn, bs rpGros Snunyopav dvéxpayev émt rod Byyaros kai édocdopyoaro... éréorn 5€ kal TH mpos Aaxedatmovious elpiyvy, ws Piddxopos Kal "Apioroddyys (’Apioro- ré\ns Hemsterhuis quem sequitur Rose, Frag. 368%, 406), rpocdels dpxovra Ev@uvoy- *Apiororédns O€ kal weptfwodmevor abrov Aéya Snunyophoat, es Thy OpaciryTa av’rod dwrocxwmrrwy. Schol. Aeschin. i 25 “év ry d-yopa TH Darapwiwy dvdnerrar 6 Lorwv évrds thy xelp’ exwv”: dvereOn 7) Dbdrwvos elxdw ob éml re év kboum héyew, ws dynow Aloxlyns, Gdn red) otrw ra édeyela driyyyere. Anuoodévyns pévror (Or. 19 § 251) veworl pynot mpd wevTjKovTa érav dvarebeiobar Tavrny Thy elxdva. éyerat de

KAdéwr 6 dnuaywyds rapaBas 7d éf ous ox7jua weptCwodpevos Snunyopjoar. 16 Heraclidis epitoma, 611, 6, KAéwy mapaBadwv d:épOerpe 7d rroNlrevya. 20—23 Locum de pecunia theorica ad iudicum mercedem male transtulerunt

interpretes antiqui.

*Schol. Arist. Vesp. 684 rods rpets 6Bodovs: Tov Pbpov réyeL,

tais éppais] hardly ‘his wild under- takings’ (Kenyon), or even ‘his incitations’ (Poste), though the latter rendering may be preferred. Better ses emportements (Reinach), ‘his impulsive ways.’ Plut. i 1012, mpgérepos kal Tais dpuais dice badaxwrepos, Then. 2, &v Tals mpdrass Tis vedrnros dpyais. The pl. is found in Ar. Z£th. i 13, 11026 21, éml rdvavrla ai dppal trav dxparav, Magn. Mor. i 35, 1197 4 39, dperal picer olov dpyal tives év éxdoTy. In contrast to Cleon, we read of Pericles (Plut. Per. 20) ob cuve- Xepe Tals dpuats Trav wokirGv. But the use of the word in the text is curious, and it is perhaps better to propose diavopats which would obviously refer to Cleon’s raising the po Obs dxagriKds to three obols,

érl tov Brjparos dvéxpaye] Neither Bia nor dvaxpdgfw is found in the Zadex

r. The Pnyx was first identified by Chandler in 1765 (Zravels in Greece, ii

"84, ed. 1825) as ‘a large semicircular area

or terrace, supported by stones of vast size cut into squares, nearly opposite the rock of the Areopagus,’ from the centre of which it is distant about a quarter of a mile to the S.W. The excava- tions directed by Lord Aberdeen in 1822 disclosed a projecting cubic block, hewn out of the rock, and approached on each side by steps. This was identified as the Bjua of the Athenian orators. It

has, however, been maintained by Ulrichs (1842), Welcker (1852), E. Curtius (1862, 1868), that this block is an altar, and the semicircular area a réuevos of Zevs thioros. The site of the B#ua is placed by Curtius on the slopes of the ‘Museum’ hill, due S.ofthe Areopagus. See his Att. Studien, i 23—, and Stadtgeschichte, pp. 30 and 61. See also Prof. Crow and Mr Clarke in Papers of Amer. School, iv 205—277.

avéxpaye] Arist. Vesp. 596, KAdwy 6 kexpakidduas, Hg. 137, KuxdoBdpov dwviy éxwr.

mept{wodpevos] ‘with his cloak girt up short about him’ (Kenyon), ‘with his robes fastened or tucked up, as if he were en- gaged in some manual labour’ (Poste, n). Cf. Plut. Nic. 9, wepromdoas 7d iudriov (with Holden’s n), and contrast AZor. ii 800 (of Pericles), ray xelpa cuvéxew évrds THs TreptBonijs.

Onpapevys] 27. § 5.

KxXeopav 6 Avporroids] He is so styled by Andoc. de Myst. § 146; Aesch. &. LZ. § 76; and the Scholiast on Aristoph. Thesm. 805, Ran. 681 (as restored by Taylor). Cf. Suidas, s.v. pidorimdrepae Knreogwrros. Aelian, Var. Hist. xii 43, says that his father’s name was unknown (Mayor). Cf. Lysias 13 §§ 8, 9, 12; 30 §§ 11—13; and zzf. 34 § 1. For further details see Holden’s Onomasticon to Aristophanes.

tryy SwPerAlav}] Pol. ii 7, 1267 4 1,

CH. 28, 1. 16—22. TIOAITEIA

113

t Ey a , xXpovov pév twa dvediSoT0, wera S¢ Tadra KaTédkuce Kaddxpdrns I \ a is / > A] / \ Lal a = nw

alavievs TPOTOS UToayouevos ervOnoev pos Toiv Svoiv dBoroty 22

21 AleAiAoy (B): duedi50ro Wyse, Richards, K-w, H-L (K%). kaTeAyce edd.: xarnbénoe Whibley. 22 mpG@rov van Leeuwen. —

ad’ Gy ébldoro rd TpidBorov. rofro dé dAdore dAws édldoTo, Toy Syuaywydv rh THO KohaxevdvTwr, Gs now "Ap. év modrelais (adde Schol. Vesg. 300, iv pay yap dararov 7d Tob puoGot> more yap diwBddrov jv, éylvero b€ ért Kréwvos TpudBodor, Vesp. 88 édlSoro xpbvov pv ria dvo dBorol, torepov dé Kdéwv orparnyioas TpudBorov érolnoev dxudgovros Too mohguov Tod mpds Aakedaryovlous). Cf. Rose, 4217, 461%. Cete- rum Kenyon noster arbitratur schol. ad Arist. Ves. 684 referre partim ad c. 62 § 1 (ra dixacrijpia Tpeis 6BoAovs), partim fortasse ad locum tractatus nostri e fine deperdi- tum ubi de iudiciis agitur.

21 *Zenob. vi 29 (Athous iii 151 apud K-w laudatus) brép 7a KadXtxpdrous infra exscriptus=* Photius et Suidas, s.v.; fere eadem habet Pseudo-Plut. Proverbia, 111. Cf. Boeckh II xv p. 299 Frankel; Meineke, Com. Gr. 1v p. yoo. Macarius iv 68... éxi rv Kab’ direpBorny Te rovovvrwy, y emi Trav Tods mpwrevovras &v Tisw Jepal-

povrwr.

q movnpla rév dvOpirwv ardnorov, kal 7d mpwrov pev ixkavoyv StwBodla pbvor, brav 8 4dn Tot’ 7% wdrpiov, del Séovrac tod melovos, ws els daretpov €MOwow. This must refer to the ¢heoricon, the fund for paying the price of admission to the theatre at the rate of 2 obols for each of the ordinary seats (Dem. de’ Cor. p. 234, 24, év Toiv Svoty d8odoiv). The payment of the ¢keoricon out of the treasury of the State is attributed to Pericles in Plutarch, Pericl. 9, bm’ éxelvov pact Tov Sjuov érl KAnpovxlas Kal Oewpixa Kal MecOav Savoudas mpoaxO7jva, and Ulpian on Dem. O/. i zzit. ra xpjuara Tatra Ta Snpboia Oewpixa érolnoe é& apxijs 6 Tleptxdfjs,...Bovrdpevos dpéoa TH Sjuw Kal trois révyow. Cf. Gilbert, i 324.

It cannot refer to the picOds duxacrixes, for it was long before the time of Cleophon that Cleon (about 428 B.C.) raised the dicast’s fee to three obols: Schol. on Ar. Plut. 330; Vesp. 80, 300; Eg. 51, 255 (425 B.c.); Vesp. 607, 682, 688, 797, 1116 (423 B.c.); Aves 1540 (415 B.C.). Boeckh, Il xv p. 326 Lamb. Probably it was originally one obol and never two. Again, it cannot be the yucOés éxxAynovacrixds as this was introduced by Agyrrhius at the rate of one obol, increased by Heracleides to two obols, and again by Agyrrhius to three (c. 41 end).

Sue8(Soro] ‘(the fee) continued to be paid.’ karéAvore] either (1) ‘over- threw him,’ ‘ousted him’ (K.), ‘outbid him’ (Reinach); or (2) ‘abolished it’ (Kaibel and Kiessling, Poland and Haus- soullier). (2) is probably right; but we should have expected some notice of the subsequent restoration of the theoricon. This omission may, however, be only

S. A.

accidental. Philochorus, ap. Harp. ».v.° Gewpixdv, says that it was restored by Agyrrhius; but this is doubtful. - Agyr- rhius was certainly concerned with the MigOds ExkAnovacTiKds (c. 42 end). Kaddtkpairys] In Zenobius vi 29, and elsewhere (Boeckh, 11 xv p. 327 Lamb), we read of a proverbial phrase dep ra KadXctxpdrous applied to excessive wealth by the inhabitants of Carystus in Euboea. This explanation of the proverb is quoted from Clearchus. Then follows an inac- curate reminiscence of the present passage in the following form: ’ApicroréAys dé gnow &v rH AOnvalwy modirelg Kaddcxpa- THY TWA TpTov TOY dixkacTav Tors puioHods els UrepBodiy avbéfjica, dOev Kal THv Tap- outlay elpjoGa. Possibly the last clause, 6Gev—elpfiaOa, has got displaced and should be placed at the end of the pre- vious sentence, immediately after the mention of the proverb. The first part of the explanation will then run as fol- lows: pyol KAéapyos drt Kadduxpdrns tes éyé&vero év Kaptorw mdovewraros* el ore oty €Bavpatéy twa of Kaptorcos éri rov- Ty, UrepBodiKws edevyov, Umrép Ta Kadde- xpdrous* S0ev xal rhv mapouutav elpijcPa. In any case it is not absolutely necessary to suppose that the proverb was ever quoted in this treatise. Zenobius mis- understood the passage as referring to the pay of the dicasts, which had been in- creased to 3 obols about 428 B.c., where- as Cleophon, and a@ fortiori Callicrates, belongs to a much later date. trooxspevos—dddov oBodcv] If the grant of the fee of two obols a head out of the theoric fund was sufficient to en- able all the poorer citizens to attend the theatre, it is not easy to see what object

8

25

114 AOHNAIQN COL. 11, 1. 39—47.

Grov 6Bordv. rovTwv pev ody audotépwv Oavatoy KaTéyrwcay torepov' elwhev yap, kav éeEarratnOn To TrHO0s, Dotepov puceiv Tous TL TpoayayovTas Tolely avTOVS TOV pi) KAAGS éxdvTwY. amd 5€ Kreopdvros 75n Siedéyovto cuveyds tiv Snuaywyiay of pardicta Bovropevor OpaciverOar nal yapiferOar tots moddois mpos TO tapautixa Brérovtes. Soxovat Sé BérXTicTOL yeyovévar tov "AOnvnot modTevoapévwy peta Tors apyaiovs Nixias Kai ovevdibdns Kai Onpayévns: Kai mept wev Nexiov cal @ovxvdidov mavtes axeddv dporoyodow dvdpas yeyovévas ov pdvov Kadovs Kayabovs GANA Kal ToNTLKOS Kal TH TOAEL Tag TAaTpLKaS Ypa-

24 cdlwOe H-L. kay: édy H-L.

.semel tantum apparet anno 302 A.C. (Meisterhans, p. 114”).

25 po. aParoNTac. Gennadios (H-L, B qui ro etiam in papyro invenit): ra K, K-w. Bé\ricro: praestat fortasse BéATio Ta, coll. 28, 4—et 32, Io.

28 7d Kontos, Ae ex Aeoi corr. 29 ABHNHICI, in titulis

KaAWC 32 TATpIKWwc.

28—30 * Plut. Mic. 2 (infra exscriptum).

there was in increasing it. But the ¢heo- vicon was not confined to the Dionysia, it was also paid at the Panathenaea and at all the great festivals (Boeckh, 11 xiii p. 305 Lamb). Harpocr. s. v. Oewpixa xp7- wara’,..é\doTe wévrar EAdNws wpladn Td OcObpmevov els Te Tas Oéas Kal els Tas Ouoias Kal éoprds, ws tore Spdov éx Tod a! Pirsr- mixGv AnnooOévous (2.e. Ol. i).

@dvarov] We know nothing of the death of Callicrates. That of Cleophon is well attested. In 404 B.c., not long before the establishment of the Thirty, he was condemned and put to death on the’plea of having neglected his military duty; Lys. 13 § 12, mpddacw pév dre odk poe els ta dTAQ dvaTravobpuevos, 7d 8 adnOes bri dvretrev brep bwwv bh KaGarpeiy 7a relyn. The Council, whose temper and proceedings he had denounced, il- legally constituted itself part of the tri- bunal that tried him (2d. 30 §§ 10—14). According to Xenophon, He//. i 7 § 35, Callixenus and others, who had prompted the people to put to death the generals who had neglected their duty at Argi- nusae, made their escape before they could be put on their trial, ordoews Twos yevouerys, ev 7 KXcodwv dmé@avev (Grote, c. 65, V 552).

proety] Ar. Rhet. ii 4. Similarly in Xen. Hell. i 7 § 35 Callixenus, the pro- poser of the motion against the generals who fought at Arginusae, who is there included among those who rov dfuov é&nrarnoay, returned on the restoration of the democracy, and wicov mevos bd mdy- Taw hug dréBavev.

Mr W. L. Newman suspects a tacit reference to the death of Socrates, cf. Diod. xiv 37, and Diog. Laert. ii 43.

§ 4. dare & Kycohuvros xrd.] Isocr. Panath, 132 sq. i

BieSéxovro THY Sypaywylav] Schol. Arist. Pax 681, ofros ("LrépBodos) werd Thy Tob Ky\éwvos duvacreiav ScedéEaro Thy bnuaywylav (Wyse).

mwapavt(ka] Hitherto found only in spurious writings of Ar., esp. in the De Plantis and in the Rhet. ad Alexandrum (Eucken, Sprachgebrauch des Ar., Prae- positionen, p. 62, quoted in Class. Rev. v 160 a). It occurs (without the article) in Thue. viii 48, 3 and iv 76, 5.

§ 5. Soxoto.—B&tioro. yeyovévar TOYV...ToALTevoapévov] This is some- what carelessly paraphrased in Plut. Nic. 2, &eorw obv rept Nixlou mpérov elrety 5 yéypapev ’ApiaroréAns, dre rpeis éyévovro BéArioTor Tay TodLTO cal mwarpixny Exovres etvorav kat pirlav mpds rov djuov, Nexlas 6 Nixy- pdrov kat Oovxvdldns 6 MeAnalov xal O7- papévns 6 “Ayvwvos. The text describes the three as reputed to be the best soli- tictans: Plutarch describes them as actu- ally being the best cétizens. The text describes Nicias and Thucydides as ruling the State in a paternal spirit; Plutarch ascribes to them a hereditary affection for it. BéArtorot here has a political sense ; cf. ol émceckets in § 1, and Kadods xdryabods in § 5; and see Holm, Gr. Gesch. ii 583.

TatpiKas] ‘paternally’; not ‘they acted in all their public life in a manner worthy of their ancestry’ (Kenyon), but

4

wrt

CH. 28, 1], 23—CH. 29, 1.4. TIOAITEIA 115

pévous, tept 5 Onpapévors Sia TO cupBihvar Kat? avtov tapa-

, 3. \ 7 > / Eel t -: >! yoders <elvar> Tas TrodTeias apdicBynTyols THs Kpioeds eae. Soxed pév<tor> toils py Tapépyws arropatvopévors ovyY WoTrEp 35

: , , \ iy - 2 BS , avtov d:aBadXovet Tacas Tas ToNLTElas KaTaNvEW, GANA Tacas mpoaryew Ews pndév Tapavopotev, os Suvdpevos TrodrTeverOar Kata macas, Omep éotiy dyabod Toditov epyov, Tapavoyovaas dé ov ovyXwpav adr’ amexOavopevos.

29. éws pev odv iadppoTa TA TpayyaTa KaTa TOY TOAEMOY nv, Siep[VAaTTor] THv Snpoxpatiav. éei dé peta THY ev DiKedia yevouerny cuphopay icyuporepa Ta THY Aaxedatpovioy éyévero Sua THY mpds Bacitiéa cuppayiay, jvaycacOncay x[wycalyres

34 <elyar>ras moditelas K-W: Tas wodirelas <elvat> Richards (H-L). TOICMH: pévroe Tois wh K (H-L); mévroe wh K-W; 5é Tots ua) B.

35 m(EN)- 38 fortasse aut

&pyov secludendum aut épyov dyaGod roNrov scribendum putat B.

XXIX 1 mpd-ypara secl. H-L. Schol. Ar. Zys. 421), H-L (K3, B). K-W, H-L,

K-w et B, qui in papyro recte legunt Ke...

TESTIMONIA.

3 A(ia)hopaNn: cuudopay Richards, K-w (e ICXYpOTATA (K): loxupérepa J B Mayor, Blass, 4 pe[racricares K;3 pe[raBadd]vres Hultsch (H-L); xt[vyoca]vres

NTEC (=Kewwyoartes).

XXIX 3 v. notam proximam,

‘they ruled the state as a father rules his household’ (Poste). o/. viii (v) 11, 1315 @ 21, (de?) ras KorAdoes marpikws palverOat Trowovpevoy.

Similarly Aristides ii 161 Dind. (quoted by Mr Wyse, Class. Rev. v 275 a) describes Pericles as, in certain re- spects, év rarpos dy rdée To Sjuy.

Cf. Pol. iii 14, 1285 @ 19 (BactAciat) Kai kara, vowov Kal mwarpixal. i 2, 1253 610 and 12, 1259 @ 38, (olkovoula) marpiKy.

Soxet pévror—drexOavopevos] This eulogy of Theramenes is all the more welcome as the traditional opinion re- specting him is that he was not much better than an Opportunist. His nick- name, 6 xé8opvos, is notorious. He is one of those who have been suggested as the politician referred to in Pod. vi (iv) 11, 1296 @ 38, els yap dvhp owemele6n pbvos Tov mpbrepov éd’ jyeuovia ~yevoudvay Tav- thy drodoivar tiv tdéw (sc. Tiv peony tohrelav), See Newman’s Poldtics, i p- 470. But it seems more probable that i is meant (cf. Susemihl? note 1303). re mapipyws}] Pol. (vii) 11, 1330 4 11, émiuéderdy Twos exew py Tapépyws. daro- avonévors] Pol. i ad fin. mprov ém- cxepipeba mepl Trav dmopyvayevwr rept Ths aplorys modcrelas. vi (iv) 1, 1288 6 35, of mreloro Tov dropawopnévew Tepl moNrelas. (vii) 14, 1333 412, dmepyvavTo

Thy abray Obtav. Rhet. ii 21, 1395 a 7, pgdlws dropalyovrat.

SiaBddAover] Critias is one of those referred to, Xen. Hel/. ii 3, 30. Cf. Lys. 12 § 78 (Newman),

Trapavopovcais of ovyxwpav] See Meineke’s notes in Frag. Com. Gr. ii 867 and 1165, where he quotes Hesych. ray tpi bv: Onpapyévns éyydloaro rpeis Timwplas kara Tov Tapdvopov Te SpdvTwy. The text dwells on the kindly feeling of Theramenes towards the whole city: we may contrast with this Lys. 13 § 10 (Newman).

XXIX—XXXIII. The Revolution of the Four Hundred.

XXIX § 1. todppora] Compare £7h. Q, 1, 1164 5 4, TyuH Te lodppomos otk ay yevaro, De Part. Anim. iv 12, 695 @ 12, looppémou bvros Too Bapous. Thuc. i 105, 6, wdxns yevouévns looppdrov.

pera. tiv év DuxeAla—o-vpdopav] Thuc. vill 24, 5, Mera THY Dicehuxny Evupopar (2d. vii 85—87). Dem. Left. 42, Isocr. 16

§ 15.

Buel After the Persian wars Ba- otreds, without the article, is the ordinary designation of the king of Persia (eg. Hat. vii 174, Thuc. viii 36). 6 Bactdeds is found in this sense in Hdt. i 132, 137 (L and S).

ocvppaxlav] in allusion to the succes- sive treaties with Tissaphernes on behalf

8—2

I

nm

fe}

116 AOHNAIQN coL.11,1.47—COL. 12,1. 7. Thy Snpoxpatiay Kkatacticas THY él TéV TeTpaKociwy ToNTEiaY, elmd[vro]s Tov pdv mpd Tod Wydlopatos Adyov MnAoBiov, THv Sé yvounv ypayravros II[vOodépou told *Enu]f[n]Aov, waduota dé cuptrecbévtwv tév Today bia TO vomitery Baotréa [parror éavtois cuumodeunoew eav S0 ddiywv ToLnow@yTaL THY TodLTeLay.| Rv b€ TO Whdicpa Tod IlvO0dHpou rovovde:

7 [TloAvg#AJov Poland coll. Diog. Laert. ix 8, 5 Iv@édwpos IloAufjaov, els Trav rerpaxoolwy (H-L, K*); [’Ea]fjAov K-w (B) coll. Athen. Mittheil. xiv 398: spatium septem octove litterarum capax, ut nomen utrumque scribi potuerit To[y TroAY etm |zHAoy. 8 “addov J B Mayor (K-w, K%, B) quod confirmat Thuc. viii 48, 1; Oarrov H-L; wéddew Marchant. [&opevo kK}, vel propter hiatum suspectum, etiam papyri scripturae evanidae minus congruere confitetur K.

10—14 Schol. Arist. Zys. 421: mpéBovdot dé mpds rots déxa (rotocde Schol., rots ofor Suid., correxit Schoell) ypéOqoav dddou k’, elonynoduevoer Ta SoKodvra BéATisTa (om. Puteanus) rf wodcrelg (77 wéAe Puteanus) pera tiv év rij DixeAlg ovupopdy (cf. v. 3).

tov Shuov édréoOau 2[Col.1,

of Persia. For the first of these, see Thuc. viii 18: for the second, 26. 37; for the third, 72, 58 (Grote c. 62, v pp. 330, 346, 373). See also Andoc. 2 § 11—17.

why él ray terpaxorlwy rodttelav] Thuc. viii 54—97, esp. 67.

apo] either ‘in favour of’ (Reinach), like bwrép; or ‘previous to’ (Kenyon). Poste vaguely renders: ‘the orator who prepared the public mind for the change.’ But, unless sufficient authority can be found for either use of mpd in such a context, it may be safer to accept srepl, proposed by Mr Wyse.

‘mAoBlov] almost certainly identical with the Melobius who was afterwards one of the Thirty and who joined in the attack on Lysias and his brother Pole- marchus, Lysias 12 § 12.

ILv@o08épov] Pythodorus is the name of the archon in whose year of office the Peloponnesian war began (Thuc. ii 2, 1). It is also the name of a orparyyés (a son of Isolochus) in B.c. 426/5 etc, Thue. iii 115, 1, 33 iv 2, 1, and 65, 3, who is de- scribed in Plat. Parm. 126—130 as enter- taining Parmenides and Zeno (dé. i 11g A): this Pythodorus had among his friends one Aristoteles rdv ray Tpidkovra yevouevov (Parm. 127 D): it was hence inferred by Bergk (Comment. de rel. Com. ant., p. 100) that he was identical with the archon of B.C. 404—3. The name of Pythodorus was also borne by a re- presentative of Athens in the treaty of B.C. 421 (Thuc. v 19 and 24). A IIv66- Swpos ‘ANateds was first raulas ris Oeod in B.C. 418/7 (CIA i157). The date of the

Pythodorus of Thuc. vi 105 (B.C. 414/3) makes it likely that he was identical with the Pythodorus who is mentioned in the text. This Pythodorus, the archon of B.C. 404/3, is identified as the prose- cutor of Protagoras, Iv6édwpos IloAuty- ov, els rv Terpaxoolwy (Diog. Laert. ix 8, 44). But the name of his father was not IloAvgmAos but ’Emifydos. In an in- scription ascribed to the early part of the fourth century Tv0édwpos ’Emifndov éxopt- yes (CIA ii 1250); and a pre-Euclidean inscr. at Eleusis bears the name of a {- amapxos who was son of ’Emlfndos. The confusion between ’El¢ndos and IloAv¢n- dos is paralleled by the corruption of the *Emigmdos of Hdt. vi 117 into the Tovgy- dos of Diog. Laert. i 2, 56 and elsewhere. Cf. Athen. Mittherl. xiv 398.

cupreacbévrwv—rodtrelav] In Thuc. viii 48, 1, Alcibiades assures the A- thenian officers who had crossed over to the mainland from Samos, Ticoagépyqv Mev mpwrov, éreara dé kal Baoihéa pldov moujoev, el ut Onuoxparoivro (ottrw “yap bv mioretcat paddov Bacidéa). Lb. 53 § 2, Peisander asks each of his opponents at Athens e twa édmlda exer cwrnpias...el ph tis meloer Baoiéa peTacrivar mapa ogas. On their replying in the negative he says plainly (§ 3) that they cannot hope for any deliverance el px) modurev- couev te cwohpovdcrepov cal és édlyous Madov Tas dpxas tovjooper, va moredy tiv Baotreds. Pol. viii (v) 4, 1304 6 12, (of the 400) tov Sfuov eénrarnoay pacKov- Tes Tov Bacihéa Xpjuara mapétew mpds Tov moAEpOP KTA.

. t cs 2 ¢ f et oon \ 3 ypabev, ty’ €& dravtwv aipevrar To aptoTov.

CH. 29, 1. 5—18. TIOAITEIA 117

META TOV TeovTapYovTaY dSéxa TpoBovrwY AdXous elKkoos ex TOV bmép teTTapaxovta &tn ‘yeyovdTwv, olTives, duocavtes 4 piv t ANN .s a t > a re UG cuyyparew & av ydvra Bédticta elvar TH TOdEL, TUyyparpovat y a , > lal A N i mw” kel 14 wept THs awrnpias: éeivar S& nal tdv dAdkwv TH Bovdouev Kyrertodav 8 ra pev adda Kabarep Wv0ddwpos elmer, rpocavatnricar 8é tovds aipeBévras eypaypev kal Tovs matpiovs vouous ods KrewoOévns ” ¢ , \ n ¢ a ’ ? \ eOnnev bre Kabiotn thy Snwoxpatiayv, Gras <av> adKovaarTes Kal

13 ovyypayoucr: ocupBovrevcove. Rutherford (H-L). 17 éypaye H-L. 18 OTTWC—-BOYAEYCWNTAI (K): Gmrws—Bovdedcovra: H-L; drws Av—Bovredowvrar

K-W, B.

Cf. v. 24, c. 30, 20, et Meisterhans, p. 212%.

§ 2 tdv—Séka tmpoBotAwv] Thuc. viii 1 § 3, (€66xet) dpxyjy Tia mpecBurépwr avipdv éhécOat, olrives wepl rv wapévTwv ws dv xatpds F mpoBouvdevoovat. Cf. Grote, c. 61, v 318—g9. This passage confirms Grote’s observation that this ‘Board was doubtless merged in the Oligarchy of Four Hundred.’ Hermann, Staatsalt. § 165, 10 and 11; Curtius, ii 6908 n. 162 (Germ.ed.). Hagnon, the adoptive father of Thera- menes, is described as one of the mpéfou- Ao in Lysias 12 § 65, and as joining Theramenes in favouring the establish- ment of the 4oo. It is implied in Ar. Rhet. iii 18, 2 that all of the mpéBovrdor lent their countenance to the change in the constitutional government of Athens (Grote c. 62, v 379 n). Cf. Isocr. Aveop. 58; Pol. 1299 b 30—38.

The ten mpéBovdo. of the present pas- sage are identical with the ten vyypadgets of Thuc. viii 67, Tov Shuov EvAdEEarTEs elrov ywuwunv Séxa dvdpas édéo0ae Evyypa- géas aitoxparopas, tovrous 5é ~vyypd- parvras ywounv éceveyxeiv és Tov Sfuov és Tuépay pyri Kad’ 6 re dpora mods olknoeTat. ‘

In Bekker’s Anecd. p. 301, 13, no number is given, but Harpocration, s.v. ovyypageis, describes that body as num- bering 30, and Suidas, s.v. mpéBovdo, speaks of 20 being elected in addition to the 10 mpéBovdo. to form a body of 30 ouvyypapets. Hence in the above passage of Thuc. it has been suggested by C. F. Hermann, Staatsa/t. 165, 11, to alter déka into rpidxovra. The historian’s account is correct so far as it goes, but is less minute than that in the text, which has been followed by Harpocration and Suidas.

Cf. Schol. on Aristoph. Zyszsty. 421, tpoBovra. dé mpds Trois 6éxa (rotode schol., trois ovot Suidas; correxit Schoell) pé- Onoav ardor k’, elorpynoduevor Ta SoKxodvra

Bé\ricra ry wodktrelg wera Thy & TH Zicedla cuupopdr,

The account in the text is in accordance with the statement of Androtion (proba- bly written before it) and of Philochorus (certainly written after it), as recorded by Harpocration s.v. cuyypageis: yoav 5é of wey mavres cuyypapels tpidxovra of rére aipedévres, xadd pnow “Avdporioy re Kal Dirbxopos, éxdrepos ev ry ’ArOldc- 6 &e Oovevdléns trav t éuvnudvevoe wbvwv Tov mpoBovrdwy. Cf. (with Wyse) Schol. Lysistr. 609, Tots x’ rots ék ris cwapytas, and Harpocr. s. vw. ’AméAniis eis rv avyypapéw bv Tddrww kwuwde? ev Lodt- orats (where Cobet inserts ¢’ after rap, following Thue. 2. c.).

§ 3. LropGyv] mentioned with The- ramenes as a ‘pupil’ of Euripides, in Arist. Ran. 967, odmol 5¢ (uabyral elow) Kretropav re xal Onpauévys 6 xoprpes. Identified by Holden (Oxomasticon Arist.) with Cleitophon, son of Aristonymus, who gives the title to one of Plato’s dialogues and is mentioned with Thrasymachus in Rep. 328 B (where Stallbaum does not identify them). He is named, with Cleon, as gaidos in Plut. Aor. 805, but this is probably a mistake for Cleophon.

7a piv ddAa Kaddsrep...clrev...8] This is the regular formula for introducing an amendment to a proposed decree. As examples before the archonship of Eu- cleides we have cia i (1. 28), 18, 38, 41, 52% 54s 55s 851 95) 119, 131, 135 (?), 138; 146, 163, 186 (Hartel, Studien vider At- tisches Staatsrecht, p. 221). Swoboda, Gr. Volksbeschliisse, p. 14, shews that amendments are not often found except in Athenian inscriptions. Plato refers to the customary formula in Gorg. 451 B, elrouu’ dv wowep ol ev TE Shuw cvyypa- Popevor, Gri 7a pev Ara Kaddrep 4 dprOun- TiKH AoporiKy exer, :

KreoGévns] cc. 21, 22.

20

25

118

AOHNAIQN

COL. 12, 1, 7—19.

tovTwyv Bovretcwvras TO dpiatov, ws ov SymoTiKyv adAa Tapa- Tryciav odcav tiv Krevabévous TodtTelav TH LodAwvos. ot 8 4 aipeOévres Tmpdrov pev eypayray émravarynes elvas Tods mpuTavess Grravra Ta Neyopeva Tepi THs cwTyplas emupndivew, &revta Tas TOY Tapavopov ypadas Kal Tas elaayyedias Kal TAs TpoTKAIoELs aveirov, drrws av of €Oédovres "AOnvaiwy cvpBovrevwcr trepl Trav mpokewevor: edv S€ Tus TOUTWY yap 7} Snusot } mpocKadhra:

23 TrPOKAHCEIC: corr. Wyse, Blass (K-w, H-L, K%).

corr. K.

25—26 HEICASHIHEIC:

ds ot—Zddwvos. Isocr., Areop. § 16, implies (like Cleitophon) that the consti- tution of Cleisthenes was identical with, or closely similar to, that of Solon. The text, while correcting the view of Cleito- phon, is also a tacit correction of that of Isocr. (Class. Rev. v 161 a). For ws c. ace. of the participle, cf. c. 7 § 4 ws— onpalvovear.

For the view that the constitution of Cleisthenes was not democratic, cf. Plut. Cim. 15, Tod Kiuwvos...reipwudvov dvw ras Slkas dvaxadetcOa Kal ri ért Krew- Oévous éyelpewy dpioroxparlay.

§ 4. mparov piv typapav—typidoa, We here find stated in full detail what is briefly summarised in Thuc. viii 67, é07- veyxay ol tvyypapiis dAdo per oddéy, atrd 5é rodro, éfetvar pev d¢jpsov elreiv (so Clas- sen, following Wilamowitz in Hermes, xii 336 n. 17: ’A@nvalwv dvecrety or dvarpé- mew, MSS; ’AOnvatos Suidas; ’A@yvalp dvSpi elretv Stahl ed. 1874: dvarel elrety ed. 1883, following Sauppe. The text is in favour of the restoration of ’A@yvalwy or some similar word, instead of accepting the conjecture of Wilamowitz. ’A@nvalwy rots é6éXovcw elmetvy would make good sense, but would involve too great a departure from the Mss) yvdynv jv av tes BovAnTat* dw 8€ rs Tov elrbvra } ypdynrat Tapavduwy 4 OAw Tw TpoTw Prdwy weyddras Snulas érébecav.

Tovs mpurdves—erupypltev] c. 43. The members of the tribe presiding for the time being were thus compelled to put every proposition to the vote, unde- terred by any risk of penalties falling on the proposer or themselves.

tds tay wapavopov ypadds] The ypadh mapavéuwv having become recog- nised as one of the safeguards of the democratic constitution, it was necessary to repeal it before any revolutionary changes could be introduced. Dem. Timocr. 24 § 154, akovw...KaradvOjy ac

Thy Snpoxparlay, wapavépuwy mp&rov ypa- gay Kxaradvdeoay kal tov dicacryplav dxtpwy yevouévuv. Aeschin. 3 § 121, ryvikaidra 6 Shwos KaTredvOn, ered Twes Tas ypadas Tuy mapavouwy dveidov (Att, Process, p» 428—437 Lipsius; Hager in Smith’s Dict. Ant. s. v.).

eloayyeAas] various forms of denunci- ation, applied to three kinds of legal causes: (1) kard xawav Kal dypdgwy dou- xnudrwv (Caecilius, in Lex. Rhet. Cant. p. 667, possibly referring to the times before Eucleides, see 8 § 4); (2) wrongs done to orphans, heiresses and widows; (3) complaints against diauryrat (c. 53 § 6). See Hager in Dict. Ant. s.v.; Att. Proc. 312 f. Lips.

mpookAroets] 22. mpocxadfrat. Legal forms of summons to the defendant. Att. Process, p. 770—2. In the Ms mpo- kMjoes (‘challenges’) is a mistake for mpooxdjoes. Similarly in Plat. Leg. 936 E, and Dem. ¢. Aphob. iii § 20, rpoxade- oOa has been wrongly suggested instead of mpoo- (Att. Process, p. 884).

ot 20éXovres] ‘Notetur usus verbi é0é- Aew pro BovAecPat, qui per haec decreta (etiam c. 30) obtinet, ad imitationem veteris linguae, qua vel Solo (c. 35 § 2; Dem. 46 § 14) vel Clisthenes usus erat’ (Blass).

tovrwv xdpwy] z.c. for making any pro- posal which he thought fit.

Cyprot...rpockadjras...clodyy x7A.] In all three cases the present here has a tentative sense., {yptot implies an at- tempt to get the speaker fined either by means of a ypagh) Tapavéuwr, or an eloay- yeNa. mpookadyrat refers to the above- mentioned mpocxdjoas. eodyy KTA. to the fact that, under the first of the three varieties of elcayyeAla, the Bovh} might hand the defendant over for trial by a court, instead of fining him. Cf. Az. Proc. p. 45 Lips.

CH. 29, 1. 19 —36. TIOAITEIA

119 ’ ’ > a eioayn eis Stxacryptoy, EvdeEw adtod eivar Kal arayoynyv mpos \ Pa \ ay lol a Tous atpatnyovs, tovs 8&€ atpatnyovs tmapadotvat Tois évdexa : ! - 5 Bavaro Enusdoa. peta Sé Tadta tHv TodTEiay Siéta~av Tovde _ I X a <Tov> TpoTov: Ta wey YpHuaTa <Ta> MpociovTa py .ékeivas y 3 a > adroce Satavinoca 7} eis Tov Todepuov, Tas 8 apyas apuicBovus 30 dpxew atrdcas éws av 0 TONEMOS 7}, TANY THY évvéa apydvTwY Kal Tov mpvTavéwy of av wow: TovTovs Sé hépew Tpeis dBorovs oe a - L * > Li rg 2 bg a &xactov Ths hyépas. thv & addnv qoritelav émitpéyrat Tacav "AOnvaiwy Tois Suvatwratots Kal Tois copacw Kal Tois ypHuacw » a \ én a ri Bg A e I Fe mtoupyeiy yt) EXaTTOv } TevTaKicxidious, Ews av 6 TorEMOS 7 xuplous 8 eivas tovTovs Kai cvvOnkas cuvTiberOar mpos ods av

26 els 76 H-L. Richards (H-L).

29 <riv> cf. c. 7 v. 8. <ra> add. kK (K-w): xpjuara del.

83 TTACIN (K): macav J B Mayor, Newman, K-w, H-L, B. WN

34 cwpaci—xphuact H-L. 35 HTTENTaKICXIAIOIC. Corrector aut 7 non viderat aut

delere neglexerat; illud existimat K (i wevraxirxiAlows, H-L et B), hoc K-w (7evra-

KtoxiAlwy).

Stkacrryptov] articulo ‘non opus in sententia condicionali ’ (Blass).

WSagv...amayoyyv] %In neither of these forms of procedure was there any summons: hence they were suited to the present emergency, in which mpookAyjoes had been abolished. dmaywy} was a summary process, resorted to in certain cases of theft, but also applicable to mur- derers and adulterers, and to robbers of temples. édecés was a charge in writing handed over by the prosecutor to the pro- per authority, who was bound to arrest or hold to bail the person criminated. It was directed against state-debtors, and others who exercised rights while labour- ing under a disqualification (Dict. Ant. s. v.). The text shews that, under the Four Hundred, these forms of procedure were arbitrarily extended to the case of those who attempted to resort to the ordinary legal remedies at a time when they were in abeyance. Cf. Att. Proc. pp. 270—280 Lips.

pds to’s otpatnyovs] In normal cases of drrarywyi) the delinquent was im- mediately brought before the A/evex ; in those of @&éeaés, generally before the Thesmothetae. The Four Hundred de- parted from those principles in providing that the offender should appear before the orparzyyol, whose jurisdiction was usually limited to military matters. Such a provision may be illustrated by our

modern declaration of martial law in cases of emergency.

§5. rd pev xprypara crv.) Thuc. viii 65, 3, Adyos Te éx Tod Pavepod mpocelp- yarro avrois ws otre uicbopopyréoy ely dddous 7} Tovs orpareuouévous, ore pedeK= téov Tav mpayudrwv mreloow 7 mevrakic- xAlows, Kal TovTos of av wddtaTa Tois TE Xphpuac. Kal Tos cbpaow wdedeiv olol Te wow, and 67, 3, évrad0a 61) Naympiis édé- yero Hon pare dpxny apyew undeulay ere éx TOO avrod Kbopmou ujre piaBogopely, Tpo- édpous Te éXéoOar wévre dvdpas, rovrous dé édéoOar éxardv dvdpas, kal trav éxardv exacrov mpos éavrdv Tpets* EXObvras dé av- tovs TeTpaxoolous bvras és TO BovAeuTypLoy dpxew Ory av dpa ,yryvwoKwow av- Toxpdropas. Kal ros mevraxtoxiAlous dé Euddéyew dbray adrois doxy. Lys. 20 §§ 13, 16; 30 § 8.

rots Suvarwrdrois kTA.] The language is almost technical. Cf. (besides Thuc. viii 47, 48, of duvardraro, 63, Suvdrous and 65, already quoted) Xen. Aipparch. 1 § 9, rods wey rolvuv lrméas...xabioravar det Kara, Tov vouov Tovs SuvaTwrarous Kal xpy- pact kal cdpaow. Also cIG 1845, 44 (inscr. from Corcyra) , édéo@ac 5é ray Bovday rods xXetpizodvras TO dpytpiov avdpas Tpets els eviavrdy Tous Swarwrdarovs xpihyace (Gilbert ii 320), and the phrase do@evijs Xphuaoe (Wyse).

cdpacw...Aqroupyeiv] Dem. ¢. Jfid. 165, A. Tots gHpact.

37

mn

120

AOHNAIQN

COL. 12, l. 19—28.

Cdwcw: décOar 8 ex ths hudrjs éxaorns Séxa avdpas brép

, \ TeTTApaKovTa ETN yeyovoTas, oltwes xaTadéEovol TOS TEvTaKic- XAlous Gudcavres Kal” iepav TErelwv.

30.

€ \ 5 e , lel 4 Ot pev ovy aipeBévtes TadTA auvéyparay.

cupwobévtwy bé

Tovtav elAovto opav avTav of TevTaKLayidwoL TOvs dvaypdwpovtas

\ f € \ yo” 8 TyNV TONLTELAY EKATOV ay pas.

ot & aipeOévtes avéypayray Kai

éEjveyxav Tabe. Bovdrevew pev nat’ éviavTov Tovs b7rép TpraxovTa 2 a A ? = ‘ érn yeyovoras dvev pucOogpopas: tovTwy 8 eivar Tovs otpatnyous

37 dé xal K, K-w: 8 é« (confusis a librario k et Kk’) H-L, B.

Eéobar...ris pudrs Exdorrys Séka KrA.] These were the xaradoyels appointed to enroll the 5,000 persons to whom the franchise was conceded by the Four Hundred. One of them was Polystratus who is defended in a speech ascribed to Lysias, Or. 20, on the ‘charge of seeking to abolish the Democracy.’ He claims credit for having placed as many as 9,000 on the roll: § 13, thar Yndiaperwr Tevtakioxirlos mrapadoiva: Ta mpdyyuara KaTadoyeds wy évvaxioxirlous karédetev. He served for eight days only, shortly before the overthrow of the Four Hun- dred (§ 14), who in the last resort found themselves compelled to take steps to- wards enrolling the 5,000. In § 2 it is said of Polystratus: npé0y bd Tav pude- trav. This is explained by the text, in which ten karadoye’s are described as elected by each of the tribes. It was supposed by Grote c. 62, v 413, that Polystratus had the sole responsibility of drawing up the list. It is now clear that he was one of a hundred persons charged with this duty.

opdoavres kad” lepdy redelwy] cf. Thuc. V 47, 10, duvivrww dé Tov értxdprov Bpxov €xacrot (the Athenians on the one part, and the Argives, Mantineans, Eleans and their allies on the other part) rov néyiorov kata lepwv trerelwv. Miiller, Hand- buch, V 3, 104. suprac. 1.

“XXX § 1. «vpwldvrov] Cf. 32 1. 2, émixupwhévrwy. The use of the two words in connexion with yy¢lopara is discussed by Hartel, Stedien, p. 207 ff., and Swo- boda, Gr. Volksbeschhisse, p. 18 ff. The latter has collected a large number of ex- amples from inscriptions (Wyse). . ddovro cay avtay of mevrakiry (Ator tovs dvaypaovras] Here, and in c, 32 § 1, the existence of the 5,000 is as- sumed; whereas in 32 § § we are told that the 5,000 Adyw pdvoy npéPncav. The latter statement is in accordance with

Thuc. viii 92, 11, of rerpaxéctot...ovK HOeXov rods wevraxcoxirlous ovre elvar oltre ph bvras Sydous elvar. In c. 67 ad fin. it had been proposed by Peisander rovs mevraxtoxiAlous EvdAdyew déréray adrots Soxg, and this proposal was ratified by the éxxAnola in 69 § 1. Mr Kenyon sug- gests that ‘all who could bear arms were provisionally entitled the Five Thousand until a body of that exact number had been drawn up by the board of: 100 which was to be appointed for that purpose.’ On the fall of the Four Hundred, the government was transferred to a body called the Five Thousand, consisting of all who could furnish arms (Thuc. viii 97, 1). Like ‘the present, this would really be a body of indefinite num- ber; whereas the body of 5,000 contem- plated by the oligarchical revolution, though it never came into actual ex- istence, was limited and definite in num- ber. The envoys from the Four Hun- dred (as observed by Mr Kenyon) assure the army at Samos ‘that they will all be members of the Five Thousand iz turn’ (rdv mevraxicxiAlwy mdvres ev T@ pepe pebéEovcw, Thuc. viii 86, 3).

§ 2. tptdkovra &rn] This was the age at which an Athenian citizen became capable of belonging to the Council under the regular constitution, Xen. AZem.i 2, 35.

&vev proPodopas] characteristic of an oligarchy. On the other hand, it is characteristic of a democracy pobogopetv padwora wey mdvras, éxkd\nolay diKacriypia dpxds, el dé wh, ras dpxas Kal rd Sexaorypia. Kal <rhy> Bovdiy xal ras éxxdyolas rds xuplas (Pol. vii (vi) 2, 1317 6 38). Simi- larly in the case of the law courts, Pol. vi v) 8, 1294 @ 383 13, 1297 4 373 14, 1298 4 18; and of the assembly, 1293 @ s—10. One of the causes that led to the fall of democracy in Rhodes was the fact that prcPopopar of Snuaywryol émdbpifov (1304 4 27).

4

CH. 29, 1. 37—CH. 30, 1.9. TOAITEIA

121

kai Tovs évvéa dpyovtas Kal Tov fepopynpova Kat Tos Takidpyous kai immapxous cal puddpyous Kal dpyovtas eis Ta dpovpra Kal Tapias TOY lepav Xpnuatwv TH O[e@] Kal Trois Aros Oeois Séxa [eat €\AnvoTaplas]] kal TAdv GdXrwv dciov ypnuaTtov dmrdvyTwY 9

XXX 9 édAynvoraplas—diaxeprofow mutila censent K-Ww.

éAAnvoraulas mutat in

talas Richards, omisso (ut videtur) cal quod subsequitur; xal édAnvoramlas et of

daxerprobow, utpote e v. 13—14 exorta, secludere malui.

kal et of diaxepotiow

jure secludit Thompson, sed idem éAAnvoraulas retinet (Class. Rev. v 277 a).

tovrwv 8’ elvat xrd.] Here follows a list of official members of the new BovA%. They are elected out of the BovdAy for the time being. Mr T. Nicklin (Class. Rev. V. 228 6) suggests that rovrwy refers to rovs brep rpidKxovra ern yeyovéras, and that these are the body from which the four councils of 400 each, and the generals &c must come; also that the éAAnvoraplar must not at the same time be in the council for the year. This interpretation appears improbable; Mr Kenyon has already pointed out that it involves the insertion of cat before ros.

orparnyods] c. 61 §§ 1, 2. dp- Xovras] c. 55. tepopvijpova] a re- corder or notary. ol. vii (vi) 8, 1321 @ 34—40, érépa 6’ dpyxh mpos Wv avaypdper bar def ra Te Ldia cuuBbrAaLa Kal Tas Kploes éx Tov dixacrnpiwy...cadodvra 6é Lepo my n- Hoves xal émisrdrat kal pvjuoves KT. Hermann-Thumser, Staatsalt. p. 99; Gil- bert, ii 413.

tafidpxous] c. 61 § 3. inmdpxovus] c. 61 § 4. uddpxous] c. 61 § 5.

dpxovras eis ra ppovpia] = ppovpapxor, the commanders of Athenian garrisons. c. 24 § 3. Gilbert, Gr. St. i 400.

taplas tov tepav xpnpdtrav TH Oca kal rots dAAots Beots-Séxa] At Athens the treasures of the various temples were under the charge of officials called raplac Tov lepay xpnudrwy (cf. Ar. Pol. vii (vi) 8, 1322 @ 25). The most important of these treasures was that of Athene on the Acropolis. The officials in charge of this were called raulac ris Geo or TE&v Tijs God, raula. Trav iepov xpnudrwv Tijs *AOnvaias, Taylas Trav ieodv xpnudrwv ris Geos. They are first mentioned in Hat. viii §1 at the time of the battle of Salamis, tapias Tod lepof; also in documents re- lating to the transfer of the treasure from one body of officials to their successors, from the date of the consecration of’ the Parthenon to 406 B.C.; in public ac- counts previous to Euclides; in Dem. Macart. p. 1073, 2, and Aeschin. Timarch. p- 127 § 110; lastly in inscriptions belong-

ing to B.c. 385, 325 and 300. Similarly, every temple had its special treasurers who, together with its superintendents (émuerdrat) and sacrificers (leporotol), had the money of the same under their care.

In 435—4 B.C. (CIA i 32) these several treasurers of the temples, with the ex- ception of those of the temple of Athene, were all united into a single board called Tapla Toy Oedy or Tov dAdNwY OeGv. From this date all the sacred moneys were kept in the Acropolis, but the treasures of Athene and those of the other divinities were generally under separate officials. Dem. Zimocr. p. 743, 1, of raplar 颒 dv 6 ’OmiaOddouos éverphan, kal ol rav THs Ocod Kal of Trav dAdwy Gedy. Never- theless we find that both were united fora time as one board of officers, as in the text, and in a decree quoted in Andocides de Myst. p. 36, rovs raulas ris Oeod Kal TOv d\\wy Gedy. In inscriptions ascribed to B.C. 401, 400, 399—397 they are called Tapia Trav iepdy xpnudtuw Tis AOnvas kal tev &\Xwv Oey, and are (as here) in 411 B.C. ten in number. In 385 the treasurers of the goddess again became a separate board of Ten, who were independent of the treasurers of the other deities (see Boeckh 1 v, 217—220 Lamb, and Gilbert, Gr. St. i 234—5).

The vapulat have been mentioned in c. 4§2,c. 7§3,c.8§1. They are called of raulat ris "AOyvads in c. 47 § 1, and simply of raylar in c. 60 § 3.

€\Anvoraplas]obviously corrupt. These officials are immediately afterwards de- scribed as excluded from the Council and they could not possibly be here enumerated among its official members.

That portion of the treasures on the Acropolis which, in contrast to the lepa Xphuara, was known as éo1a xpyara, was according to Suidas (s.v. rapia:, art. 1) entrusted to ‘the treasurers chosen by lot who had the care of the statue of Athene.’ Thus the public money was ordinarily kept by the raplat rfjs Geod, who were often called raylacalone(Boeckh

\

I

°

122

AOHNAIQN

COL, 12, 1, 28—38.

eixoouly of Swvaxetpiodaw]] nal ieporrowods Kai émtmedntas Séxa éxatépous: aipeiabas Sé mavtas TovTous éx mpoxpitay, éx TAY del Bovreudvtwy mrelouvs Tpoxpivovtas, tas 8 dAXas dpyds dmdoas KAnpwras elvat Kab pn éx THs Bovrss: rods 86 EXAnvoTaplas of dy Siayerpifoor Ta Yphpata pr) cvpBovreve. Bovdras 8 rothoar 3

10 diaxerpioior H-L.

TESTIMONIA,

13 EAN.

13—14 *Harp. édAqvoraulac: ... bre dpyy Tis mW ol EAAnvoraplat, of

dtexelpitov ra xphuara, kat ’Ap. Sndot év rH AG, Tod.

7. ¢. p. 221—2). In the text, with a view to multiplying the official members of the 400, a separate board of 20 is men- tioned.

Mr Kenyon infers from the present passage that separate raulac trav dolwy xpnudrwv formed part of the ordinary Athenian constitution ; in the absence of evidence it is perhaps better to regard them as a special body created by the oligarchical revolution.

teporrotods] c. 64§ 6. Gilbert, Gr. St. i249. ol. vii (vi) 8, 1322 6 22—25, oupBatve. thy émiédecav Tabryy (ray Tept Tovs Beods) éviaxod pev elvar ulay...émaxod 6¢ modAds Kal Kexwpiouévas THs lepwovvys, ofov iepototovs Kal vaoptdakas Kal Tapias Tay lepav xpnudrov.

émiupehytas] Pol. vii (vi) 8, 1322 4 19, Gro 8 eldos emipedelas ) wept rods Geods, olov iepets Te Kal émiedyral Trav epi Ta iepd rod opfecOal re Ta tmdpxovra Kal avopfoicba Ta wimrovra r&v olkodoun- are Kal Tov &d\\wv boa Téraxrar mpds Tovs Jeovs. The leporotol, the vaopidAaxes and the raplac dv iepwv xpypdrwy are in Fol. t. «. separate officials entrusted with this émiuédea., The term émpedyris is vague, but the context implies that the official here meant was connected with matters of public ritual.

aipeto@ai—tk mpoxplrev] ‘and that they (the Council, c. 31, 15) should appoint all these officials out of a number of select- ed candidates, choosing a larger number (than those actually required) out of the members of the Council for the time being.’ All the officials enumerated were to be members of the Council of 400, and the Council itself was (1) to nominate candidates out of its own body to succeed these officials and (2) to choose such suc- cessors out of the number so nominated.

€&\Aynvoraplas] it is probably this pas- sage, and not the corrupt passage a few lines earlier, that is the source of Harpo- cration’s notice s. vz. Mr Kenyon leaves both passages as they stand in the ms;

he points out the inconsistency between them in his commentary and endeavours to remove it in the notes to his Transla- tion:—“ If this is not to be taken as directly contradicting the statement made just above, it must be supposed that the actual handling of the money was confined to a few of the Hellenotamiae (probably in rotation), the duties of the rest being to advise and superintend.” The Héleno- tamiae, or special board for the manage- ment of the tributes, existed from the time of the formation of the confederacy of Delos and lasted to the end of the Peloponnesian war. They are frequently mentioned in inscriptions down to the ° time of the anarchy. On the restoration of the democracy, the office was not revived, as the jyeuovla of Athens, and the duty of paying tribute on the part of her allies, had come to an end.

In 410/9 we know of eleven Helleno- tamiae, three of them from one tribe alone, and two others from another tribe. Two of thetribe Acamantis were Hellenotamiae in the same prytaneia, and the two of the tribe Aeantis were similarly holding office at the same time. Boeckh supposes that in their appointment no regard was paid to the tribes (11 vii p. 243 Lamb). Cf. Gilbert, Gr. St. i nae

§ 3. Bovdds—rérrapas}] ze. four Councils of 400 each, each of the four holding office for one year (els évavrév inf.). The order in which they were to hold office was to be decided by lot (cf. 7d AaxOv wepos). The one hundred who had drawn up the constitution were to distribute themselves and ‘the rest,’ z¢. the rest of the 5,000 above the age of thirty, into four divisions of 400 each. At the end of c. 31 provision is made for the future ‘in order that the 400 may be distributed over the four divisions (els ras rérrapas Ajées),’ one hundred being as- st ee by lot to each of the four divisions of 400.

The total number of the officials above

CH, 30, 1. 1o—24. TIOAITEIA 123 téTTapas €x THs HruKias THs eipnuévys eis Tov Aovmov ypovor, Kal TOUT@Y TO NaxoV pépos Bovrcvery, vetwat 5é Kal Tods AAXoUS Tpds

\ a ¢ ft \ > : Ai y a A thy AHEw éxdornv. tors & éxatov dvdpas Sivaveiwar chas te avtovs Kal Tovs dAXovs TérTapa wépy ws icaitata Kal SiaxAnpdoa,

4 xal eis éviavtov Bovrevew. <BovreverOar> Sé 7 av Soxh adtois dpiora éEew wepi Te TOV XYONuaTav, bTrws av owa 7 Kal eis TO Séov , , % N a ” - By A ” BY L avarickntat, Kal mepi Tdv GAdwY ws av SvVwYTaL apiota’ éav Sé

19+ LA % t > tal oe te OéXwow Bovrcicacbas peTa TrELdvWY, eTEITKadElY ExacTOY 2 , a a Qf a i) a >A ¢ fe \ > éreioxAntov ov av €OéAn TaV ex THS avTIS HrAicias: Tas 8 &pas toi THs BovAs Kata mevOnuepov éav pr Séwvtar TAcover.

16 AOYAEYEIN. 19 BovAedew. <Bovrevew> 6é K; Bovdedew <rovs Naxdvras’ mparrew > b€ K-w; BovdrevecOar 7 dv doxq xT Richards (H-L). malui Bovdevev. <fPovreverOar> 6é scribere. Bovrevew <rTods Aaxdvras’ BovreverOar> dé Blass. 20 cwa; et cos et ods in titulis Atticis exstant (Meisterhans, pp. 52%, 1177): oa K-w. 21—22 EANTI: Kav ToK;3 dev <dé> 7 J B Mayor, K-w, H-L, B. 22 €0éA\wot H-L.

K

23 ETTEICEKAHTON corr. K. 24 TTENOHMIMEPON corr. K.

23—24 Hesych. ipa: Bovdjjs: at éyivovro kara revrarpepov.

enumerated is as follows, if we assume that the numbers were in every case the same as usual:

orparyyol (10), dpxovres (9), lepouyyuwy (1), raglapxoe (10), teapot (2, 1 in 31,14), pvrapxot (10), apxovres els TA Ppovpra (?), rapla. Tay lepdv xpnudrwy (10), Tauiac tav dolwv xp. (20), iepomocot (10), éruedn- tal (10), making 92 out of a total of per- haps 100.

The dpxovres els ra Ppovpia were possi- bly eight in number, in which case they may have represented the 8 tribes not represented by the 2 trmapyo:. Thus 7 may have dropped out after ppovpra (1. 7). But it is more probable that there was only one Yrmapxos under this constitution and therefore 9 dpxovres eis 7a Ppovpia, in which case @ may be the missing number. This is confirmed by the fact that the number of Attic ¢povpia known to us is exactly nine, Eleusis, Anaphlystus, Sunium, Thoricus, Panactum, CEnoe, Phyle, Aphidna and Rhamnus (Boeckh, lI x; the evidence for the last two be- longs to the times of Philip).

els rov Aourdv xpdvov] = els Tov uéANOVTA xpévov c. eas

tots dAdovs}] probably, not the 300 co-opted by the 100 (Thuc. viii 67, 3), but the rest of the 5,000.

Siavetpar...rérrapa pépy] c. 21 § 4, Oéverme...rpidxovra wépy.

ds loalrara] Plat. Leg. 744.c. 81a- KAnpaoat, to ‘assign them by lot,’ Thuc.

viii 30, 1, SeakAnpwodmevor, ‘Shaving drawn lots,’ vi 42, rpla wépy veluavres Ev éxdory éxAjpwoap.

§ 4. o@a] The evidence of inscriptions shews that o@os and ods were alike in use (Meisterhans, Gr. p. 117 ed. 1888). Cf. Dem. Zept. '§ 142 note. The codex = of Dem. has nom. masc. eas in Aid. 126, Aristocr. 131; neut. cv Lept. 142; acc. pl. o@s in Fac. 17, Chers. 15; gen. sing. owas F.L. 78; pl. cdo in #.L. 57, 153, 326; acc. sing. cuav Mid. 177; pl. nom. aio Cor. 49, Phil. iii 70, Timocr. 106 (Voemel, Proleg. Gramm. in Dem. Cont. § 33).

es to Séoy dvadlonnrat] Aristoph. Nub. 859, eis 7d Séov drwreca, Dem. O/. 3,28, dvnAwxapev els ovdév Séov, Plut. Per. 23.

+ henacirundhay (to co-opt) and émelonAn- tov are only found in this passage.

pas] c. 4 § 3. It is the technical term. CIA i 31,73 59,413 ii 8004 15 cet. (Mayor).

kara, revOrpepov] not ‘for five days at a time’; but ‘once every five days’; cf. kar’ éviaurév (‘year by year’), kara pijva. Kad’ jwépay (‘daily,’ Thuc. vii 8 § 1 and 50 § 3). Mr Poste extracts doth senses out of the passage: ‘the sessions of the council shall be for five days at a time with intervals of five days.’ Under the democracy the Bovd} met daily except on public holidays (43 § 3)-

mevovey, sc. Edpav.

15

20

2

on

30

124

AOHNAIQN COL. 12, 1. 38—COL. 13, 1. 28,

Krnpodv Sé thv Bovajy Tovs évvéa dpyovtas, Tas dé Yeuporovias kpivew wévte Tos NayovTas éx THs Bovdjs, Kal ex tovTav eva KAnpovaba Kal éExactnv <THv> huépav Tov éeripnpiobdvta. KAN- 5 poov 8 rods AaxydvTas TévTEe Tos EOédovtTas TpoceNOely évavTiov THs BovAts, mearov wey iepdv, Sevtepov 5¢ xynpvkw, tpitov mpec- Betas, réraprov Tay ddAXwv: TA Sé TOD Todépou Grav Sén dxAnpoTi

mpocayayortas Tovs otpaTnyous ypnuativer Oat.

Tov 6 wn ovTa 6

eis TO Bovdevtnpiov Tav Bovrevovtav Tv wpav THY TpoppnOcioay ddeirew Spay THs juépas Exdorns, av pn ebpowevos adeow

THs Bovdhs aryl

25 ‘an m\fjpouv?’ K-w. K-W, H-L, K3, B (K, K-W).

27 rh addidit B. 33 etpduevos Tyrrell et Richards (H-L, B); €YpICKOMENOC

29 mpecBelat: mpecBelas Wyse,

kAnpodv . . tHv Boudry robs évvéa dpxovtas] This means either (1) that the Council is to appoint the archons by lot, or (2) the archons are to superintend the sortition of the Council. (1) is followed by Kaibel and Kiessling, and also by Poland; (2) by Mr Poste and Mr Kenyon. In (1) the order is verb, subject, object, just as in § 5 KAnpodv rods AaxdvTas TeévTE rovs é6éhovras; and this is supported by the context. We are first told how the Council is constituted, and next what it has to do. But this view is open to a fatal objection. The Council cannot ap- point the archons by lot, because under the present constitution the archons are chosen out of a select list ($ 2, 1. 11). We must therefore suppose that the archons were to superintend the sortition of the Council. Those of the 5,000, who were over 30 years of age, have already been divided into four groups determined by lot (§ 3). The archons in each year have to draw lots for appointing 400 out of each of these groups to serve on one of the four successive Councils. M. Th. Reinach regards this sentence as an inter- polation.

For wAnpobdy, which has been proposed in place of «kAnpoby, cf. dkxacrhpia rdypody in Dem. 24 § 92, 21 § 209, and Isaeus 6 § 37; also Arist. Zccé. éxkdnolas.

xetporovias Kplvew] ‘decide divisions taken by show of hands.’ The five functionaries act as ‘tellers.’ One of them is appointed by lot for each of the five days during which the Council sits, ‘to put questions to the vote,’ z.e. to act as president or chairman.

§ 5. K«Anpotv—Bovdys] These five

9, mAnpouperns:

persons were to determine by lot the order of precedence among those who wished to appear before the Council.’

iepov ... nrfpubiv... mpeoBelq...rdv dd- ov] The two alternative constructions are arranged in the order of a chiasmus or introverted parallelism, the two nearest and the two furthest terms corresponding in construction. Apart from love of variety there is no apparent reason for this change. Exactly the same order and the same variety of expression is found in the statement of the proceedings in the éxxdyala in c. 43 § 6, lepav...xjpvéw Kat mpeoBelas ... dclwv. Cf. also Aeschin. Timarch. 23, wpoxetporovelv xedever robs mpoédpous mept lepiv tov marplwy kal dclwy Kal Kippvée kal mpeoPelats.

§ 6. Tv @pav] not ‘the hour,’ but ‘the time’; the use of wpa for ‘hour’ is not earlier than the Alexandrine age.

édheldav Spaxpryv] the infliction of a fine for non-attendance is characteristic of an oligarchy. od. vi (iv) 9, 1294 4 38, {of law courts) év pev yap Tals ddvyapxlacs Tots evrdpors Snulay rdrrovow, dv ph dixdswor, Tots & drépas obdéva pu Ody, cf. 12986 17. It is one of the devices of aristocracies mentioned 2. 13, 1297 @ 17, §qulay ém- keto Ban Tots evrdpors, cay wh ExxAnord {wou Fines for non-attendance at the BovAy in particular are apparently not mentioned in the Politics.

edpiokduevos, | in the enjoyment of leave of absence,’ is less likely to be right than elpdpevos, ‘having obtained for himself leave of absence.’

deo] not found in this sense in Ar. The corresponding adj. d@éotuos occurs in c. 43 § 3.

=A

CH. 30, l. 25—CH. 31, 1. 17. TOAITEIA 125 - 31. ravtnv pév odv eis Tov wéddOVTA ypdvov avéyparay Tv J 3 A lad a lal - ‘es ra \ , mourelay, év 8: 78 Tapovts Kaip@ tTHvde- Bovdevew ev TeTpaAKoct- ~ 3 a 2 ‘ a ous KaTa Ta TaTpla, TeTTapaKovTa €F éExaaTHs <THS> pudijs, éKx f x Dy e e cd lel € x cd wv mpoxpitoy [olds av EXwvtas of pudéras Tav bmép tpLdKovta érn , an fol yeyovotwy. tovtous S& Tas Te apyas KaTacThaat Kal wep) Too bpxov évtiwva xp duocar yparpat, <Kal> epi TAY vowov Kal TAY ? lel ie a Bh “a es @ e nn t fal evdu[v]av Kat Taév dAdwv rparrew 7 dv HydvTat [cup] hépewv. Tois d€ vopors of av TeOdowy Trepl TeV TOdTIKOY XpHaOat, Kal pr) eEeivas petaxiveiy und érépous Oéc8ar. tadv Se otpatnyav TO viv elvas THY ov 2 € Z nn a , \ \ , aipecw && amdvtwy roveto Oar THY TevTaKLayLArLov, THY 5é Bovdyy, érevdav KatTacTh, Touncacay ékéracww <éy> Srdows, érdécOar déca dvdpas Kal ypaupatéa Tovtous, Tovs 8é aipebévtas dpyew Tov eiovdvta évavTov av’ToKpatopas, Kav Tt Séwvtar cupPBovrever Bau peta Ths Bours. édXc0as 5é cal imrapyov eva Kai duddpyous déxa* TO S€é Aowrov THY alpeowy ToeicOas TOUT@Y THY BovAnY KATA \ L A 7 2 a \ a x \ in Ta -yeypaupeva, Ttav 8 ddr\Wv apyav TAnY THs BovAjs Kal TOY las \ 2 aA , , , be X\ 4 x otparnyov pn éEcivar pnte TovTos pte GAM pNdevi réov 7}

XXXI 3 rfjs addidit B. 11 KATACTHCHI corr. Wyse, Blass, etc. K-W, H-L; é7Awv K. 13 éf6vTa H-L. BoyAeyc@at.

6 <xal> K, K-W, H-L, B.

8 EAN. redo. H-L. oTtAoIC: <év> b8rdos Wyse, Blass, kal dv K, K-W, B; kal édy H-L. CYN-

17 TIAGION (K-Ww, B): wAéov H-L, K%, cf. Meisterhans, p. 120%, n. 1090.

XXXI§1. xpévov...catpo] Ar. Anal, Pr. i 36 § 6, 6 xatpds éore xpdvos Séwv.

dvéyparbay] ‘drew up,’c. 2 § 4.

kata td métpia] in allusion to the Council of 400 under the Solonian con- stitution, c. 8 § 4. The phrase is in- serted to propitiate those who regarded Solon as the founder of the Athenian democracy.

é« tpoxplray ods dv wvrar of pudérat] According to this, the ten tribes were to make a preliminary selection of more than the requisite number; but we are not told how the final choice was made out of those nominated by the tribes. According to Thue. viii 67, 3, the pro- posal carried at the éxxAnola held at Colonus was to choose five mpée8po.; and for these to elect 100 in all, and for each of these 100 to co-opt three others. The historian’s account supplies an omission in the text by describing the process by which the requisite number was arrived at. The two accounts may be partly reconciled by supposing that the 100 were limited in their choice to selecting the additional 300 out of those preliminarily selected by the tribes. As regards the

method by which the original hundred were appointed, the precise account in Thuc. seems more trustworthy than the vague description of the appointment of the 400 given in the text.

evOvvwv] ‘the examination of official accounts,’ ‘audits.’ c. 48§4. Att. Proc. p- 259 Lips.

§ 2. 1d viv elvar] Plat. Rep. 506 E, Xen. Cyr. v 3 § 42.

wiv alpeoty...moveto bat] 27/. 1. 15.

karaory] 32 § 2. Lys. 13 § 34 and 25 § 14, of Tpidxovra Karéorynoay,

e&éracw ev StAo1s] Xen. Anad. v 3, 3, and Cyrop. ii 4, 1, éééracts év rots 8ros. Thue. iv 74 § 3, é&€racw dmdwy érrout)- cavro, vi 45 § 2, Ord ekerdoe kal trrwr.

elovévra] during the ‘ensuing’ year, after the lapse. of the two remaining months of the archonship of Callias.

Urmapxov va] The normal number was ¢wo (c. 61 § 4). $vAdipx ous, c. 61 § 5.

pr eEetvar—mddov 7 darat dpfat]

Under the normal constitution of Athens military offices might be repeatedly held by the same person, but none of the others more than once, except in the. case of membership of the Council, which

nr

=“

cal

°

5

20

on

126 AOHNAIQN COL. 13, 1. 28—COL. 14, 1.9.

/ dak dptar thy adtny apynv. eis 8¢ tov dAdov Ypovoy, iva vewn- Adcw of Terpaxdctor eis Tas TérTapas AH~ELS, Gtav [TOFS] avTois if \ a By, f s > x. € yiuyuntar peta tov ddAXNwy BovArcvew, Staveyuavt@y avTovs ot ExaTov avdpes. a 4 32. of pév odv éxaTov of bTd TAY TevTaKLoyLriwv aipebévTes , 3 sf \ tf 2 Oé be iA ey TavTny avéyparpav Thy TodTelav, émixupwOévTwy Sé TovTwY bo Tov TAHOous, éripnpicarvtos "Aptatouaxou, 1 “ev Bovrn <1)> éml lo} * a KaadXiov rpiv SiaBovrcioas xatervOn pnvos @apynrLavos TeTpad. an J egy t >? > 7 6: (3) a emi Oéxa, of dé reTpaxdaror etonecay evatn POivovTos Mapynrtovos: Het S€ tHv eihnyviav TO kvaum Bovdjvy eicrévas terpads émt Séxa 18—20 Wa et dray locum inter se mutasse putat Hude, qui etiam (cum Thomp- sono) éyylyvnra: conicit; dray veunPdow—, iva py—perd Tav abrdv Bovdevew, dddrws Stavecudvrwy nimis audacter Poste. 19 rots dorois secl. K%, retinent K-w; rois

avrois Tyrrell (H-L, et B qui etiam in papyro invenit [a]ytoic): mihi quidem [e]re- poic aut simile aliquid scriptum fuisse videtur; malui tamen adrois accipere, et rots

secludere, utpote ex interpretamento rofs 7’ (sc. To’s rerpaxogiows) exortum.

XXXII 3 <%> Rutherford, Blass, K-w, H-L, K%. 6 @6e. 6é: ETIAE corr. K.

K, H-L3; elonecay K-W, B.

5 EICHIECAN: eloqoay

might be held twice (see c. 62 end, and Pol. 1275 @ 25; 1299 @ 103 1317 6 24; there quoted).

vepnOaor...els tds... Anges] c. 30 § 3, velmar...Tovs &Adous Tpds Ty AjEw Exdoryv.

‘As regards the future, in order that the 400 may be distributed into the four divisions (above mentioned, 30 § 3), let the hundred make the distribution when it is possible for them (z.e. the 400) to sit in council with the rest.’

tav dddwv refers to the 5,000, as in c. 30 § 3, twice. avrots refers to the rerpaxdato: aforesaid.

Kaibel and Wilamowitz explain ray ad\Awy as Tay év Xduw, but (as observed by Mr Kenyon) ‘BouAevew is a technical word, and the Athenians with the fleet would not become members of the Bovd} on their return, and there would be no occasion to await their return before arranging the subdivision of the Four Hundred among the four councils.’

In Stavedvrwv we have a sudden transition from the inf. of ovat. obligua to the imperative of ovatio recta.

XXXII § 1. érubydloavros] 30 § 4 end. ’Aptoropdxov, otherwise unknown.

‘The absence of the name of father and deme is in accordance with the lapidary style of the sth century, in which the decrees simply have 6 6deiva émeorarel, ¢.g. CIA 1, 32, CSofev rH BovdT kal TQ Shum Kexpomls émpurdveve’ Mvy- aldeos éypaypdreve’ EdrelOns érecrdres

KadXlas ele. On the other hand, the addition of the deme (c. 34 w/t., &ypape 7d ehpitua Apaxovrldys Agovaios) or father (29 § 1, ypdavros vdodépou rod "Emig. ou) of the proposer, is not in the manner of sth century inscriptions’ (Wyse).

éml KadXlov] B.c. 412—4I11.

amply BtaBovActoat] ‘before the com- pletion of its term of office.’ The word is not found elsewhere in act. dafov- AeverGa, ‘to deliberate thoroughly,’ is found in Andoc. 2 § 19; and in the sense of ‘taking counsel’ in t uc. ii § and else- where (L and S), eg. vii 50 § 4, ‘to discuss.” As appears from the context, the Council was within a month of com- pleting its year of office.

OapynAravos rerpd&: él Séxa, the 14th of Thargelion (May-June) or about the end of May. évary @lvovros Oapyy- Atavos, the 21st of Thargelion, or about June 7. rerpdSe éml Séka Uipospoprdvos, the r4th of Scirophorion (June-July), or about the end of June.

%et] ‘was bound’ in ordinary course, according to the normal constitution.

tiv eAnxviay 76 kudpw Bovdijy] Thuc. viii 66 § 1, Sfuos pévroe Guws err Kal Bovdh 7 ard Tod Kuduov ~vvedéyero, 7b. 69 (of the attack of the Four Hundred and their emissaries on the Council of 412— 411), éréornoay rots did ToO Kuduou Bou- Aevrais. The object of the emphatic mention of xaos is to point the contrast between the constitutional Council and

CH. 31, l. 18-—CH. 32, 1.17, TOAITEIA 127

bed 4 \ > ‘3 , a L ¥ t

2 LKrpopopidvos. 1% wey ovv dduyapxia TovTOv KaTéoTN TOV TpdrTTOV émt KadAliov ev dpyortos, éreaw 8 torepov Ths Tey Tupavver b] Lol , e ¥. * F t ¢ #

éxBodjs padiota ExaTov, aitiov pddiota yevonevav Iletrdvdpou cat ’Avtipdvros cal Onpapévous, dvdpav Kai yeyevnuéver ed Kai cuvécer Kal yan Soxovvtav Sivadépery. || yevopévns 88 tadrns THs moduTEelas of pev TrevTaxiaxirtor Aoy@ Lovoyv HpéOnaav, oi Sé TeTpakoatoe peta TOV Séxa THY avToKpaTdépav ciaedOovTes eis TO Bovreurypiov Apyov tis méAEws, Kat mpos Aaxedaipovious mpec- Bevaodpevor katedvovto Tov TodEwov ed’ ols ExaTEepor TUyydvovow éyovtes. ovdx brraxor[ad]ytwv 8 éxelvwr ef un) Kal THY apyny Tis

[Olaxarrns apynoovew, ovTws aréaTnoav.

8 érect H-L. €PH

sequentibus illapsum. Hude(K-w).

12 HpEOHCAN HPE@HCANOAE, 16 vraxou[drwv H-L.

9 pddora ante éxaréy temere om. H-L, utpote e verbis proxime

14 jpxov <re>

that of the Revolution. The latter was not appointed by lot out of the general body of citizens. Cf. 31, 4, ods dv EXwp- TAL

‘§ 2. pdduorta éxardv] B.C. 510—to end of May 411, or 99 years; hence pa- Mora. Thue. viii 68, 4, ém’ éree éxaroor@ pddora ered) of Tipavvo KarehvOnoay.

TlewdvdSpouv] Thuc. viii 49, 53—56, 63—68, esp, 68 § 1 (of the éxxAnoia held at Colonus), jv dé 6 per ri yudunv rary elmav Ileloav8pos, kal rdéAdNa éx Tod mpo- gavois mpodupérara tvyxaradvoas Tov Sjmov? 6 wévror wav 7d wpayua Evvbels Ory tpbry Karéorn és Todro Kal éx mdelorou ériyehnOels "Avrupav iv, dvyp “A@nvalwy Trav cad’ daurdv dpery Te ovdevds Sevrepos kal kpdrioros évOupnOjvar ~yevouevos Kal & yotn eiretv. In § 3 Thuc. mentions Phrynichus who rapéoxe... éavrov mévrwv Siapepdvrws mpoOundrarov és rHv ddvyap- xlav, and in § 4 Onpapévns, who éy rors Evyxaradtove. Tov Squov wpGros jv, dvhp otre elreiy otre yodvar dddvaros. wore dm’ dvipGv mo\d\ov Kal Evverav (cf. cuvéret) rpaxdev 7d Epyov obk drekérws kalrep wéya dv rpovxwenoe. On Peisan- der, see also Lys. 12 § 66; 25 § 9; and Andoc. 2 §§ 12—15: on Antiphon, Lys. 12 § 67; on Theramenes, 24. 62—78.

§ 3. Aédyw pévov] Thuc. viii 92 § 11, kal of rerpaxdatot Sic TOTO ovK HOEY TOds mevraxicxiAlouvs otre elvar ore wh dvras dHdous elvat, TO wey KaTaoThoa peTdxous TosovTous dyrikpus By Sfjuov jyovmeror, Td & af dpaves PbBov és dddijdous mapétev.

of 8 terpakoorot 7A.) Thuc. viii 70, ol Terpaxdotos éoehOdvres és TO BovdeuTHptov...

Td Te dda Eveuov Kara Kpdros Thy TOAW KTR. tov Séxa] the ten crparnyol of c. 31 § 2. awpos Aak. xri.] Thuc. id. mpdés re

*Ayw rev Aaxedapovlwv Baoidéa dvra ev TH

Acxedelg émexnpuxevovro, Adyovres diad-

Aayivat BovrAe Hau (Grote, v p. 391). 71 § 3,

pera 6€ To0To mapa Te Tov "Ay érperBev-

ovro ol rerpaxdc.oe ovdev jocov, Kdxelvou

MGddov dn mpocdexoudvov Kal mapaw-

obvros éxméurovet Kal és Thy Aakedainova

tepi EvpBdoews mpéoBers Bovdduevor dad-

Aayfvat. go§ 2, diwrécreday ’Avtipovra

kal Ppbvixov kal GAdous déxa xara rdxos...

emcorelhavres wavrt tpbmy doris Kal Orwo- ody dvexros tvvaddaryfivac mpos Tos Aaxe-

Saipovlovs. Lastly, g1 § 1, of éx ris Aaxe-

Saluovos mpécBes ovdév mpdtavres dvexb-

pyoay Tots E¥prace EvuBarixdv. ‘We read

with astonishment,’ says Grote, v 409,

‘that the (Lacedaemonians) could not be

prevailed upon to contract any treaty and

that they manifested nothing but back- wardness in seizing the golden oppor- tunity.’ But the envoys clearly could, not answer for the armament at Samos, and therefore returned without obtaining any terms that would apply to the Athenians at large. The text tells us what we do not learn from Thucydides, viz. that the reason for this failure in the negotiations was due to the envoys declining to sur- render the maritime supremacy of Athens.

This embassy was afterwards impeached

by Theramenes (Lysias 12 §§ 66—68);

Antiphon was condemned and executed

(Phrynichus had been already assas-

sinated). karedtovro] tentative impf.

on

10

128 AOHNAIQN

COL. 14, |. 9—37.

33. whvas pév odv tows Térrapas Siéuewev 4} TOY TeTPAKOTiwY Toduteia, Kat ApEev é€ abtav Munaidoxos Siunvov emi Oeomopmov dpxovtos, <bs> Apke Tovs eminoimous Séxa phvas. Hrrndévres 88 7H cep) "Eperpiav vavpaxia x[al] tis EdvBolas drocracns édys Troy ’OQpeod, xademds eveyxovtes erl TH cupdopa padiota Tay mpoyeyevnuévov (wreiw yap ex THs EvBolas i) rhs “ArtiKijs éerbyyavov apedovpevor), KaTéAvoay Tovs TeTpaKoTioUs Kal Ta mpdypata Tmapédwxav Tois mevtaxiaxidiow Tois ex TOV Shun, Andicdpevor pndewiav dpynv elvar prcOopdpov. aitiwtata S éyévovtTo Ths Katadvaews ’Apiotoxpatns Kai Onpapévys, od cvva-

Ao

XXXIII 2 mNacimayoc; Mvactdoxos (K, H-L): Mvyaldoyos K-W, B. Arrnbévres 6é <ol ’AOnvaiow>? WHerwerden, Richards.

9 MICBOMPOPWN: pLcbodspov J B Mayor, Rutherford, Naber, Frankel,

K (K-w, B): 6 8 H-L.

5 wploy.

edd. TESTIMONIA.

1 *Harp. sv.

3 <és>

Terpaxdoto:...of Terpaxdcto. mpd émra éraiv

karéornoay Trav tpidxovra Tupdyvwv map’ "AOnvaios’ olrwes TéTTapas whvas Hpay Ths wéAews, ws now ’Ap. év AO. tod. (Frag. 372”, 410°).

XXXIII § 1. pivas...tows rérrapas] The 400 were practically in power from the end of May to the end of June, also for the two months of July and August in the civil year next ensuing (S{unvoy). This makes ¢kree months. Hence the oligarchical revolution began about a month earlier, z.e. at the end of April, while the constitutional Council was still nominally in office (Thuc. viii 66, 1), and the four months are May, June, July and and August. Thuc. viii 63, 3, places the fall of the democracy a little earlier than the spring of 411. It has been assigned to March 411, soon after the Lenaea in which the Lysistrata was produced (Wattenbach, De Quadr. p. 29, quoted by Classen, Thue. /.c.). Similarly Grote, c. 63 7#zt., describes the Four Hundred as ‘installed in the Senate-House about February or March 411 B.C., and deposed about July of the same year,’ and speaks of Athens undergoing ‘four or five months of danger and distraction.’ It now appears that these dates are rather too early.

Myvyoldoxos] the archon eponymus selected by the 4oo. Mvyotroxos is mentioned in the list of the Thirty given in Xen. Hell. ii 3, 2 and there is every probability that the two are the same. Cf. cla iv 3, 179 a1, p. 162, [AOnvat]o avidlwoay ért Mynodd]xouv apxo[vros]. This expenditure was authorised not (as usual) by vote of the dfuos, but yygioa-

pévns THs Bovdhfs. At the date speci- fied, the 21st of Hecatombaeon, the Four Hundred were still in power.

@Ocoréptrov] the archon eponymus ap- pointed by lot on the restoration of the democracy in the third month of the civil year, B.C. 41I—IO.

émudolrovus] not found in the Jdex Ar. In 40 § 1 we have the ordinary word vrodolrous. émldouros is often used by Plato, Rep. 540 B and Leg. 728 D, Tiv értdourrov Biov, 26. 628 A, els Tov éldovrov xpdvov.

Ti wept Hperplav vavpax(q] Thuc. viii’ 95. In Lys. 20 § 14 one of the karaNo- vets sails for Eretria after holding office under the 400 for eight days only. wAyv *Opeot. Thuc. /.c. § 7, (the Lac.) EvBoay dracay droorioavres tA} ’Qpeod.

Xaderds éveyndvres xrA.] Thuc. viii 96 § 1, rots & "A@nvalors ws AOE Ta Tepl THY EdBouay yeyevnudva, exmdnits peylorn 8) Tay wp wapéorn.

rhela—aicpeAovpevor] Thuc. viii 96 § 2, (Euboea) €& js rhelw 9 ris ’Arruchs doe- Aofvro. Decelea was at this time in the occupation of Agis.

katéXvoav tovs terpakoclous «rh.] Thue. viii 97 § 1, rods Terpaxoolous xara- mavoavres Tos tevraxtaxinias éyynploavro Ta mpdypara mapadotvar* elvar be atrav éréco Kal Sarda mapéxovrat’ Kal pucdv pndéva pépew pndewud px.

§ 2. ‘Apioroxpdrns kal Onpapévns] Thuc. viii 89, 2 (of the opposition to the

CH. 33, 1. I—CH. 34, 1.4. TTOAITEIA 129 pecKopevot Tois Ud TAY TeTpaKoclwy yiyvouévows’ ArravTa yap Sv avrav érpattov, ovdéy érravadépovtes Tois TevtTaxiayiAtals. S0- Kodoe Sé KANG TOALTEVOAVaL KATA TOUTOUS TOUS KaLpOUS, TOAEwoU re KabecTOTos Kal éx TOY bTAWY THS TOALTELAS OVENS.

34. rovrous pev ody adeideto Try TrodtTEiavy oO SHpwos Sia taxous: éret 8 EBSoum peta thy Thy TeTpaKxociwy KaTddvavy, él Kaaniov rod “Ayyernbev dpxovtos, yevouevns THs év “Apyivovcais vavpaxtas, mpatov pev Tods déxa oTpaTHyovs TOvs TH vavpayia

'

11 FENOMENOIC; ywoudvos K-W; yeyv. H-L, K3, B. 13 an kalrep modduou?

Herwerden. XXXIV 2 eBAomol: ékrw K-w?. KATAOAYCIN K, H-L, K-W?, B3 Kardoracww al K-w), 3 AaPrINOYCcac: Apywotccas B. 4 rv vavpaxlav Tyrrell. rods—

vix@vras e margine irrepsisse putat Richards.

TESTIMON. XXXIV 3—12 *Schol. Arist. Raz. 1532 KAeopav d€ payéodw: mapbcov, ws "Ap. dyol, wera Thy ’Apywotoas vavuaxlay Aaxedacuovlwy Bovdouévwy éx Aexedelas driévar é’ ois Exovow éxdrepor Kal elpjynv d-yew él (rod secl. K-W) KaAAlov, Knrcopav rece tov Sjuov wy mpocddéacOa, ‘ éXOwv els rHv éxxdAynolay—éeay wy wdoas

dpadct ras médes of Aaxedaimdvior” (Frag. 3707, 408°).

extreme members of the 400), éyovres 7ye- pévas Tay wavy [orparnyov] Trav ev TH édeyapxig [Kal] év dpxats svTwv, ofov On- papévny Te Tov" Ayruvos kal “Apioroxpdarny tov Zkeddlov. Lys. 12 § 66, (Theramenes) peréoxe Tuy ’Apioroxpdrous Epywv.

Aristocrates had been one of the envoys who negotiated the peace of 421 B.C. (Thuc. v uy and 24). In 414 B.C. he is represented as a typical ‘aristocrat’ in Arist. Aves, 125, ("Exow) dpuoroxpare?- cba SHdos ef Syrav. (HveAr.) eyo; | hxwoTa: Kal Tov BKeddlov PdedAdTropa, cf. Plat. Gorg. 472 A. He was a raglapyos under the 400 (Thuc. viii g2) and is ex- tolled by the author of the speech against Theocrines, [Dem.] 58 § 67, for taking part in the destruction of the fortress of Eetioneia and restoring the democracy. He was one of the generals at Arginusae (406).

ovSty émavadépoyres Tots mTevTaKto- X'Alous] In Thuc. /.c. the opponents of the 400 insist rods mevraxtoxiAlous épyw Kal Hy dvbpare xphvat drrodeckvivat.

Soxotor S& Kadkds moAtrevOijvar KTA.] Thue. viii 97, 2, obx jKioTa O74 Tov mpwrov xpivov él >’ eno “AOnvator palvovTa: eb TodTevouyres* perpia yap 7% Te és Tovs Alyous Kal és Tods moddods EdyKpacts éyé- vero kai éx movynpav Tar mpayydrwv Toro Tpirov dviveyxe Thy TON. Grote c. 57, V 430.

&& TOv STAwY] c. 4 § 2, dredédoTo 7 ToNrela rots dda mapexouevars. Pol. 1297 5 1, be? 5 riv wodrelay elvae pev ex TaY

S. A.

Te dha exdvTwv pdvor.

XXKIV. <Arginusae and Aegospotami.

§ 1. dre 8 EBSspo xrd.] The archon- ship of Theopompus was in B.c. 411/0; that of Callias in 406/5. Thus, the latter was in the sixth year after the overthrow of the Four Hundred. Mr Kenyon sug- gests that ‘the calculation was probably made by inadvertence from the establish- ment of the Four Hundred, which was in the official year 412—411 B.C.’

vod "AyyednGev] Added to distinguish him from the Callias who was archon in B.C. 412 (c. 32 § 1). Others of the same name were archons in 456 and 377.

It was more usual to remove such am- biguities by adding the archon of the previous year, é.g. Arg. to Arist. Ranae, émt KadXlov rod mer’ ’Avreyer (the Cal- lias of the text); Schol. Ach. 10, KadXlov Tob wera MvnolGeov (the Callias of 456). In Schol. Mud. 971 Phrynis is said to have been victorious at the Panathenaea émt KadXlou dpxovros, probably B.c. 406, as this was the third year of the Olympiad (Wyse).

*Apywotoats] Xen. Hell. i 6, 27—38. Cf. Grote, c. 64, v 501—536; Holm, Gr. Gesch. ii 573 ff, 585.

tods Ska orparryyous] In Xen. Hell. i 5, 16 we have the names of the ten generals: Conon, Diomedon, Leon (also mentioned in 6 § 16, but probably a mistake for Lysias, who is mentioned in 6 § 30, and 7 § 1), Pericles, Erasinides, Aristocrates, Archestratus, Protomachus,

9

14

tn

130

AOHNAIQN COL, 14, 1. 37—COL. 15, 1. 4.

viKkavTas cvvéBn KplOfjvat wd yetpoTovia TavTas, Tods pév ovdE

Thrasyllus, Aristogenes. Of these Conon was blockaded in the harbour of Mitylene, and was therefore not present at the battle of Arginusae (He//. 6 §§ 16 ff.). Leon and Erasinides were with Cleon when he first made for Mitylene (/.c. § 16) and we hear no more of them until we find Erasinides among those engaged in the battle (§ 29). The other generals engaged in it were Aristocrates, Dio- medon, Pericles, Protomachus, Thra- syllus, Lysias, and Aristogenes. We know from Lysias 21 § 8 that Archestra- tus died at Mitylene, though Xenophon is silent on this point; and Erasinides probably left Mitylene on board the ves- sel mentioned in the passage of Lysias just quoted: dmofavéyros 5¢ rovrov (Ar- chestratus) év MuriAjvy ’Epacwldys per’ éuod owérde. (Bauer p. 159, assumes that Leon is the tenth general of whom Xenophon is silent, and that he is not identical with the general who bears the name of Lysias.)

Thus only eight of the ten were en- gaged in the battle; after the battle, the generals were recalled. Two of them, Protomachus and Aristogenes, declined to come. ‘Warned of the displeasure of the people and not confiding in their own case to meet it, they preferred to pay the price of voluntary exile’ (Grote v 510, c. 64).

Tony six returned to Athens. It was ultimately proposed to the Council by Callixenus (Xen. He//. i 7 § 9) and carried, that the case should be decided by the public assembly voting in their tribes by ballot, and that one single vote was to decide the case of all the generals (§ 34, mug Whow dravras xplvew). In the as- sembly it was moved by Euryptolemus that each of the generals should be tried separately (kplvecOat rods dvdpas dlya &xagrov, 2.). The assembly first voted by show of hands (diayetporovia) in favour of this motion, and then against it; thereupon they condemned all the eight

enerals who had taken part in the battle earetidiouyrs Tov vavpaxnodvrwy orpa- Tyyav, éxTd dvTwy), The six who had returned were put to death.

If we now turn from the narrative in Xenophon to the description in the text, we find several discrepancies: (1) a// the ten are put on their trial, not eight alone; (2) they are tried 4g xeporovig, whereas it was only the vote on the rival motions

. (including the decision to try them col-

lectively) that was taken by show of

hands, and the final verdict was given by ballot (Gcayyjpiots). rods pév obdé ow- vavyaxjcavras must refer to Conon who was at Mitylene, and to Archestratus who died there. rods 5 ém’ daAdorplas vews owOevras is so far borne out by Xenophon that, according to the state- ment made in the speech of Euryptolemus (Lc. § 32), ove of the generals was éml egy vewss StatwOels (cf. Diod. xiii ah regards our other authorities, Philochorus (frag. 121) speaks of six generals as having been put to death; Diodorus (xiii 101 —2) describes six only as actually condemned. According’to Andro- tion’s Atthis (quoted by Pausanias vi 7, 7) the decision was limited to the generals who actually took part in the battle. Plut. Per. 37 says of Pericles the younger, rovrov...améxrewev 6 OSiuos pera Trav svotparnyav. The Schol. on Aristoph. Ran. 698 describes four of the generals as having escaped and six as having been put to death. This is somewhat fanci- fully regarded by Bauer (p. 161) as imply- ing that the charge concerned all the ten.

Plato Afol. 32 B says: Gre duels Tods béxa orparyyous robs ovK dvehouévous Tovs éx Tis vaupaxlas éBovrctcacbe déOpbovs kplvew rapavouws, TéT’ éyw povos TOY mMpv- tdvew qvavriwOnv tuw. [Plat.] Axzoch. 368 D states that all the ten orparyyol were condemned to death. This account is carelessly followed by Aelian V. Z. iii 17, ok érepygicev ’APnvaios (Zwxpdrys) Tov Tov déxa orparnyav Odvarov. Cf. Valerius Max. iii 8, 3 and Schol. Aristid. iii 245, 24 Dind.

According to Bauer the ‘dream of Thrasyllus’ (Diod. xiii 97, 6) implies that seven of the generals were put to death. The seventh (he suggests) was Leon. Diodorus (xiii 101 § 5) states that Conon also was accused but acquitted. Bauer considers the account in the text too defi- nite in its terms (2 scharf ausgedrdicht), in so far as it takes no note of Conon’s acquittal; but he actually regards it as more correct than the narrative in Xeno- phon. He suggests that Xenophon passes over the case of Leon who had not been present at the battle, because it would put the injustice of the sentence in too extreme a light. In Bauer’s opi- nion the author can only refer to Leon in the vague plural rods ode curvaupa- xhoavras, which Bauer admits is an ex- aggeration.

CH. 34, lL 5—11. TMOAITEIA

131 cuvvaupaxnoavtas, Tovs § én’ dddoTpias ves cwbévtas, eEatarn- Oévtos Tod Syyov bia tods mapopyicavtas: émevta Bovdopévov AaxeSayroviwy éx Aexedeias amrévat kal ép’ ols éyovowy éxatepor

fol. 15.] elpnvny dyew, évsoe wev éorrovdatov, 7d dé wdHO0s || ody baHKovcer

eEarratnOévres bd Kreopavtos, ds exwruce yevéoOar THv eipnvnv é eOav eis THY exxArAnolav peOvwv Kal Oopaxa évdeduKes, ob dacKwr

6 EZATTATHOENTEC corr. K. 8 ANIENAI;: dmévar J B Mayor, Sidgwick, Wyse, Blass, Herwerden, Naber, Gennadios, coll. Schol. Arist. Raz. 1532, H-L, K-W, kK. Kal Ed OIC EXOYCIN IPHNHN EKATEPO! AEIN; Kal ép’ ols Exovow éxdrepor elpiyny dryety K (H-L) ;—elpyvnv dyew éxdrepor Gomperz 3 ep’ ols Exovow éxdrepot kal elpjvny dyew K-W e Schol. Arist. (et B, in archetypo é@’ ols gxovew éxdrepor supra versum adscriptum fuisse arbitratus). 9 bmjxovoav mavult Herwerden. 10 éfa- warndev Rutherford.

7—12 *Schol. Arist. Raz. 1532; v. Testimonia in p. 129.

e€ararnbévros Tot Sijpov] Xen. Hell. 17 § 33, Uorepov...eynploavro olrwes Tov Shuov eénrdrycav, mpoBodas atrav civar kal éyyunras karacTicat, ews av Kpddcw,

tapopyloayras] in Act. hitherto found only in N. T.

ek AexeAclas darvévar] Decelea had been occupied by Agis since the spring of 413 B.c. (Thuc. vii 19 § 1), and it was re- tained until the end of the Peloponnesian war. On the site, about 15 miles N.E. of Athens, near the entrance of the defile leading between Parnes and Pentelicus from the plain of Athens to Oropus and Tanagra, see Leake’s Demi p. 18 and plan in Curtius, Szeben Karten.

ed’ ols Exovow excirepor xrd.] These overtures after the battle of Arginusae are not mentioned by Xenophon or Diodorus. The terms are the same as those proposed, according to Diodorus (xiii §2), after the battle of Cyzicus in 410 B,C., and opposed by Cleophon (23. 53) (see Grote c. 63, v 458—461). The present overtures are in fact ‘a second edition’ of those put forward four years previously. Xenophon says nothing of them on either occasion. The account in Diodorus led Grote (c. 65 zt. p. 537 n) to suppose that the Scholiast on Aristoph. Ranae ult., who quotes the present pas- sage, had confounded the two battles. It now appears that the Scholiast’s quo- tation was correct. It is not improbable that Diodorus is wrong. It is to the overtures in the text that we should refer the account in Philochorus, fragm. 117—118 Miiller (ap. Schol. ad Eur. Ovest. 371) :—Aaxedaipoviuy mpecBev- capévow epi elphvys dmothoaytes ol "AOnvato. ob mpoojxavro. Cf. Schol. on 1.722. Grote v 460 n.

€ararnlévres bd KXeopavros}] Inc. 28 § 4 Cleophon (and Callicrates) are described as having ‘deceived the people.’ Cleophon’s action is described as follows in Lysias 13 § 8, dre yap 4 rpwrn éxkdnola, rept ris elpiyns éylyvero, Kat of mapa Aakedaipovlwy axovres edeyov ed’ ofs eroi- pot elev tiv elpjvnv moetobar Aakedaiud- vio, el kaTacKkagely TO TELXWY TOY LaKpaY émt déka orddua éxarépov, Tére duels Te, @ dv. 7A, odx twéoxere axovoavres rrepl Tay Texav Tis karacxaphs, KXeopav te brép tuav mdvrwv dvacras dyreirev ws ovdevi tpdrm oldy re ely movely raira. Aeschin. 7. Z. 76, KXcogpuv...daroxdyew qretha paxyalpe tov Tpdxndov, el Tis TIS elpquns wynoOjoerat, and J. L.151, ravra- tmaow ékppwy éyévero (with schol. on 150, where el 71s elpjvn yerynOjoera, printed elpyyns yevynris éora., is clearly a mistake for elpyyns yn Ojoera). Cf. Arist. Raz. ad fin. Kyeopuv 5 paxéoOw, and Holden’s Onomasticon s.v.

peOvav Kal Odpaka évSe5ukes] It has been suggested (by Hartman) that we should read @épaxa éxwv and interpret the latter as a metaphorical phrase equivalent to weOdwv (coll. Aristoph. Vesp. 1195 etc). If so, the writer has misinterpreted a phrase borrowed from a comedy and quite out of place here. But there is nothing unreasonable in Cleophon’s appearing in armour. His life was not safe, as may be inferred from the animosity with which he was regarded by members of the oli- garchical party (Aristoph. Haz. 1504, Lys. 13 § 7 ff., 30 § 10 ff.). (Herwerden’s n.) It will be remembered that Cicero, at the time of the Catilinarian conspiracy, went down to the Camfus Martius armed with a lata insignique lorica (Cic. pro Murena,

§ 52). Q—2

I

mn

20

132 AOHNAIQN COL. 15, 1. 4—34.

érutpéew av pn macas apdat Aaxedayucrvios Tas Toes. ov 2 na a \

xXpntapevos Se Karas TOTE Tots mpdypyalot], wer’ ov ToAdY ypdvoV oe \ e , a \ of y 2 > 9 y

éyvocay thy duap[tiav]. Te yap varepov eres em ‘AdeEiov dpxovros nTvyncay tiv ev Aiyos motapois vavpayiav, é& is auvéBn Kiptov yevouevov THs TéAews Avoavdpov KaTacTHaat Tovs THS elpnvys yevouévns adtois ef’ @ Te 3 TONTEVTOVTAL THY TaTpLOV ToALTEiay, oi pev SnpuoTtKot Siac@lew érreipavTo Tov Shpov, Tév bé yvwpipav oi wev év Tais ératpelats ” ‘ el U e€ \ \ | ene I > 7

bytes Kai Tv puyadwv of wera THY eipnvnv KaTeNOovTes ddALyapyias éreOupour, of 8 év érarpeia pev ovdeusad cuyxabectares [a]AXws

rebti pour, écraupela pig ory a > > rd a a

5é Soxodvres ovdevds émidelmecOat tev ToNTOY THY TadTpLOV moditeiay éCntouv: av jv pev kal “Apyivos «al “Avutos Kal Krecropav cal Doppicvos nal repo moddol, mpoerotynKes 8é

TplakovTa TpoT@ ToL@be.

12 adic (K):

c 18 AlacwZEIN ; -owoew K}; -cdcat hiatu admisso J B Mayor et Wyse; -c@tew Blass, K-W, H-L, K%. 20 apxian corr. J B Mayor, Rutherford, Blass, Frinkel.

dpdot Naber, Gennadios, Richards, K-w, H-L, B e schol. Arist.

22 etmtAlTrEecOal : Kontos, Hultsch (H-L).

émtXelr. K, B, (‘an AelareoOac?’) K-W; daodeur. Richards, Gennadios, 23 EZHTOYN (K, K-W,.B): é{jAouv H-L,

§ 2. ém ’AreElov] B.c. 405/4.

Seiten Tv—vavpax lav] an excep- tional, but quite intelligible, phrase for expressing ‘defeat in the naval engage- ment.’ We have something like it in Aristides ii 334 Dind., Zo@oxdjjs Bido- KXéous Hrraro...rov Olélarovy.

éy Alyos rotapois] Xen. Hell. ii 1, 21—32. Plut. Lysander,c. 11—12. Grote u. 65, Vv 542—7.

AtcavSpov] Lysias 12 §§72—76. Plut. Lys. 15, Tpidxovra pev év doret, déxa dé év Tlapate? xataoricas dpxyovras, Grote c. 65, V 559:

3. Tv wdrptov modutelav] c. 31, 1.3. Xen. Hell. ii 3 § 2, eoke To Shum tpidxovra dvdpas éEX€cOa, of ros TaTplous vouous Evyypdwwor, Kad’ ods modirevcovct, The term (as Mr Kenyon observes) was ‘sufficiently vague,’ indicating generally the constitution of Solon; but, as the virtue of the constitution depended on its working, it was possible for moderate democrats, extreme oligarchs, and mode- rate aristocrats alike to hope that it would be modelled according to their views. Diodorus (xiv 3) recounts the arguments of the opposing parties at some length, and describes Theramenes as urging the Athenians to follow 77 rarply mohirelg.

Tov yuplpav] 2§1,5§ 1, 16§9, 28§ 2.

ératpelats| Cf. Thuc. iii 82, 8; viii 54, 4. Hermann, Staatsalt. 70, 2 and 103 meliriann: Ant. p. 363 E. T.

’Apxivos] Dem. Zimocr. p. 742 ois 35, *Apxlvov...rod karahaBéyros bul kal werd ve Tos Oeods alrwwrdrovu bvros THs Kabdov TG Ohup kal dda ToAAG Kal Kaa memo- Aereumvov Kal eorparyynkéros awoAhaxts. Isocr. 18 § 2, Aeschin. c. Cfes. 187, 195. Inf. c. 40 §§ 1, 2

"Avutos] In the speech made by Theramenes in his defence, in Xen. Hed/. ii 3 § 42, Anytus is mentioned with Thrasybulusand Alcibiades: ov« af édéxet poe ovre OpacvBovdov odre “Avurov obre "AdkiBiddnv duyadevew, and 7. § 44, wérepov olere OpacdBovhov | kal “Avurov kal rods dddous guyddas a eyw éyw Badov ay evOdde BobrccBar ylyverBat q & ovToL mparrovew;

KaAeropav] the proposer of the rider to the proposal of Pythodorus respecting the establishment of the 400 (29 § 3). Isocr. Catlim. 11 § 30. He is possibly the same as the son of Aristonymus and pupil of Socrates who gives his name to Plato’s Cleitophon. In Plut. Mor. 805 KaAerodav (mentioned with Cleon) is probably a mistake for KAcopav.

Poppiorvos] ‘Yréesrs to Lysias Or. 34, Dionys. Halic. de Lysia, c. 32, Tod yap Ojuou KaredOdvros éx Tleparws, Kal wnge- capévou Siadttcacbat mpds tous & adore, kai pndevds Tw “yeyernuévay panoucaxev, ddous dé bvros, uw wddw 7d TAROOs els Tovs evmrépous UBpliy Thy Epxatay é£ovclay KeKo- pucpevor, kal mroddav vmép Tovrou ~ywwoue-

CH, 34, 1. 12—CH. 35, 1. 5. TIOAITEIA 133

padicta Onpapévys. Avadvdpov Se mpocbeuévov toils dduyapyt- 25 xois kaTaTrAayels 6 Siwos jvayKxacOn xeupotoveiy THv ddeyapytav. éypanpe Sé 70 Wygiopa Apaxovtidns ’AdiSvaios.

35. of wév ody TpLdKovTa TodTOV Tov TpoTTOV KaTécTHaaY em TIv@o0dapou dpyovros. yevouevor S€ KUptoe THS TOdEWS TA bev ddr Ta Sokavra repli ths TwodTelas wapewpwv, Tevtaxocious b& BovreuvTas Kal Tas dAXas apyds Kataorhcavres éx mpoxpitav éx TOV Xidiwv, Kal mpocEeAduevor ahicw avtois Tod Tleparéws

or

XXXV 1 KATECTHCE corr. K. 5 éx rav xiNwy delet Marindin: revraxiorxt- Alwy? K-W, ék rev TevraxicxiMwy Thompson, H-L; é« ray gudavy Hude. xal ras Gras dpxas karaoricayres éx mpoxplrav & Tav xilwy post micBopdpor in c. 33, g ponit Harberton, mutato xAlwy in revraxicxiAlwy et nostro in loco wpocehépevor de scripto.

€ Tripatwc: ITepaéws K, K-w; Iletpatds H-L, B.

TEsTIM. XXXIV 27 *Schol. Arist. Ves. 157 Apaxovrlys :...20ru yap obros 6 7d mrepl Tay TpidKxovTa Whgitua mepl dduyapxlas ypdwas, ws’Ap. év modurelacs (Frag. 373", 4113).

(Class. Rev. vi 123).

XXXV 5—6 Bekk. Axecdota, p. 235 déka twes elol: Séxa joav Twes ev Ietpace? of dpiavres kara Thy rupayvlda r&v rpidxovra. dAdd Kal mpocératay adrois ebOdvas Ths

apxijs Sotva Tpid.Kovra xarddvvow (c. 38, 5).

Mh dyvoipev Sé bre Erepol elor déxa, ods ’"AOnvaior elAovro wera Thy THY

vow héywr, Populords rs Tay cuyKaTedObv- Tw geTa TOD Syuov ywwpnv elonyhoaro, rods pev pevyovras KaTiévat, THY 5é Tod- relay wh wow, GANG Tols THY iv exovct mapadoivat, Bovouévww Taira yevérOar cai Aaxedaiyovlwy, Grote c. 66 vi 43 Schémann, Ox Grote, § 11, holds that it is wrong to regard Phormisius as an ad- herent of the oligarchical party; at the same time he was no friend to extreme democracy. Schémann’s view is sup- ported by the text.

He was sent with Epicrates and others as an envoy to Artaxerxes before the Co- rinthian war and accepted valuable gifts from the king. The envoys were attacked for this in the IIpéoBes of Plato, ap. Athen. 229 F (frag. 119 with Kock’s note). He is mentioned in Arist. Raz. 965 as an admirer (ua@yrhs) of Aeschylus. Didymus, in Schol. ad /oc., describes him as dpacrixds kal rhy xdunv rpépwv kal PoBepds doxGy elvar.

Avodv8pov—rots éAvyapxtkots] Dio- dorus, xiv 3.

Wnidiopa] Isocr. 15 § 67, of wey yap Vhdionare wapadaBovres Thy wodw.

Apaxovrl8ys] Lysias 12 § 73, Onpa- Hévys éxéXeurey buds Tpidxovra dvdpdow emirpdpar ray won, kal TH ToAtTela XpHoOae qv Apaxovrlins drépavev. Aristoph. Vesp. 157 with Schol. He was himself nomi- nated as one of the Thirty (Xen. Hell. ii 3.§2; Hypereid. ap. Harp. s.v.). Cf. Plat. Com, frag. 139 Kock.

XXXV—XXXVII. The Rule of the Thirty.

XXXV § 1. of...cpidxovra] Dio- dorus (xix 32 etc) is the first writer who calls them of tp. rUpayvo. The same designation occurs in Plut. S#d/. 5 and in later writers.

él Tlv068wpou dpxovros] dy ’APnvaion, bre év ddeyapxle npébn, odk évoudtovow, aN’ dvapxlay Tov éviavrdv xadodow, Xen. ffell, ii 3 § 13 cf. however Lys. 7 § g.

7a piv dd\\a—Povdevtds—katacri}- cavres] Xen. Hell. ii 3 § 11, alpedévres ép’ @re Evyypdyar vouous, cab’ otorwas TodiTrevcowTo, TovTous pev del e&weddov tuyypdgew re xal drodexvivar, Bovrdyv de kal Tas das dpxas Katéornoay, ws édéxee avrois. tas éddas dpxds, ¢.g. that of King-Archon which was filled by Patrocles, Isocr. Callim. 18 § 6.

ék mpokplrav é& tav xAlwv] ‘out of those selected beforehand, z.e. out of the tooo.’ If xAlwy is right, the reference is to the Knights. Cf. Philochorus, fragm. too, ap. Hesych. s.v. iwmfs, lriels (‘Inrmedow Schow)’ adn’ elow inmijs dvdpes dyabot x{Atoe [Aristoph. Zg. 225]. cvornua Tokenmkav dvdpov xilwv trmous TpepbvTwv. Pirbyopos bé év rerdpry elpyke, wore Kare- oTdbnoay xihior. Seddopa yap jv larmréwy TrHON Kara xpbvov’AOnvatos. Cf. Gilbert’s Gr. St.i 305. The Knights were generally credited with oligarchical sympathies. Cf. Martin, Les Cavaliers Athéniens, 1886,

10

134 AOHNAIQN COL. 15,1. 34—COL. 16,1. 13.

La apxovtas déxa Kal tod Seopwrtnpio puraxas Evdexa Kal pactuyo- i opous tpia[xlocious vrnpéras, Katetyov THY médw Si éavTav. TO \ a a Hey obv Tato péTpLoL Tois TodiTaLs [Hloal[y] Kai mpoceroLovvTo 8 , A UG , \ , >? "Eh 4 \ loxely THY TaTpLoV To[AiTleiav, Kal TOUS T giarrov Kai ’ , , “y \ Lr) A a 2 Apxeotpatou vopous tovs mepl Tav Apeotrayitav Kabetrov && *Apeiou [rayou] Kal rév Lorwvos Oecpdy boo. Scapa Byt[Ho Jers elyov, kal TO Kipos 5 wv év toils Sicactais x[até]Avcav, as éravopOobvtes Kai rovotvt[es] avaugicBhyntntov THY ToduTEay’

7 banp. del. Rutherford. €AYTWN: adrav J B Mayor sc. rwv banperav (H-L). 8 rodtredpace Poste. 9 AIOIKEIN (K coll. c. 27, 11): due Kontos, Gertz,

K-W, H-L, B, coll. c. 13, 18. 11 Alam@izBHT. 13 ANAMIZBHTHTON. Post annum 329 A.C. etiam in titulis Atticis apparet ¢ aut of pro o, e.g. évdéguous

(329 A.C.), PHpegua (paullo post 100 A.C.), Meisterhans, p. 68°.

pp. 472—480, Les Cavaliers et les Trente.

It is improbable however that the select body, out of which the 500 and the other officials were appointed, numbered only 1coo. Hence it has been proposed to read mevraxicxiAiwy (or éx Tov m.), but (as observed by Mr Kenyon) we know of no such body as in existence at this time, unless it is vaguely applied (as under the 400) to all capable of bearing arms.

tov TTaparéws dpxovras Séka] Plut. Lysander 15, déxa 6é év Tletpace? xara- orjoas dpxovras. Plat. “fist. vii p. 324 B. Scheibe, Oligarchische Umwal- sung, p. 68.

eyBexa] c. 52 § 1. Xen. Hell. ii 3 § 54. This new board of Eleven was under the control of Satyrus, one of the most violent partisans of the Thirty.

pacriyopépous] The word occurs in Thue. iv 47. Xen. Hed. ii 3 § 23 men- tions certain vedyicxor, who carried out the orders of the Thirty, but their number is not specified.

§ 2. pérpror] cf. Xen. Hell. ii 3 § 12. The Thirty began by attacking the ouko- gdvra alone. Plut. Aor. ii pp. 959, 998. Lf. 1, 18. |

*EqudArov] c. 25 § 2.

*Apxertparov], Possibly the orparyyes of that name in the Peloponnesian war, a son of Lycomedes (Thuc. i 57 § 4; Xen. Hell. i 5, 16; ii 2, 15). He died at Mitylene (Lys. 21 § 8). In Thue. viii 74 § t we have an Archestratus, who is described as the father of Chaereas.

Mr Kenyon conjectures that ‘probably Archestratus was one of the supporters of Ephialtes, and some of the laws curtailing the power of the Areopagus stood in his name.’

KaQetAov é£ “Apelov wdyou] This im- plies that the laws of Ephialtes &c limiting the powers of the Areopagites were actu- ally preserved on the Areopagus and that the Thirty removed them from the hill of Ares and thereby virtually repealed them. The context further implies that the laws of Solon were also preserved on the Areo- pagus, whereas they were really preserved in the Prytaneum (note on 7 § 1, KpBers). Possibly we should strike out é "Apelov mayouv. As a milder remedy we may remove the comma after efyov, so as to bring the laws of Solon here referred to under the influence of the verb carédvoav : but as the text stands, the laws of Solon are coupled to those of Ephialtes and Archestratus and can only be separated from them by striking out 7’ before *E@idArov.

Zddwvos] Schol. Aeschin. 1 § 39, of 0’ TUpavvot...éduujvavto rods Apdxovros Kal LoAwvos vopous.

Oerpav] c. 12 § 4 1. 45, in the Iambic lines from Solon.

SiapgioByryoes] Inc. g § 2 it has been remarked that the right of appeal to a lawcourt was one of the strongest points in the democracy as constituted by Solon. In the same passage the ambiguities in, the law of property and the law of ‘ heir- esses’ are described as giving additional power to the lawcourts. Some of these ambiguities are removed by the Thirty and the power of the lawcourts (and the commons) vo ¢anfo diminished.

dvapdirBryryrov] an epithet of xplows in Pol. iii 13, 1283 4 4, and coupled with gavepdv in 1332 6 20 and Categ. 5,3 4 4. The adverb is found in Categ. 8, 11 2 2.

CH. 35, 1. 6—23. TIOAITEIA 135 Col. 16.] ofo[v] <rév> || rept rod Sodvas Ta éavtod 6 dv e0édy Kiptov Tow- cates Kabara€, tas 8¢ mpocovtaas SucKorias ‘édv pity) pariady 7 ynpas <évexa> 7} yuvarxl miOopuevos’ adetrov, das pity) H Tos auxopavrais Epodos: cpoiws 8¢ Todr’ pwr Kal eri Tov ddrov. 3 kar’ apyas pev odv Tadr’ émoiovy Kal Tos cuxodavtas Kal Tovs 7@ Oru mpos xaptv outdodvTas Tapa To BéXTLCTOV Kal KaKoTpay- povas évtas Kal Tovnpods avypovy, éf ols Exaipev 1) TOALs 20

4 yeyvopévots, nryovpevos Tod Bedtictou ydpw To.eiy adtovs. érrel

Se THv Tod éeyxpatéctepoy Exyov, ovdevds amelyovTo THY ToN-

TOV, GN aéxrewov Tors Kal Tails ovaiass Kal TH yéver Kal ToIs

15

14 olov <rov> K-w dy <tis> H-L. TIOIHCANTEC: érolycay ‘emendatio incerta, nec. praestat Tou avres Kabdmaé, Tas mpoootcas duoKxonias’ K-W. 15 MANIWNHHPWN, Maviar 7 yipsy K, K-W: paviwy 7 ‘yipws <Wvexa> Blass et Wyse, coll. [Dem.] 46 § 14; wavy 9 yipws <7 papudkay i vooou evexey mapavowy> Poland; eadem (nisi quod évexa malunt et mapavowy non accipiunt) H-L. 16 TTIGOMENOC (edd.): meiMduevos Wyse et Poland coll. [Dem.] /.c. ‘sed praestat

aoristus (= mea Gels)’ H-L.

19 xal secl. K-w.

20 €XAIPON propter participium

yyoUpevoe retineri posse putat K, retinent H-L, B: &aipev Sidgwick, Rutherford (k-w,

H-L). H-L, K-W.

21 frirn (edd.).

23 ATTEKTEINAN (K):

améxrewvov Blass, Kontos,

wept Tov Sovvat td cavrot @ dv ery] Plut. Sol. 21, eddoxiunoe & kav TQ repl Siadnxav vouw* mpdrepov yap ovk éeéfy, GAN’ ev r@ yéver Tod reOvynxdros eeu Ta Xphuara cal rov olkov karapéverr, 6 8 Bb Botderal res érurpéwas, el wh watdes wae yj, Sotva: Ta adrod KTA. od phy dvédqv ye wédw 005’ amdGs Tas Sdcers epfixer, ANN’ ef uy voowy evexev } dapudxwv 7 Secpav 7 dvdyKky Karaoxedels -yuvaikl mecOouevos, See note on Dem. Left. § 102.

xa@daa£] ‘absolutely.’ Under Solon’s law it was only in the event of a man’s having no legitimate children that he could make a will at all. Possibly the Thirty made the right absolute.

‘tas mporovoras SuckoAlas] either ‘the inconvenient limitations attaching thereto’ or ‘the additional inconvenient limita- tions’ ; : probably the former.

édy py} vudy—miBdpevos] [Dem.] 46 § 14, éay BH pavedy a yhpws 7 gpupudcwv 7 vocov évexa, 4a yuvackt mwetOdpmevos, and § 16, vocotvra n pap- haxavra 4 yuvackl retObpevov q bao Yipws }bwo paviay 7 bd dvd-yxns Twos karadypdévra. 48 § 56, dxupd ye radra mdvra évonobérnoey ewar 6 Dédwv, 6 Te dv Tes yuvarnt med uevos mparry. Lys. frag. 74, Ths diabécews.. qv éxeivos dtéBero ov Tapayowy obde yuvaued mecabels. TIsaeus 6 § 9, dav uy dpa povels 7 bard yhpws KTH.

§ 3. robs cvKopdytas krd.], Xen. Hell. .

ii 3, 12, mp@rov yey ods mdvres qoeoar ev TH Onuoxparig ard ouKopayrias fGvras cal Tots Kaols kd-yabois Bapeis Gyras cvAap- Bavovres bwiyov Bavdrov: kal 7 Te Bovdh Hdéws airav xarepyplfero, of Tre dAdot, doot Evvyderay éavrois wh ovTes ToLorot, ovdev HxOovro. Lysias 13 § 5, (of rpid- Kovra) pdoKovres Xphvat Tov ddikwv Kadapav mwojoa. TH wodw. Plato, then a young man of 24, and a nephew of Critias, was at first misled by these splendid professions, Lpist. 324 BC (Grote, v 562).

mpds Xap] (Adyew rt) Xen. Mem. iv 4, 4: Hell. vi 3, 7; Rhet.it, 1354 6 34, axpodcbat mpds xapu. Pol. iii 16, 1287 @ 38, ToAha mpds érjperav Kal Xapwv mparrew. Eth. 10,2, 1173 6 33, (6 pldos) mpds ra-yabov buerelv Soxe?, (6 xdAak) wrpds Hdovqv.

Theramenes protested against putting people to death simply because they had enjoyed influence under the democracy: ‘Even you and I (he reminded Kritias) have both said and done many things for the sake of popularity’ Xen. He/. ii 3 § 15 (Grote, v 565).

§ 4. ovSevos dmelxovro xrd.] Xen. Fell. ii 3 § 14, obs EBovdovro EwedhauBavor, ovxére Tovs tovnpovs Te Kal ddLyou délous.

drékrewov «rA.] 26. § 15 (6 Kpertas) mpomerys qv él 7d moddovds droxrelverv, and § 17, dmroOvnckéyrwy modhOv Kat adixws. Among those who were put to death were Strombichides and other officers who were attached to the demo-

25

© Re

10

136 AOHNAIQN COL. 16, 1. 13-—COL, 17, 1 2. akvipacw mpoéyovras, ireEaipovpevot te Tov PdBov Kai Bovds- pevoe Tas ovcias Siaprdfew: Kab ypdvov Svatreadvtos Bpayxéos, ov« éhatrous dvnpyKecay 7) yidlovs TmrevTaKoc tous.

36. obtws S58 Ths odrews brropepoperns, Onpapévys ayavaxtav emi Tots yeryvouévous THS pev doedyelas abtois Tapyver TavcacOat, petadodva, 88 Tév mpayudtwv ois BedTiotols. of Sé mpawTov évavTinbévtes, érel Sueordpynoay ot Oyou mpos TO TAHOoS Kal mpos Tov Onpayévnv oixelws elyov of moddoi, PoBnOévtes pu) mpoorarns yevouevos Tod Sipov Katadvon THY Suvacreiay KaTa- Ayousw Tay TodiTaY TpLEXLNoUS ws peTASwGOVTES THS TodTElas. Onpapévys 8 radu éritipG nab Tovrous, mpaTov pév oT, Bovdo- pevot weTadodvas Tois értereéot, TpLoxKLALo“s povors peTadiddact, ws & tovTe TS wANOEL THs apeThs wpispevns, eel Sts dbo Ta évay- TiwtaTa Trawdctw, Biavov Te THY Gpynv Kal TOY apXopéevwv HTT KatracKevdalovres. of 5¢ ToUTwY pev Ouywpnoay, Tov be KaTaroYoV

24 dtuduaot H-L. 6évros Herwerden. XXXVI 1 olrw H-L.

Aéyouct H-L. CKEYAZO NTEC.

7 AtcxiAloye corr. K.

2 TIN (K-W).

25 AiatreconTtoc (edd.)?: d:adurdvros J B Mayor, dted-

3 TIPWTOI corr. K. 6 kara- Ka 9 peradidbacw H-L. 12 METO-

XXXV 26 Heraclidis epitoma, Frag. 611, 6° (locus infra exscriptus).

cracy (Lysias 13 § 13; 30§ 14); Lycurgus who belonged to one of the most eminent sacred gentes in the State ([Plut.] Viz. Orat. p. 838); a wealthy man named Antiphon ; Leon of Salamis (Plat. Aol. p. 32); and even Niceratus the son, and Eucrates the brother, of Nicias, Xen. Hell. ii 3, 39—413 Lysias 18 §§ 5—8 (Grote v 566).

bmrefatpotpevor—oBov] ‘cunningly re- moving (making away with) all whom they had reason to fear.’ Plat. Rep. 567 B, and in pass. Thuc. viii 70 (of the Four Hundred) dvépas...dréxreway od moddovs of éddxouv émirHderor elvar drretat- peOfva. Either rov oBov, as suggested by Mr W. L. Newman (Class. ev. v 164 4), is the ‘object of their fear’ (a some- what poetic usage), or we must render the passage ‘getting quit of their own apprehension,’

X'Alovs twevtakoclovs] Heraclides g, kal dvetdov ov éddooous xiAlwy ¢’. Isocr. Areop. 67 (of the Thirty), ol wey yap yy@l- opate rapadaBorres Thy wodw TevTaKxoglous wey xal xirlovs rOv modtray axplrous dméxrewav, Paneg. 131. Aeschin. Cites. § 235. Cf. Grote v 577. The Schol.

on Aeschin. 1 § 39 quotes Lysias for the number 2500.

XXXVI §1. drodepopévys] c. 25 § 1.

Onpapévys x7r.] Xen. Hell. ii 3 §§ 15 —I7.

Stermdpyoav] 5. Adyov, Xen. Hell. v 1 ,

§ 25.

poByévres—trodtrelas] Xen. Hell. ii 3 § 18, éx rovrou pévrot Kpirlas xal of dddoe Tuv TpidKovTa, 46n poBodmevor Kat ody qkiora Tov Onpapevnv, ph cupprvelnoay mpods adrdy ol modtra, Karaddyouat Tpic- xAlous robs peOéEovras 5) T&v mpayudrwr.

TporTarns TOU Sypov] c.2 1.9; c.28§ 2.

§ 2. ©. madd ériripg] Xen. Hell. ii 3 § 19, 68’ av ©. kai mpds rabra édeyer, re drorov doxoln éaurg@ ye elvar rd mparov nev Bovdondvous Tods Bedtiorous Tay ToAL- Tay Kowwvors Tojcacbar Tpioxedlous, domep Tov dpiOuov rodrov exovrd twa, dvdyxnv Kadods Kdyabods elvar, Kai od? tw tovrwy orovdalous of7’ évrds Tobrw movypovs oly re etn yeréoOa erera 3’, €py,. 6p@ eywye Svo quas Ta évayribrara mparrovras, Bialay re THY dpxhy Kal yrrova Tuy dpxonévww karackevagouevous.

tov 8 Katddoyov xrd.] The narra- tive in Xenophon (Hel. ii 3 § 20) pro-

CH. 35, 1. 24--CH. 37, 1.6. TOAITEIA 137

TOV TpLTXLALwWY TrOADY fev YpdvoY DrrepeBadXovTo Kal Tap avTois * épdratrov Tovs éyvwopévous, OTe dé kal SdEaev adtois exbépew Tovs pev e&nreupov Tav <éy>yeypaypévav, Tos 8 avrevéypahov tov éwbev.

37. 76n dé Tod yeymadvos everTdTos, KatadaBovtos Opacv- BovrAov pera Tav guyddav Dury, cal nata THY oTpaTiay iv eEnryayov of TptaKovTa KaKas aTroywphcartes, yvacay TaY pev -GdrAwv Ta Grra TaperécOat, Onpapévynv Se SvapOeipar rovde <Tov> TpdTrov. vdpmous elonveyxay eis THY Bovdny dv0 KedevovTes || 5

4

5

da, fol. 17.] €mreyecporovelv, av O pev els adToKpatopas érroies TOUS TpLaKoVTA

13 yrTepBadA.

14 cvppépew van Leeuwen.

15 [ETPAMMENON (K):

<éy>yeypaupévww Herwerden (H-L, K-W, B).

XXXVII 2 xal secl. K-w.

tpidxovra del. Richards (H-L), ante éyyweoay ponit J B Mayor, 5 <rdv> K-W, H-L, K’, B, coll. c. 7, 8.

corr. K.

CTPATIAN K, H-L, B: orparelay K-w.

3 of € _& Traplecdal

ceeds immediately with an account of the review of the 3000 in the agora and of the rest (rav éw rod xaradéyou) else- where. The xaradoyos is the list of the 3000 referred to by Theramenes in Xen. Fiell, ii 3 § 52, lkeredw...uh érl Kpirig elvar ééadelpew...dv dv BovAnrat, aN’ vrep vouov obrot éypayay mepl rav év Te karahoyy, KaT& TolTov...ryv Kplow elvat, ib. 4 § 28.

dvrevéypadov] The word is used by Dem., but only in the pass.

XXXVII § 1. rot xeupdvos éverraros] the winter of B.c. 404/3.

KatakaBovros — PudArxjv] Xenophon (Hell. ii 3, 23—56) completes the story of the opposition of Theramenes to the proceedings of the Thirty, and his con- sequent death, before relating the capture of Phyle by Thrasybulus. In ii 4, 1, after the death of Theramenes, the opponents of the Thirty were compelled to withdraw, and many of them went to Megara and Thebes, - Thereupon (é« rovrov § 2) Thrasybulus dpunOels éx OnBav as oly EBSounKovta Budyv xwplov KkaradapBdver isxupév. In the text the occupation of Phyle, and the defeat of the force sent out by the Thirty against the holders of that fort, are described as the cause of the dis- armament of the general body of citizens and the execution of Theramenes.

This implies that Thrasybulus held Phyle for a longer time than has generally been supposed. It was not long after the surrender of Athens, on the 16th of Munychion (end of April), that the Thirty came into power, probably early in May,

404. speaking immediately after the battle which ensued on the occupation of Munychia, describes the rule of the Thirty as having lasted for eight months. This brings us to the end of December, 404. It was not until the small force which originally occupied Phyle, variously stated as 30, 60, 70 or over 100 (Grote v 585), had increased to rooo that Thrasy- bulus advanced on Athens. Mr Kenyon suggests that ‘they probably remained for two or three of the winter months at Phyle.’ The fact that it was during the winter that Phyle was in occupation is illustrated by the narrative of the snow- storm which thwarted the Thirty in their attempt to blockade Phyle after their first: repulse (Xen. Heli. ii 4, 2). Tad SAG tapedérbar] Xen. Hell. ii 3 § 20, Ta Bra wayTwy rAHY Tov TpLoXAlwY mapelNovro, and 26. § 41. Pol. 13114 8 ff. vopous elorjveykav] asyndeton. avroxpdropas—rpioxitAlov] Xen. Hell. ii 3 § §1 (Critias /oguitur), éore dé év rots Kawots vouos Tay per ev Tots TptoxeAlots évrwv pndéva drobv jokey dvev THs buere- pas wWidov, trav 6 gw rod Karaddyou kuplous elvas Tous Tpidxovra Oavaroiy. yw ody, py, Onpayevny rourovl ééareldw ex Tou Kataddyou EvvdoKolv dracw july Kal roorov, én, Hucts Oavaroduev. This im- plies that there were other xawol vdpot,

Cleocritus in Xen. Hell. ii 4, 21,.

and the second given in the text, but un- .

recognised by Xenophon, would be one of them. But if it had already been passed before the meeting of the Council at which Critias denounced Theramenes,

10

15

138 AOHNAIQN COL. 17, 1. 2—38.

TOV TOALTGY arroKTelvas TOUS put) TOD KaTAAOyoU peTéYoVTAS TOY Tpiayirior, o & erepos éxoAve Kowwvelv THs Tapovans ToALTelas boot Tuyxdvovawy To év ’Hetwwveia tetyos KaTacKaypayres, h Tos Terpaxoo lois evavTiov TL mpatavres [}] tots xatacKxevacacs op ™porépav ehuyapy iar oly] ériyyavev dpporépay KeKoLveovntcars 0 Onpapévys, date cuvéBaivev érixvpwbérvtav Tav vopwv zw Te ylyvecOar ths moduteias adtov Kal Tods TpLdKovTa Kuplous elvat Bavarobytas. dvaipebévros Sé Onpapévous Ta Te Sarda rrapetdovTo 2 TAVTOY TAHY THY TploxXidALwy, Kal év Tois Gos TOAY Tpds @pornta Kal rrovnpiay éméSocav.— — mpéoBes méuryravtes eis

7 oe TpioxiAlwy delere vult B. 9 Tuyxdvovet H-L. 10 7 secl. K-W, H-L. 14 @aNaTOyNTAc (K, K-w) defendit Kontos coll. Thuc. v 34, Plat. Leg. 878 E, Polyb. iii 85, 2 etc.: @avarodvy Lacon, Keil, (+avréy Poland), coll. Xen. “ell. ii 13, 51.

16 rpéoBes <at> J B Mayor, Blass, Hude (H-L, kK, B): ante mpésBes lacunam indi- cant K-w; verba mrpéoBets—égpovpovy olim in fine capitis 36 locum habuisse censet van

Leeuwen.

the latter would obviously have withdrawn from Athens. The only alternative is to suppose, with Mr Kenyon, that Critias proposed the second law on the spot and ‘forced it down the throat of the council by the threat of armed force.’ This is not inconsistent with striking the name .of Theramenes out of the list of the 3000, the only detail recorded by Xenophon, who omits the second lawas superfluous, and as therefore marring the dramatic effect of his narrative.

Cf. Isocr. 18 § 16, obdéva Pavyoouat Tov TokiTay obre Xphuact (nuiwoas ovre mept Tod cdparos els klvduvoy KaTacThoas, otr’ éxk wey Tav peTexdvTwy Tis modtrelas déadeiwas els 5¢ Tov wera Avodvdpov Kard- oryor eyypayas.

16 ty Herwwvelq retxos kararkdipavres] ‘the projecting mole which contracted and commanded, on the northern side, the narrow entrance of Peiraeus,’ Grote c. 62, v 403, 408, 412. See Map of Peiraeus in Curtius, Steben Karten, no. 2.

Thue. viii go § 1, 70 év rH Hetiwvela kahoupery Teixos érootyro. 7235. go § 3, qv 6é Tov relxous } youn arn, as ey Onpayevas kal of wer adrov, obx wa Tovs év Lauw, Av Bla émumréwor, wh SéFwvrar és rov Tlerpasd, ddd’ tva rods rodeulous mad- dov, 8rav Bothuvrat, kal vavel kal weve beEwvrar. xnr7 yap éore Tov Tletpards n Herusvera, kal ree alray evOvs 6 eomdous éorly, ib. 92 $ Io, Tov On ane porwr

“el doxel abr@ én’ dya0@ 7d retxos olkodo-

pet bat, Kal el dwewvoy elvar kadapeber. 6 dé, elmep al éxelvors Soxel KaSaupelv, Kal avrg &py Evvdoxe’v, Kal évrevOev evOds

dvaBavres ol Te OmNirat Kal-mrodol Trav ex Tov Tlepaws avOpirwv xarésxarrov rb telxiopa. In [Dem.] Zheocr. § 17 p. 1343, the incident is wrongly referred to the time of the Thirty.

§ 2. &mAa tapelAovro] This has already been mentioned as resolved by the Thirty, in § 1. Xenophon places the actual disarmament before the execution of Theramenes, /el/. ii 3, 20.

Trohd mpds Gpdrnra—emwéSorav] Xen. Fell. ii 3, 21, wodAods pev ExOpas evexa améxrewvov, woddovs 5é xpnudrwv. It was after the disarmament, and before the death of Theramenes, that, according to Xenophon, ten of the wérotxot became the victims of the Thirty. Among these was Polemarchus, the brother of Lysias (Lys. 12 § 17).—Categ. 10, 13 @ 24 émtdoly dv els 7d BéXtLov eivat, Ath. 10, 8, 1175 @ 35, értdddacr els Td olxetov epyov. Magn. Mor. i 9, 1186 6 29, mpds & wadrov émidl- Souev. Isocr. 33 B, é mpds evdatmovlay.

awpéo Bets mépipavres] This asyndeton is not justifiable on the same grounds as vouous elojveyxay in the second sentence of this chapter; and betrays some serious disturbance of the text. ‘There is no connexion whatever between the first of these sentences and those that go before them, and the coming of Callibius pre- ceded the final measures taken against Theramenes’ (Zdinburgh Review, 1891 p- 478). Besides, it is too late to ac- cuse Theramenes when he is already ex- ecuted. There is thus every reason for believing (with van Leeuwen) that this paragraph ought to be transferred to

CH. 37, 1. 7—CH. 38, 1.12. TTOAITEIA 139

AaxeSaiuova tod te Onpapévovs Kxatnydpovy Kat BonOeiv avrois néiovv' av axovoavtes of AaxeSanovioe KaddiBiov dmréotetiav dppootny Kal atpatidtas ws émtaxocious, of THY akpoTro\y enOovres eppovpour.

38. pera S& radta KataraBovtwoy tev aro Durhs THv Mouniyiav, cal vixnodvtav pdyn Tos peta TOY TpLidKovta Bon- Oncavras, éravaxwpioavres peta Tov] Kivduvoy of éx TOU doTews kal cuvabpocbértes eis THY dryopdy, TH baTepaia Tovs mév TPLdKOVTA katéhucay, aipovvrat Sé Séka Tay TodTaOY avToKpaTopas éml THY 5 [rod wrojAéwou Karddvow.

20

of 8& mapadaBovtes tiv apynv ép ols pev npéOncay ovK émparttov, *éré[ateAdXov] 8 eis Aaxedaipova 2 BonOevav petarre[prropjevoe Kal ypypata Saverbouevor. yadrerras % t ; - a ? lal ¥ - *

5 [de]lpovrwv emt rovtous tadv év TH Todsteig, po[Bovpevlor wn Katadvoacw Ths apyns Kal Bovropevor catlawAHE]as rods dAAOvS

a + ee 4 ¥ x 3 be v La

(6mrep éyévero), cvANaBovres [A]nudperov oddevds dvta SevTepov TOV TOALTOY aTréxTEway, Kal Ta Tpdypwata BeBaiws etyov, cuva-

3

17 ayTOIC (K, H-L): abrots K-w, éavrots B.

XXXVIII 2 et 16 MOYNYXIAN. corr. K.

Cf. c. 19, 5+ 7 é(rpéoBevjo[ay] K (K-W): ére[upay] H-L, B; spatium litteras aliquanto

4 CYNACOpOICce? 6 ENOIC

plures quam éreuyav, paullo pauciores quam émpécBevoay, postulare videtur ; scripsi

érésreddov, coll. Thuc. viii 38 émoréd\da—és THv Aakedalyova.

H-L. inserit Richards.

TESTIMONIA,

10 Karadvéaor

11 Anudperoy Blass (K-W, H-L, K®); post hoc nomen dper7 fortasse recte 12 cvverywrifoudywy papyrum habere putabant H-L.

XXXVIII 5 Bekk. An. 235—6 (cf. Testim. ad xxxv 5—6).

some such place as the end of c. 36. Xenophon’s narrative (é//. ii 3 §§ 13, 14), as noticed by Mr Kenyon, is supported by Diodorus xiv 4, and is in itself more probable than that in the text:—‘It would hardly have been possible for the Thirty to have carried on their Reign of Terror without an armed force at their backs, whereas Aristotle represents it as having occurred while the whole body of Athe- nians was still in possession of weapons.’ Part of this objection is removed by transferring the passage to the end of c. 36, but we still have the protests of The- ramenes placed after, instead of before, the arrival of the Spartan garrison. KadXlBrov] Xen. Zc. and Plut. Zysand. 15 ad fin, In neither of these passages is the number of the garrison mentioned. XXXVIII—XL. The Rule of the Ten. The end of the oligarchical revolution and the restoration of the democracy. XXXVIII§1. karadaPBsvroav—Mov- vixlav xrh.] Xen. Hell. ii 4, 11—19. Andoc. De Myst. 80. éravaxwpyoayres krv.] Xen. Lc. § 22, Tovs wed” éavréy daripyaryov els Td dorv.

Tovs TpidKovTa KaTéAvoay KTA.] 7. 23, évnpicavto éxelvous uty Karamaioas, dd\dous dé édXdoGa. Kal elNovro Séxa, &va do puri.

The appointment of the Ten is describ- ed by Lysias, ¢. Eratosth. 12 § 54, dpxov- ras 6€ rods éxeivors éxOlatous elAovTo. Among them were Pheidon, formerly one of the Thirty, with Hippocles and Epi- chares and others who were regarded as opposed to the extreme party of Charicles and Critias (§ 55). AaPdvres...ras dpxas kal Thy wodw audorépos érodéuouv, Tors TE TpidKovTa TdvTa KaKd elpyacudvas Kal buy wdvra Kaka wemovOdce (57). érré- a@rtedoy xTr.] (Pheidon) éAOav els Aake- Saivova erewev abrods atpareverOa...ov duvdpevos dé Tov wy Tuxely...éxarov TAAaYTA édaveloaro, iva exor émixovpous picBovcbat (58—59). They were appointed soon after the time when zepl [ray] diadAayar oi Abyot é-ylvovro (53), but their policy tended od dtadrAdéar GAN’ drrodécat...rhy modu (60). The 100 talents are also mentioned by Xen. Hell. ii 4,28. Suidas and Harp. 5.U. Oéka.

140 AOHNAIQN coL, 17, 1. 38—COL. 18, 1: 30: yovifouevov KarruBiov te cal tév eXorrovynciwy tav Trapovtav kal mpos Tov[tor]s éviwy trav év Tois immedor TovTwY ydp TwWES

15 uddloTa TOY TodLTaY eorrovdatoy py KaTeNOeiv TOds dd Duds. ws 8 of tov Tletpaéa nai tiv Movwyiay éxovtes, amoaravtos 3 dmavros tov Sipov mpos avtovs, érexpdtouy TO TodAeuM, TOTE Katadvoartes Tous déxa Tovs TpwTous aipebévTas, GAdous elrAovTO béxa Tods Bedtiotous elvar Soxobdvras, éf av acuvéBn Kal Tas

20 Starvaes || yeverOas cal caTerOeiv Tov Shpoy, cvvaywvifouéevev Kat [Col

mpoOvpoupévwy TovTav. mpoeraTyKecay 8 a’Tav wdduora ‘Pivey te

6 Tlataveds nat Pairros 0’ AxepSovaros odTot yap mpiv <te> [7]

Tlaveaviav [7’] adinécbar Sceréu[rrovt]o mpos tovs év Tetpare?, cai

adixopévov cuverrrovéacav thv KdOodov. eri mépas yap iryaye 4

THY eipnynv Kal Tas Stadrvoers Ilavoavias 6 Tov Aaxedatpoviov

Bacireds peta trav Séxa SiadrraxTav Tév orepoy adixopévav ex

€ €

16 Tripaid: Ietpaéa K, K-w, B; Ietpaid H-L: in titulis Atticis Tetpacéa saepius quam Ilepada apparet; Te:pacé nondum inveni. 17 attantoc Blass (kK): TIANTOC K! (K-w, H-L). AYTHN (K): adrods Blass, Kontos, Hude, K-w, H-L. 22 axepAoycyloc corr. Bywater, etc. 22—23 TIPIN H TIAYCANIAN TE xK7TA (K): wply 4 IL.— dteréurovrd <te> K-w!; ply <re> II. —dteréumrovro Richards (H-L,

ee

K-W?, 8). 23 Tripall: Ilepace? K, H-L; Ilecpaet K-w, B. Ilecpae? tituli Attici (Meisterhans, p. 25") duodecim in locis habent, e.g. Dittenberger 337, 9, 14, 36 (B.C. 320) év vel éu Ilepaci. 24 APIKNOMENOYC corr. K. 25 Ilavoavlas del. H-L; 6—Bacrreds del. Richards, regis nomine iam antea commemorato.

21 Heraclidis epitoma, 611, 6°, rovrwy 5€ karadvOGrwv OpactBouvdos kal ‘Plywy

25

mpoecoTHKkeoav, ds Hv dvyp Kands kal dyabds.

§ 2. tots trmetor)] Xen. Hell. ii 4, 24. Lysias Mantith. 16 § 3, obx tmmevov... éml ray tpidxovra. After the restoration of the democracy there was evidently a prejudice against those who had been lrmeis at the time of the Thirty. Man- titheus meets this prejudice by shewing that he was not of the number, and also that many who were, had subsequently become members of the BovA} or had been elected orparnyoi and Yrmapxot (20. 8).

§ 3. GAdous etAovro Séka] These are not mentioned either by Lysias or by Xenophon.

cuvayovitopévov] with the democrati- cal party. tovTwy probably refers to the Ten.

‘Plywv] Isocr. Callim. §7, els riv déxa yevduevos, but Isocrates does not clearly distinguish this board of Ten from those who were elected immediately after the overthrow of the Thirty: § 5, jjpxov ev yap ol déxa ol pera Tovs TpidKovTa Kara- oTdvres. ‘

@diddos] otherwise unknown.

ply] The removal of 7 (proposed by Herwerden) is justified not only by its rarity in Attic Greek, but also by the fact that Mss often vary between mply and mpiv 7 (Wyse).

§ 4. él wépas—iyaye] The phrase wépas &xew = wepalveo Oat is found in Isocr. 42 B, Lycurg. 155, 34 (§ 60) and elsewhere: and Polybius uses mépas AauBdvew (v 31, 2) and 1. émiBeival run (i 4r, 2). Ar. Meteor. 1,14, 353@ 18, 7d epyov abrav exer mépas, 6 dé xpdvos ovk Exe. mépas is a frequent word in Ar., but él mépas dyew is not recorded in the Jzdex Ar., though dyew émi...occurs in Pol. 1313 4 19; 1270 26,

Tlavoavlas] Xen. Hell. ii 4, 29—39.

tav Séka SiadAakrav xrdr.] Lc. § 38, étéreupav mevrexaldexa dvipas els Tas *"AOjvas kal éréragay tiv Iavoavig diad- Adéae Sry Stvawro KédANora. (It will be observed that Xenophon mentions 15, not 10, and as the number is exceptional it is more likely to be right than not.) of be duprAakay ép’ Gre elphvyy wey exew ws mpos GAAHAous, dmidvar dé eri ra éavrov

CH. 38, 1. 13—CH. 39, 1.8. TIOAITEIA

141 , a

Aaxedaipovos, ods avtos eorovdacev édOeiv. of 8 me[pl] Tov

‘Pd 5 , ‘ A \ ? \ 8 a ? 4 \ ivova Sia Te THY evvovay THY eis TOV O[fwor] émrnvéOnaav, Kal

NaBovres tHv érripédecav év druyapxla Tas evOdvas Bocay [ely

/ > \ > ui) b; / > tal + A 3 yy

Snpwoxpatia, Kal ovdels ovdev evexddece|y ad]rois ode THY év dareL

pewavrwv ovte Taév ex Lletpavéws xatedOdvTwr, dddd bia TabTa ‘ \ > \ ee: € a.

Kal orpatnyos evOds 7péOn ‘Piven.

39. “Eyévovto § ai Siadvoes err’ Evxrecidou dpyovtos Kata Tas cuvOnkas tacde. Tovs Bovropévous "AOnvaiwy tav év date pewavtav éEouxeiv exew EXevoiva, émitiwous dvtas Kal xupious nal avtoxpadtopas €lav|rév Kal Ta avTdv Kaptroupévous. TO 8 iepov elvat Kowdov auotépwv, érimereicOar S€é. Krjpucas Kai Evporridas cata Ta watpia. py eeivar Sé ynte Tois ’EXevoivobev

3 A BA , a ? fel » ’ - af \ eis TO Gotu pte toils é« Tod dorews "Edevoivade iévas mAHV puatnpiows éxatépovs. ouvtedeiv Sé amd Téy TpocidvTeav eis TO

€

29 post émpédeay .. COYC (evOds ? H-L) deletum. 31 TrIpalwe: Tepacéws K, K-W; Ilespaus H-L. [I]e[c]oads CIA ii 834 4 1 64 (B.C. 329).

XXXIX 2 aAOHNAIWN, supra TWN additum, retinet K, post r&v locat kK}, coll. c. 27,15 T@ Bovlonévy Aaxiaday et c. 29, 24 of eOédovres "APnvalwy: delent K-w, H-L; ante rév ponunt Blass et k%. 4 é[av]rav Jackson, K-w, K3, B: €[wl rao]w x); amdvrwy Poland (H-L). 8 éxarépous fortasse aut defendi aut excusari posse putat Jackson, sed mavult éxarépos, ‘mysteriis maioribus minoribusve’; idem mavult

Hude.

éxacrov whiv Tay TpidKovra Kal Tap evdexa kal ray év 7G Tepace? dptdvruw déxa. el détwes poBoivTo Tuwv ef darews, Zdokev aibrots (avrods Hartman) ’EXevoiva xarouxeiv.

XXXIX § 1. ém’ HuvxdclSov] B.c. 403/2. The dcadvcets took place near the end of the summer of 403. Xen. lc. § 25 speaks of the party of the Peiraeus as foraging for da cal érdpav, and Plut. Mor. p. 349 F (de gloria Ath.) gives the 12th of Boedromion (September) as the date of the return of the exiles.

oucety txav] If we retain ’Edevciva, we should probably have to render the passage: ‘should have Eleusis to migrate to.’ The words are generally understood to mean: ‘should have it in their power to migrate to Eleusis.’ This would re- quire ’Edevolvade. Cf. Dem. 29 § 3, Méyapas’ éfpxnxe, and Lys. 31 § 19, of an incident of the same date as the present, (Philon) cvckevacdmevos yap Ta éaurod évOdde els Thy Umepoplay cEwxnoe.

érur(yous] in full possession of their rights as citizens; cf. Xen. Hed/.ii 2,11 (of an earlier date, when Agis was holding Decelea), rods driyous émuriwous Towjoavres éxaprépouv. Xenophon is referring to the Wwhpiopua of Patrocleides, quoted in Andoc.

de Myst. 77—79 3 tb. 73, émel yap al vijes OveOdpyoav Kai 4 wodopkla éyévero, éBov- AedoacGe mepl Guovolas Kal Eboker buiv Tos ariuous émiriuous morjoat. Then follows the locus classicus about a&rizla in which,

among those who were under partial '

driyla, are mentioned (in § 75) the sol- diers who érduewav éml trav tupdvywy év TH mode (rerpakoclwy may be suggested instead of rupdvywy; this suggestion is anticipated by Dobree, and approved by Blass; in any case the Four Hundred are meant; and not the Thirty). kuptous kal avroxpdropas] ‘possessing full and independent powers of self-government’

:)

§ 2. ftepdv] The temple of Demeter at Eleusis. Krjpvxas cal Hipodr(das] wu 57 § I.

Hie miawskaananiemaamnn influenced by éé&va:; similarly below, é« Tod dorews.

éxatépous] The constr. changes from the dat. to the acc. with the inf. Fora similar change of constr. after éteiva, cf. Aeschin. 3 § 2, Wa é&f wpdrov wey Te mpecBurary Tov TodTwY...€rl 7d Biya mapeNOovTe Ta BéATioTA TH oA oUL- Bovrevew, Sebrepov & Hn Kat rav ddrAwv

a

I

rf

Oo

on

142

AOHNAIQN coOL. 18, 1. 30—COL. 19, 1. 12,

cuppayixoy Kabamep Tovs dAXous "AOnvaiovs. eav é Twes TAY 3

3 ¥ a

amovtay oikiav AapBavecw "EXevoiv, ocuprreiOev tov Kexry-

pévoy' dav 8& ux) cvpBaivwow addr, TYuntas éEdXéoOar TpeEis £

éxatepov, Kai hvtw av ovTor TdEwow Tiny NapBavew. *EXev- -

owieoy 8€ cuvoieiy ods dv avtol Boddwytat, tHv 8 arroypadny 4

» a / > an a ‘ b lo’ S43) <= EY

etvat Tos Bovropéevors eEo.xetv, Tois ev érid[nulodow ad’ is av

Bath \ Lg L e n \ > 9 , y a

opocwawy Tovs SpKous S[éx]a jpepav, tTHv 8 éEoixnow Eiko, Tois

> 9 n by x > / \ a 8 drrodnpodow érevday éridnunowow Kata Tavra.

pn éEeivar 8é 5

ov , . \ on aor \ 9 a n apXew pnSepiay apXnV TMV EV TO ATTEL TOV Enevotve KQATOLKOUYTAa

mply av arroypdantas Tadw ev TO doTer KaTOLKEV. TAs Sé|| Sixas [Col. 19)

12 eEKATEPWN. (B): éxdrepov Bury, Richards, Hude, Papabasilius (K-w, H-L,

x), tdéwot H-L,

B qui etiam of av av’rol scribendum suspicatur. 16 drodnpote.<v> K, H-L.

K3, B: 60 [ém7]a Ki. —vypdaynrat K-W, H-L, B; —ypddyrat K.

13 OYTO! (K, K-W, H-L): avrol Richards, Herwerden,

15 éuécwor H-L. OL éxJa K-W, H-L, 18 aTTOrpayH | YHTAal:

TmokiTav Tov Bovdbmev ov yrounv dmopal- veo@a: (Kiihner, § 475, 2c, Anm.1). éxa- répous is possibly preferred to avoid the ambiguity arising from éxarépos, which would naturally agree with wvornplos and has actually been proposed in this sense.

cuvredciy...els] Dem. Left. 28, cuvre- Aodow els Tov médEMOor.

7d cuppaxtxdv] elsewhere of ‘the allied forces’ (Thuc. iv 77), or of a ‘treaty of alliance’ (iii 91, v 6): here ‘the fund for the common defence.’

§ 3. ouprre(Oav] not ‘shall first obtain the assent of the owner’ (Poste), but ‘the people would help them to obtain the consent of the owner’ (Kenyon).

ovvoukety] ‘of the inhabitants of Eleusis, those whom thesecessionists desired should

‘ live in the same community.’ Thuc. ii 68,

3, dd TrOv ’Aurpaxwrav tuvocnodvrwv. In Thuc. vi 64, 3 (the Syracusan horsemen tauntingly ask the Athenians) ef Evvou7y- covres cplow adbrots waddov qKovev ev TH adrorpla 7} Acovtivous és Thy olketav Karot- kiodvres, 2b. ii 68, 3. The proceedings have an arbitrary air as against the ordinary inhabitants of Eleusis, but it would appear that Eleusis was, subject to certain con- ditions, handed over to the secessionists. § 4. tiv droypadiy elvar] Those who proposed to secede were required to enter their names in a list (cf. 40 § 1). daro- pay, in Attic law, is generally applied to a register of land, property, moneys, rather than of persons. Lys. 25 § 9, elol 6& olrwes rav "Edevolvade dmo- ypawapévwr, dEedOdvres wed” budv, érro- AcopxodvTo wer’ adr&y (Westermann, Cobet;

pel air&v MS; érrod\dpxoup rods ue0? abrav Scheibe, Frohberger).

rods Spkous] ‘ the oath of pacification’ (Poste). Xen. Hed/. ii 4, 43 (of a slightly later time, after the commanding officers of the party at Eleusis had been put to death and a reconciliation effected with the re- mainder), dudcavres épkous 7 why wh uno. Kaxnoew. Séka hpepov, 11, 5 déka érav.

§ 5. wply—droypdyyrat] ‘until he shall again register himself in the list with a view to residence in the city.’ Lys. 25 § 9 quoted above. dmroypdger Oa, mid. to register oneself (e.g. as a citizen: Pol. vi (iv) 13, 1297 @ 24, eviaxod & &eore dv waow droypayapévas éxxdy- adgew Kat duxdfew, dav dé drroypaydpevor par’ éxkdrnord{wor pire Sudfwow, ént- kewrat peyddat nulat rovrots). Xen. Hell. ii 4 § 8, vig §29. The passive is found in Plat. Leg. 914 C, dy droyeypap- pévov 7 Tapa Trois dpxover Td KThua.

tas St Slkas rot dévouv—] This passage does not help us to decide the question whether the Areopagus was suspended or not by the Thirty. Lys. 1 § 30 (delivered after the year of Eucleides) says of this tribunal, @ xal mdrpidy éore Kal ép” quay (Suv MSS) drodldorat (d7rodédorat theread- ing of an inferior Ms) Tod Pévou rds dixas duxdgew. Grote, Rauchenstein (Phzlol. x 604 ff.) and Curtius (iv 16 note) hold that it was suspended ; Schémann (Azz. p. 549 E. T.) that it was not. Practically, how- ever, its authority was obviously superseded by the Reign of Terror. See also Philippi, Areop. p. 265, 266, and Frohberger’s Lysias vol. ii 180.

CH. 39, 1. 9—CH. 40, 1.1. TIOAITEIA

143 A t % A \ x f y g > t » a tod ovo eivat kata Ta matpia, el Tis Ta adToxElp aTréKTELED, } étpwcev. Tav Se mapednrvOdTwv pwydevi mpds pundéva wvnatKaxely 20 ‘ ‘ éEeivat, TAY Tpos TOUS TpLaKovTa Kal Tovs Séxa Kal Tos evdexa % \ a La ” \ X tA 2\ rn kal Tovs Tov [letpavéws apEavtas, undé mpds TovTous, éav Siddaw He t 3 6 bd 8 A 5 a i. x > IL a > nn evOuvas. edOdvas 8é Sodvar Tods pév év Tletpacet dpEavtas év Trois tal \ o> 2 of a a év Tlecpase?, rods 8 év 7@ does ev Tois TA TLmnpata TapEeyopevats. ei obtws éEorxeiv Tovs €BérovTas. Ta b& ypjpata a eaveicavTo els Tov TrOAELOV ExaTépouS arrododvat Yapis. 40. yevouévar Sé ToLovTav Tdv Svaricewr, Kai poBovpévav

€ €

19 ayTOXIpaeKTici (Ci ‘ita ut paene N legi possit’ B) EHPWCACTWN ante pw deletis €H (B), vel OT, i.e. 6 Tpdoas (K), vel OIC (K-W), vel CH (H-L): adroxepl <dr- éxrovey > éxtice: lepdoas K1, tadrdxerpa éxrice iepwoast K*; abroxeiplia exrewe rpwboas Wyse; avroxeplg éxrewev 7} Etpwoev K-W, H-L; adréyerp (van Leeuwen) daréxrewev € € €l

7 érpwoev B. 22 Tripalwc: Teparws H-L. 23 TTIpall. 24 TTIPall- Praestaret év rois <év 7@ dore: K et Gertz> tiwjuara (=droriiuara) tapexouevous,

25

aut 7a <atra Gertz> Tijpara mapexoudvois, Ci. c. 2, 12. 25 TOYC EBEAON-

Tac: rods ddévras B, qui in archetypo litteras Oe deletas, et a (non A) scriptum fuisse putat.

TESTIMONIA. XXXIX 21—23 Bekk. An. 235—6 (cf. Testim. ad xxxv 5—6).

airéxep daréxrevev] Hdt. i 140 etc. abroxepia krelvew. adroxep exrevev would be a poetic form of expression, but avréxetp itself is used in prose, as in Dem. P- 321, 183 549, 53 552, 18. Tpwoas, ‘by wounding,’ gives less good sense than 7 @rpwoev, but might be defended by édy tis @dpuaxov Sods dmroxrelyy et similia, ‘Unlawful wounding’ comes under the cognisance of the courts that try cases of homicide, c. 57 § 3 fiz. kretvar 7 Tpdoal TWO.

§ 6. pvyoikaketv] Xen. Hell. ii 4 wilt., éuboayres Opkous 7} myY ut pynoiKaKhoceE, ére kal viv duo Te wodurebovras Kal Tots Spots eupéve. 6 Shuos. Aristoph. Plut. 1146, wy pynorxakyoys, el ob Pvdyy xaré- AaBes, dAAG EdvorKov mpds Gedy SéEarGEe we, with Schol. Andoc. de AZyst. go, Kat ob pvnoikaxnow T&v modtrav oddevi mAh Tov TpidxovTa Kal Tay &vdexa, ode ToUTWY ds av eér\a ebOdvas Sidbvac THs dpxis 7s ptev and 2.81,91. Aeschin. /. Z. 176, (Archinus and Thrasybulus) 7d wh pyyot- kaxely mpds GAAjAOUS évopKoy Tuiy KaTa- ornowvTwv, Justinvio§ir. Cf. Lueb- bert, De Ammnestia, Kiel, 1881.

kal robs Ska] Neither in Xenophon (Hell. ii 4, 38) nor in Andocides is this body of Ten described as excluded from the amnesty. Xenophon mentions the ‘Ten who ruled in Peiraeus’ (c. 35 § 1);

Andocides does not mention even these.

éy rots év [leuparet] not ‘for all matters coming within the limits of Peiraeus’ (Kenyon), but ‘before the courts held in the Peiraeus.’ ‘To the residents in Peiraieus’ is Mr Poste’s rendering; but such a rendering of an account would be very informal. Some lawfully constituted body is clearly meant.

év rots Ta Tipsjpara mapexopevors] ‘before a court consisting of those who can produce rateable property’ 2.2. who have property on which they pay taxes. This limitation excludes all paupers or citizens of the lowest class. apéyeo@at, is ‘to have as one’s own, to produce as one’s own,’ ‘to bring forward’ (L and S); rots Owha mapexouevors occurs in c. 4, but I can find no instance of rapéxeo@a: being coupled with riujpara.

Tiprpara is here understood of penal- ties, by Poland, Kaibel and Kiessling, and Haussoullier (eb@dva: came under the class of Slkae ryunral, Att. Proc. pp. 226, 264 Lips.). Reinach makes rlunua syn- onymous with dzo7iuqya, ‘a security,’ comparing CIA ii 570, 21, [riuj]uarc 7 éyyunry, and Lys. ap. Harp. s.v. tlunua.

ottws] after satisfying all these legal requirements.

droBotvat xwols] 277. c. 40 § 4.

on

144

AOHNAIQN

COL. 19, l. 13—45.

boot wera THY TpLdKovTa cuveTTOAeunoay, Kal TOANGY éivOOUVTeV pev é£ouxeiy dvaBadrdropevar S& THY amoypadny eis Tas éaxydras Huépas, Srrep etwOacw rovety drravtes, Apxivos cvmdSav To TrAHOOs kal Bovrcuevos Katacxeiy avTovs bpetre TAS Urodolrous Hucpas THS atoypadis, ote cuvavayxacOjvar pévey ToAdOVS AKovTas €ws €Odppncav. kal Soxel TovTé Te ToAuTevoacOat Kars ’Apyivos, 2 Kal peta Tadra ypayrapevos TO Wwhdiopa TO OpacvBovrov tapa-

XL 2 MENETTINOOYNTWN (K, <éfoixety> pév émwootvrwy ? K-W) : 3 ANATPADHN (K): K-W, H-L, B; dva-ypapyy fortasse casu ex dva-Baddouévwv ortum.

pev Blass (H-L).

H-L, B,

émrivoovvruy droypaphy Jackson, Wyse, Bury, Blass, 4 elwbacr

XL § 1. ’Apxivos] mentioned (with Dion) as an orator in Plat. Menex. 234 B, and with Cephalusin Dinarchus, 1§ 76. He was the proposer of a law to prevent cuko- gavria after the amnesty (Isocr. ¢. Callim. 18 § 2, dv Tis Sucdgnras mapa Tovs bpKous, etetvar rp pev-yovrt mapaypdyacbat Krh.). It was on his motion that the Ionic alphabet was adopted in public documents from the archonship of Eucleides onwards (Suidas s.v.). The action recorded in the text is not mentioned elsewhere. He is described as cooperating with Thrasy- bulus in the restoration of the democracy, *Apxlvov kat OpacuBotdov rpogrdvruv Tob Sqwov, Aeschin. /. Z. 176. It was Ar- chinus who moved the decree on that occasion: ¢. Cites. 187, 6 7d Wihdiopa ypdwas Kal vixjoas Apxivos 6 éx Koldns, els rv Karayayovrwy Tov Shyov. On his opposition to a proposal of Thrasybulus, see below.

cuvddy to AnOos] numbers.’

Tas trodolmous tyépas] the remainder of the term of days allowed for the pur- a of registration.

ypaipdpevos +6 Ynjpiopa +d Opa- ovpotncr} This fact is well known owing to its having affected the position of Lysias. who fully deserved promotion from the position of a mérotkos to that of a citizen for his great services towards the restoration of the democracy, and for the losses he had incurred at the hands of the Thirty, who had even put to death his brother Polemarchus (07. 12).

Aeschines, ¢. Ces. § 195, describes Archinus as having resisted the proposal to confer the distinction of a crown on some of those who had done good service in the restoration of the democracy. The scholia give us further details: Opacv- Bovdos 6 Zretpeds werd 7d KaredOeiv' Tov Sfuov drd Pudijs @ypaye Wipicua doOjvar

‘observing their

monrelay Avolg Te. Kegdndou (Kedar Ms, correxit t Wyse) T@ pHropt wodNa. evepye- Thoavte Tovs els (rhv MS) Pudhy xaragu- yovras Kal ToiTo dir poBouhevrov elonveyKey els Tov Ofjmov. ovddérw yap hv kabeorapevn Boudh pera THY Tv N Karddvow" TodTo Td Yidioua éypdWaro mrapayéuwy "Apxivos 6 éx KotAns xal elde kal érlunoay re Opacu- Boddy of dixkacral Spaxuis mids. “AAws émlarevov Tots doxovow dudvew Tots véuos.

"Apxivos yap 6 éx Kotdns éypdyaro mapa-

vouwy bre karhdOev 6 Sfjuos...Avalov rod Zupaxoclov wevraxoolas pev donldas dévros Tos paxerauévors ev Suny, Tptaxootous 6é (Zupaxoctors MS, correxit Blass) orparwras pig Owoapévou & Alyivyns, éypaye Widiona mworlrny atrov yevécOart OpactPovdos. mapavouwv bé abrdv "Apxivos 6 éx KotAns éypdwaro, Ore odrw yevduerns Bovdijjs pigdiopa &ypayev cal <ol> dixacral Kary veyxay abrov Tas Whpous d\vydpws mpd Tob Bovdip brdpkar (Bdvyspws—iadpéae placed after éypayev by Schultz). 6 6¢ & 77 Tepyoet mrapeddwy, Bavdrov, eon, TimGpat Gre dxaplorous’AOyvatous byras ed érolyaa. ol 6é Stxacral aldecOévres TH pev éripnoay Ty Karadlknvy Spaxufs, rov dé Avolay o¥d’ otrws éroujoavTo moNlrny. Maximus Planudes, Scholia on the ordces of Hermogenes in Walz, RZ. Gr. v 343, Tapardyjowov Kal Td mept OpacuBovdov loropotmevov, ds pera THY T&V TpidKovTA karddvow eypaye TY Avala Whpioua rept Tob dev abrov yevécOat rodlryy Kal KaTy- yopndels ws dm poBovdevtov Yidioua.. i eloeveyxiv, od yap IY Tw KaTacTaca 7 Bovdrh, KaredixdoOn xpnudrwv' 6 dé, ob pa Ala, py, dddrAa Oavdrou rh yap To.od- tous fowfov; Cf. [Plut.] 846 a. The proposal was made pera rh» Kadodov én’ dvapxlas ris mpd Evxdeldou (2b. 835 EF), z.e. between the return from exile and the restoration of the democracy. At that time the Bovdy had not yet been constituted. See Blass Att. Ber. i 340!,

CH. 40, ], 2—24. TIOAITEIA

145 Fi - on yf) A , fal a i TL La

vowwy, év & peredisov Tis TodwTelas maou Tois é« Iletpacéws ovy-

kateNOodar, Sv éviot havepds joav SovAo1, Kal tpitov, émei Tis

jpEato TOv KaTeAnAVOCTwY pYnoLKaKElY, aTrayaywY ToDTOV éri \ Ny x , ” > a / 4 a 4

thy BovAny Kal Teicas dxpitov arroKreivat, Néywv Ste viv SeiEovow

‘\ 4 a

ei Bovrovtat tiv Snwoxpariav o@lew Kal Trois dpKots éupéverv® Ly 4 \ AY a 4 \ \ Le 2N\ +

aévras péev yap TovTov mpoTpéyrey Kai tovs dANovus, édv §

dvékwow Trapaderypa trounce araciw. OSmep Kal auverecer:

arroPavevtos yap oddels maToTe Uatepov euvnoikdnnoev. adda

Soxodow KddAdMoTa 5) Kal TwodTiOTaTAa aravTeV Kal idia Kal

a ¥ n

Kown xpyoacbar Tais mpoyeyevnpévats cupopais: ov yap pdvov \ | a Ca + a by b 2 A \ \ ra

Tas Tept THY TpoTépwy aitias éEndewfray GANA Kal TA yYpHaTa

Aaxedatpovioss, & of Tpidxovta Tpos Tov TOAELOV EXaBov, aTédocay

KOWh, KeNevovae Ov Ta cuvOnKay Exatépous arodiOdvat ywpis, TOvs

T é« Tod dotews Kal Tovs ex Tod Tlespaséws, Hyovpevos TodTo

rn ” a a © ’ > \ a Bd I > Tpatov dpyew Selv Tis ouovoias: év 8€ tais AdAats TeAEoW OY étt mpootiéacw Taév oixelwy of Shuor Kpatycavtes, dAAA Kal

EWC

9 Tripaloic: Tetpards H-L. 13 CWZEIN. 17 Soxodo. H-L, B. €

kalAla ante corr. 22 TripAlwec: Iepards H-L. 23 AEN correctum in AEIN. 23—24 OYX OION ETI (vel ETI): ox ofoy Eri K, H-L, B; ovx olov émimpooriOéacw Gen- nadios (K-W); obx S7¢ mpooriOéacw J B Mayor, é7t in ére corruptum atque olov deinde per errorem insertum arbitratus. 24 OIAHMOKPAT : of Snuoxparjcayres K et B cui ‘est Snuoxparjoavres ut povapyjcavres’: of Shuot xparioavres van Leeuwen, Hude (H-L, K-W), quod unice verum est,—‘alibi cum vicerunt populares, spoliare solent divites, non propria etiam bona in publicum commodum absumere’ (Herwerden).

349°, and Jebb, Att. Orators, i 151; cf. Wyse in Class. Rev. v 335.

Yparo—pvyoiKkaxeiv] c. 39 § 6. The action of Archinus is the natural sequel of his law against cvxopavyria (Isocr. c. Callim. §§ 2, 3). Cf. Curtius, 4. G. iv 59. But his method of procedure was arbitrary in the extreme. .Nevertheless,the author passes no condemnation on it. dar- ayayav] of summary arrest, 29 § 4.

trois bpxos éppévev] Xen. Hell. ii 4 ult., Tois 8pxous éupéver 6 Siuos.

§3. kéddAvorra 84] According to Eucken (De Aristotelis dicendi ratione ; de parti- cularum usu, p. 49), 6% is nowhere found in the writings of Aristotle after a super- lative (Class. Rev. v 160 a).

airlas é&yAeupav] Andoc. de Myst. 76, earetpar mavra 7a Woplopara, Lys. 1 § 48, rods xeyudvous vouous éfadrerpar, érépous 5¢ Oeivat, 30 § 5, Ta mev eyypdpes Ta 3 éfadelgets, Here probably metaphorical, as in Dem. Pant. 37 § 34, 7d yeyrdonew kal ounévas 7a Sikaia...éfaretpar éfa-

S, A.

Aelgew is not found in the /ydex Ar.; dmakelpew occurs in c. 47 fiz. and 48 222. and mpoetadeigew inc. 47 ult.

Td Xpypara—spovolas] See note on Dem. Let. p. 460, esp. § 12, roiro rparov brdpfat THs owovolas onuctov, koww7 Siadtoac Ta xpyyara, and Isocr. Areop. §§ 67, 68 there quoted.

otx Stet] odx ofoy is not found in Ar. obx Grt...ddAd Kal occurs in Pol. 1331 a 11, Poet. 4, 1448 6 35. ody Ort...dddAa in De Gen. Anim. iv 1, 765 6 19, De Anima ii 7, 419 @ 21, Anal. i 41, 494 22.

mpooriliaciy Tov olkelwy] ‘pay addi- tional sums out of their own property.’

of Spot Kparrjoavres] Pol. vi (iv) 8, 1294 @ 13, év ddvyapxla Kal év dpicroxparia kal ev Styos. viii (v) 10, 1310 J 21, of Sfjuor (opp. to al drgryapxla). iii 11, 1282 @ 28, ds (evOdvas kal dpxas) év évlas montrelats...Tots Sjyots droddbacw. vii(vi) 4) 13202 4, ol be vov Squaywyol xaprfduevor Tots Opmots oANG Snuevouar did Tay dixa- ornpluv. 7, 1321 219, Tadry dé émexpa-

Io

2

on

nn

“retinent K-W, B, delent H-L.

146 AQHNAIQN COL, 20, |. 1—26,

Tv || xdpav avddacrov mrowtow. SuedvOnoay dé Kal mpos Tods 4 [e]] Erevoine [xaror]ejoavras eres tpire peta thy éEoixnaw, émt [Eevas]vérou dpyovros.

41, radra pév odv ev Tois boTe[poly cvvéBn yevécOas Karpois, rote 58 Kvpsos 6 Shwos yevdpevos TAY TpayyaTwv, éveaTHaaTo THY [viv] obcav oduretav, eri TlvOodapou pev d&pyovtos, [S]oxodvTos 8é Sixalas Tod Sypov ANaBelv thy [é£ovcilav, da 7d TroujocacBas Thy xdbodsov 8: aitod tov Shpov. Av d€ Tav peraBorav Eévdexarn ro[y 2 dpi]Opov airy. mporn pev yap éyévero [klatactacis tov éF

-evmrépwy.

26 €N supra scriptum melius abesset (K, coll. Cobet, Var. Lect., pp. 30, 201);

Cf. Meisterhans, p. 169%.

[efou]ejoavras K, K-W,

H-L; [werou]xfoavras propter hiatum conicit J W Headlam; [karocxjoavras B, qui éforx. ‘et propter hiatum et propter spatium vestigiaque’ condemnat.

XLI 3 IIvdodapouv: Hvxdeléov exspectaret B coll. c. 39, 1.

Post dpxovros lacunam

indicant K-w, ‘hiat sententia; damnatae Pythodori memoriae facta erat mentio.’

4—5 djpov—dfjuov: an OpacuBothov—de adrov rov Sjuov ? K.

[pocract]av ? K et Kontos (H-L).

[eEovel]ay K, K-w, B:

Y 5 AIAYTON ? d¢ avrdv K (an 颒 abrof ? H-L): O¢ abrof B; idem, seclusis rév Sfuov, K-w.

6... ATATACIC: 7 Kardoracts K,

K-W; kardoracis B. [r&v xlarac[Taécewr] ‘dubitanter van Leeuwen’ (H-L).

rolow ev rails diacrdcerw ol Shor Tay Thue. iii 82, 13 viii 65, 1.

tv xépav dvdSacrov movotc] Pol. viii (v) 5, 1305 @ 2, dré pev ydp, wa xaplfwrvrat, ddixodvres Tovs yowpluous cuv- wraow, i Tas ovolas dvaddorous movobyTes q Tas mporbdous Tais Necroupylais, dre dé SiaBdrddovtes, v’ éxwor Snuevew Ta KTHMATA Tay whovelwy. 7, 1307 a1 (of the Lace- daemonians about the time of the second Messenian war), @\Bduevor yap Twes bia rov wodenov Alou dvddacrov moveiy Tip xdpav. 8, 1309 a 14, det & & pev rais Snuoxparlars Trav edmopwv peldeoOa, wh pbvov TE Tas KThoELS MH Totty dvaddoTous, adda pnd Tods Kaprrovs.

§ 4. SreAvOnoav] Xen. Hell. ii 4, 43, borépy dé xpbvyw dxovcarres Eévous puc- Boia Gat Tos’ HNevoin, orparevodmevor Tay- Sypel ex’ adrovs Tods mev oTparnyous alrav els Nbyous éNOdvras drréxreway, Tots 6édAXors eloméupavres tods lous Kal dvaryKalous éreay cuvaddaryfvat’ Kal 6udcavres Gpkous 7 eI wh pynouaxhoen, Ere kal vdv duod re ToNtTevovTat, Kal Tots Bpkos eupéver Oo OFjpos.

ere. rplrw—éml Bevawérov] B.C. 401/o. The final reconciliation is thus placed later than has generally been inferred from Xenophon’s phrase torépy xpdvy (corresponding to év rots torepov Katpors ofc. 41 § 1). Grote c. 65 end, v 598—9.

XLI. Recapitulation.

§1. &vermjoravro] Probl. 951 a 28, év-

orjcacOa: 76 mpayua. Intrans. 5 § 2, 2. ult., 17 § 4, 27 §2, 37 §1. The intrans, parts are those generally used in Ar. On the other hand cuvcrdvat (ovo rijoat, oue- thoacba) wédw, odtreav, is found in Pol. 1266 a 23, 1284 6 18, 1288 w 40, 1319 4 33, also in Oecon. 1343 @ 7.

émt Ilv@o8dpov] B.c. 404/3. In c. 39 § 1 the formal convention for the restora- tion of the democracy is placed in the archonship of Euclides (403/2). But the return of Thrasybulus and the other exiles of the democratical party, and the occu- pation of the Peiraeus, took place about January 403, in the archonship of Pytho- dorus.

The text implies ‘that the subsequent extension of the democracy...was justified by the fact of its having secured its own re-establishment, without the open help of any other nation, and in the face of the opposition of a powerful party at Sparta’ (Kenyon). But it is difficult to resist Mr Kenyon’s suggestion that the passage is corrupt, and that the position of Thrasybulus as leader of the restored democracy was recognised in the latter part of this sentence.

§ 2. Kardoracis tov & dpxis “Lwvos] The constitution under Ion (which is, of course, prehistoric) was doubtless described in the early chapters of the treatise. Cf.

fragm. 343?= 3815,

CH. 40, 1, 25—cCH. 41, 1.17. TIOAITEIA 147 apxfs "Iwvos cal tév per adrov cuvoikncavtarv' TéTe yap TpaTov els Tas Tértapas cuveveunOnoay durds Kai Tors duvdoBacrr<«is katéotncav. Sevtépa S& cal mpwrn peta tavty[y] éxyovea ToL- tetas Taki él Onoéws yevouévn, pixpov TapeyKdivovea THs Baciduxhs. pera S& tadrnv % ert Apdxovtos, év 4 Kal vouous avéypayvav mpOtov. tpitn 8 7 peta Thy oTdaow, 1) él Lorwvos, ad 7s apy7 Snuoxpatias éyévero. tetdpty & 4 émi Tesotrtparou tupavvis, méurTn © 4 weTa <THY> TOY TUPdvYwY KaTadvOLY, 7 KnrercOévous, Snpotixwtépa tis Yorwvos. extrn 8 7 peta Ta Mnéoica, tHs €& Apetou wayou Bours émictatovans. éBdSopn & 7 peta tavTny, hv “Apsotetdns pev béderEev, "Equddrns 8 érreré-

7 cwoxnodyrwy Blass coll. frag. 3813, K-w, H-L: ovvoixudyrwy defendit kK? coll. c. 18, 7 et Thuc. i 24, vi 5. 8 TeCCapac. 9 META arene exoyca! (deleto 1) TIOAITEIAN TAZIN: pera Tatra [ét]éxouoca modirelas rdéis K', —[uer]éxouoa J B Mayor, —tmdpxovea Richards; [rap]éxovea aut wodrelay rdéis (Rutherford) aut modc-

relas rdéw (Wyse), véay éxovoa wodirelas rdéw Gertz. perplay tw’ exovoa rrodrelas rdtw H-L; werd talra.. éxovca modrelas Tak K-W; pera Tabryny éxovoa modcrelas

rdw K8,B, 14 <rhv> add. kK (edd.). ’ ) J] B Mayor, K-W, H-L.

16 Ae Kal (K, B coll. vv. g et 20—21):

17 émeré\ece H-L.

cworkyodvrav] Heraclides z77#., cvvot- khoavros 6¢“Lwvos adrots.

eas rds rérrapas—vdds] c. 8 § 3. ovvevepOnoav] cf. 21 § 2, cureverme (al. dréverpe).

Snebaowt] c.8§ 35 c. 57 wt.

evrépa...kal mparn] 2.2. the constitu-

tion of Theseus was second to that of Ion and was the first of the eleven weraoral.

mwoditelas tdfw] cv. 3 § 1, 7 Tdés THs dpxalas modureias.

pikpov trapeykAlvoura Tis BaotAuKiys] The prehistoric ‘constitution of Theseus’ was treated in an early chapter that is now lost. The lost passage is referred to in Plut. 7hes. 25, Ore 5¢ mpGros daréx eve mpds Tov dxdov, ws "ApiororérAys pyol, kal -dpijxe 7d povapxeiv, oe paprupely kal “Ounpos év vedy xaraddyy pdvous *AOnvalous Sijuov mpocaryopevoas. mapey- kMvew intr. is found in Hist. Anim. 498 a 16, oxédn wixpdv els 7d mAdyLov twapeykNvovta. éyxAtvecy intr. in Pol. 1307 @ 21, ép’ dmérepoy dy eyKrAlyn 4 tohrela, and 1266a@ 7, 4 Tv Aaxedat- Hovlwy tohirela padrov eyxAlvew Bovderat mpos Thy ddkvyapxlay. éx«dlvecy intr. in Pol. ii 11, 1273 a 8, TH pev els Stor exkAlver waddov 7a 8’ els ddvyapxlav.

évy Wf kal vépous dvéypaay mpdrov] The summary does not strictly correspond to the original account inc. 4. Nothing was there stated on the important fact that under Dracon the laws were first

reduced to a written code, though it was partly implied in the words: rods Oecpovs 2Onxev. On the other hand, the remark- able ‘ Draconian constitution,’ which has justly aroused considerable suspicion, finds no recognition in the summary. This supports the view that the description of that constitution is an interpolation. ZdAwvos] 5—12. dpx7 SypoKpa- tlas] 9 § 1. Tlacirrpdirov] 14—19. Kaeo 8évous] 22. Snpoticwtépa] 22 init. THs & "Apelov mdyou BovAjs]

23.

*Apiore(Sys] Aristides ishere described as having traced the outline which was completed by his successor Ephialtes. The former admitted the lower classes to a larger share in public life. Though he’ did not actually throw the archonship open to all the citizens of Athens (as

asserted in Plut. Avis. 22), he encouraged

the rural population to resort to Athens (c. 24 § 1) and thus prompted them to take an interest in political affairs. Ephi- altes carried this democratical movement still further by abolishing the supremacy of the Areopagus.

There is no justification for the criti- cism of Riihl (hen. Mus. 46, 432) that Aristides is hererepresented as cooperating with Ephialtes. The absence of the name of Themistocles is, however, worthy of note. Asa constitutional reformer he is eclipsed by Aristides. It may even be

I0o—2

148 AQHNAIQN COL. 20,1. 26—CcOL. 21,1. 5. Necev Katadveas Ty Apeorayirw Bovany: év } TrelaTa cvvéBy THY Tod Sid Tors Snuaywyods dpaptdverr —— bia Thy Tis

20 Oardrrns apyjv. dydon & [9] Tay TeTpaxocioy Kardotaois, Kal peta tavrnv évdrn [Se] [S]nuoxparia mdduw. Sexdtrn § 4 Trav Tpidxovta Kal 4 Tov Séca Tupavvis. évdexdtn Sy peta THY ard Dunijs cab éx Tesparéws xdbodov, ad’ is Siayeyévntas péxpe tis viv, del mpocemiAapBdavovea TH TAHOEL THY eEovoiay. amdvTwv

25 yap avTos avTov memroinkey 6 Shuos Kipiov Kai mdyTa StotKeirar Wybicpacw Kal Sixacrnpioss, év ols 6 Shpuos éotw 0 Kpatay. Kal yap ali ris Bovrts xpices eis Tov Shpov —AndrUOacw. Kal Todo

19 da (K, K-W, B): <xal> 8a H-L; — — ‘deest fere Oappijcacay’ K-w coll. Pol. 1274412. 20 OFAOHNA KATACTACTACIN. 21 6é secl. J B Mayor

(K-w, H-L), retinent K, B. 22 Kal [7] K-w. 23 TrEIPaiWwec (H-L). THC: Too H-L. 24 Locus corruptus, K-w. 26 Wdlopact H-L.

doubted whether he really has any claim to have acted with Ephialtes in over- throwing the Areopagus, as narrated in

. 25 § 3

17. Trebate] with wp@ros in Rhee. iii 2, 1404 6 25, and Poet. 4, 1448 6 37. Cf. Hdt. i 189, Xen. Oecon, xi 18. The metaphor is probably derived ‘from the tracing of lines underneath by a writing- master, for the pupil to follow or write over,’ Protag. 326 D (Cope’s Lxtrod. to Ar. Rhet. p. 284).

*EquaArys] From the tenour of the earlier part of the work we are prepared to find a prominent place assigned in the summary to Ephialtes, as compared with Pericles. The reforms in the Areopagus due to the latter were of minor import- ance. But it is singular that so notable a name should find no mention in the present passage. He is here regarded as one of the demagogues whose influence was detrimental to Athens. The slight notice of his policy in 28 § 1 is indeed not unfavourable; but it is certainly far from enthusiastic.

Sud trv THs OaAdrrns dpxrv] Isocr. de Pace, 79.

Tay tetpakorlwv] 29—32. Kparla] 34.

1) TOV TpLdKovra—rvpavyls] more accu- rately described as an oligarchy in 53 zzt.

tov Séka] 38 § 1.

mpomemuAapBavourca To mwAryOe tiv overlay] Schomann, Axz. p. 386 E.T.: ‘The demagogues found it their interest to extend the activity of the popular assemblies as far as possible, and to

Sypo-

establish the principle that the people was, in the most comprehensive sense of the term, lord over everything, and could do what it pleased (cz Neaer. p. 1375; Xen. Hell. i 7,12). On the other hand, men of keener insight complained that the State was administered by Psephismata— that is, according to the pleasure at any moment of the sovereign people—rather than according to the laws, and that there was only too often a contradiction between the laws and these Psephismata.’ oi, vi (iv) 4, 1292 @ 4—37, Erepov eldos Snpo- kparlas radda, pév elvar tatrd, xéprov 3 elvas Td TAROoS Kal ph Tdv vouov. Toro 6 ylveras Brava Wydlopara Kipia 7 adAG uh 6 vépos. cupBalver d€ Toiro bid rods Onuaryuryous krX. Dem. Left. § 92.

els tov Sijpov AnAVOaow] In the de- partment of judicature indictments or informations concerning breaches of the law, which could not be dealt with in the ordinary course, were in the first instance brought before the Council. Ifthe offence were too important for the competency of that body, they passed to the popular as- sembly. The Council could not inflict any fine beyond 500 drachmae. Schémann, Ant. 394—5 E.T. Cf. 45 and 49 § 3; Pol. 1299 6 38 ff.

kal rotro xrA.] This is understood by Cauer (p. 48 f.) as a general eulogy of the fully developed democracy and as incon- sistent with the views expressed in the Politics. But the eulogy is really limited to one particular point, the transfer of judicial functions from the Bovd} to the éxxAyola, and both of these bodies are

did a

CH. 41, 1. 18—CH. 42, 1.1. TIOAITEIA

149

Soxotar mroteiv 6pOds* eddiapOopwrepor yap <ol> drbyou Tév ToANGv 3 elolv «[ai] xépder x[al] ydpiow. paOoddpov & exxdynoiav To wev MpOTov arréyvocay Tovey. ov cvdAdEyouevwr 8 eis THY exKAyaolar, 30 =! X - rd an / a a \ GANA Todda codilouévav Tov TpuvTdvewr, OWS TpocLoTHTaL TO

[Col 21.] wAHO0s mpds thy érilkdpwow Ths YeipoTovias, mpOTov per

"Aydpptos 6Bordov émépicev, wera S€ TodTov “Hpaxreldns 6 Krato- pévios 6 Bactreds émixadovpevos SibBorov, madw 8 *Aydpptos

TpLw Borov.

42. éyer 8 4 viv Katdotacis THs ToruTEelas Tévde Tov

28 OAIFON: éAlyou K: <ol> éAlyor Gennadios, Kontos, K-w, H-L, B.

H-L, 8: 6é <rhy> K-w, de B.

29 elal 31 co(?)hizOMENWN Blass, Gomperz,

K-W, K3: Yndigopévwn K}, yndifoudvwv <pdbvwv > H-L.

TESTIMONIA. XLI33—34 Hesych. K)afouevios: otros ‘Hpaxdelins 6 Krafopends Te kat 6 Bais (ex hoc loco Bacwreds scripsit Houtsma) cadovpevos.

distinctly democratic. The text is in fact in perfect accord with a passage in the Politics, iti 15, 1286 @ 30, 5a TodTo Kal kplver dmewov OxAos TONG 7 els SoTicobv. ére paddov adid@Oopov 7d todd, Kabdmep Ydwp 7d mrAelov, orw Kal 7d wAHOos Tov brlywr ddiadopdreporv. Cf. O. Crusius, Philol. 1, p. 175.

§ 3. 16 piv mpe@rov] on the restoration of the democracy.

*Aytpptos] a statesman belonging to the deme of Collytus, prominent asa financier in the early part of the fourth century. In 400 B.C. he had a dispute with Ando- cides about the lease of a tax (Andoc. De Myst. 133, with Marchant’s note).

Schol. on Arist. Zzc/. (B.C. 392) 102—5 (Arydpptos...mpdrret ra wéyor’ év rH rode): 6A. orparryds Ondvdpusdns, dpgas év AdoBw. Kal rov picOov 5 Tv Tord owérewe (cf. Schol. on Ran. 367 and Plat. Com. frag. 133 Kock) cat rpdros éxedynoragreK ov dédwxe. In Eccl. 300— 310 the poet refers to the time when only one obol was allowed instead of three: ale’ @%e AaBeiv EdOdv7’ SBordv pdvov, whereas now rpubsBorov fyrodct AaPeiv, 2b. 380, 392, Plut. (ed. 2, B.C. 389) 329 and 171 with the Schol. where, however, the pusbds éxkAnowaorixds is confounded with the uw. dicacrixés. The text shews that the Schol. on Zec/, 102 was right in making Agyrrhius the originator of the fee. Boeckh (11 xiv p. 316 Lamb) in- ferred from the mention of Myronides in Zccl. 305 that the fee was introduced some time after the beginning of the in- fluence of Pericles. He was further led

te ascribe its origin to one Callistratus, Append. Vatic. Proverb. iii, 6Boddv edpe Tlapvirns. KadXlorparos ’A@jvnot aohe- Tevodpevos, émixadovuevos dé Llapvirns, picOdv erate rots Stxacrats Kal rots éxxdy- otagrais. Possibly Callicrates, who added an obol to the d:aBodov of the Oewpixdy is really meant (28 § 3). The text also proves that for a short time the fee for the public assembly was two obols, though this was denied by Boeckh, 2. ¢.

Agyrrhius also restored the @ewpixdy (Philochorus ap. Harpocr. s.v.), On the death of Thrasybulus (early in 389) he was elected orparnyés (Xen. Hell, iv 8, 31; Diod. xiv 99). Plat. Com. frag. 185 Kock, AaBod AaBod ris xerpds ws TdxuoTd Hou: wé\Aw orparnyov xetporovely ’ Avyip- ptov. It was probably after 387 that he was long in prison as a debtor to the State (Dem. 24 § i.

“HpaxAclSns 6 KAatopévios]mentioned in Plat. fom, 541 D (with Phanosthenes of Andros), ods 75¢ % més Edvous bvras, évdertapévous Gre détot Adyou elol, Kal eds orparnylas kal els Tas GANas dpxas dye. Favorinus ap. Athen. 506 a; Aelian, Var. Hist. xiv 5. The name Bacidreds is perhaps due to his belonging to some royal family in Asia Minor (cf. Strabo, p- 632; CIG 2881, 2069, 2157, 2189). Peisistratus was called Baoieds in the Ajuos of Eupolis (frag. 123 p.291 Kock). O. Crusius in Pfhi/ol. 1, p. 177. Hera- ‘cleides is identified by Kohler (Hermes, xxvii 68 ff.) with the person of that name mentioned in an inscr. in Bull. Corr. Hell. 1888, p. 163.

on

150 AOHNAIQN COL, 21, l. 5—26.

TpoToy. peTéxovawy pév THs ToduTeLas of EE dupotépwv yeyovores dotav. éyypddov[ras] 8 eis tods Syuoras dxtoxaideca érn yeyo- vores: Stay 8 eyypdpavrat, Sianpivovtar rept abTay duocavres ot Snuotar, mpatov pev eb Soxovar yeyovévas THY rixiay THY éx Tov vopov, Kav pr) SdEwou, arépxyovras dAw eis traidals, SlevTepov & ef erevOepds ears al yéyove Kata [To]ds vopous. errett’ dv pev arroynpicwvrat pr) elvar edevOepor, 6 per épinow eis 76 Suxacry-

XLII 2 peréyovor H-L. 3 OKTWKAIAEKASETEIC ante corr.

& éyypad. Wyse, Blass, Herwerden, Naber (K-w, H-L, K%). T éay wey H-L,

4 Aerpad: 6 d6fwow H-L, 8 ETTIPH (K): dong. Wyse, Blass, K-w, H-L; cf. Phot. dc.

TESTIMONIA. XLII 3—4 *Schol. Arist. Vesp. 578 maliwy rolvuy dSoxipafouévwv’ mpds 7d eos. "Ap. 5€ gyow sre Wihpw ol eyypadbuevor Soxiudfovrat, mh vedrepor (vedrepor wh codd., correx. K-W) in éray elev (Frag. 4277, 4673). lows 5 dy mepl rav By Kpwonevey tatdwy els rods yuurixods ayavas réyet (sc. 6’ Aptoropdyys)* odx ws ev Sikaornply xpwopevwv adX b1d trav rpecBurépwv.

8 Phot. (et Etym. M.) eects: ...éyévero 5¢ "AOjvnow éml riv ev rots Simos dropy- prob&rur, épetcOa yap adOts ctqv avrois els Sixagrypov wept THs mwoNcrelas* Kal el wev éddwoar, érwdobvro ws tévor' ef Se yu}, éravyjecay els rods e av drevnpicOyncay Shpous.

Part II, c. XLII—LXIII. duerés WBAoa (Aeschin. Z. c.) denoted the

The Exist-

ing Constitution.

XLII § 1. Enrolment on the list of citizens.

§ 1. peréxovow tis woAtrelas] Pol. 1268 @ 24, 27; 1275 531; 12904 4.

&€ dphorépwv—dorav] Pol. 1278 a 34, Tédos 6é pdvov rods €& duoty doray monl- Tas woodow. 1275 521, dpltovrar dé mpos Tip xpihow wodlrny rov €& dudorépwv todt- Tov Kal py Oarépov pévov, oloy marpos H pyrpés. See note on 26 § 4.

éyypddovrar] Pol. iii 1, 1275 @ 14, maidas Tovs whmw Ov Hruklay éyyeypap- pévous. Dem. Eudbul. 57 § 61, quik’ éve- ypaony éyw kal dudcavres of Snudrac btxalws mdvres mepl éuod riv Wipov epe- pov, otre xarnybpnoey ots’ évayriay rhy Pipov jveyxev. Isaeus 7 § 28, dudcavres xa’ lepav évéypaydy pe (sc. els TO dnkt- apxixov ypaypareiov). Lycurg. Leocr. 76, éredav els TO Antapyexdy ypayparetov eyypapact kai 2pnBor yévwvrar. The ear- liest ephebic inscr. (B.C. 334-3) mentions of &pnBor ol ert rot Krnouxdéous apxovros éyypapévres. By this registration the youthful citizen entered on the duties of civil life at the same time as he was en- rolled on the list of ephebi. This was the only list of ep4ed7 kept by the demes, and such a phrase as éyypadeoOat els épi}- Bous (Pseudo-Plat. Axioch. 366 ©) is an inaccurate equivalent for éyy. els rods Synudras (P. Girard, in Daremberg and Saglio, iii 624).

oxroKalSeka ern] Schol. Aeschin. c. Ctes. 122, dd dxTwxaldexa érav éveypd- govro els rd Anivapyixdy, and 1 § 1g. émt

close of the two years intervening between the ages of 16 and 18 (A. Schafer, Dem. iii 2, 19 —38; Lipsius in WV. Fahro. 7. Philol., no. 117, p. 299 ff.; Gilbert, Gv. St. i 186).

In Aristoph. Vesp. 578 it is re- garded as a privilege of the dicacral to take part in ascertaining the physical ma- turity of Athenian youths on the occasion of the doxiwacla. In the present passage the preliminary enrolling belongs to the Snuorat, while the subsequent doxiwacla is now for the first time assigned to the BovdAy, to which it was perhaps trans- ferred after the time of Aristophanes. According to the text, the diacral are only concerned in the event of an appeal on the question whether the person en- rolled was of free birth or not. (Cf. Meier and Schémann, AZt. Process, p. 253-4 Lipsius. The doubt there sug- gested as to the accuracy of the Schol. on Vesp. 578 is now withdrawn by Lipsius, in the Verhandlungen der K. Sachsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften, Leipzig, 1891, p. 63.) Possibly, in the event of a dispute on the question of age, the matter was similarly referred to a court, but this is not stated in the text.

Sranplfovrar] The ordinary diayzj- gots here described might be followed by an appeal to a dicacrjptov. The pro- cedure was the same as in the special Suayyngiots described in Dem. 57 § 60, érace Stapnploag dat rods ‘Adtuovalous mepl abray kal karnyopav deca Tur Syuo- ray étéBanev, ods dravras why évds Kare défaro 7d Sexacrhptrov.

CH. 42, 1. 2—17. TIOAITEIA 151 ptov, ot dé Snudtas katnyopous aipodyras mévre [dv]Spas && abray, cay pev pn Son Si[xat]as eyypadler]Oat, rawr? TodTov 7 TOL" dav 88 vixnon, Tois [8n]uorats emdvayxes éyypddew. eta 8é Tada Soxiyater Tovs éyypadévras 7 Bovdry, xav tis S6E[n vjewre- pos oxTwxaidera éradv elvat, nutot [rod]s dnudctas Tovs éyypdyav- tas. émav 6 Soxypalab|dow of ébnBo1, cvdreyévTes of matépes avTav Kata pudas, dudcavtes aipodyras Tpels ex Tav pudeTav THY imép tetrapdxovta ern yeyovoTwy, ods av yydvtar BedticTous elvat Kal éritndevordtous émiperciobar trav epnBwr, éx 88 rovT@v

N 11 Versus in fine ENrpadel éeyypddew (sc. erdvarykés dorw abrdv eyypddeww) recte al van Leeuwen (H-L, B): ENTpadeT éyypddera: K, K-W; constructio quidem utraque recte se habet; émdvayxes éyypdgew defendunt c. 29, 21, Pol. 1266 a 10, 17,18 et 1301 523; émdvarykes éyypaderat Pol. 1266 a 15; sed manus tertia nunquam aut Tai contrahit aut a! supra verbi finem scribit, N autem septies eodem in loco ponit, c. 41, 30 y vv v v v eExKANoLA, C. 42, 34 AapBavovet, C. 43, 4 XEtpoTovover, 7 MpuTavevet, 15 Bovdn, 17 XEt- v v

porover, 29 KeAevovet; quorum exemplorum sex in fine versus inventa sunt. 14 ETTAN : éreddv H-L.

xaldex’ K-W, B.

13 éxTw-

dropyplowvrat] used absolutely in Dem. 57 §§ 11, 56, 58, 59, 62; followed by wh in F. LZ. 174, drepndloavro ph néurewv. emipnplfecda is found c. acc. in Dion. H., Amd. vi 71, and Diod. xix 61; but these passages do not justify the re- tention of émyndlowvrat.

éplyow xrr.] Dem. 57 § 6, dé... w- bérw rv trav Snporsy droyypiow to.- elo Oat Texuhptov buds, ws dp’ oxi mpooyjxer pot THs wodews. el yap évoulfere Ta Slkara Suvfjoerbar Tods Snudras Siaxpivar, odK dv Cdwxare rip els buds Epeciv. Cf. Etym.M. and Photius, s. v. épeots, quoted in Zestém.

méyre dySpas] We find a similar pro- cedure in the decree of the ppdrepes re- corded in the Decelean inscr., CIA ii 2, P+ 534—6, no. 841 4, Il. 30—34, eay dé mis BovAnrar é@etvac els Anpotiwvldas, dv d aroyngdlowvras, céetvar air@, édéo- Gat dé éx’ abrots cuvnydpous Tov Aexedeckaiv olkov wévre dvipas wmép tpidxovra érn yeyovéras. Cf. Class. Rev. v 221 a.

twAet] Dionys. on Isaeus, 16 p. 617, eypddy 4 Tis bro Taw ’AOnvalwy vouos’ é&é- Tacw yevérOar Tay Tokiruy KaTa& Simous, tov & dmopngicbevra Urd rév Snuoray THS ToduTelas wy weréxev, Tots dé ddlxws droyngicbeiow Epecw eis Td SixacrHptov elvat, mpotxadecapévors Tous Snudras, Kal av 7d detrepov ceheyx Pact, tempac bat kal rd xphuara evar Onudora. Bekker, Anecd. (and Suidas) s. v. dropngicd&ra’

el ris Edvos otev elvar kal od sodlrys, rovrov év rats Stapndloect trav Shuwv dmrepnpliovro of Snudrat, cal édéyero dme- Wngicpévos. elra eloyyero els 7d dixac- Thpiov Kal éxplvero ~evlas, Kal el wey éddrw, érimpdoxero ws éévos' el dé éxpdrer, dvedapBdvero els rHv modirelav, ottw Ay- poobevns (de Cor. 132). Cf. Meier and Schémann, p. 440 Lips., n. 705.

§§2—s5. Onthe military training of the Ephebi. Onthe Zphebi,see Dittenberger, De Ephebis Aiticts, 1863; Dumont, Zssaz sur PEphébie Attigue, 1875-6; Grasber- ger, Erziehung und Unterricht im Klass. Alterthum, iii, 1881. Also Capes, Uxi- versity Life in Ancient Athens, 1877; Wayte on Zphebus in Smith, Dict. Ant. ; P. Girard, Péducation Athénienne, 1889, pp- 271—327; and esp. the same scho- lar’s article in Daremberg and Saglio, 1891, iii 621—636 (the only account of the subject written since the discovery of this treatise).

§ 2. Soxupdte] This doxpacta (like that of adopted sons) probably took place at the time of the dpyatpeotar (Isaeus 7 § 28; Dem. ¢. Leoch. 44 § 39) at the beginning of the official year (Lys. 21 § 1). Cf. Gilbert, i 187.

tmp trerrapdkovra érn] Similarly any xopryds who had boys under his superin- tendence had to have attained the age of

40 (56 § 3).

20

152

AOHNAIQN

COL. 21, 1. 27—35.

6 Sipos eva rils dluris éxdorns yerpotovel cwppomarHy, xal [coo]unriy ek tév ddXwv ’AOnvatwy emi wdavtas. avdrdgaBdvtes 8 3 obra tovs épnBovs, mperov pev Ta tepad mepupdOov, cir’ eis

19 ...MHTHN?: Koopyrqy Paton, van Leeuwen (H-L), K-w, K%, B; [émmJedyryvK}. TTANTA vel TTANTAC ante CYAA: mdvra. cvAA. K; Wavras. guAN. K-W, B; Wdvras.

mapad, H-L.

18—25 Bekk. Anecd. 301 (infra exscriptum).

Xétporovet] one of the few exceptions to the general rule by which appoint- ments at Athens were made by lot. Cf. 43 § 1 and Headlam, Ox the Lot, p. 104.

codpovietiv] [Plat.] Axioch. 367 A, was 6 Tod pepaxtoxov xpdvos (v. 2. mévos) éorlv td owhpovords. Dinarchus, adv. Philocl. 15, 6 wev Snpos &ras ot’ dapades otre Stkaov voulfwr elvar rapaxaradécbas Tovs éavTod maidas, dmexeporévycey abrdov dd Ths TOv eppBwv emipedrcelas. Philo- cles, the orparyyds here referred to, was a owppoviorys, not a Koounrys (Gilbert, i 297; Dumont, Essai sur ?Ephébie At- tigque, 1876, p. 169 f.). In Bekker Anecd. 301 the cwpponcralare defined as dpxovrés Twes xeporovyral, déxa Tov dpiOudy, éxdo- Ts pudgs els. ereweodvTo 5é THS Twppo- obvys Tov EPIBwv pico Tapa THS TbEWws AauBdvorres Exacros Kab’ yudpay Spaxpry (similarly in Photius and Etym. M. s. v.).

They are mentioned in the earliest ephebic inscr. now extant, B.C. 334—3 (Bull. Corr. Hell. xiii 253); also in B.c. 320/19(CIA ii 581); and in B.c. 3085/4. This last inscr., as restored, includes the words: [rod Koopnrot Kal T]Ov cwppo[yiordv xal tay djdackddwv. The xoopuyrijs also ap- pears to be named near the beginning : [émecdy of EpnBor... éw]iwedodvra €[....Kal +. ror }wodv[rac....] erwot ebrdxrws... re Kooun[r....T]Gdkda 7a mepl TH[v... rots btdaloxdAous xr. In the same inscr. the épyBo. are described as éyypagévres (Kohler, Aittheilungen, 1879, iv 324—1). The latest inscr. belongs to B.C. 303/2,.. cwoppoviorhs bd Too Siyou xeiporovndels [rav] épfBuv rav eyypadéytwy [ris] Tav- Scovldos pudfis él Aewarpdrov dpxovros (B.C. 303) Kaddis kal owppdvus Kal edrdxrws é[re- pe]urnrat atray Kal darog[alyjovew adrav els ray pudgy [ol wlardpes ray éppBuw ém- MepleA]fjo0a kard. rods véuous Tuv eppBuv «rn. (Bull. Corr. Hell. 1888, xii149). Are- lief published in Rev. Arch. 1876, ii 185, copied in Daremberg and Saglio, iii 628, represents three cwppovioral in their robes holding their wands of office in the pre- sence of a divinity who, cannot be identi- fied. The office was apparently suppressed early in the third century B.c. to be re- stored in imperial times. See Ditten-

berger, De Ephebis Atticis, pp. 29, 443 Dumont, Sur PE phéie, p. 200; Smith, Dict. Ant. i 998 4; and esp. Girard in Daremberg and Saglio, iii 626.

Kkoopytiv] Erotianus, Lex. Hipp. s.v. kbopou" Koounral ol rav épyBwv evratlas mpovoodyres. The word is found in [Plat.] Axioch. 363 E (as quoted by Stobaeus), ére- dav 8 els rods EpyBous eyypagdy, Koounrys kal PbBos xelpwv, arid in a general sense in Plat. Zeg. 372 a. The usual formula for the election of this officer is yetporovy- Gels koopnris-éml robs épyBous els Tov él (rod Setvos) dpxovros évavrév, CIA ii 465, 467, 469: in 471 1. 56 the people koouy- [rl cablorno[w éx] cav dpiora. Be[Br]wxs- tw. Hardly any of the inscriptions in which this officer is mentioned are earlier than the second century. The earliest belongs to B.c. 305/4 (quoted in last n.); the next to about B.c. 282 (cIA ii 316, 10=Dittenberger, Zzscr. no. 346). It is suggested by Dittenberger (De Zphedis, p- 31) that the office was created in the time of Alexander. Theinscr. of B.C. 305 (already quoted) shews that for a short time the xoouynrys and the cw@povicral existed together. This is confirmed by the text, if the restoration is correct. Cf. Dumont, Lphébie Attique, p. 166 ff.; Gilbert, i 299; and Girard in Daremberg and Saglio, iii 626—7.

In literature, one of the earliest passages on the xoopyrys is in Teles (fl. middle of 3rd cent.), ap. Stob. 98, 72, pmBos yéyovev* éuradw Tov KoounThy poBeirat, Tov mado- TplBnv, Tov dwhopdxov, Tov -yunvaclapxor, b1d TavTwy TobTwWY pacTIyoDTaL, Tapa- rypetrat, tpaxnrlgerar. ef épfBwv éori kal 4dn ekoow érav' ert goBetrar kal maparnpe kal raklapxov Kal orparnyby.

ém\ mavras] For él, of persons set over others, cf. Xen. Cyr. iv 5, 58, émt rods mefovs kabtordvar apxovra, and Hell. iii 4, 20. In this sense it is more common c. gen. Or dat.

§ 3. td tepa mepryAQov] It was pro- bably at this stage that the épmBor took the oath in the cave of Aglauros (Dem. F. L. 303; Lycurgus, Leocr. 76; Sto- baeus, Flor. 43, 48; Pollux viii 105; another clause is quoted in Plut. 4. 15).

CH. 42, 1. 18—24. TIOAITEIA

153

Tlecpacéa rropevovrar, cal ppovpodaw of wev tiv Movveyiav of dé

tiv Acryy. xeupo[rovet] Sé Kal maidotpiBas avrois Sv0 Kal dida- , oe ¢ an \ , \ 2 ¢

axanous, [ot]ruves OmAopayeiy Kal rokevew kal axovrivew x{[al]

katatantny adiévat didacKovew.

21 Tleparé H-L. AQTTEATHN

<ol> K-w. 24 KATHN

cf. Meisterhans, p. 127 (kararaArav annis A.C. 330—323).

MOYNYXIAN. Cf. c. 19, 5-

Sidmor Sé Kal eis tpol pyr]

28 [ol]rwes K, H-L, B: 7[ér]7[a]pas

karaméArny (K}, K-w?) : —mdArqv K-W!, H-L, K3, B,

diddEovow Rutherford (H-L).

Cobet, V. Z. 223, regards the formula in Stobaeus and Pollux as a figment of the grammarians ; but it can hardly be doubted that some such oath was taken, although it is not mentioned in the text. (Cf. Schémann, Axt. p. 359 E. T.; Gil- bert, i 296 n.) The taking of the oath is exhibited on a vase in the Hermitage Museum, which shews us an édnfos, armed with shield and spear, holding his right hand over an altar; the oath is being administered by an aged man (pro- bably representing the SovAy) beyond it: behind the ép7S8os we have a Nixy holding a helmet (Daremberg and Saglio, iii 624).

Movvixlav] 19 § 2, Even in Roman times, B.C. 100, the ephebi mwepiémAevoay ..els Mouvexlay (CIA ii 467, 22).

*Axriyv] the name given to the southern peninsula of the Peiraeus, the highest point of which is about 180 feet above the sea. Harpocr. s. uv. ém@adarrldids Ts potpa THs “Arrixys. Lycurg. Leocr. §§ 17, 553 Diod. xx 45; cf. 61 § 4. Wachsmuth, Stadt Athen, ii 46.

tratdorp(Bas] officials employed to train the ephebt in gymnastic exercises. In B.C. 305/4 their number was reduced to one (Kohler, A@ittheilungen, iv 327, cf. Teles ap. Stob. Flor. 98, 72). In the inscriptions this officer generally takes precedence over the other instructors. Dumont, pp. 177—185 ; Daremberg and Saglio, ili 627 4.

wSackdAous] Down to about B.c. 136 this term is regularly applied to the in- ‘structors of the eg/ebz, including the madorplBns, the émAoudxos and the rest (cra ii 341, 465, 467, 469): after that date they are usually called madevrat. Du- mont, p. 176; Daremberg and Saglio, iii 627; Grasberger, iii 167.

The four following verbs describe the functions of the several instructors. The corresponding official titles have hitherto been known to us from the ephebic in-

scriptions of the 3rd century. The literary -

evidence of the text is earlier than the earliest inscriptions mentioning these in- structors.

StAopaxety] Xen. Azad. ii i, 7; Plat. Gorg. 450 E, rods matdorplBas xal Tovs éy Srdos Siddoxovras wdxecOa, Huthyd. 271 D, Laches 179 BE, 182 B, Leg. 804 D, 813 D, 833 E; Teles ap. Stob. Flor. 98, 42; Theophr. wept mixpopidorimias (with Jebb’s note on p. 203). In the ephebic inscriptions the drAoudyos, or ‘ drill-ser- jeant,’ ranks next to the xoounryjs and the madorpi8ns (Dumont, pp. 185—9). CIA ii 467 (=Ditt. no. 347) 1. §2, B.C. 100, érawvéoat dé Kal rovs didacxddous, Tév TE matdorplBnv—Kal tov dardopdxov—xai Tov dxovrictiv—kal Tov adérnv. In an inscr. of Teos, the érdoudxos precedes Tov di- Sdtovra rokevew kal dxovritey and receives a stipend of 300 dr., as against 250 (Ditt. no. 349, 22—27). In the Attic inscrip- tions the usual order of precedence is OrAoudyxos, dxovrisThs, ToesTNS, KATATANT- agérns, and after these the ypaymareds and danpérns (CIA ii 316, 465, 467, 469— 471, 482). The drill was held in the Lyceum (Grasberger, iii 139).

rokevew] On the rotérys, see Dumont, p- 152; Daremberg and Saglio, iii 628. He was not necessarily an Athenian (CIA ii 316, ll. 29, 72). Cf. Plat. Zeg. 813 D.

dkovtifew] On the dxovricrys, see Dumont, p. 190; Daremberg and Saglio, 4c. The same person is repeatedly men- tioned in the inscriptions as holding this office for several years (CIA ii 465, 471)-

karamdArny arevar) Zzh. tii 2, 17, p. IlI1 at, 6 bé mpdrrer dyvonceer dy Ts, ofov...dettac Boudduevos ddeivat, ws 6 Tov karaméArnv. The instructor in charge of this department was called the a@ér7s or the xaramadragérns (le mattre de balis- tigue). The former title is found in B.c. 100; the latter in B.c. 282, CIA ii 316 (=Ditt. 346), 28, émawéoa dé kal rov matdorpiByv—Kai Tov dxovricriy—[kal Tov karat |ad[ra]pérnv—xal rov ypapparéa— kal tov rogérqv (mentioned last in this case because he was not an Athenian, but a Cretan). xaramadragérns, karama\ta- geota and xaramdArys occur in an inscr. of Ceos, Ditt. no. 348, 25, 30, 27. Cf. c1A ii 413 (=Ditt. 196), 15 (after B.C. 200),

25

30

154 AOHNAIQN COL. 21,1. 35—COL. 22, |. 12.

Tois wey acwhpovictais Spaxynv piav éxaotp, tois 8 epnBoww téttapas dBodods éxdotw: Ta dé THY pudeTSY THY a’TOd Aap- Bavov 6 cappovarns exacts ayopdtes Ta éruTydea maou eis TO Kowwov (cvactTobot yap Kata dudds), Kal TOv Gdrwy émipedeirar TavT@v. Kal Tov pev TpOTov eviavTov oUTws Sidyoucw tov 8 4 vartepov, éxxdynolas ev TH Oedrpw yevouévns, amodeEduevor TH

25 Spaxuity wlay per compendium scriptum <a. 28 cvoctrofow B. 29 obrw H-L.

29—30 AYCTEPON ; &’ Uorepov K, H-L, B: Sedrepov K-w, coll. Harpocr. rov dedrepoy

rip éviaurév. 30 TEN? -yevoudvys Blass (K-W, H-L, K%). aTToAEIZ K, K-w, B; émideé. H-L.

§ 4 * Harp. meplrodos:...’Ap. ev ’AQ. trod. wept Tov ephBuv Aéywr dyno obrws Tov Sedrepov évavrdv éxxAnolas ev TH Oedrpy yevoueyys (yw. CD) dmodefduevor (drroderEdpevor Dittenberger) r@ dijyw mepl ras rdées xal AaBdvres dowléa Kal Sépv mapa roi Shpov Tepimodovar Thy Xwpav Kal diarplBovow ev Tots pvdaxryplos (Frag. 428°, 4685). Schol,

Aeschin. 2, 167.

els rods karamd\ras veupas érédwxev. The engine used in this exercise is termed in the inscriptions xaramdArys, Spyavov or ALBoBbros. KaTaradrwy is the spelling found in B.c. 330 (CIA ii 807 4 129, 131, 132); in B.C. 325 (2b. 809 ¢ 10, 12, 13); and in B.C. 323 (26. 811 4 196, 200). Cf. Dumont, p. 191; Daremberg and Saglio, iii 628 a; Grasberger, iii 166.

Spaxpry play xrr.] Bekker, Amecd. 301, quoted on cwopomorqy p.152a. Boeckh, II xvi p. 332 Lamb.

§ 4. Tov pv mparoy éviavTov xrA.] Aeschines says of himself, 7. Z., 2 § 167, meplrodos Tis xwpas ravrys éyevdunv bv’ érn. Hence it has been supposed that the épnBou served as mepiroko. for two years (Schomann, Azz. p. 360 E. T.; Philippi in Ahezn. Mus. 34, 613). The text describes the first year as spent in military exercises, and the second as de- voted to the duties of reptrodor (this was the view already held by Dittenberger, De Ephebis, and Gilbert, i 296). The discrepancy is noticed in Harpocr. s. uv. meplrodot... Taparnpnréov ody ort 6 pey Apirroréhys eva poly éviauTov év Tots mepurédos ylyverOar Tovs épyBous, 6 dé Aloxlvys dvo (cf. Dumont, p. 28 ff.). The purport of the text is quoted by the Schol. on Aeschin. 2. ¢., of yap &pnBor Tov ded- Tepov enaurov, éxxdyolas ev re Oedrpy yevouévns, A\aBdvres dorlda kai dépu mapa Tod Ojuov, mepterddouv rouréore mepiyp- xovro Thy xwpay Kal dérpiBov év ois puraxrnplos 7 év Tots ppouplos évlore éros pévov, évlore do. The context of the present passage shews that they acted as poupol for both years (§ §), while it is

implied that they served as meplaroor for the second year alone. Girard endeavours to remove the discrepancy by observing that the author ‘ne dit pas expressé- ment, en effet, que les éphébes n’étaient astreints au service de treplaodo que la seconde année. I] se borne a constater que la premiére année était remplie par une sorte d’apprentissage du méetier de soldat, mais cet apprentissage, qui se faisait au Pirée et 4 Munychie, avait déja le caractére de ce que devait étre, Vannée suivante, la vie éphébique’ (Darem- berg and Saglio, iii629, note 174). Itseems simpler to suppose that Aeschines was using a popular and only approximately accurate phrase in describing himself as meplronos for two years.

exkAnolas ev to Oedtrpw] Cf. A. Miiller, Biihnenalterthiimer, p. 743; and Jebb in Smith’s Dict. Ant. ii820 a. ‘Juv. x 128; Plut. Zimol. 34,33 38,3; Nepos, 7zmol. 4,2. Athenian decree in Joseph. Amt. xiv 8, 5. The inscriptions bearing on this point are collected by Adam Reusch, de diebus contionum ordinariis ap. Atheni- enses, diss. phil. Argentor. sel. iii 4’ (Mayor).

atrodefdpevor xrd.] ze. ‘having given public proof of proficiency in military exercises.’ Harpocr. has dmodetduevot, corrected by Dittenberger, De Ephedis, p- 12, n, ro. The &pmBor of B.C. 100 similarly appeared in public, at the exd of their period of service, éroujoavro dé kal én’ é&6dp THs épnBelas Thy drbdekw TH Bovdy, CIA ii 467 (= Ditt. 347, 43); cf ii 468, 26.

CH. 42, 1. 25—CH. 43, 1. 1. TIOAITEIA 155

| {[Col. 22-] Spec Il Ta mept Tas Takes, Kal ANaBdvTes domida Kab Sépu mapa

THS TOAEwWS, TEepLTTOAOvEL THY yYoepav Kal SiatpiBovew év Tois guraxrnplous. poupodar dé ta So érn, yrapvdas éyovrtes, Kal arenes clot ravtav Kai di[kn]y odt[e] Siddacww ode Nau Bavovow, iva wn m[p]o[places 7 t[L0]d amrcévas, Any Teph KAnpov Kab émiKdAN- [pov], Kav Tue Kata TO yévos lepewouvn yévntar. dueEeAOdvTwy 8¢ taéy Svety érdv, 78n pera TOY Grrwv eiciv. TA wey odv Tepl 2S, a a BJ \ \ \ bd t aA y \ THY TOV TOMTOY eyypadny Kal Tors épyBous TodTOV eye TOV TpoTroy.

43. tds 8 dpyds tds meph thy éyxdunrov Sioiknow amacas

31 ra om. Harp. 32 rijs wéNews: Tod Siwouv Harp. et Schol. Aeschin. 35 m[p]é[Placrs 4 [0] daévar in ectypo feliciter agnovit Blass (kK%); legebatur mpdy- pace ouppeyetéy Te PK}; apd[yplace cuppryviwvra J B Mayor, Hude (H-L); mpdy[uJace ovyyvevrat Rutherford (K-w). 36 KATATOLENOC ?, kata Td yévos K, H-L, B;

kara yévos K-W. IEPOCYNH lepwovvn K, H-L, B; lepewovvn K-W (cf. Meister- hans, p. 36%). AI€E.EABOINTWON : SteAOovT. H-L. 37 AYEIN: duoiy K-w’.

domlSa Kal Sépv] These are exhibited on the vase representing the ephebus taking the oath, mentioned in note on § 3, Ta lepa mepr@dOov.

§ 5. hpoupotor] The Schol. on Aeschin. #. L. 167 quotes the two following lines from Eupolis, obros év rots gpoupiows xowrd- gerat, and rovs mepirddous dmiévac els Ta gpoiua. The épnBor of B.c. 100 (CIA ii 467, 22 and 87) e&#NOov emi ra Ppovpia kal 7, dpia THs ’Arrixys weovdkis év Sots. Among the ¢povpia were Anaphlytus, Thoricus, Sunium, Rhamnus, Eleusis, Phyle, Aphidna (Gilbert, i 297).

xAapvdas] ‘short gowns or mantles.’ Pollux, x 164, 7d 6¢ roy ép7Bwv ddpnua méragos kal xAapis’ Piryjpwv év Ovpwppe

eyo yep és Thy xAapvda KareOduny more Kat TOY TéTaTOV. Cf. Antidotus, ap. Athen. 240 B, éyypa- giva kal NaPet 7d xhapvdiov. Meleager, in Auth. P. vii 468, has an epitaph ona youth whom his mother éxrwxadexéray éorédioev xAauUt. &x xAapUSos =F Epy- Sov in Plut. ii 752 , cf. 754 F. It ap- pears on vases as the characteristic dress of young men (L and S), ¢.g. Tischbein, Vases,i t4 ; Hamilton, Vases, i 2 (in Smith, Dict. Ant.i 416); and esp. on a lecythus from Eretria (Studniczka, Jahrb. des Kais. deutsch. arch. Inst. ii 163; Daremberg and Saglio, iii 630, fig. 2680). The garb of the pmo. is sometimes supposed to have been ‘yellow or saffron-coloured ’ (Dict. Ant. L.c.), but it was black accord- ing to Philostratus, Vit. Soph. ii 1, 5, Mehalvas xdaptdas evnupévor Tas éxKdy- olas meprexdOnvro Kal ras mroumas émewrov.

Herodes Atticus altered it into white and himself defrayed the cost of the change (CIA iii 1132; Capes, Unzv. Life, p. 9).

dreAets—rdytwv] This general exemp- tion did not include the rpinpapxla, which was incumbent on all Athenians of a cer- tain census from the time of their en- rolment on the Anétapyixdy ypaywareiov (Dem. AZid. 154). Even this Ayroupyla was remitted for one year in the case of orphans, Lys. 32 § 24, ods # més ov povov mwatdas byras aredels érolyoev, GANG kal éredav Soxtmacbwow eviavrdy ddjkev amacuy Tav AnToupyiuv.

arep\ KArjpov] Thus Demosthenes sued his guardians as soon as he came of age, Onet.i15,173 Mid. 78. émucdyjpov] At the age of 18, the young Athenian became kUptos rns émekAjpov, Isaeus 8 § 31, 10§ 12, rag. oo, Hyperid. frag. 223 = 194; Suidas, 5. U. Ankvapxixdy ypauuaretov,B; A. Scha- fer, Dem. I11 2, p. 24 f.

The list of lawsuits in the text is pos- sibly not exhaustive. In Lys. 10 § 4 the speaker, who was 13 at the time when his father was put to death by the Thirty, instituted 4 prosecution against them before the Areopagus as soon as he came of age, éreidy Traxiora edoximdoOny (§ 31, in B.c. 399). The other alternative is to assume that the statement applies only to the time of the writer (Hager in Smith, Dict. Ant. ii 1066 2).

XLIII § 1. On officials elected by show of hands.

8 1. yy éykvKAtov Stolknow] Pol. 1255625, eyKkAla Oaxovypara, 1263 a 21, éyxixdcor Seaxovtar (every-day duties). 1269

156

AOHNAIQN

COL, 22, 1. 12—20,

Tolovat KAnpwTas, TAY Tapiov oTpatiwTiKaY Kal Tov éml TO

Gewpixoy kal rod rdv Kpnvav émipedntod. ravras € yeipotovod-

ow, Kat oi xetporovnPevres dpyovow ex Tlavabnvaiwy eis Tlavabn- S vata. xYewpotovodcs dé Kal Tas pds TOY TOAEMOY Amrdcas.

K XLUI 2 mrAHpwtac (6 TAHPOYTA!). Richards.

<roi> raulov <TOv> orparwrikav

3 KPHNWN : koway J W Headlam (u-L).

6 35 (of courage), xptowuos mpds obdév ray . 6yKukM wy GAN’ elrep els Tov wodepov. Oecon.

2, 1346 @ 8, mpdaodos dd Trav éyxuKAlww.

taplov—orpariwtikey] The war-fund included the income from the property- tax and the surplus of the yearly revenue, [Dem.] Meaer. 4, Ta mepidvTa xphuara ris Storxjoews. The fund was adminis- tered by the raulas ray orp. This official provided pay for the troops and defrayed all other military expenses (Smith, Dict.

‘ Ant.ii 7616). Heis first mentioned in B.c.

338, [Plut.] Lycurg. 27. In 334 (CIA ii 739) he makes payments to the treasurers of Athene’and to the commissioners for restoring the figures of Nixy and the articles of plate used in processions (see further in Hartel, Studien diber att. Staatsrecht, pp. 135-6; Gilbert, i 237; Diirrbach, ?orateur Lycurgue, pp. 32— 33). For some of his other duties cf. inf. c. 47 § 2,49§3- | an

Tov emt To Oewptxcv] probably instituted under the administration of Eubulus (be- tween B.C, 354 and 339). It has been a moot point whether there was only one official ét 7d Oewpixdy or more (Gilbert i229). The text implies that there were several. In B.C. 343/2, CIA ii 114 C 5, a single individual is mentioned émt ro Jewpixdv, immediately after the ypaupareds kara mpuravelay and emi ra Wyolopara, and immediately before the Bov)fjs raylac; thus he is possibly only a Povdeuris charged with looking after that depart- ment of business and is not necessarily to be identified with the management of the fund. Aeschines, c. Cres. § 24, men- tions the archon of the year in which Dem. was elected treasurer of the Oew- pixév ; hence it was inferred by Boeckh (11 vii p. 248 Lamb) that the office was annual. The text shews that it was held for four years, from one Panathenaic festival to the next. Cf. 47 § 2.

Kpyvov emripednrod] kpqvav émipednrat are mentioned in fo/. 1321 6 26, where Athens is doubtless in Aristotle’s mind, though not expressly named. Plato, Leg. 758 E, refers to xpynvav émmednTds. An inscr. published in the "E¢quepls ’Apxaco-

Aoytx}, 1889, pp. 13—16, no. 28, describes the work done by one Pytheas as ém- pednThs Tv KpynvGy in B.C. 333. émredh TlvOas alpefels éwl ras xpiyas Trav BAdwy év TH apxy émtpedeirar adds kat prrorinws xr’ éravéoa Ivddav...dperns evexa kal dixarootyns Tis wept Thy émyédecav Tov Kpyvav, Sirus ay ol dddor ol det xetporovod- pevo. érl rds Kpivas ptdoriu@yrat KTA.

Cf. Hesych. s. v. kpnvd-yyn (sic)* apxnh éml rijs émipedelas BdarTos, and Pollux viii 113, émusednrhs 6é tis...éylvero, ds kat éxadetro ep’ Udwp, 7v...kal kpyvopuddxiov dpxy: also Photius, xpnvoptaAak jv dé kal dpx} tis "AOjvynow. It is uncertain whether xpyvoptAaé was another name for this officer or the title of a subordinate official. The importance of this officer is indicated by his being elected and not appointed by lot. The office of bddrwv émtorarns was held by Themistocles (Plut. Them. 31 § 1). Cf. Daremberg and Saglio, s.v. Eprmeletes, ii p. 668 4.

As two of the officials mentioned in the text are connected with finance, some surprise has been felt that no notice is taken of the important financial officer called the raplas ris xow%s mpooddov or 6 éml rH Stoxjoe. (The latter title is supposed by Fellner to have been in- troduced about 300 B.c., but the suppo- sition is not approved by Gilbert, i 233. Cf. Diirrbach, Lycurgue, pp. 21—38.)

This official, like those in the text, held office for one term of four years only, [Plut.] vit. Lycurg. 3. Lycurgus, whose financial activity began in 338, is described as raxGels él 7H SoKyoer (Hyper. frag. 121 Blass); he probably ceased to hold this office in 334, and this treatise was written about ten years later. Hence, it is suggested by Mr J. W. Headlam to alter xpnvdv into Kxowdv. It would be safer, however, to suppose that xat Toi émi rq dtocxjoe: had dropped out, than to accept this suggestion. The fact that the xpnvav émiuedyrhs was elected at the Panathenaea (about 23—28 Hecatom- baeon, before the middle of August) is confirmed by the above decree in honour of Pytheas, which is dated 9 Metageitnion,

CH. 43, 1. 2—8. TIOAIT EIA

157

bs! nr an fal Bourn S€ KAnpodras mevraxdcto1, TevTnKOVTA amo <Tis> Huds t i ay n n exaorns. mputavever 8 év wcpes THv purdy éxdorn Kal b Te dv AdXwowW, ai wev mpdTas TérTapes &F Kal Tpidxovta nu<pas ExdaTn,

6 DN (K, H-W, B); wevraxdovot, wevT}KovTa H-L, <Tijs> pudfs B.

TESTIMONIA. XLIII § 2 * Harp. wpuravelas:...€o7e d¢ dpiluds quepGv mpvravela rot As Ae, ds éxdorn pudy mpuraveter. SueldexTat dé wepl rovrwy "Ap. év 77 AO. TON. Harp. (=Bekk. Az. 291, 4, Lex. Dem. Patm., Schol. Plat. p. 459) mpurdveis :...émpu- Tdvevoy dé...é« diadoxfs dhdpraus al Séxa pudal _kdjpy Aaxoiea. Schol. Plat. Leg. p. 459: mpuravela b€é éorw dpiOuds Tis Huepy Hrot As 7 Ae, ds éxdorn pudy mpuravetew déye- Tat...al Sinpyvrar els Tavras ai ucpac Toh émavrod Kata yap ceAHv yy dyouct ToiTov, as ékdory puAG T&v béxa émiBddrdew A|e quepas, heovdtew dé dAlyas. 5d kal Tas Nourds amédwxay ob *AOnvatar rats mpwracs Aaxotoas Técoapor pudais, iva exelywy pev Exdorn Tas As Huépas mpuravedy, ai d€ Nowral & dva de. Fere eadem Photius, rpuravela, inter alia éviaurdv dé of "A@qvator tov cedynaxdy yoy (Frag. 393%, 433°). Schol. Maximi Planudis ad Hermog. in Rhet. Gr. v p. 509, 20 Walz: wpicuévar foav éxxdnola kara mpuvravelay éxdorny résoapes* Séxa dé ovowy ’AOHynor puddy émpuTdvevoy al wev

mparat Naxoboa pudal récoapes ava rpidxovra ef qucpas, al dé Noval ef dvd. TpidKovTa

mate xTh.

eleven days after the close of the Pana- thenaea.

é Tlavanvatwy els Tlavabrvaca] zc. for four years. The phrase (with és for els) occurs in CIA i 32 A 28, B 27 (Hicks, no. 37)3 If7, 33 1213 1253 1293 1333 141, &c; 170; 273 (Hicks, no. 46). The greater Panathenaea were held in every third Olympic year, in the same year as the Pythian games. The Joct classict are collected in Michaelis, Par- thenon, Anhang II, 318—333.

tds pds Tov wédepov] The offices of orparnyot and their subordinates, the immapxos, piAapxos and ragiapxos. Cf. Gilbert i 220 ff., and Headlam, Ox the Lot, p. 102; inf. 61 § 1.

§§ 2,3. Zhe Council. On the subject in general, see Hermann, Staatsalt. §§ 125—127; Schomann, Axtz., p. 371—9, E. T.; Gilbert, i251—264; Smith, Deez. Ant. i 309.

§ 2. K«Anpotrar] It was appointment by lot that made the Council consistent with the democratical constitution of Athens and prevented its becoming an oligarchical body of higher authority than the public assembly. The power of the old aristocracy had centred in a Council, and this power was broken down by the introduction of the lot. The Council of 40o under the ‘Draconian constitution’ is described as appointed by lot (4 § 3). The earliest documentary evidence bear- ing on this subject is an inscr. of Erythrae, the constitution of which was modelled on that of Athens in B.c. 455—450. It is there ordained for Erythrae (as for Athens) dad kuduwy Bovdyy elvas (CIA i 9

‘and roth prytanies.

= Hicks, no. 23). Cf. Headlam, On the Lot, pp. 41—56, 86.

mputavever] ‘presides,’ z.¢. sits as a superintending sub-committee of the Coun- cil. Cf. Harpocr. s. v. rpurdves, Schol. Aeschin. 3 § 3; also Schémann, p. 376, and Gilbert, i 255. Even the order in which the mpurdves held office is deter- mined by lot (cf. Headlam, /. ¢., p. 51). This fact had already been ascertained by Clinton, Fas¢i, ii 344—6 =415—8.

ai pév wpdras xrh.] The normal Attic year consisting of 354 days, the tenth part would be 35 days, and 4 over. It has been supposed by Gilbert, i 255, that these four days were assigned to the several prytanies by lot. The text states that they were assigned to the first four prytanies, which thus lasted for 36 days, the remaining six lasting for 35 only. This fact was already known to us through Photius, Suidas and the Schol. in Hermo- genem, v p. 509; but their authority was set aside on the evidence of the Choiseul Marble, c1a i 188 (Ditt. no. 44), Il. 25— 40, B.C. 410/9, where we have express mention of the 36th day of the 8th, gth, Hence it was in- ferred by Clinton, Fast, ii 346—418, that the four supernumerary days were assigned to the Jast tribes and not to the jist. While this was clearly the case in B.C. 410, the text shews that, in the writer’s time, the latter plan was adopted instead.

The duration of the rpuravetas is dis- cussed by Unger, Philol. 38 p. 425 ff, Usener, Rhein. Mus. 34 p- 392 ff, and A. Schmidt, Gr. Chronologie, pp. 241, 423 etc.

I

°

158 AOHNAIQN COL. 22, 1, 20—37.

ai 6é && ai totepas mévte Kal TpLakovta jpépas éxdotn’ Kata cedjvny yap dyovow Tov évavTov, ot 5¢ mpuTavevovTes avTay 3 TpOTov wev cvocitodaw ev TH OorAw, NapPavovres dpytpiov Tapd TS ToAEws, éreta cuvdyovow Kal THY BovAny Kal Tov Sho, thy pev [odv]] BovaAny doat Huepas, wAnY éay Tis apécipos 7H, Tov dé Sjpov rerpaxis THs mputavelas éxdotys. Kat da[a] de? ypnwari-

9—10 xara cedqvyv—eriavréy del. Lipsius, Herwerden. 10 dyovot H-L. 12 cuvdyouct H-L. Kal (vel €1 ?): Kal roy K3, K-w, B: els Tiv K}, THY H-L. 13 OYN om. Harp. (K-w, H-L, B): retinet K coll. Ar. Poet. 1458 a 25 etc (Zud. Ar. p. 540 4). TTAHNENAN corr. K. 14 XpPHMATIZEI corr. K.

§§ 3, 4,6 Pollux viii 95, mpurdvets: oro. Thy Boudiy cuvdyoucty donuépar, TARY dy Tis 1) dperos, ‘ray 5& Sfjmov Terpaxis” éxdorys mpuravelas* Kal mpoypddover mpd Tis Bovdfjs kal mpd ris éxxAnolas brép dv ‘det xpnuarigew.” Trav & éxxrnordy 4 wev kupla, év Has dpxas émxecporovotcw, elmrep Kahws apxougiy, } dmroxetporovotow' ev 7 kal ras eloayyeAlas 6 Bovdduevos elowyyédAet, “Kal Tas daroypadas Tay Snwevouevwr” dvaryryvdoxovow ol mpds rats Stkas, “Kal ras Antes Tov KAjpwr.” 96, H Se Seuvrépa ~ éxxAnola dvetrat Tots Bovdopévars ixerynplav Oeudvors Aéyew dbews wept re Tay Lilwy kat trav Snuoclwy' 7 5& tplrn “Kppvé. Kal mpeoBelas” dévot xpnuaritewv, ods def mpbrepoy Tots mpuTaveriy drodobvar Ta ypduuara, 7 dé TeTapTn wept LepGv Kal dolwy (Frag. 3947, 434°). Cf. Schol. in Aeschin. 1 § 104.

§§ 3,4. *Harp. xupla éxkryola:...rlves 6¢ ai xbprar éxxdyolas Ap. SedprwKev ev 77 "AO. Tod. Aéywn Tods mpuTavers cuvdyew “THv Boudhy Kal Tov Sijov, Tiv pwev Bou” donuépar, SarAhv—éxdorys.” mpoypapovor dé pyar kal kuplay éxxrnolay, év 7 det Tas dpxas dmroxetporovely of Soxotor wy Kaas apxetv* Kal mwepl praxis dé THs xwpas.

“kal ras eloayyedlas—movetoOal ” pyor xal ra éffs (Frag. 395%, 435°).

Kata oedivqv—eviavtév] This ex- planation is introduced quite as natu- rally as that in the corresponding passage of Schémann’s Avt., p. 376 E. T., where, immediately after defining the duration of a prytany, the writer continues: ‘The Athenians, it may be explained, had a legal lunar year consisting of 12 months of 2g and 30 days alternately, and therefore of 354 days altogether.’ The phrase re- minds one of Arist. Wud. 626, xara cedyyny ws dyew xph Tob Blov Tas Tuepas, and Diog. Laert. i 59 (of Solon), jélwcé te “AOnvatwy Tas hudpas kara cedhvnv dyew. The explanation (like many others in this treatise) would not be needed by Athenian readers ; but it does not neces- sarily follow that it is an interpolation, as suggested by Lipsius, Leipzig Verhandl., 1891, p. 47 n. if

§ 3. cvocitotow ev TH O6Aw] Dem. F. L. § 190, of mpurdvers Qvovew éxdarore kowy Kal cvvdervotow addjdots Kal cve- mévdovow. Ammonius ap. Harpocr. s, v. O6ros,—6 5é réros Sov éoriGyrat of mpv- tdvers Kadeirae O6dos. Cf. Pollux viii 155; Bekker, Amecd. 264. Ona special emergency the Bovdy even passed the night there, Andoc. de Adyst. 45. It was also called the oxids (Gilbert, i 256, n. 4). It was near the BovAeurijpiov (Paus. i 5,

1), to the north of the east end of the Areopagus (Curtius, Stadtgeschichte, p. xciii and 171). Thus the rpurdves could readily leave the @éAos to attend the meetings of the whole body of the Council in the neighbouring BovAeuvrjpiov. Cf. Wachsmuth, Stadt Athen, ii 315.

cuvdyourw Krv.] CIA ii 417, 459 and elsewhere (of the mpurdvecs), émeuehjOnoay 6é Kal ris cudAoys THs Te BovAts Kal roo Sjuov Kal Tay Gddwv wy adbrois mporérarrov of vduot.

Scat rpépar] The manuscript reading has been retained, ‘as it facilitates the following 71s’ (J. B. Mayor). Hitherto our earliest authority for this equivalent to éonuépa: has been Themistius (A.D. 355), who also has éoa: pac in p. 192 D. éoo. phves occurs in Dem. 744, 25 (L and S).

ddéoipos] Aristides i 344 Jebb. The large number of such holidays is noticed in [Xen.] de Rep. Ath. 3, 2. Among them were the Afaturia (Athen. 171 £), the Thesmophoria (Arist. Thesm. 79), the Kronia (Dem. 24 § 26), and the daroppddes huépar (Plut. Adc. 34). Gilbert, i 258, De 4.

terpdKis] Elsewhere (Photius, s. 2. kupla éxxAnola, Schol. Arist. 4ch. 19 and Schol. Dem. 24 § 20) we are told of ¢hree

CH. 43, 1. 9—21. TIOAITEIA

159 A A ¢ few tHv Bovrny [al 6 ri] év éxdory TH rjuépa, nai drrov Kabifew, 4 ovToL Tpoypddovar. mpoypdovar S¢ kal tds éxkAnaolas odTOL, Fs \ x a fal fo} piavy pev xupiav, év 7 Sel tas dpyds émuyeipotoveiy ei Soxodct Kados apxew, kal epi citov Kal rept dudaxhs THs ydpas ypnua- rile, Kal Tas eicayyedias ev Tavty TH Huepa Tos Bovropévous moeia Oat, Kal Tas amroypadas Tév Snwevopévoy avayvyvecke.y, Kal A Fr lal t \ a z / >? ig ig : tas A\nEes TSv KANpwV Kal TOY eTLKNyi pwr [avayiyvooxery]], [S7rw]s 15 kaioTi (corr. e KaITOY) secl. B. OTIOYKAO..E1: & Te od KaOhKe? K; OTIOYKaGEIZEI? Grou kadlgew egregie K-w(B); etiam Herwerden verbum xadl{e: hic

latere suspicabatur. 20, 21 dvayeyvioxew (bis) K*, H-L (Meisterhans, u. 1238): ANSPIN (K, K-W); verbum in v. 21 secl. K-w, B.

§4 *Lex. rhet. Cantab. xupla éxkAnola:...duewov ody ’Aptororéher <melOecOar>° Tas yap dpxas év rats xuplais éxkdnolats pyoiv émcxerporovelaba kal ras elaayyedlas <riv Bovhépevor eloaryyédXew addidit Meier> kal ra ddda Tov dvayxalwy xpnuarifew

“kal mepl olrov <xal> gudaxijs ris Xwpas, Kal Tas dmroypapas—KAijpwr.”

meetings in each month, all of them termed xvplae éxxAyoiat. But the text shews that thére was only one xvpla éxxAnola in each month (§ 4), as already held by Gilbert, i 269, n. 1.

émov Kabl{ev] The sessions of the Bovdy, though ordinarily held in the BovdAevripiov, were occasionally trans- ferred to the Eleusinion, the Theseum or the Panathenaic Stadium, or even to the Acropolis (Gilbert, i 259 n. 1). 8 Te ob kabjxe. could only mean ‘ what is not suitable’; and such a sense is out of place here. I was once inclined to sug- gest Gray xabjxy, ‘at the proper time,’ lit. ‘whenever the time arrives.” Dem. P- 399, 6, éxxAnolav totijoa, Srav éx Tav vouwv KabjKy. Ar. Hist. An, viii 2, 23, 6 xpdvos KabjKe,

Tpoypadover] CIA ii 61, éradav dé taira Trapackevacby, Tous mpuTdves 7 po- ypdwar wept rovrwy év Bouvdeuryply bray oly Te J

§§ 4—6. Zhe Public Assembly.

§ 4. mpoypddovar—éxxrAyolas] Five days notice was given; Bekker, Axecd. 296, 8, rpdaeuarra (Gilbert, i 270 n. 1).

-play pév Kuplav] see note on rerpaxes, §3. The agenda for the xvpla éxxdyola were already known through citations of this passage in Harpocr. (Gilbert, i 282).

émxeporoveiv] ‘confirm the election of.’ Harpocr. s. v. xaraxetporovia’ os Wy AOivnct kara Tov dpxévTwv Kal Kard Tay cuKopavTay mpoBodas ev TO One idea ef 5€ Tis KaTaxecporovnOely, obTos elojyero els Td SuxaorHpiov. For this xara- xetporovla he refers to Theophrastus, év o Néuwv. Cf. Schémann, De Comitics, P. 2313 Ant. 391 E. T. The term zpo-

Body is inaccurately applied to the émye- porovla (Meier and Schémann, note 389 Lips.; and Smith, Dict. Ant. ii 492 6).

mepl olrov] Xen. Mem. iii 6, 13, rooov xpévov ixavos éorw 6 éx THs xwWpas yryvo- Mevos otros Starpépew Thy woAW, kal rocou els Tov éviaurov poo deiras.

trept pudakis] 23. § 10, Tepl ye pudakhs Tis xa@pas of6’ Gre WOn cor weuédAnke, Kai olcOa, dméoat re pudaxal émlxarpoi eloe kal dméca: uh, Kal Grdco Te Ppoupol ixavol elo. kth. This topic of deliberation is mentioned in Ar. Rhet. i 4 § 10, epi gudakns THS Xwpas wy AavOdvew Tas pu- Adrrerae xrA.: in Pol. 1298 @ 3 it is omitted. Cf. CIA ii 225 and 334, els guraxhv rhs xwpas (Gilbert i 282 n. 2).

tas eloayyeAlas] Such information might either be brought before the BovAy, through the wpurdves; or (as here) before the éxxAnola, through the beouobérat (c. 59). Cf. Hager in Smith, Dict. Ant. i 709, ii 1067.

Tas droypaddas TGv Sypevopévev] ‘in- ventories of confiscated property.’ od. 1298 @ 3, Tepl... dnuetoews. On drro- ypapi see Meier and Schémann, pp. 304 —6 Lips., and Dict. Ant. s. v.

tds Arjfes TOV KAypov Kal Tov ém- KAyjpev] 72.2. the legal claims (or ‘lists of suits’) for the right of succession to in- heritances, and for that of marrying the daughter of a citizen who has left no son to inherit his estate (56 § 6, KAjpwr kal émixdipwy émidtxacta:), Meier and Schémann, pp. 791—4, 606—8, 616 Lips.; Dict. Ant. s.v. Heres, i 947 @ and Epi- clerus, Pp. 747 a

Strws—épypov yevdpevov] ‘that all may have cognisance of any vacancy in an

15

20

160

AOHNAIOQN COL. 22,1. 37—COL, 23,1. 5.

pndéva Xan pndev Epnuov yevowevor. ri [8] THs ExTys mputa- 5 velas mpos Tois eipnuévous Kal mept THs daTpaKxodopias émuyetporo- viav diSdacw, ei Soxel rroseiv 4 pu, Kab ovxopaytdy mpoBodds Tay 25°AOnvaiwv Kat Tév peroixwv péxps tpidv éxatép[wr, Kav ti]s brocyopueves Te wn Towjon TO Sym. érépav 8€ tais ixernpiass, 6

23 HPHMENOIC.

émtxetporoviay ; idem habet lexici rhet. Cantabrig. codex a

Dobreo exscriptus (K, H-L,B) : mpoxetporovlay K-w quod ibidem a Meiero scriptum est.

25 EKATEPAN ?

kav tts Blass, Frankel (H-L, K°); éay ris K!; kal édy tis K-W.

26 érépay 6¢ K, K-W, B; érépa 0” éorl H-L, quod ‘spatium non capit’ (K3),

§ 6 2b. “emt 5é rijs Exrns—émixerporoviay ”’ (rpoxetporovlay edd.) didocGat el Soxe? Ff

uh (Frag. 3967, 436°). Tas dpxas émixetporove eet.

Hesych. xupla éxxd.: ula xupla éxxdnola qyero ’AOhvnow, ev

estate.’ This clause refers only to the suits concerning xAjpo. and émlxdypou. épnuos is a specially appropriate epithet for an estate deprived of its owner, or for children bereft of their father: Plat. Leg. 927, els dppava, kal Eonua bBplfovow, The object of this public recital was partly to draw attention to any claims on the es- tate; partly to give due notice to all who were interested in establishing a right of succession.

§ 5. &krns mpuravelas] In B.c. 410/9, when the Attic year began on July 14, the sixth mpuravela began on Jan. 5, B.C. 409 (Clinton, Fasti, ii 347=418).

Garpakodoplas}] On this occasion the point to be determined was whether there was a case for having recourse to ostra- cism ; if so, a day was fixed for the final voting in the eighth mpurayela (Lex. Cant. s.v. doTpaxioues ; Schol. Arist. £g. 851, and fragm. Lex. Dem. Aristocr.; cf. Blass in Hermes, 1882, p. 152).

“A, Schmidt, Gr. Chronologie, p. 259, seeks to reconcile Aristotle and Philo- chorus. The date of the dorpaxogopla is explained by the desire to settle a danger- ous political struggle before the opening of spring, i.e. before the end of Anthesterion. The 6th prytany in an ordinary year is equivalent in general to Gamelion 1— Anthesterion 5. But Philochorus wished to embrace the case of an intercalary year in which the 7th prytany is equivalent in general to Gamelion 22—end of Anthe- sterion: ‘before the eight prytany’ means either in the 6th or 7th, for z/ the principle was that the ostracism was to be proposed in Gamelion or Anthesterion, it might fall in the 7th prytany of an intercalary year. The hypothesis is absurd, for ab- solutely no reason is suggested why the Athenians should have ostracised men /ater in the year if it chanced to be inter- calary,—to say nothing of other obvious

objections ” (Wyse).

ovKopaytay mpoBoAds] A mrpoSod} was a preliminary criminal information brought before the public assembly ; if the people approved, a trial before an ordinary law- court ensued. This procedure was applied in the case of those who had accused the generals concerned in the battle of Ar- ginusae (Xen. Ae//.i 7 § 34). The case against Midias began with a wpofody%. Cf. Schomann, De Comitits, p. 231 ff., Meier and Schémann, p. 335 Lips., Dict. Ant. ii 492 @, 732 a

For its application in the case of cuxo- pdvra, cf. Isocr. Antid. 314, xara dé TobTwy (sc. Tay TvKopavTuy érrolnoay) ‘ypa- gus pev mpos rods Gecpobéras, eloaryyedlas & els riv Bovdjy, mpoBords 8 ev TH Shum, and Aeschin. F. Z. 145, Tov cuxopayray os kaxotpywr Snuoolg mpoBoras morovueda, also Pollux viii 46, mpoBoral d¢ joav Kai al rns ovxopaytias ypagal.

tov perotkev] This implies that a pérouxos could be charged with cvxogay- tla. Hence it follows that he was en- titled to give information against public offenders. Ordinarily this right was con- fined to citizens (Plut. Sol. 18, ééqv ra duvapévp Kat Bovrouévy xrr.), A fo- reigner, who desired to accuse a person of any offence against the people, was required to obtain special permission for that purpose, ddéea, Andoc. De Myst. ‘. i5- Cf. Meier and Schémann, p- 330

Ips

Kdy tis drooxspevos xrA.] Dem. Left. 100, gore 6¢ dyrou vomos dpiv, édv tis brocxéuevds Te Tov Squov H} Bovdyw FH di- Kagripiov ekararhoy, Ta trxara macxew, and 26. 135 (where it is called a vomos dpxatos and death is named as the pen- alty). The procedure began either with a mpoBory (as in Xen. Hell. i 7 § 35) or an eloayyeAla, [Dem.] c. Timoth. 49 § 67.

§ 6. ixernplats] ‘supplications,’ ‘formal

CH. 43, 1. 22—30.

TIOAITEIA

161

Col. 23.] €v 7) Bels 0 BovAcpevos ixernpiav, [bmép] dv dv BovAnras || kad (lov

* if a : fal kai Snuociwy Siarékeras mpds Tov Shyov. ai Sé Sto wept TSv GdXov 27 2 e _ elaiv, év ais KeAevovoty of vomor Tpia pev tepav xpnpaTive.,, Tpia ca t dé xnpvEw Kal mpecBeiass, tpia 8 ociwv. ypnpatitovow 8 éviote 30

27 oYBoyAo corr. K. WN K: mepl dy Kontos, Lipsius, Gertz, K-w, sed spatium

vix duarum litterarum capax vacuum relictum; Sarép (Y) av H-L (8). AezeTar: duaddferae K (K-W, B); duadéyerae H-L.

28 Ala-

30 Kjpvét H-L. Tpla-

AOCIWN suprascripto CYpAKOCIWN ‘corruptumne ex Capa A OCIWN ut Ar. rérrapa

& doiwy scripserit ?’ K-w.

Xpnuartifover H-L.

petitions.’ For 6els...ixernplay cf. Dem. de Cor. 107, od7x ixernpiay EOnke Tpijpapxos ovdels mubrod’ ws adukovmevos map’ duly, c. Timocr. 12, @ecay rip ix. av oa Ta Xehpara dvOpwiro, 2b. 53; Aeschin. /. L. 15, ix. Oévres of olxetor €déovTo tudv. The ixernpla (faB850s) was an olive-branch bound with wool (Aesch. Suppl. 22, 192), which the ‘suppliant,’ or petitioner, held in his hand before depositing it on the altar in the place of public assembly. Such an application for the right of pe- tition might also be laid before the Bovdy}, Aeschin. c. Zimarch. 104. In Andoc. De Myst. 110—116, it is laid before the Bovdy on the occasion of its session in the "EAevotov, although presenting a petition in that place was forbidden, 2. 116. Such petitions might include ap- plications for the recovery of civil rights, or for the remission of sentences; and, in general, for exemption from legal penal- ties. Cf. Dem. c. Zimocr. 46, Tijs ddelas SoBelons, and see Schomann, Azz. p. 397 E.T.; Gilbert, i 294; Dict. Ant. i 24 4, 702 a.

ai 8 800 xrA.] Pollux, who gives in viii 96 a paraphrase of the present pas- sage and its context, describes the hear- ing of heralds and embassies as the busi- ness of the third éxxAnota, while that of the fourth is zepl icpwy cai dolwv. This distinction is not in accordance with the text. The latter is confirmed by Aeschines 1 § 23, was dé KeNever Tovs mpoedpous xp7- Harltew ;—2poxerporoveiv—repl lepav Twv tarplov kal xjpuée kal mpeoBelas kal dolwv. The statement in Pollux may have origin- ated in some confused and fragmentary reminiscence of the constitution in c. 30 § 5, where, in the order of business before the Bovdy, the third place is assigned wpecBelats, after which they deliberate tepl rav dddwy, (= dclwv).

tela] This implies that only three questions under each of the several head- Ings were allowed to be discussed in each wpuravela. Similarly in § 5 only three TuKogavruy mpoBodal could be brought

S. A,

against Athenians, and three against resi- dent aliens. These limitations have been hitherto unknown.

Hartel, Studien tiber Urkundenwesen, cites, as examples of business connected with ritual etc., being brought before the people év iepois, CIA li 325, 352 4, 373 4, and (a decree of the Kijpuxes and Evyod- ml5a) 605. On p. 173 ff., he cites the following inscriptions: "A@jvatoy vi 152 (=Ditt. no. 101, Hicks no. 111) 1. 55 (B.C. 347/6 on the mpécBes from the sons of Leucon), xpyuarloae rods mpoédpous of dy Adxwor mpoedpevdew év Te Ohuw TH dydbn émt déka mpGrov wera Ta tepd. The privilege of access to the @ovAy (and in most cases to the dfjuos) wera Ta lepad was granted to Aretus of Colophon (cra i 36), to the NeomoNira: (26. 51 Suppl. p. 17), to the communities of Mytilene, Colophon and Cythnus (CIA ii 52 ¢, 164, 233), and to certain individuals named in 1 4, 34, 206, 209, 289, 316. Cf. Dem. 24 § 25 ff.

tepdv...dolwv] ‘things sacred and pro- fane.’ gaia, when contrasted with lepd, includes all that is untouched by divine law. Thus, in things concrete, iepa would include temples and their treasures; ova, civic buildings and money belonging to the state. Dem. 24 § 9, Tay lepwy pev Xpnuarwv rods Oeots, Tuv dolwy be Thy médw dmoorepe?t. The same terms are used to contrast religious and civil privi- leges, Dem. 23 § 65; 39 § 35; as well as the corresponding legal enactments, as in Lys. 30 $25, Twv dciwv Kal Trav lepay dvriypapeds (see Frohberger’s Lyséas, iii p- 172, and Ruhnken, 7imaeus, s.v. dora Ta ldwwrixd, Kal yt) lepa).

kypuéiv Kal mpeoBelats] The construc- tion changes from gen. to dat., as in Aeschin. 1 § 23, where the order in which the four kinds of business are mentioned is the same as in the text. Foreign envoys were usually introduced to the éxxAyola by the BovdAy (Aeschin. F. L.§ 58). Dem. 24 § 150, Kal xjpuxos kal mpecBelas. Cf. c. 30 § 5.

xpnparifoveww—dvev mpoxeporovlas]

IT

162 AOHNAIQN COL. 23, |. 5—18.

kal dvev mpoxeipotovias. mpocépyovras Sé Kab of KnpuKes Kal of mpéaBes Tois mpuTdverw mpeTov, Kal of Tas émaToAds pépovtes

33 TOUTOLS drrodLOoact, 44. "Eore 8 érictatns tov mputavewy els 6 rNaxyodr

32 mpurdveot H-L, B. 83 drobtibacw H-L. TESTIMONIA. XLIV §§ 1, 2* Harp. émirrdrys :...d00 elaly of kafiorduevor émiordrat, dy 6 pev éx mpurdvewy xAnpobpevos, 6 5é ex Trav mpoddpwr, dy éexdrepos rlva duolknow - Siok? SedHAwkev ’Ap. év AO. mod. Lex. Dem. Patm. p. 13 Sakkelion, émordrqs : odros éx T&v mpurdvewy exrnpobro kal éweordrea ‘‘vixra Kal fuépay” pdvoy, kal obx éffy Sevrepov Tov abrdv vyiverOar, ras 5é Kreis Tov “‘lepGy ev ols” daréxecro TA Xpyuara kal ra ypduuara THs movews... Suidas (e lexico Photiano) émerdrys : “rv mpurdvewy els 6 Aaxav” éemordrns édéyero. Sls dé rdv avrdv émiorarjoa ovk ef. purdoce de Tot lepot ras krets dv G Ta Onuboa Xphwara, ert why Kal Tiv Onpoclav cppayisa (puddooe—ogpayida Etym. M. p. 364, 41). émecday 5é of mpurdves ‘‘cuvayaywor Thy Boudiy 7 Tov dijuov,” 6 éemurrarys ‘ KAnpot mpoédpous évvéa,” dio ‘‘ pudqs éxaoTys” éva “ad ris mpuravevovons. Kal wad” éx tov évvéa robrwy émiorarny eva Kal 7d mpaypa (sic) tapadidwowv. Telephus ap. Eustath. in Od. p 455...yiverae ydp pnow "AGhynow éx Trav mpuravew els 6s ‘‘émicrare? vixra Kal tyépay” play, cal mrelw xpdbvov ovx eeorw odde ‘dis rdv abrov yevéoOat, Tas Te Kreis <T&v lepdy> & ols ra Xphmard elor puddrre Kal Ta ypappara Tis wodews Kal riv Sypoolav oppayioa. KAnpot d¢ cal mpoédpous e& éExaorns pudys eva “ wdhv ris mpvravevotons Kal madw éx totrwy émorarny eva” (Frag. 397°, 4373). Pollux viii 96: émorarns 3° éoriv els Tay mpuTdvewy, 6 KANpy axa, dls B obK eLeort yevéaOar Tov adrdv émiordryv. exer dé ofros Tay lepGy Tas Krets & ols TA XpHmaTa Kal Ta ypdupara. Kal dray ol mpurdves Tov Shuov yf Thy Bovhhy auvd-ywow, ovros cE exdoryns pudqs mpbedpov eva

KAnpot, wbvnv Thy mpuravevovoay aquels (Frag. 394”, 434°).

‘Sometimes the members of the éxxAn- ola take the initiative in bringing for- ward public business, without a prelimi- nary vote (on the question whether it will discuss a proposal on the part of the Bovdy, or accept it without discussion).’ Cf. Harpocr. s.v. mpoxeporovia’ ...drérav Tis Bovdijs mpoBovrevodays elopépyrat els Tov Shuov 1) yvwun wpoTepoy vylverar xet- porovia év TH éxxAnola wérepov Soxel rept TOv mpoBovrevdervru cxéparbar Tov dijpov, 7} dpxe? rd mpoBovdevya.. In Dem. 24 § 12 (after a mpoBovdAeuna) yevouévyns éexxdnalas mpovxerpordvncev 6 Sjuos. Cf. Aeschin. 1 § 23, and see Gilbert, i 276 n. 3.

The course described in the text would involve a departure from the principle laid down by Solon, uydev éav drpoBov- Aevrov els éxxAnolay elodépecGar (Plut. Sol. 19). This principle was also vir- tually set aside when the Bovd%, without arriving at any conclusion on its own part, referred a question to the éxxAnola direct. Thus, on the memorable evening when the messenger arrived with news of Philip’s capture of Elateia, the éxxAnola had already begun to assemble before the Bovdky had had time to draw up a pre- liminary decree; and, the business being urgent, the mpurdvets brought it imme- diately before the assembly (Dem. de

Cor. 170). It was also open to any member of the éxxAnola to take the in- itiative by moving to refer any question to the BovAy with a view to a mpoBoi- Aevwa being drawn up by the latter (Gilbert, i 278 n. 3).

mpoaépxovrar—rois tmpuTdverw tTpw- tov] Aeschin. / Z. 58, (the Bovdy) tais Eevixats mpecBelars ras els Tov Sfjuov mpoaddous mpoBovrever. On the capture of Elateia, the messenger brought the news ws rods mpurdves (de Cor. 169). Cf. Arist. Zhesm. 654, Taira rots mpu- Tdveow ayyedd,

XLIV. The Public Assembly, con- tinued.

§ 1. émordrns tov mputdvewv] In the fifth century the émordrys T&y mpu- Tdvewy actually presided at the meetings of the BovdAy and éxxAyola, and took the sense of the meeting. Thus, in 415 B.C., we find Nicias addressing the President at the Assembly in the words xal od, d mpvravt, radra,..émupypite (Thuc. vi 14). Again, in 406, on the memorable occa- sion when Socrates refused to put the illegal proposal that the generals con- cerned with the battle of Arginusae should have judgment passed upon them collectively, his own tribe was the du\q mputavevovoa (Plat. 4fol. 32 B), and he

CH. 43, l. 31—CH. 44, 1.8. TIOAITEIA 163 obdtos 8 éeriotare? vinta Kal repay, Kab ov« gotw ovte mrélo xpdvov ote Sis Tov adrov yevéoOar. tnpet 8 odtos tds TE KAéis Tas Tay iepdv ev ols ta xpypat’ dotly Kal <td> ypdupata TH monet, Kat THY Snuociay odppayida, Kal pévew dvayxaiov év rH Bor TobTév <7’> eoTw Kal TpiTTdY THY TpUTdvewy Hv dv obTos

2KereUn. Kal éreddy cvvayaywow oi mputavers THY Bovrny 7) Tov Sijpov, obtos KAnpot mpoédpous evvéa, eva éx THs hudhs éxdorns

XLIV 2 ov« tore relw H-L. 3 KAeIc (K-w, K%, B; cf. Meisterhans, p. 28°):

kAys K}, H-L. 4 ypdppara K: <Td> ypduuara e gramm. K-W, H-L, B. 6 totrby <T> K-W.

§§ 2, 3 *Harp. mpdedpoc éxdnpodvro trav mpurdvewy Kad’ éxdorny mpvravelay els et éxdarns pudys wAYY THs mpuTavevodons, olrwes ra wept ras éxkdnolas dusxow.... dre 8 6 Kadovpevos émicrdrns KAypot avdrovs, elpncev "Ap. & "AO. wrod. (=Suid. s.v.). Photius (Bekk. 4x. 290) mpbedpor: of ra mepl Tas éxkAnolas "AOhwyot StocxodvTes <Kal

Tis ebratlas émiwedovpevor add. Lex. Dem. Patm. p. 12>. els éxAnpodro bd Trav mpurdvewy Kad’ éxdorny éxxdnolav ef éxdaorys pudjjs. ;

was émiordrys for the day (Xen. Mem. i I, 18, émucrdrys év THe Syuw -yevduevos). Cf. Gilbert, i 257 n. 3.

In the fourth century, on the institu- tion of mpdedpo with an émordrns of their own, the duty of presiding in public was transferred to the é. rav mpoddpwv (Gilbert, 2d. n. 5), while the ér. trav mpu- tévewy discharged the duties stated in the text. As the latter remained in the @6Xos for the day and night during which he was in office, he was necessarily pre- cluded from presiding over the éxxdyola or the BovdA#. On the institution of the mpoedpo, see § 2.

tds Te KAets KTA.] The keys of the public treasure kept in the dziOddomos on the Acropolis (Boeckh, 111 xx). The custody of the keys did not involve any responsibility for the actual management of the fund. The Arg. to Dem. Androt. P- 590 applies to the émrdrns language of less precision than that in the text: abrds Tas KNels THS AKpoTddews émiareveTo kal mdvra Ta xphwara THs modews. It adds: wy’ oty pH épacdy rupavvldos, dia Totro ulay juepay émolouv avroy dpéat.

té&v iepdv does not necessarily imply that the public treasure was kept in more than one temple. Hence the pl. throws no light on the obscure question whether the éricOddou0s of the ‘old temple’ of

Athene between the Erechtheum and Par-_

thenon was at this time still in use, as well as the Parthenon (see Miss Harri- son’s Mythology &c of Athens, p. 505— 8). The ‘old temple’ was burnt in 406 B.C. (Xen. Ae//. i 6), and the burning of the dmic8ddouos mentioned in Dem. 24

§ 136 may refer to the same event. In B.C. 353 the priestess transferred to the émeoradras (probably theéz. dnuocluv épywv) in the archonship of Thudemus certain ‘gold ornaments’ which were removed from the ‘old temple’ to the Parthenon (cia ii 758 11 7). The public records (ypdppara) were preserved in the My- Tpwov near the Bovdeurypiov (Aeschin. 3 § 187; Paus. i 3, 5; Lycurg. Leocr. 66). Cf. Curtius, das Metroon, Gotha, 1868.

Sypoolay odppaytda] [Xen.] de Vect. 4, 21, dvipdroda ceonpacneva THe Snuoolw onuavtpy. The seal probably represented an owl or a Gorgon’s head. Cf. Curtius, Abh. d. Berlin Akad. 1874, p. 88 (Gilbert, i p. 256 n. 2). Both the badges above mentioned may be seen on the extant examples of ducacrap mivaxia (c. 63 § 4).

§ 2. ampoéSpous] In the 7/#/ century it was the rpurdvets who presided over the Bovdi and éxkAyola in the person of one of their own body who was the ém- orarns TOY mpuTdvewr and was necessarily a member of the rpuravevovoa pud}. Thus, in CIA ii t 4, we have two decrees of the year of Eucleides, B.c. 403—2. (1) was passed in the prytany of the tribe Pandi- onis, and the émordrys was of the deme of “Qa, which belonged to that tribe ; (2) in the prytany of the tribe Erechtheis, and the érirarns was of the deme of Kydal belonging to that tribe. As a general rule the deme of the ér. rév mpurdvewr is not specified; it necessarily belongs to the presiding tribe.

In the fourth century the mpbedpor came into existence. The émordrns ray mpv- tdvewy was deprived of his preeminence

I1—2

10

164

AOHNAIQN

COL. 23, |. 18—31.

\ a TAY THS MpvTavevovans, Kal wadw é« TOUTwY émioTaTHY eva, Kal mapadidwot TO mpoypappa avrois: of S¢ mwapadaBdvtes Ths 7° 3

10 rpéypaypa corrupte mutatum in rpayua habet Suidas s. v. émtorarys. of

K-W, B; of K, H-L.

and obtained in its place the privilege of appointing by lot nine mpdedpo, one from each of the tribes except his own, and of drawing lots among those nine for one of them to act as the émiordrns rév mmpo- édpwv. Under this system, the éw. rév mpoédpwy was necessarily a member of some other than the mpuravetovca dvd}. In cia it 17 6 (Ditt. no. 64), in the ar- chonship of Nausinicus, B.c. 378/7, though the mpdedpor are mentioned, the deme of the émiorarys is uncertain; but in CIA ii 17 (Ditt. no. 63), in the same year, in the prytany of the tribe Hippothontis, the émorarys is of the deme "A@povoy which belongs to a different tribe, Ce- cropis. In ii 50 (Ditt. 75), B.c. 368/7, in the prytany of the tribe Aeantis, the émurarys belongs to a deme of the tribe Aegeis. In ii 116 (Ditt. 107), B.c. 341/o0, in the prytany of the tribe Pandionis, the émorartns belongs to another tribe. Be- tween the years 378 and 320 we have in all 24 decrees giving the name of the pry- tany and the president, and in no case does the deme of the president belong to the vA} mpuravevovea. For the years between Eucleides and Nausinicus (403— 378) there is at present no evidence; but it is probable that the change came into force in the latter year, a date of special importance in the financial history of Athens. The aim of the change was clearly to give all the tribes a concurrent share in the superintendence of the BovA} and éxxAngla, instead of each tribe having in turn the sole superintendence for the duration of its own prytany. (See esp. Prof. W. W. Goodwin’s paper in Zrans. of the American Philol. Association, 1885, vol. xvi 165—175.)

In the f/th century the formula for describing the president was 6 deiva éze- oraret. From 378 to 347 the same formula is used to denote the émardrns rv mpo- é5pwy, side by side with a new formula,

Tay mpoddpwv érevydigev 6 deiva. From

347 onwards the last alone is found (Gil- bert, i 257 n. 5).

It was once supposed that the 50 mpu- tdveis were divided into five groups of ten mpéedpot holding office for one-fifth of a prytany (generally for seven days) and appointing one of their number to serve as émordrns for each day. This suppo- sition rested on the Scholia to Aeschin.

c. Ctes. 39 and Dem. p. 594, 5, and on the and Arg. to Dem. Androt.p. 590. It was accepted in an early work of Schomann (De Comitiis Ath., 1819), where, in the endeavour to reconcile the conflict of evi- dence, it was suggested that there were two sets of mpéedpot in existence at the same time, (1) the proedri contribules, belonging to the same tribe as the mpu- Taves, and forming a subdivision of that body; and (2) the proedri non-contribules, belonging to a different tribe to that of the mpuraves.

Nearly three centuries earlier it was held by Sigonius (1529—1584) in his De Atheniensium Republica, that wher- ever the wpéedpot were mentioned, they were the nine who were not of the same tribe. This opinion was accepted by K. F. Hermann (1843), who noticed fur- ther that the mpéedpor are never men- tioned until after the time when one of the mpuraves used to preside in the As- sembly. Hence the mpdedpor (xon-contri- bules) were a later institution, and the proedri contribules were a merely ima- ginary body. Schémann’s earlier view survived in Grote, c. 31, iii 118, but it had meanwhile been abandoned by Sché- mann himself, in favour of Hermann’s view which is conclusively confirmed by the text. See Schomann, Azz. p. 377 E.T.

Some confusion has arisen from the fact that Harpocration, s. v. mpéedpor, implies that the mpdedpor held office du- ring the whole of each prytany, whereas the text, which he professes to follow, really describes them as appointed by lot for each meeting of the Bovdy or éxxAnola. The most accurate citation of the text is that preserved by Telephus ap. Eustath. on Od. 17, 455, and by Suidas, s. w émordrns, art. 2. On the general ques- tion see Goodwin Z. ¢., and Gilbert i 257 (with the authorities there quoted); also Caillemer on Boule in Daremberg and Saglio, i 740—1, and Chavannes on Epistates, ib.iii 700; and Wayte in Smith’s Dict. Ant. i 320—1, and on Dem. -Timocr. § 21.

émotatyy] sc. TOv mpoddpwy. He is mentioned as presiding (1) at the BovAy} in Aeschin. c. Zimarch. 104, Bovdeuvrys dy xal mpoedpedwv, and in CIA ii 168 (B.C. 333) TGv mpocdpwr ereyigifer, and simi- larly in ii 179 (B.C. 325) about the time

CH. 44, 1. 9—18.

TIOAITEIA

165

¥ ‘4 3 a NG ON. a t 4 evxoopias éripeNodvTat, Kal viép dv Set xpnuatiley mpotibéacw, Kal Tas yetpotovias Kplvovaw, Kal Ta <1’> ddra TravTa SLovKodow,

kat Tod [1] adeivar Kuvpsoi cio.

kal émiotaTnoas pev ovK

eectw wréov 7 &rrak év TO evravT@, mpoedpevew S eeotw amak

él THS MpuTavelas ExadoTNs.

4 Towbar Sé kal dpyaipectas otpatnyav Kat immdpyov Kal Tov

dAXwv TOV pds Tov TdAEMOY apyav év TH éexxAnoia, Kal’ 6 Te dv Db Sn Sonn: Tovodat & of peta THv Extn TpuvTavevovtes ep av 7 Sie So«p pera viv &erqy mp

-Aeik(at).

11 A€IXYPHMATIZEIN: Se? xonuarltew K, H-L, B: xpyuarifew det K-w. 13 7’ delent Richards, Blass, K-w, B; in 6 mutat Hude; 14 éfeort H-L.

<7?> K-W. thy éxxdnolay Rutherford (H-L). wAéov H-L, K®, Meisterhans, p. 120%.

12 7d

TIAEION (K-W, B)? 16 Aek(ai)AeKapx: delevi Aek e Aek(a!)

male iterato exortum, idem fecerunt Blass, Frankel, K-w, H-L, K?; etiam in versu propinquo (18) dittographiae vitium denuo apparet METATATHN (mera Ti).

when this treatise was written ; (2) at the éxkdnola, id. c. Ctes. 39, Tov 8° emiorarny Tov mpogdpwr Siaxetporovlay diddvar rep &7- py, F. L.82,(Demosthenes) Aayxdvet mpo- edpevew and (84) dvacras éx Trav mpoédpwv odk ep TO Wipiow’ érupygrely, cf. 25. 68. 7d mpdypappa] 43 § 3, mpoypddouct.

§3. evkooplas émipeAovyrat] In the previous century the same duties had been performed by the mpurdves with the aid of the roféra:: Arist. Zhesm. 923, 929—946, and esp. 854, ef mh kooplws ees ews dv Tav mpuTdvedy ts gavg. The mpdedpo. as well as the mpvu- tdvers are named in Aeschin. ¢. Ctes. 4, Tis Tav pyrépwv dxooulas ovKére Kparely Sévavras 086’ of vdpor ob6’ of mpurdves 006? ol mpbedpor ob0’ 4 mpocdpevovoa pudz}.

The phrase émiwedetoOar edxooulas is found in Pol. 1299 6 16 and 19 (cf. 13216 14 and 20); also in Isocr. Aveop. 37.

mporiOdacww] 48 § 2; Xen. Mem. iv 2, 3, THS médews Adyov mporiHelons. In Aeschin. 7. Z. 65 we have the excep- tional proposal that, at the first of two éxxAnolat, there should be a debate; and that, at the second, the mpéedpo should put the question to the vote, Adyor dé wh mpoTcOévat, In the fifth century this was the duty of the mpurdves. Thuc. vi 14, © mpbrav...yvduas mporlbe aides, iii 36, 43 42, I.

Xeiporovlas] Aeschin. c. Czes. 3, dv dé ris Trav GAdwv BovrevTav dvrws rAaxD KAnpojevos mpoedpevew Kal Tas duerépas Xetporovlas dpbGs dvayopely xT).

ddetvar] Arist. Ach. 173, of yap mpu- rdvets ovat Thy éxxrAnolay. Dem. Zimocr. § 26 (during the Kpéma), dpepévns rijs Bounjjs.

emorarnorat] sc. trav mpoéspwy, In

Dittenberger, Jzscr. nos. 98 and 101, we have two decrees in the same prytany of B.c. 347-6, in both of which Oedpiros ‘AXwovoos éwecrdre. It was rightly inferred by A. Schaefer that both were passed at the same meeting of the éxxAnola. The text shews that no one could be émiordrns Trav mpoéspwv more than once in each ey

§ 4. otparnyov] 61 § 1. immdpxav, 61 § 4. ay andav, 61 §§ 3, sce Aeschin. c. Ctes. 13, (dpxas) ds 6 dfjuos elwOe xeiporoveiy &v dpyatpectas, orpary- yous kal lamdpxous Kal ras mera ToUTWH dpxds, also Xen. Mem. iii 4,1; Dem. 23 § 3171; Plut. Phoe. 8.

ot petd miv exryv mpvtavevovtes] The author of the 2nd Arg. to Dem. Androt. p. 590 erroneously states that the dpxaipectou fell on the last four days of the Attic lunar year of 354 days. But, as observed by Schémann, Azz. 390 E.T., they could not possibly have been held so late in the year: they must necessarily have taken place much earlier, so as to allow time for the doxcuacta. It has been inferred by Kohler (Aonatsd. d. Akad. ad. W., Berlin, 1866, p. 343), that they were held in the first éxxAyola of the zinth prytany. This inference is drawn from an inscription of the time of the 12 tribes (after B.C. 307), CIA ii 416, in which the dpxatpeclac are fixed Kara Thy pavrelay for the 22nd day of Munichion (early in May), corresponding (in the time of the 10 tribes) to the be- ginning of the ninth prytany (see also Gilbert’s Bettrage, pp. 5—13, and Busolt in Miiller’s Handbuch, 1V i 152). The text shews that the election was held in the seventh prytany. This would begin

20

166

vn >? , if ap evonuia yévynras. TOUTwY.

AOHNAIQN

COL. 23, 1. 31—24, 1. 2.

def 5€ apoBovrcvpa yevéoOar Kai sept

45. 1 5é BovAn mporepor wev qv Kupla Kal ypnpaciw Cnuidcat kat Sioa Kal drroxretvar. — — kat Avoipayov adtis dyayovons

19 TENECOA! K, H-L, B: ylverOar K-w.

XLV 1 xpjuact H-L.

2 post dmoxreivat lacunam indicant K-w.

three days before the end of Gamelion (the first six prytanies containing 214 and the first seven months 217 days), and would mainly correspond to the month Anthesterion (middle of February to middle of March).

This statement has a direct bearing on the story of Sophocles being appointed otparnyds against Samos &c owing to the success of his Aztigone (on the au- thorities for the story, see Jebb’s ztvrod, p. xliti). If the play was produced at the Great Dionysia (10—15 Elaphebolion = March—Appril), z.e. late in March, B.c. 441, the ordinary election of orparryol for the ensuing official year had already taken place a month before. We must therefore either infer that the story is false; or that the date of the election was exceptionally delayed in that year owing to inauspicious weather; or that, at that time, the dpyapeotac fell later than was the case in B.C. 325. If the election of Sophocles took place a month before the Great Dionysia, and was prompted by the success of the Antigone, the play must have been performed at the Great Dionysia of the previous year, in which case eleven months must have elapsed before the election. But by that time the impression produced by the play would have become appreciably weaker, and the story would have lost its point. On the bearing of the date of election on the ‘de- position of Pericles,’ see Mr Marchant in Class. Rev. v 165.

evo-np(a] ‘on whatsoever days there are signs of fair weather.’ eanula is found in Hippocr. 1170; etonuos in Meteor. p. 363 @ 27, yéypamra: rod pah- Aov evohuws Exe 6 Tad dplfovros KUKXos.

The proviso is one of practical im- portance in the case of a large meeting on an open hill-side like that of the Pnyx. Even when the ordinary éx«Ay- olat came to be held in the theatre of Dionysus (¢.g. in 290 B.C.), the Pnyx continued to be the scene of the dpyac- peotar (Pollux viii 133).

When the duos was desiring to elect Cleon as orparnyés, there was thunder and lightning, an eclipse of the moon and

afterwards one of the sun, Arist. Wd. 581 —6 (and Schol.). Presumably amid all these portents the election was deferred. In Thue. v 45 2d. an éxxdyota is adjourned because of an earthquake. Even a drop of rain was sufficient to be regarded as a ‘sign from heaven,’ dtornula ore cat pavls BéBAnké pe (Ach. 171). Cf. Suidas, sv.

arpoBovAeupa x7A.] In accordance with the general principle ordained by Solon, Plut. Sol, 19, wndev éav darpoBovdevrov els éxxAnolav elopépec Oa.

XLV—XLIX. The functions of the Council,

XLV § 1. xKvupla—{yprdoar] The

BovAy was not competent to inflict a higher fine than g00 dv., Dem. c. Euerg. P- 1152 § 43, (after an elowyyeNa) ev 7G Ouaxetporovelv qv % Bovhh wérepa Sixarrnplp mapadoln 4 knuuwdoee Tals revraxoclus, 8cov Hv Kupla xara Tov vopov. Ina decree drawn up about 446 B.C. any encroach- ment on the Ie\apy:xdv is punished by a fine of 500 dr., to be inflicted after an elcayyeNla has been brought before the Bovdy by the archon Bactreds (Ditt. no. 13, 59)- Syoa] Arist. Zhesm. 943, edote rH Bovdh@ ce detv. A limitation to this right is mentioned in the oath taken by the Council in Dem. c. Zimocr. 144, 0066 Show AOnvalwy obdéva, ds dv Eyyunras Tpeis Kadiory TO avrd réXos TedodvTas* why édy tes él mpodoala ris wbrews 7 éml karadvcet Tod Shou cuviy ddA@ B TéAos TL Tpidmevos 7 éyyunodpevos F éxdéywv ph KaTapdrdg. It is there stated that this oath was in the interest of untried persons to give them every opportunity for preparing for their defence. In § 148 we are told that ‘Solon’ made the Council dxupov rob dca, ze. did not grant them an absolute right of im- prisonment, but a limited right subject to proper bail being found. In certain cases, however, bail was not allowed, and in these the Council’s right was not barred. See also 22 § 2 and 48 § 1.

Cleophon was imprisoned by the Council and then handed over to the dicastery (Lys. 30 § 10); he was con- demned to death by a court consisting of

CH. 44, l. 1I9g—CH. 45, 1.13. TIOAITEIA 167

\

as Tov Syusov * kal avOnuepov* Hdn médrovta arroOvycKew Edpn- Méns 6 "AdwrrexHOev ddeireto, ov packer Seiv dvev SixacTnpiov yuooews ovdéva THY TodTaY aTroOvycKEY: Kal Kpicews ev OLKA- 5 ornpin yevouérns 6 wev Avoipaxos arépuyev cal érwvupiay over es \ a i. x. eS fol 3 an fol ‘ a 6 ard TOU TUTdvov, o Sé Shpos adeirero THs BovdAFs TO Oavarodv kab deiv Kal ypnuace Enpiodv, Kab vouov eOeTo, dv Tivos adiKxely 9 Bovrdy Katayve 7 Enuidon, Tas KaTayveces Kal Tas émutnuLod- aes elodyery Tos Oecpobétas eis TO SuKaaTnptoy, Kal 6 TL av of dicactal Wnpicwvtat, rodTo Kvpiov elvas.

xpive. 8€|| Tas apyds 4 Bovdy) Tas TAciotas, waddicl boar

i , » ES + . + > - . b xpnwata Siayerpifoverw: ov xupia & % Kpiows, adr’ épéoipos eis

]2

8 xabnuevov 4n wéddovTa dmobv. K, K-W, H-L; xabjwevov 75n <Kal> wéddovra drody.

J B Mayor :

guye H-L.

épéotmos K, K-w, B; ér’ épéoruos H-L.

legendum fortasse cat av@nuepdv Hin wéddovra darodv. cf. Aeschin. 1 § 16 (lex) wapadobels rots &vdexa reOvdrw avdnpepdv. K-W, H-L, K3, B, cf. Meisterhans, p. 1412, n. 1234. @roundrctdns Od. p 134): Edundldns K-w, H-L, K3,

5 <7T@> dixacryply K-w, idem inc. 46, 10 et c. 55, 7 T@ non inserunt. €ECXEN: Goxe B, elyey K. (nusquam alibi inventum) K, K-w, B: {nmidoes Wyse, H-L.

8, 5 ATTOONHCKEIN: drobvncKew 3 EYMHAEIAHC (8 coll. 4 AAWTTEOHKEN corr. K. 6 dzé-

9 emifnurdces 13. ecTecimoc?;

8 édy H-L.

the Council and a dicastery, 26. 11, and 13 §12 (Newman).

Avolyaxov] possibly the person of that name mentioned in Xen. e//. ii 4, 8, (the Thirty) Avotuaxov rv trmapyov éxé- Aevoy dvayaydvrTa mapadodva: avrovs Tots édexa. On the restoration of the demo- cracy his services to the Thirty may well have been remembered against him.

kat adOnpepdv—drrobvyjoKey] Hist. An, 603 @ 15, amoOvycKovew avOnuepsv, 398 @ 35, 568 6 21.

One Sosias had a similarly narrow escape: Antiphon 5 § 70, 6 dvnp drnxon (mss, év74x8y Dobree, dedv@n Kayser, darm\\dxOn Baiter ; dpethero, in the text, suggests dpypéOy) id rod dyyou Tob duerépov wapadedopevos Hon rots evdexa.

HipydSys] The only passage where the name is found, as that of an Athenian, is [Dem.] 49 § 11, 7¢ racdt rod Boyndidov. The date of the speech i is B.C. 362.

defero] here ‘rescued him.’ It is used below in another sense: ‘deprived of the power of.’

6 a6 Tod TuTdvov] ‘the man who escaped the bastinado.’ ‘Schol. Arist. Plut. 476, répmava...g0da, 80 av rods karadélkous érumrov, and Photius, 5. Ts Téumavov. Cf. Lys. 13 § 56, ws dvdpo- Pbvov dvTa—r@ Syulw mwapédore Kal drre- Tunmravlcdn, ib. 67,68; and Dem. 9 § 61. This form of punishment was inflicted on

xaxodpyo, including dvéipodéva. This confirms the conjecture that Lysimachus was arraigned for taking part in causing

citizens to be put to death under the Thirty (Xen. /. ¢.). The restriction in the powers of the BovA} mentioned in this chapter has already been noticed in more general terms inc. 41, al Ts Bovdfjs xploes els rov Sjuov éhyUOacw, a passage referring to the time subsequent to the archonship of Eucleides. Even before that time the Bovdy did not necessarily enforce its right of inflicting penalties, but sometimes ex- ercised the option of referring the case to a law-court, cf. CIA i 59, (riv Bovdiv) Kod few tav Swpodoknodvrwy Karayndt- fopuévnv, kal els Sixacrhprov avrovs elaayev, Kadére av Soxy abry.

éminpdores] not found elsewhere. ra émifjpua is used of ‘penalties’ in Dem. and Plato; émifnuoty, in Xen. Hell, v2§ 223 émgnplwua, in Pollux viii r4g.

Ger pobéras] 59.

§ 2. Kplvea tas dpxds] Antiphon, 6 § 49, Tub bwevos avrovs (the mopiocral, mwdyral, mpaxrépes and sroypapparets) dewd kal cxérrdua epydferOa, elojyov els Thy Bovhjy.

eééoipos] [Dem.] 7 § 9, Taira d¢ xipia grea bau ovk éreddy &v TH Bixacrnply To map’ div kupwO...4XX’ émeidav ws éaurov erravevex 9h, epéorpoy Thy Tap’ vue yevo- pévnp yroow ws éavTov Tovojwevos. Lucian,

168 AOHNAIQN COL. 24, 1. 3—25, |. 4.

70 Sixacrnpiov. Feats Sé Kai Tots iSedrais eloayyérrew fv dv 15 BovAwyTar TAY dpydv ph xphoOat roils voposs. eheors dé Kal TouTots €atly eis TO SuxacTyptoy, édv avTaV 7 BovdAy KaTayve.

Soxiudter 8é Kal tods Bovreutas Tods Tov botepov évavtoy 3 Bovrevoovtas xai tods évvéa dpyovtas. Kat mpdrepov pev Hy amrosoxidoat Kupia, viv b& <Kal> TovTous epecis éotw els TO SixacTypiov,

ToUTw@Y peV ody AKupos éaTLv H Bourn. mTpoBovrever O° eis TOV 4 Sjpov, Kal ovK éEeotw ovdev amrpoBovrevtov ovd 6 te adv pn mpoyparrwow oi mputaves Whhicacba To Shum’ Kat’ avta yap tadra evoyds éotw 6 viknoas ypaby Tapavopor.

46. ézriereiras S€ Kal tadv Temounpévov Tpinpwv Kal TOY oKevav Kal TdY vewooixwv, Kai Troveirar xawwas [dé] Tpenpes 7

20

19 <xal> rovros K-W, B 23 Kara yap raira Kontos, H-L; v. Dem. 20 § 96.

XLVI 2 6é secl. K (edd.).

pro Imaginibus 15, épéorpov ... dixyv. Pollux vill 125, (kplow) épéoipor.

eloayyéAXeww] probably here used in the general sense of bringing to the know- ledge of the Council, without reference to the special process called eloayyeNla. The procedure in the latter case is de- scribed by Dr Hager in Dict. Ant. s.v., i 709 a.

% 3- Soxtpdte.—Povdevrds] Dem. AZid. Ill, Bovhevew pou Aaxdbvros Soximafouévou xarnyope, Near. 3, dayxdver Bovdrevew "ArroAAbdwpos* Soxiwacdels de xal dudcas Tov vouimov bpxov KtrA. Two of the speeches of Lysias are concerned with the Soxiwacla of a Bovdeurys: Or. 31, xara Pihwvos, is a speech for the prose- cution; Ov. 16, brép MavriOéov, for the defence. § 9 of the latter speech shews the wide scope of the scrutiny in such cases: év dé rats Soxiuactas Slxasoy elvac mavros TOO Biov Adyor Siddvar.

dpxovtas] Lys. Or. 26, kar’ Eddvdpov, is a speech in accusation of one who was appointed by lot to be First Archon in reserve. The case was heard on the last day but one of the preceding official year (midsummer, B.C. 382). The next day was a public holiday, and, in the event of his rejection, an appeal was im- possible: § 6, Sixacrijpiov...ob Suvardv Trnpwhfva. Dem. Left. go asserts that the junior archons underwent a double Soxipacla :—rovs Bec pobéras dls Soximac- Bévras dpxew ey re 77 Bovdy kal wap’ duiv év TO dicacrnply. The doxiuacla before the Bov)7 is called an tvdxpiots in Dem. Eubul. 66; it is described as affecting all

the archons (74. 70). Cf. c. 55 § 2.

§ 4. ov8tv le eae Plut. Sol. 19, quoted on c. 44 zt.

ey parpacry] 43 § 3 wit.

fj Tapavopwy) Here the illegality

sfiine on a point of form. Among cases in point are the motion of Androtion to award a crown to the outgoing Bovdy

(Dem. Androt. 5); and that of Thrasy-

bulus to grant Lysias the citizenship of Athens (note on 40 § 2).

XLVI § 1. tTév tpiipev] Gilbert, i261 n. 4.

TY oKEVov] esp. of ‘naval stores and engines,’ and ‘the tackling of ships;’ [Dem.] 47,¢. Zuerg. § 19, oxedn rpinpixd. Xen. Oec. viii 12, da woddGv.. .gvdAwv oxevov ‘oars,’ ‘rudders,’ ‘masts,’ ‘ yards’) cal mdexrav (‘cables’) épulterar vais kal dvdryerat, dia moAdGv dé Tar Kpewagruy (‘ sails’ and ‘rigging’) xadov- uévwy mei. The specifications of the famous oxevo7«7 in the Peiraeus, designed by the architect Philon under the ad- ministration of Lycurgus, are still extant (cIA ii 1054=Ditt. no. 352). This oxevodyKkn was intended rots xpepacrois oxeveow, and (though not finished) was probably already in use in B.C. 329, a few years before the text was written. Cf. Diirrbach, Lycurgue, pp. 64—73-

tav vewrolkwv] Strictly speaking the vewoouxot are the sheds in which the ships are laid up, and vewpia the dock- yards; but the terms are sometimes inter- changed (cf. Dict. Ant. ii 206 a, and Diirrbach, J.c. p. 65, n. 3). In [Xen.] de Rep. Ath, iii 2, among the duties of

CH. 45, |. 14—CH. 46,1]. 10. TOAITEIA 169 ‘ ¢ 3 c lal t *% , UJ

TeTpNpEls, OTOTEpas av oO SHwos Yewporovyjcy, Kal oxe’n TavTais

kal vewaotkous. xetpotovel 8 apystéxtovas 6 Shpos emt Tas vads:

By \ lal 2 4 a a / fal \ dv 5€ pn wapaddow eferpyacuéva tadta tH véa Bovdy, THY

> yv > an cal a t an dwpedy ov« Eotw avrois raBeiv. eri ydp ths otepov Bovdrjs

[Col 25-] Aap Bavovor». || wrove?ras.dé tas Tpunpers, déca avdpas e& dl raver] 2 édowévn Tpinpotrovos. é&eTaber 8 cal Ta oixodopnpata Ta Snuo- ova Tavra, Kav Tis adixeiy ath S6£n TS Te Sw TodTov [dm ]opai-

ver Kal KaTayvovTos Trapadidwat SucacTnpiy.

5 éav H-L.

7 a[rdvrwv] K, H-L: 10 KATAPNOYCA K, H-L: Karayvdvros K-W, B.

éaurijs Wayte, a[vr&v] K-w, B coll. 48, 13.

<Tg> dikacryply Gennadios,

Naber (H-L, idem 7@ non addunt in c. 45, 5 et c. 55, 7).

the Bovdy we find vewplwy émipednOjvar. From B.C. 347 to 323 an annual property tax amounting to ten talents was raised for the building rév vewsolkwy xal Ts oxevobyxns (CIA li 270).

kKaivas tpiypes] Twenty, according to Diod. xi 43. In B.c. 356/5 the Council failed to build the requisite number of new triremes; Androtion nevertheless moved that they should receive the customary compliment of a golden crown; and for this he was attacked under a yeagh Tapayd wiv (Dem. Axdrot. 8).

i terprjpets] In the list of the fleet for B.C. 330/29 eighteen quadriremes are mentioned: CIA ii 807 4 76—79, Ter- papas O° éu pev rots vewplas mapédouev MMIII, gu wAG d¢ A. For the three years between B.c. 334/3 (26. 804) and the above date the lists are missing. The earliest notice of quinqueremes is in B.C. 325/45 when seven are mentioned, ib. 809 @ go, the list for the previous year (4. 808 d 36) giving quadriremes, as well as triremes, but no quinqueremes (Boeckh, Seeurkunden, p. 76). The archonship of Cephisophon, B.C. 3209/8, is mentioned in c. 54 § 7. Hence the date of the treatise falls after B.c. 328, and before 325, the year in which quin- queremes appear for the first time (C. Torr in Athenaeum, Feb. 7, 1891; and Lipsius in Leipeig Verhandlungen, 1891,

- 45).

apxirékrovas] ‘naval architects,’ or ‘master ship-builders.” These are not mentioned elsewhere, but the names of 35 such persons are known to us from inscriptions (Boeckh, Seeurkunden, pp. 93—100). The dpxiréxrwy of Dem. de Cor. § 28 is a different kind of official,— the manager of the Theatre of Dionysus.

mapadacwv] of Bovdeuvral. tiv Swpedv] Dem. Androt. § 8, (vdmou) odk eGvros eé-

civar wh Tonoapéry TH BovrATy Tas Tpihpers alriicat Thy Swpedy (=Tdv orépavoy, id. 36).

tpinporowwts] In Dem. Androt. 17 the treasurer of this body is mentioned: ovx 7 Bovdy yéyovey airia rod pH me- rovjoba: Tas vais, GAN 6 T&v TprnpoTroLiv taplas dmobpas wero éxwv revd’ Hurd- havra. The reference to the rptnpororol in Aeschin. c. Ctes. 30 implies that they were an dpxiy aiper#: ots ai dudal Kal ai tpirtves Kal of Sfuor ef éavTdv aipotvra Ta Snubow xphuara diaxeplfev. This last passage suggests that they were chosen by the tribes out of candidates nominated by the demes: the text implies that the choice rested with the Bovdy. Probably the latter ratified, as a matter of course, the selection made by the tribes. Among similar commissioners elected by the tribes, may be mentioned the recxorotol and the ragpororol; the drooroneis were certainly elected é£ ’AQn- valwv amdvrwy (Gilbert, i 250).

§ 2. otko8opusjpara] The inspection of public buildings has not hitherto been known to be one of the functions of the Bovd7j. But it is naturally connected with their duty of letting reuévy Kal lepa kat olxlas, [Xen.] de Vect. iv 19.

atopatve] ‘formally denounces,’ ‘reports.’ Ant. de Chor. 9, dropjvact

kal e€edéyEaow, Lys. 20 § 7 (of karryyopor) détxodvras drogalvover, and Dinarch. c¢. Dem. 48, xdmod xaréyvw mpbrepov 7 Bovd7 (the Areopagus), and 2. 49, awépyvey 7 Bound}.

mapadiSwa. Sucacrnple] CIA i 59, (B.c. 410), [rhv Boudiy Bovdebo]ac év 77 TPOTY e0[pe év 7@ Bovdeurnpily Kal xo- Adfew rv Swpoldoxyodvrwv xaray]ndgi- fouévnv, kal els Stxac[ripiov abrovs eiod- yetly, xabbre dy Sox abry’ T[Gv bé duxacraey Tovs] mapévras diropalvew, KTh.

Io

170

AOHNAIQN

COL. 25, l. 4—13.

47. cuvd00rne’ Se nal Talis ddXaus dpyais Ta TAEioTA. TpPaTov Bev yap of Tapias THs “AOnvas cicl per déxa, Kd npodra] & els éx THS hudhs, é« TevTaxociopedipyvwv Kata Tov Yrwvos vou[ov (ere yap 6 v]opos Kipios éotwv), dpyer 8 6 AaXov Kav wav Tévys

wn

7. TwaparapBavor[ar dé T]o te dyadpa THs AOnvas kal tas Nixas

kal Tov Gddov Koopov Kal Ta yp[_nuat la évavtiov THs Bovdjs.

XLVII 2 xAnpoira: 5’ Gertz (edd.): «Anpwrol K1. gpudijs Wyse coll. 61, 2 ;—éx Tis pudARs <éxdorns> Bury.

Syudoi. Phot. et Bekk. An.’ K-w.

2, 7 kAnpodyrar & els é& éxdorns 6 ‘xphuara lepd Te Kal

_ TESTIM. § 1 * Harp. raplac:...dpxq Tes map’ AOnvators qv of raylar béxa. Tov dprOudy. maparhauBdavouar 5’ ovra “76 Te dyahua—Poudijs,” ws pyow Ap. év’AO. ToA. Phot. (Bekk. Az. 306, 7): dpxovrés elow ’AOhvnot kXypwrol ard Tov Tevrakogtopediuvar, of ra ev TQ lepg rijs ’AOnvas ev dxpombde xXpipara lepd re kal Snudova Pudarrovow, adAd kal atrd 7d dyadpa THs 'AOnvas <xal rov xéouov add. Bekk. Az. l.c.>. Pollux viii 97: raptac THs Geo KAnpwrol wey ex wevTakoctomediurvwy joay, Ta de

Xphuara TapedauBavov THs BovAfs wapovons.

XLVII § 1. of taplar ris "Adyvas] The full title is rapla: rav iepov xpnudrwv tis "A@nvatas. This is found in the in- ventories of the treasures in the Par- thenon, the Hecatompedos and the Pronaos (cIA i 117—175), and in the records of payments from the treasure of Athena for public purposes (2. 179, 180, 188). Cf. Hicks, Ast. Juscr. nos. 50, 51, 53, 54- The short title, raulas trav

rhs e009, is found in inscr. of 328 (Boeckh, ~

Seeurkunden, p. 465). See Boeckh 11 v; Schomann, p. 418; Gilbert, i 234; and cf. note on 30 § 2, raulas Tov lepav xpnudrwv xTr.3; also Panske, de Magis- tratibus Atticis, 1890, i pp. 13—46.

Zdrwvos vdpov] 8 § 1, KAnpody rods Taplas éx wevraxociomedi yyw.

dpxe 8’ 6 Aaxdv KrA.] Solon’s law regulating the qualification was practically obsolete. Cf. c. 7 ult.

mrapadapBdvougt xrd.] The accounts of the treasures transferred in each year were annually audited; they were also inscribed on blocks of stone once in four years (éx Tlavaénvalwy és Tavadjvaca).

76 Gyadpa] The statue is not mentioned in our inventories; but from B.c. 385 there is proof of the existence of a separate specification respecting it. This was kept in the temple and the treasurers certified in each year that the statue and its appurtenances were all safe xara rip orHdny (Kohler in Mitthetlungen, 1879, p- 89, quoted by Hicks, p. 89). The &yadua is incidentally named in CIA ii 652, 42 (B.C. 398).

vas Nikas kal rov dddov Kécpov] About 435/4 B.C. the treasures of the Parthenon included golden figures of Niky, CIA i 32, B 2, Tas Nifkas ras

xpuloas xal ra w[opmreta]. The number was probably ten. About 407/6 eight of these were melted down and made into gold coin, the xawdv xpvolov of Arist. Ran. 720 (see Schol.). Seven of the pedestals of these figures were still in existence between 377 and 367 (CIA ii 678, 47). In the earliest inventory after the archonship of Eucleides a xpvo7% Niky is mentioned (ciA ii 642). This Niky, which was nearly two talents (52 kilogr. =115 1b.) in weight, was probably made out of the proceeds of the confiscated pro- perty of the Thirty (Michaelis, Parthenon, p. 301). The same Nixy is entered in an inventory of the rapula: trav lepdv xpn- patov ris AOnvalas kal Tov ddAdwy Gedy, who existed as a joint body from about 403 to 389 B.C., to be separated again in 385. It is also named in cia ii 677, B.C. 367. Under the financial administration of Lycurgus (B.C. 338/7—326/5) part of the surplus of the public revenues was spent on preparing a number of golden Nixa, which were set apart among the treasures on the Acropolis. The decree of Strato- cles, preserved in [Plut.] ii 852, recites that Lycurgus alpedels trd roi diyou Xphmara wodda ouvipyayev els Thy axpb- Tokw Kal wapackevdoas TH Oeg Kba mov Nikas re édoxptcous mopretd te xpucd kal dpyupa kal x60 mov xpucoby els éxardv kaynpbpous (cf. 2b. vit. Lycurg. § 5, Top- mela Te Xpvod Kal dpyupG rH mode Kare- oxevace kal Nixas xpvods, and Paus. i 29, 16, Karecxedace Sé roumeia Ty Oe@ xal Nikxas xpuods cal rapbévors kbopov éexarédv). It was in B.C. 334 that, according to the

_ Abyos rayudy ris Peo and « special com-

mission acting with them, part of the surplus handed over by the raplas rap

CH. 47, l. I—12. TIOAITEIA

171 2 ere?” of wwrnTal Séxa pév eior, Krnpodtar & els ex Tis glvaAjs. puc]Oodor S€ ta picOdpata wavta Kai Ta péTadra mododcr, Kat Ta TéAN [peta T]od Taylov Tov otpatiwtikdy Kal Tov él TO Oempixdv 7 pnuévev évavtiov THs [Bovdjs] KaTaxupodow btm dv n Bovdn xetporovncy Kal Ta wpabévta pérardara, [Ta 7’ épydoipa ta els tpla érn mempapéva, Kal Ta cuyKeywpnuéva Ta 11 péradnda [doa] K}........000.. et H-L (in papyro scriptum non €1, sed ap vel ar vel

al; a. Ta 7’ K-W (B), meTaAAa TaTapepr deletis ap sec. K-w). In archetypo erat fortasse TA T APTA K TA EPfacima, 12 cvyxexwopuéva Poland, Busolt.

§§ 2,3 * Harp. rwrnral: of pév mwrnrat dpyy tls éorw AOjyynot, déxa Tov dpiOudv dvépes, els ex udfs Exdorys. Storxovor dé Ta mimpackdpeva bd THs whdews TavTa, TEAN kal péradda. Kal wicOdoes Kal Ta Onwevoueva...dielhexrar 6€ wept adra@y xai’Ap. év AQ. wor. Fere eadem in Bekk. Am. 291, 17 et Lex. Dem. Patm. p. 14. Pollux viii gg: rodytal Ta TEA MempacKovar ‘‘uera TOY éml 7d OewpiKdy onuevww,” Kal Tas “ rOv ef "Apelov wdryou” werd Tov mpérepov Abyov pvydvTwv odclas Kal Td Sednuevpéva (Frag.

4017, 441°).

oTpariwrikey was spent els ras Nix[as kal] 7d m[oulreta (CIA ii 739). These may be identified with certainty as the Nika: of the text. Kéopos refers in part to the xécpos kavngopixéds (CIA ii 162, frag. ¢ 10), including dippo, vrodepldes (necklaces), du@pdéa. (bracelets), and orépavo: (ii 741 Be 3—5). Cf. Michaelis, Parthenon, p. 292; Boeckh, note 719 Frankel; Foucart, Les Victoires en or de PAcropole, Bull. de corr. hellén. xii 283—3 and Diirrbach, Lycurgue, pp. 80—91.

§ 2. wwAnral] Hermann, Sfaatsalt. § 151, 2; Schémann, p. 417; Gilbert, i 227; Panske, de Magistratibus Attics, ip. ro.

pro®otor xrd.] ‘farm out the public contracts.’ Thus the contracts for setting up tablets inscribed with public documents (c7#\at) were let out by the mwdnrai (Ditt. no. 13, 513 43,383 45» 8)- The contract for building the walls of Athens in 334—326 is let out by the same body (CIA ii 167).

Ta pétadda todovor] By the ‘sale of the mines’ is meant the sale of the right of working them. The ‘purchaser,’ who may be more correctly described as the lessee, paid a fixed price together with one twenty-fourth part of the net produce as a perpetual tax. The ordinary price of a share was one talent. See Boeckh, On the Silver Mines of Laurium, Appen- dix to Publ. Econ., ed. Lewis. In CIA ii 780—783, and 782 b (p. 513), we have fragments of dvaypagal werdAAwy drawn up by the rwAqrat.

td téhyn] Most of the tolls, customs and taxes were farmed by veAdvat (Boeckh, 111 viii; Gilbert, i 335; Dicé. Ant. 5.v.).

Tov taplov Tov otpariwtiKdy] The management of military finances, which, in the fifth century, had been entrusted to the éAAnvoraptar, was entrusted in B.c. 338 to a new officer called the rayulas rav orpatwrixav. The first to hold this office was Callias, the brother-in-law of Lycur- gus ([Plut.] Vit. Lyc. § 27). It was supposed by Boeckh (11 vii) that it was immediately after the archonship of Eucleides that the éAdAyvoraulac were superseded by the raulas ray orp. and the superintendents of the theoric fund. But as late as 347 B.C. we find the dmodéxrat described as making payments éx Ty orpatwwrixdvy xpnudrov (APH. vi 152), which implies that the raplas r&v orp. was not yet in existence (A. Schaefer in Rhein. Mus. xxxiii 431, quoted by Gilbert i 237 n. 3, and Dem. w. s. Zeit, 1? 307 n. 2). In Boeckh, n. 317, Frankel assigns 347 as the date when this office was instituted; but he is op- posed by Hartel, Stzdiex, p. 132 (Diirr- bach, Lycurgue, p. 32). It is at present therefore impossible to assume any earlier date than 338 for its institution—The same official took part in superintending the Panathenaic games (498 3).

Tay él tS Oewpixcv] These financial officers were apparently instituted under the administration of Eubulus, between 354 and 339. The plural here decides the question whether there was only one official of the name, or more. Boeckh (11 vii, p. 2492) supposed that there were ten. The pl.in Aeschin. «. Cves. 25, of émi Td 0. Kexetporovnuévoe used to be under- stood of successive holders of the office. Cf. Gilbert, i 230.

zpla ery] It has hitherto been supposed

15

172 AOHNAIQN COL, 25, 1. 13—25. eis <tpia> é[rn] mempapéva. Kal Tas ovolias Tav e& ’Apeiov mayou evysvtwy kal tav [odecre]rov év[avtiov rhs] BovAns Twrodaw, kataxupodart 8 of évvéa dpxovtes’ Kal Ta TéAn TA els éviavt[ov] wempapéva, dvayparpavtes cis Aehevewpéva ypaypateia Tov Te mprduevov Kat [dcov] dv mpinrat, TH BovAn rwapacdidcacw. dvaypapovow S& ywpis pev ods Set kata mpu[tlavelay éxaorny kataBanrrew els déxa ypappareia, xwpis & ods z[pis Tod] éviavrod,

13 els . érm K, K-w, ‘els 7 érn dubitanter nunc legit K’, els rpla ern B: [els del]

H-L. 14 [derde]rav ? K®: [2 épe]ray dubitanter K-w; driwwy (quod quondam conieci) acceperunt H-L; aAA (i.e. dAXws vel GAAodev) post T(WN) agnosci posse

putat B qui rw [dAdobev éJy[avrloy] dedit. aptius K-w, K%, B.

18 riv ante mpvravelay ins. B.

17 [6réc0u] Tyrrell, H-L: écov spatio 19 z[pis rod] K-w, B;

t[edodvros] K1, ré[Aee Tod] K*3; apd rédAous H-L.

that the state never let the mines for a term of years, but only granted them on perpetual leases (Boeckh’s Szlver Mines of Laurium, § 7, p- 645). °

We have already been told that the mwAnTal ‘sell the mines.’ We are now told that they lease for » term of three years, not only the mines that are still workable, but also those that are the sub- ject of special concessions. It is observed by Boeckh, /. c. p. 646, that it could ‘scarcely have been compulsory upon a tenant to pay to the state the purchase money of a new mine, if, after having expended his trouble and capital, he was unsuccessful in finding any ore.’ It may therefore be here suggested that a term of three years was fixed for a provisional letting of the lease, and.that the annual payment of 4 was not due until the three years had elapsed. Possibly the original purchase money was in the first instance paid conditionally, and was re- covered in the event of no ore being found. In the other event, at the end of the three years the provisional lease would be ‘confirmed’ in the presence of the Bovd7.

In connexion with the mines, a period of ‘three years’ is mentioned in Hy- perides, Zu.x. col. xliv, and [Dinarchus] fragm. in Baiter and Sauppe, Oratores Altict, ii 325 64; butit seems to have no bearing on the present passage.

Ta TvyKEXopypéva] possibly mines ‘let under a special agreement’ without the previous payment of purchase money. It has been suggested, however, that some word contrasted with épydouua is needed, such as cuvyxexwopéva, exhausted mines with heaps of scoriae accumulated near them. Such mines, if they had reverted in any way to the state, would

have to be ‘sold’ for a very much smaller sum. In CIA ii 782, shortly after the time of Lycurgus, we find mention of a (uéraddov) madrady dvacdetuov, ‘an old mine reopened and worked afresh,’ which is sold in the second mpuravela (2d. 780) for the small sum of rs50 dr.

tav ¢€ ’Apelov mdyou devydvrwv] In trials before the Areopagus a person accused of wilful murder might (except in cases of parricide) withdraw from Attica ‘after delivering his first speech’ (Dem. 23 § 69), and thus avoid the penalty of death (Pollux, viii 117). Such a person was never allowed to return; and, when any decree was passed to sanction the restoration of exiles, there was «a special clause excluding oi ¢é *Apelou mdyou pevyorres, Plat. Leg. 871 D. Their property was confiscated, Dem. 23 § 45, TOv dvépopdywy Tov étednrvOdrur, Ov Ta Xphpara éritipa.

tav ddeterav] If a debt to the treasury remained unpaid at the ninth prytany, it was doubled and the debtor’s property sold (Andoc. De Myst. 73; Dem. c. ial p- 1255 § 273 ¢. Meaer. p. 1347 § 7):

Aedevkwpéva. yp.] [Dem.] 46 § 11, (yp. AeAevxwuevov. Lys. g § 6, (of a fine, ypawavres els Nevkwua Tos Taulats mapé- docav. Dem. 24 Zimocr. 23, (of a new law) dvaypdyas els Aevkwua. Bekker, Anecd, p. 277, NedKwpd éore tlvak yoy adndcwévos, mpds ypadhy modtriKav ypap- parton émirpdeos.

§ 3. KaraPddAdev...caraBodrrjy] of payment by instalments, as in [Dem.] ¢. Neaer. 27, Gwonpévos Thy mevtnkooriy Tod olrov...kal Séov abrov karaBdddew Tas karaBohas els rd Bovdevryptoy Kara& mMpv- tavelav, c. Timocr. 98, ai Trav reddv xaraBonal,

Ww

CH. 47, 1. 13—27. TIOAITEIA 173

ypapnpateioy Kata tHv KataBodnv éExdoTny Tooaytes, yopis 8 20 ods [ert] tis évadtns mputaveias. dvaypdpovar Sé kal ta yopia kal Tas oikias [Ta droypad]évta nal mpabévta év TH Sixactypio: kat yap Tavl” obrot mwALodaw. érecw avaykn THY Tiyund arododvar, TdV S& ywpiarv év déxa* 4 xataBadrovow Sé tav’ta éml ths évarns mpvtaveias. cial pélpes 8¢ kal 6 Bacireds Tas puocOdcers TOY <Te>pEevav avaypdrpas év ypappare[tors Nedevx ]wpevors. gare 88 Kal rovTar % wey picbwors

oo \ nm \ > n 5d t gore] dé THY pev oixidy év TévTe

n

5

22 [7a dmroypap]évra Wyse, K-W, H-L, K3; rdroyp. B; T[& picOwO]ara x.

23 [fort] dé K-w, K3, B: kal H-L. K3, B: mapadl6wot quondam Paton (H-L). Wyse, Blass, (K-w, H-L, Kk’),

25 xaraBdddovor H-L. elopéper K-W, 26 T(WN) M(EN)WN: Tar Temevay

27 suppleverunt Jackson, van Leeuwen (edd.).

évdrns mpvravelas] The time when the purchase-money for the ré\y was paid: Dem. Zimocr. 93, 98.

droypadévta] In cia i 274—281 we have the accounts rendered by the mwA7- rat for property (probably that of the “Epuoxoridat) which had been confiscated and sold by the state. See also CIA ii 777, and 779 (740° émpdy eddy arluyra ovra); also 811 col. ¢ 183—195, Kare- BNf0n c& droypadis, js dméypayer—rodro KareB\}On mpds rwAryras Tos Ep‘ Hynatov

dpxovros, B.C. 324/3; cf. Boeckh, Seeur- |

hunden, p. 543- aéyre...5€Ka] These details have been hitherto unknown. The only definite state- ment about the rent of a house is in Isaeus 11 § 42, where a house in Melite worth 30 minas, and another at Eleusis worth 5, jointly produce an annual rent of 3 minas; . 80 that in less than 12 years the occupant would have paid the value of the houses. In the same passage an estate at Thria, worth 150 minas, produces 12 minas per annum; so that in 124 years the occupant would have paid the value of the estate. § 4. 6 factdeis] The functions of this archon being mainly religious, he is here described as responsible for bringing the leases of sacred enclosures to the knowledge of the Council. Cf. cra iv fasc. 2, 53 @ (quoted by Wyse, Class. Rev. v 275 a): (418/7 B.C.) v. 3 599. *Adovoto[s elie’ elptar To lepdvy 7d Kédpou kal rd Nydéws cal 7Hs Bactdys (Plat. Charm. 133 A) x[a}t weoOGoo 7d Téuevos kata Tas cuvypapds, of b€ mwdyral rip elpt[w] dropicOwodvrwy, Td dé Téuevos 6 Baciteds droucOwodtw Kara [rlas Evv- ypagds 7d dé dpyipiov és Thy elptw dro rot repévous elvat, mpagar dé Taira mply 7] ékdvar THvde Thy Bovdiy 7

dbiver Pat xiAlaue Spaxynot Exacrov Kard, ra elpnucva. v. 11 sgg.: "Adovoros ele: Ta pev GdXNa Kabdrep TH Bovdy’ 6 6é Bact- Aeds w[t]oOwodrw kat of mwAnral 7rd Té- pevos 7d Nydéws cal THs Bacthys Kalra tas Evvypapas elkoot ern. Tov 6é micOw- odpevov elptat 7d le[p]ov 7d Kédpou kai 7d Nadws xal r7s Bacthys rots €avrod rédeow. ér[dlonv & dy Grpy plo[O]wow 7d réuevos Kara Tov éviaurov éxacrov, KaTraBadhérw 7d dpydpiov ert ris evdrys mpuravelas Tots drodéxrai[s], of dé darodéxrar Tots Taplaoe tov GdAwy Oewy wapadidévrwy Kard Tov vonov. 6 58 Bacireds doy wh morjon Ta évnpiopueva. 7} &ddos Tis ofs mpooréraxrat wep rodtwy, él ras Alynléos mpuravelas, ebOuvécOw puplnor Spaxunow. tov bé €[wynuévoy ray idov éxxoploacOar éx THs rappou éml ricde THs Bovdns drodévra Td dpyvpiov ra Nydet doov émplaro. 6 dé Bacwheds cEarely]drw rov mpidmevov rhy nov éretddy drodge thu ploOwow, Tov dé pecOwoduevov Td Téuevos Kal dmdcov ay pucObonrar dvrevypaparw 6 Baotheds és Tov Tolxov Kal rovs éyyunras Kara Tov vouov domep Ketras (rept) Trav renevdv. Cf. J. R. Wheeler in American Fournal of Archaeology, iii, nos. 1 and 2.

The Bacireds is associated with other officials in an inscr. of B.C. 329, "Hd. Ap. iii, 1883, p. 110 B 29, [Trav Teuevar] & éulaOwoav 6 Bacrdeds kal of md pedpor Kat ot é[re]ordr[ae of "EJAe[vowd dev kal of ém- pednral rev] wvornplov.

Tas picOaceas Tov teyevdv] [Dem.] 43 § 58, Tos un dmodidvras Tas pmicOdoes ray reuevav. Didymus ap. Harpocr. s.z. ard pucOwpdrov (Isocr. Areop. 11)... ék Tay repevixav mpocoduy. [Xen.] de Vect. iv 19, wicOodvrac yooy Kalremevy Kai lepa kal olxlas, cat réXyn wvodvTaL Tapa THs modews. Plat. Leg. 759 E.

AQHNAIQN COL, 25, 1. 25—42.

174 eis érn Séxa, kataBddreras 8 emi tis [évarns] mputavelas: S10 kal wAeiota ypnuata emt TavTns auANeyeTas THS TpulTa]veias. 30 eloéperan ev obv eis THY BovdAnv TA ypappar[eta Ta] Tas KaTa- Bodas dvayeypappéva, tnpet & 6 Syudatos: Stav 8 7 xXp[nuarov kataBlorn, mapadidwar Tois amodéxtais avTa TavTa Kabe[Nay ard TOV] émicTUN av dv év TabTy TH Hpépa Sel TA YpHpaTa KaTaBry- [Ojvae [eal a]rarevpOjvarr ta & addra aréxertas ywpis iva jun 35 Mpoeear[erpOn |.

48. [eal] 8 dmodéxtas Séxa, KexAnpwpévor Kata udas:

30 kK? TAC, xal per errorem scriptum putat K: [74] rds K-W, B; mdvTwy rds H-L sed

spatium non sinit.

éx [ray] K-w sed A incertum et é« valde dubium putat kK. KaraPAnOnvar kal K-w, K3, B: karaBdnberra bet 35 mpoctad[erpOy] K, K-w, B: mpoeta[Ael-

Xpyyara K3, K-W, B: om. H-L. WL. 34 aAEIPHNA! corr. K. pnrat] H-L.

32 xae[Adv] dad rev] van Leeuwen (H-L, K3, B): xaded[av]

33 Ael, ante 7a

TESTIMONIA. XLVIII §§ 1, 2 * Harp. dwodéxrat:...’Ap. 5° év 77 AO. mon. dedjjAwKev Os déka re dnocay kal ws ‘‘rapadaPbvres—xpyuara” ris Bovis évaytloy “év rg—

Snyocly.”

kal drdGs & mpdrrovor diacadet.

Bekk. Az. 198, 1 (Etym. M. 124, 41;

érn Seka] CIA ii 1059 (=Luser. Brit. Mus. p. 24 xiii), in B.C. 321, mwicOotor Tlepacets Tlapadtay cal ‘Aduuplia kal rdr- Aa reuévyn daravra for a term of ten years. The same term of years is re- corded in a lease granted by a ¢parpla in B.C. 300 (20. 600), and also in an Attic inscr. relating to some land in Delos and Rheneia belonging to the Delian temple, CIA i 283 (B.C. 434). Wyse (Class. Rev. v 275 4) quotes a Delian inscr. of B.c. 250: emocddoauer 6¢ Kal Ta TEeudvy TA Too Oeod els rn Séxa kara THY lephy ovyypadiyy (Homolle, Les Archives de [ Intendance Sacrée a Délos, p. 19 0. 1).

awreiota—mputavelas] It may further be noticed that all who had not paid

their debts to the treasury by this date.

(the penultimate prytany of the Attic year) had their property sold by the state (see note on dgecderuiv, supra, § 2). § 5. 6 Sypdortos] ‘the public clerk’; slaves were employed as dvtvypage’s or ‘checking-clerks.’ Dict. Antz. s.v., and Gilbert, 1 323 n. 3. amoSékrais] 48 § 1. SC. TH ypappareta. émorudlwv] It has been suggested that this term is metaphorically applied to the ‘columns’ in the list of accounts (Class. Rev. v 181 6); but obviously it cannot mean ‘columns’ at all, but some- thing that rests upon them. In archi- tecture the émoridov is generally the ‘architrave’ (Plut. Per. 13 § 5; Vitruv. iv 3 § 4, ‘supra epistylium conlocandi

atta tara,

sunt triglyphi cum suis metopis’; cic 4608 (A.D. 151), wapacrddas Kai Kidva kal ra, érdvw atrav ériridva kal padldas) : it is even said to be sometimes used of the whole of the entablature (Smith, Dic. Ant. s.v. ad fin.), but I know of no authority for this statement.

In the present passage I should under- stand it to mean a shelf supporting a series of ‘ pigeon-holes,’ and itself supported by wooden pedestals, in the office of the public clerk. The entablature in Doric architecture, with its originally open metopes alternating between the triglyphs, may well have suggested a metaphorical term for a shelf of ‘pigeon-holes’ used for the preservation of public documents. K-W translate it repositorium or loculi. Haussoullier suggests a modern parallel in ‘certains bureaux turcs (bureaux de douane ou de santé), ot les papiers sont serrés dans les sacs que l’on accroche aux poutres et que l’on décroche au moyen d’un long baton.’

mpoegaderpOy] not found elsewhere. efarelpew, however, is found as a syno- nym of dmahelpev, being applied to annulling laws and decrees (in Lys. 1 § 48, and Andoc. De Myst. 76), and to cancel- ling debts (in Dem. 25 § 70, egad#dcrras 7d OddAnua, and CIA i 32, 10, droddvTuy Te Xphuara kal éaderpovrwv), Cf. CIA iv Jase. 2, 53 a, éadeuvdrw contrasted with dvrevypawarw.

XLVITI § 1. darodécrat] ‘general re- ceivers.’ These officials were instituted

CH. 47, l. 23—CH. 48, 1.13. TOAITEIA 175 obra. Sé maparaBevtes ta [ypa]upareia, drradeipovor ta KaTa- / , * A lal a ‘3 na f Baddopeva xXpyjuata évavriov [THs Bovans] év TH Bovdrgcutnpie, kal madw arrodiidacw Ta ypaupateia [Te Sy]uocip’ Kav tos erin KataBornv, evtadl éyyéyparrrat, Kas Surd[odv alvdyKn ro [erArA]eupOev xataBdrr.cw 7 SedécOa, kal tadta eiompalrrew 7 \ \ gan , \ \ , 2» nts oak 5 2 Bolvrn cal Sioae [xuplia Kata tods vouous éotiv. TH pev odv mpotepaia déyovrar Ta xp[nwata] Kal pepifover tals dpyais, TH 8 torepaig Tov Te pepiopov eia[pépov]or yparravres év cavids kai 4 > ~ rd \ t ? a A kataréyovow év t@ Bovrevtypio, kal m[potiOélaow ev 7H Bovrr el tis twa oidev adixodvTa mepl Tov pepta[uov 7 aplyovTa 7 Dsorny, Kal yuopas érrupndifovery éav tis te Sony al Sucety. 3. K)Anpodar 8é Kai Noytotas €E abTay oi Bovdrevtal Séxa Tovs

XLVII 4 drodidéact H-L. 5 ENTEYOENLE, evreDOev yéypamra: K: évTabe” éyyéypamrae Herwerden, Kontos, Gertz (H-L, K-w, B). Sumdoby dvdyxyn van Leeuwen (K-W, H-L, K%, B). 9 elopépovot van Leeuwen (K-W, H-L, K’). “10 mpor:éacw olim conieci (H-L), idem habent K-w, K%, B.

Zonaras 234; Bekk. Az. 427, 13): dpxovres k\ypwrol, Séxa Tov dpiOudv Kara pudyjy elow, olrwes mapedduBavoy Kai dredéxovro Ta ypaypareia Tov dperrdvrwy TH Snuocly... elra éftjrafov rd Te dpercdopeva kal Ta dmrodiddueva xphyara odv TH Bovdy Kal éudpitov els & xp dvadloxew (Frag. 400%, 440%). Schol. in Aeschin. 3 § 25 dwodékra: joay of Sexduevor TA Xphuara TOY KaTaBodGy Kr.

- §3*Harp. Aoyioral:...elol dé rdv dptOudr déxa (Exdorys pudfjs ets Schol. in Aeschin.

by Cleisthenes to take over most-of the duties previously performed by the xwda- xpérat (Androtion ap. Harpocr. s. v.). They are mentioned in Dem. ¢. Timocr. §§ 162, 197, Aesch. c. Ctes. 25, Pol. 1321 b 31, ddAn 8’ dpxn mpds wv al mpdcodot Tov Kowar avapepovrat, Tap’ wy pudaT- rovrwv pepttovrat (cf. 1. 8 peplLovor) mpds éxdornv diolkyow* Karoo. 8 dmodéxras robrous kal raulas, also in an inscr. of 418/7 B.c. quoted in note on § 4, 6 Bao- revs. See Boeckh, 11 iv; Schémann, p. 417; Gilbert, i 226; and Dict. Ant. s.v.; Be ae, de Magistratibus Atticis, i 46—60.

wd kataBadAdpeva, xprpara évavrlov tis BovAys] CIA ii 807 col. 4 15, Todro kareBddouev dmrodéxrais in B.C. 330/293 4 30, in B.C. 329/8; 803 col. 2 93 and 138, 5 els BovAevTHptov KareBddoper, B.C. 360 and 363.

&Adlry KataBodryv] ‘fail to pay an instalment.’ Polyb. iv 60, 2, €AdeAot- révat Twa. Tay dpuviwy.

évravd’ éyyéypamrar] ‘it is entered in this document’; this seems preferable to évreDOev yéypamrat, ‘a note is made of it from this record’ (K.). éyypdgew is spe- cially applied to entering the names of state-debtors, Dem. 25 § 7o (cf. L and S, II 3).

Syoa kupla] In Dem. ¢. Zimocr. 98 the speaker argues that, owing to the law proposed by Timocrates, allowing debtors to the treasury to find securities instead of making prompt payments, the Bovd7y (as well as the dicacrypia) ceases to be kupla dfjoa. Cf. 45 § 1.

§ 2. pepl{ovor] cra ii 38, 18 (not later than Ol. 100=B.c. 380-), peploa dé 7d dpybprov—rovs drodéxras éx Tay KaTaBan- opevwy Xpynudruv eredav Ta ex TaY vomwy ueptowot, Lb. 181, Tods dé dmrodékras pepl[ca To dpxe]Oewpy bs dy del dpx[e]- Olewpjon 7d] dpydpov. 115 4 44, [7d apyliptov rotro meplfew z[lods darodléxras T@ Tapig Tod Shufou els rov] évaurdv Exar tov. 834 0 (B.C. 329/8) col. ii 3, 7d me- pioder els Ta épya map drobexrGy émord- rais’ENevalvobev. Pol. 1321 6 31, quoted above. Cf. Boeckh, i 210 n. a, Frankel.

peptopov] ‘the apportionment’; rarely found in this sense. For exx. see Ditten- berger, no. 344, 18, 21, 23.

aayl&t] rare in sing. Dem. 25 § 70 (of the record of a debt) 4 cavis % mapa TH Oe Keyuery.

mporiOéaciy] 44 § 3-

§ 3. Aoyorrds] ‘These are identical in name and number with those mentioned in 54 §2. Both bodies are appointed by lot; but the Aoyeral in the text are a

on

"

°

15

176 AOHNAIQN COL, 23, I. 42—s5. Aoyloupevous t[als aplyais Kata THy MpuTavelay éxdoTHV. KAy- podar 8& nal evOvvous, &va THs Puvdns éxdotys, Kal rapédpovs dvo Exdot@ Tov evOUver, ols dvayxatoy éote Tais alyoplais Kata Tov ema@vupor Tov THs hudHs éExdoTns KaOjaOat, Kav Tis Bov[Anrai]

‘ n ‘ 70/ 2 n if / 2, \ a Twt Tév Tas evOvas ev TO SixacTnpia SedwxdTwy, évTds TpLa@v

jlwepav ad] Hs éwxe Tas evOdvas, evOvvay, dv 7 idiay dv Te

16 rats d[yop]ais K (K-W): Tals edtvats H-L et B invita papyro. 17 éxdorns K, K-W; exacrov H-L; éxaoro[c]s B;

mapa van Leeuwen (K-W, H-L).

post 7 prior tantum pars litterae 7 vel o dispici potest.

KATA (K, B):

19 dv 7 ldlay dy re

Sypoolay optime Gertz (H-w, K%, édy 7’—édv 7’—H-L).

3§ 15; cf. ib. § 9) ol Tas evObvas Tov dupknuévwy exoylgovrac & typépats d, drav ras

apxas drodGvrat of dpxovres.. 6re Stadépover Tay edOuvay. Tapaxodovety rots Storxodow.

.duethexrat mepl roirwy Ap, év 7H ’AO. Trod., 6a Selxvuras Pollux viii 99: xal rovrous 4 Bovdy KAnpot Kar’ dpxyy ws

§4 “Harp. edOvvor :—déxa, Tov dprOuov 7 joay dvdpes, tap’ ols é6ldocav ol mpeaBeboavres

q dptavres q Stoxjoavrés Te Tey dnpogluy Tas edOdivas. dex Wy Ts.

774 'A@. wor. Phot. edOuvos: 6& dvo mapédpous (Frag. 4057, 445°).

Gtelhexrar wept abrav Ap. &y

& éxdorns 5é pudts eva Kdypodor* robrw

committee of the Council. They are there- fore to be distinguished from the board of Aoytoral, who, with their cvvyyopor, audit the accounts of all officials at the close of their term of office. The officials ap- pointed by lot are enumerated in c. 50— 643 ¢. 54, in which the Aoyioral are named, is introduced with the words: kAnpodor 6é kal rdode Tas dpxds. This implies that the officials in question have not been mentioned before. The existence of a committee of the Council, side by side with a board of the same name, appears to be supported by the analogy of the committee entitled of éri 7d Bewptxov tpnuévor (CIA ii 739), and the BovdAcurijs described as émt 7d Oewpixdy (CIA ii 114 ¢ 5), existing by the side of the official board of éri re Bewpucg. The double sense of Aoyioral is confirmed by Pollux vili 99, Aoyioral duo Foay 6 pay TAs Bouhfjs 6 6é ris dtouKyo ews, kal rovrous 7 Bovdy KAnpot kar’ dpxjv ws mapaxodovdeiy rots diockobow (Lipsius, Leipaig Verhandl. pp.

66, 67). Aoyoral Sto is the reading in Belker’s best Ms; the rest have dvo 8’,

making it refer to the dytvypageds (see 54 § 3)-

Tovs Aoyroupévous—mpuravelay é éxdo- Ty] Lys. 30 § 5, ol wey GAO THs abT Gv apy is kara mputavelav oyov dropépovar (dvapé- povot MSS). The text shews that this pas- sage was rightly understood by Schémann, as referring to the accounts which had to be presented to the Aoyioral, and not to the émixerporovla Tov apx@v (43§ 4). ‘dvadé- pevy nihil aliud esse potest quam quod alibi

dicitur do-yor éyypdew, hoc est perscrip- tam rationem ad eos,quibus ea examinanda est, deferre, quemadmodum ipsum Lysiam mox hoc verbo eyypdyat uti videmus, et Aeschines quoque daodépev Ad-yov mpds Tovs Aoyioras dicit, in Ctesiph.§ 22, eodem sensu quo paullo ante, § 20, Adyov éyypd- gew apds rods Noyioras dixerat’ (Opusc. Acad. i 295).

§4. evOvvous] ‘Examiners of accounts.’ Harp. in Zestém. At the audit of accounts by the board of Aoyoral, the e0Ouvor were entitled to bring charges against the brev@uvos. The assessors of the ed@uvor are mentioned in Andoc. De AZyst. 78, ow etOuval rwés elor kareyp wo mévat &y Tots Aoyorgptors bro Trav edOivwv Kai (7 MSS) T&v mapédpwv, and in cia 8094, Spertérw 6 ph moujoas, puplas Spaxpudas lepas 7H ’A@nva Kal 6 edOvvos Kal of mdpedpo érdvayxes avrav Karayvyvwo- xbvrwy 7 adrol ddehévrwv. In CIA ii §71 (B.c. 368), the ed@vvos (of a deme) is mentioned together with his mdpedpor; and 7. 578, the ed@uvos (of another deme) with the Aoyiorys and the cuv7yopor.

The text shews that, even after the audit had been passed, officials were liable to be prosecuted by private persons in respect to the manner in which they had discharged their duties. Cf. Lipsius in Leipzig Verhandl. pp. 66, 67.

tats dyopais] zc. at the regular meetings held by the several tribes for the transaction of tribal business. CIA ii 555, 7H Kupla dyope Kpopony Yydia- peévav Tal[y guderav] év ry dxporéret,

4

wm

CH. 48, 1]. 14—CH. 49, 1.1. TIOAITEIA

177 , S[npociav], éuBaréoOar, yparras eis mivdxiov AEedevewpévov Tod- f i a 4 ‘\ na Cs \ \ > tb me voua TO <Te> [avto]d nal Td Tod hevyortos Kal Té adixnu’ 6 re dv $ a \ , a n eyeany, kat Tiwnua [eroypayrd]uevos 6 te dv adt@ Sony, SiSwow TO evOdv@" 6 dé AaBav TobTo Kal d[vaxpivas], édv [wer] catayre, mapadidwcw Ta per lb. Tois Stxactais trois Kata S[npwous, rots] Thy \ a gudny tavTyy eiodyovow, Ta b& Snudora Tois Oecpobéralis erre-] ypadet, oi S& Oeopobérat, édv TapaddBwow, radu elcdyovow [Hv] edOvvav eis Td Sixactypsov, kal & Te av yvaow ot Sixact[ai, tovTo KU|ptov éott. 49. Soxipdter dé Kal tors tarmous 7 Bound, Kav wey Tis Kadov 21 76 avrof Blass, Richards, H-L, K3; 76 re avroO K-Ww. 22 [érvypapd uevos Wyse, Lipsius (K*); [érvypayd]uevos H-L, B; ¥[roypad]éuevos K-w, sed v valde incer- tum putat K. dldwoe H-L. 23 d[vaxplvas] Wayte, Lipsius: d[vayvovs] Blass, K-W, H-L, K*, quamquam vel propter proximum xarayv@ suspectum ; d[xovcas] K}, pev secl. K-w, B. 24 legendum fortasse 74 wey fia rapadidwotv, alioqui in altero

membro verbum languet. Tols Thy B; of Thy cet. 25 EICAPOYCIN K, H-L, B: dixafovow coni. Richards, Thompson (K-w). [ava]ypdge: K, H-L; [éy}ypddec

Lipsius ; [érc]ypagde: B; [rlunua 8” vrolypdpet K-w, sed spatium non sinit. 28 roiro kipidy éore van Leeuwen (K-W, H-L, K%, B).

youct H-L.

26 elod-

XLIX 1—2 kadov Urmovy K-w (K3, B); xad[@s wv] K! qui nunc in papyro ONI

agnoscit; xardoracw Wyse (H-L).

5544, év 7H dyopa (of the tribe Pandi- onis), 564, drav d-yopay momow (Gilbert, i192).

dy 7’...dv re] Kiihner, § 541.

éuBaréoOar] of formally ‘putting in’ a document, Dem. p. 1014, 25, éuBeBrn- Hévos ovdeulay paprupiay, 1104, 6; 1203, 26, éuBadrouevou yap éuob tov épxop els Tov éxivov. ;

tlunua émiyparsdpevos] Arist. Plt. 480, rl dfrd cou riunp’ éreypayw 77 Olky; Lex ap. Aeschin. 1 § 16, riunua é7e- ypapduevos. Dem. 29 § 8, rav émcye- ypaupéver (‘the damages claimed’) ért- eyoay.

§5. dvaxp(vas—Katayv@] The exami- nation of the accounts by the Aoyoral and ouvyyopo. is described as an dvdxpuots. Ar. ap. Lex. Rhet. Cant. s.v. doyoral, (cuvyyopot) cvvavaxplvover robrous (sc. Tots Aoyiorais). For the general use of dva- kplyw, as applied to the official conducting an dvdxpiots, cf. Dem. Olymp. 31, 6 Epxwy dvéxpwe maow hiv rots dudic- Byrodow, and Isaeus, Drcaeog. 32, dva- xplvayres Huds modddxis of Starryrai. Cf. 56 § 6 (ypagdal and dixat) ds dvaxplvas els 7d Sixagrhpiov elod-yer. The statement that the dvdxpicis was also called an dvdywors rests on a wrong reading in Dem. 53 § 22. The object of an dvdxpists was to determine by a preliminary exami-

S. A.

nation, ef &dws elod-yew xp7 (Harp. s.v.).

Sixacrais...xard Srpous| 16 § 5; 26 § 33.53. |

THY hvdHy rairny elordyourt] 53 § 2, mapadidbacr...rots THY PuAY TOD Pev-yovTos Ouxdgovew, 58 § 2, rods Thy pudty duxd- fovras, Lys. Pancl. 2, rods 7H ‘Imro- Owvrldt dixdfovras, and Isaeus frag. 1, 8re mpds Tiy pudqv Tod KexTnwevov al mpds Sovrovs AayxXdvovrac Sika: (Meier and Schémann, p. go x. Lips.).

émvypader] Aeschin. 1 § 35, uéxpe mev- THKovTa dSpaxuav xab’ exacrov ddlknua émvypapew Tois mpdKropow.

One of the other suggestions, éyypade., is supported by Aeschin. 3 § 20, Aédyov éyypapew mpos Tos Aoyords, Lys. 30 § 5, Dem. 24 § 199, Arist. Vesp. 996 (Lipsius).

The construction is slightly irregular, as a principal verb is not wanted, wapa- didwor being the verb to both clauses— wev and 6é. The irregularity is removed by striking out wév, but this involves a needless hiatus and is not absolutely Necessary. ,

8 re dv—kipidv éore] Cf. c. 45, 1. 10.

XLIX § 1. Soxipdfer—rodts tarovus] Xen. Oec. ix 15, 4 BovdA} tous . kai imméas Soxipate, Hipparch. i 8, (4 1é6Xs) mpocérate TH Bovdy cuwvemimedcioOat Toi immexod, and ili g—14. A fatera from Orvieto, now in the Berlin Museum,

12

20

25

wm

178

‘

AOHNAIQN COL. 25,1. 55—COL. 26, |. 10.

Ummov éy]ov ands Sox tpépew, Enusot TO citw, tots S€ pn Svvapevors [axor]ovbeiv, 4 wn Oérovor pévety aGvay<w@yols> ovat, tpoxov éml thy yv[d0ov émriBadret, ab 6 Tlobto wabav adoxiués

éort, Soxpager 8 cat rors mp[od]p[ouous, Saou dv aluTn Soxa|low [Col

> ‘ t a v > 39 t , emiTndecor Tpodpomevey eivat, Kav TLY aTroXELpOTOVHGN, KaTaBeé- 3 dxodovdeiy Wyse (K3, B) ; Tpépew K}, rpéxew: Campbell, K-w, H-L. bédovee Ar (vel AA) K, B. MENEIN ANASPOYCI; Hever, dvaypdgouo. Campbell; peévew, ériBdddovar R D Hicks; pévew dvay<dryos> ofot H-L (K%); pévew adr’ dvdyovot B (intrans. certe usurpatur in Arist. Av. 383, 400, 1720 et Xen. Cyr. vii 1, 45 dvayaydy éorpa- tomedevcaro, sed non de equis dictum); (post @é\ovow) onpetov émiBdddovor K-W. 4 yvd0ov Hicks coll. Hesych. s.v. rpvotrmeoy; érlBaddover post pévew posuit Hicks, post yvdOov H-L (K3), sed (ut videtur) novem tantum litteris locus relictus ; praestat igitur émBddree (B). [kal 6 rJofro K, H-L, B: [kal 6 trmos 6 r]ofro (post yd- Gov) K-w. 5 olrwes K!; of dy K® (H-L); [kplvovca, of dly <at>r7q K-w sed spatium non sufficit: 80: dv K3 (B); inter rpodpépous et avr® sex septemve litterarum spatium superest. 6 TInatT[po]y (ut infra, v. 7): Tw’ dwox. J B Mayor, Camp- bell, Wyse, Blass, etc. K-wW, H-L, kK’.

TESTIMONIA. XLIX 4 Hesych. rpvolamov et trou rpoxés, infra exscriptus. Phot. Urmov tpoxés: 7d Tpvalrmov 6a 7d Tois 5a yfpas éexrpuxwhetow Immo extvToicbar Tpoxdv, drodeyovrwy abrovs TOY oTparryGv.

represents three horsemen in chlamys and petasus leading their horses by the bridle past two standing figures who examine them as they pass. A third figure is seated and is entering memoranda on a scroll resting on his knees. In the centre is a lmmoroéérns standing beside his horse. The subject is doubtless a trmwv dox- pacla (Archaeol. Zeitung, 37, 1880, pl. 15; Duruy, Hist. d. Grecs, ii p. 1773 Daremberg and Saglio, s.v. Dokimasia, p- 3273 Schreiber’s Bilderatias,i 40, 7). On the doxiacta of the lame?ts and their horses, see Martin, Zes Cavaliers Athéniens, pp. 328—334.

rots pt] Suvapévors dkodovbety xr.) Xen. Mem. iii 3, 4, éav odv...rapéxwvrat cot.rovs Uarmous ol ev otrws kaxérodas 7 Kakookenels 9} dobeveis Wore wy SUvacOae adKorou ety, ol 5¢ obrwsdvaywyous wore ph wévery brov ay ov rdéps...7l cor Tod larmixod bpedos tora; Hipparch. i 13, rous...lrméas 4 Bovhh dv pot Soxe? mpoe- motoa ws...roy wh Suvdpevov trrov adkodovdety dmrodoxidoe, émireivac av Tpépew Te duewvor kal érimeeto Par paddov rav Inruv. dvdywyos is also an epithet of ‘unmanageable’ dogs in Jem. iv 1, 3.

tpoxsv-——tmPdddea] Hesych. s. v. tpuolrmov' Tov xXapaxriipa Tov bd ris Bovdfs év rats Soxiwaclas rots dduydros kal rerpuppévois <rdv tmmrwy émiBadro- pevov addidit Petitus>, tva puyxére orpa- revuvTat, TO Tadatdy éxddouv rpualmmor * rpoxds 5° qv 6 ériBadddpevos Xapaxrhp TH yvd0w Tov trrwv. Hesych. trmou rpoxés*

Tav yeynpaxdow lrmos éxdparrov émt thy wd0ov onpetov, Tpoxod oxjpa éxov. éxa- Retro 6¢ Kal rpvolrmov. Aelius Dionys. apud Eustath. ad Od. iv 562, p. 1517, 8, tpvolrmov’ éyxavpa trmou yeynpaxéros éml tis yvdbou, Suorov rpoxy. Crates, Srag. 30 (Kock i 140), tm ynpdoxorre Ta pelova KiKN émiBadde, quoted by Zenob. iv 41,...mer@xrat 6¢ dard orparis- tikav Urry, ols ynpdoxovow éméBaddov 7d Kadovpevov Tpvolrmov* erre 5é TovTO ainpots rpoxickos...6v éxmupoivres éé- Baddov rats crayéor tov trmwv. Eupolis 318 (Kock i 343) GAN womep tmp pot "riBadrets tpvolrruv; Cf. Photius s.v. tpvoinmiov and trrov rpoxés, and Pollux vii 186. As suggested by Kaibel and Wilamowitz, most of the above expla- nations probably rest ultimately on a scholium on the Zaxzarchi of Eupolis founded on the present passage. arpoSpépous] ‘mounted skirmishers.’ The term is applied by Hdt. to ‘ horse- men in advance of an army.’ Xen. Hipparch.i 25, uses it of ‘javelin-men’ under the command of a cavalry officer : el ros audi oe mpodpbuous Koounoats pev Smdots ws KddAdora, dxovritey dé uederav étavaykdoas ws pddiora, xTh. In the march of Alexander to the Granicus, the Paeonians formed a special corps of mpé- Spouot for purposes of reconnoitring (Arr. An.i12,7; Droysen, Kriegsalterthiimer, P+ 117, 3): apodpopedve] not found elsewhere. kataBéBykev] ‘dismounts’ (as dis-

CH. 49, 1. 2—17. TIOAITEIA 179 Bnxev odtos. Soxyudfer 88 kal Tos duimrous, dv tw’ aroyerpo-

2 tovyion, Téravtas picOopopady odtos. Tods 8 imméas KaTadéyou- ow of KaTaXoyels, ods dv 6 Efpos yetpotovijan Séxa dvdpas: ods & av xataréEwor, mapadiddac ois immapyxous Kal pudrdpyous, obToL d¢ mapadaBovtes eiagépovar t[ov] Karddoyov eis tiv Boudry, cal Tov tivax avoikaytes, ev @ KaTaceonmacpéeva TA dvopata Tov imtéwy éari, Tovs wey eEopvupévovs Tdv mpdtepov eyyeypappevov pn Suvatods elvar tois cdpacw immevew eEareipovor, Tovs bé karetheypevous [K]adodou, Kav wév tis eEopoontrar pn Svvacbat Te 35 odpare immevew 7 Th ovoig, rodrov ddd, Tov Sé pun) éEouvdpevor Siayecpotovodatw ot Bovrevtai, wétepov émitndetos eat immevew

~

°

7 ANITTTTOYC: Gularmous Newman, Wyse, Blass, K-w, H-L, K% 12 TTINAKANOIZANTEC: mivak dv. K-w, B; mivaxa dy. K, H-L. 13 ENTeErp.

(ut supra, v. 6). k(aTa)CECHCM(EN)ACM(EN) a. K, H-L; éfourvdnrat K-W (B).

TINATTPOX

15 EZOMHCHTAL: eLoudonra

qualified); used differently in [Dem.] 42 § 24 of giving up riding, caraBéByxev amd Tov tru.

dplwrous] ‘infantry fighting in the ranks of the cavalry.’ Thuc. v 57, 2, (of the Boeotians at Delium) 6ém)?ra, yrrol, lars and dummoa. Xen. Hell. vii 5, 24 (Epameinondas) dylasous mwefgovs owératey avrois (=r@ lrmix@); the oppo- site side was épnuov refOv aulrmwv (23); the mss have in both cases dvimm., corrected by Morus. Xenophon recom- mends their use: Hipparch. v 13, doGeves 70 mefav epnuov immuxdy mpds TO dulrmous mefous Exov. Harpocr. s.v....0t abv trots orparevouevot...unmore (perhaps) mpédpo- pol twés elow of dua rots lmmefor TeTay- pévor Bidbxopos -yodv év rH S-’ prot Kal mpodphuous. Ar., in Pol. 1321a@ 17, speaks of generals of ouvdud{ovor mpds thy inm«hy Stvayw Kal omderikhy Thy apudrroveay Tav Yrdav. Cf. Martin, Les Cavaliers Athéniens, p. 410.

§ 2. ofkaradoyeis] These officials (who bear thesame nameas the caradoyels under the Four Hundred, Lys. 30 § 13, but are not mentioned elsewhere) are described as employed in drawing up the roll of the cavalry; they hand it over to the Hip- parchi and Phylarchi, to be brought by them before the Council. The fact that the Bovdy conducted the doxiuacia of the immeis was already known (Xen. Occ. ix 15). In Lys. 14 § 10, "AAKiBiddys érdd- Byoev dvaBrva.... obre Ud’ duwy Soxiuac- Gels, the pronoun loosely identifies the dicacral with the Bovdevral. The text

shews that no proceedings before a law- court were involved in a doxiwacla larméwy.

The term karddoyos is applied to the official list of the imme?s in Lys. 16 § 13 (of Mantitheus), rporeA Oa 2pyv re ’OpOo- Boddy (doubtless his Phylarchus) éfaretwat be x TOU Karaddyou, 2b. § 6, robs pudrdp- xous dreveyketv rovs immedoavras. The Hipparchi, as well as the Phylarchi, were responsible for the xardoyos, as had al- ready been pointed out by Bake, Scholica Hypomnemata, v 150, 170: the text shews that it was drawn up in the first instance by the caranoyeis.

tov mlvak’] The xarddoyos of the trweis under the Thirty is described as drawn up on a cavidtoy (Lys. 16 § 6) or cavlées, Lys. 26 § 10, ws irmevxdros adrod él rév tpidxovra Ttotvoua év tais cavlow éveyéypamro.

karaceonpacpéva] Plat. Leg. 756 E, (in the scheme proposed for the appoint- ment of the Bovdj) Ta Karacnuarbévra évéuara ékeveyxeiv tods apxovras ldety mao Tots toNlrats.

opvupevous] Pollux viii 55 (efwuoola) bray ris H mpecBeurys alpebels 7 em’ dANny twa Snuoclay vanpectay, dppworeiv | ddu- varelv pdoxey éfouviyrat avros 7 dv’ érépov. Schol. on Arist. gic ee F

é apuevov] Lys. 26 § 10, quote Pc: § 6 (as emended by Mark- land). Arist. Zy. 1371, 6wAlrys évredels év KaTadoyy éyyeypawera.

éEarelpovor] Lys. 16 § 7, ék Todrwy (the lists of trmefs under the Thirty) pddvov Fv ekarerpOfvar TO Bovropevy.

12—2

180

AOHNAIQN COL, 26, 1, 10—20.

ay a \ , ’ , > \ , ? 88 H ov" Kav pév yelpoTovncwow, éyypdovow els Tov Tivaka, ei Oé f by, Kal todrov addudow. wv éxpivev O€ Tote Kal TA Tapadeiywata Kal Tov Témdov 7 BovrAn, 3 vov 5€ 70 Sixacthpiov TO Aaxov' eSoKovv yap odToL KaTayapiterOas \ # lol t a n n y” a > THY Kpicw, Kal Ths wornoews TOY Nixdv, kal Tov dOdwv Tav eis a f Eel Ta VavaOnvara, cvverripedcitas peta ToD Tapiov THY oTpaTLO-

a TLKODV.

Soxipater dé Kab Tors dduvatous 7 Bovdy’ vowos yap éatev ds 4

20 expe H-L.

k(at) TON K, K-W, H-L: 74 els rév B.

§ 4 *Harp. ddvvarot:...ol evrds rpiav wv Gv Kexrnpevot 7d Gua wennpwpévor [remnpw- pévov codd. praeter E (Suid.), ubi of remnpwpdvor 7d cOua; 7o 5¢ cua memnpwmevor

§ 3. mapa8elypara] Of the architect’s plan for the temple at Delphi, Hat. v 62. The construction of such a rapdderypa is illustrated by an inscr. cited by Homolle, Les Archives de l' Intendance Sacrée a Dé- los, p. 13,0. 4: els TO wrapddevypa, TOD mpo- mbdov tivaxa jyopdcapev mapa Xpyoluov AH. émurkevdcavre Tov mlvaxa Oeodjuwe Hh. Aeukdoavri rév rlvaxa duporépwley Hr. The wood used for the zivaé is also men- tioned : rod polvcxos Tov mepryevouevou d7rd Tob mapadelyparos (Wyse, Class. Rev. v 2756). Cf. CIA ii 807 4 ror (B.C. 330), Tapaderyua Tay Kepayldwy tov éml riv oxevoOykny and 2b. 126, mw. tdAwov Tis Tprytgou Tis &vxatcews. The last item recurs in B.C. 325, 2d. 809 col. ¢ 8, and in B.C. 324, 20. 811 col. d 193.

tov métdov] woven by épyacrivat, under the superintendence of two dppy- gp and certain priestesses. In CIA ii 477 we have an inscr., ascribed to B.c. 98, referring to a proposal to dedicate to Athene a silver giddy with 100 dr. on the part ray mrapOévwv Tov jpyacpévay TH "AOnvG Ta epia ra, els Tov wérAov. These were the epyacriva: al rdv wérdov dpal- vovoat(Hesych.). In cia ii 956, 957,957 4, we have lists of épyagriva: (one of them containing more than 100 names) arranged under their respective tribes, many of them belonging to the Evrarplia (Bull. Corr. Hellén. xiii 170; Mittherl. viii65). A new peplus was made every year (Schol. Arist. £q. 506). The loci classici are collected in Michaelis, Parthenon, Anhang 11 §§ 151 —164, 17I—3, P- 328-9. Suidas, s. uv. éemudyaro, describes the dppypdpor as se- lected by the archon BaotAevs, while Har- pocr., s. v dppyndopetv, states that four dppnpbpo exetporovodyro d’ ev-yéverav, and two of these éxplvovro to superintend the mémdos. The text shews that the appoint- ment was ultimately transferred to a law-

court to secure an impartial selection.

viv 8& +d Sixacriptov] The date of this transfer to a law-court of duties for- merly entrusted to the Council is uncer- tain. The wapdderypa of the oxevolyjxn designed by Philo was expounded in pub- lic by the architect himself :—Cic. de Or. i 62, ‘Philonem illum architectum, qui Atheniensibus armamentarium fecit, con- stat perdiserte Zopz/o rationem operis sui reddidisse’; Val. Max. viii 12, 2, ‘ Phi- lonem...rationem institutionis suae in theatro reddidisse constat.’ It was con- structed between B.C. 347/6 and 330/29.

The fact that the exposition took place before the ‘people,’ ‘in the theatre,’ is suggestive of a meeting of the éxxAyola rather than one of the BovAj. It is cer- tainly inconsistent with an appearance before a dixacrnptov. There is more evi- dence for the theatre being used for meet- ings of the éxxdyola (Miiller’s Biihknen- alterthiimer, p. 73) than for those of the Bovdy. The only evidence for the latter is CIA ii 482, B.C. 39—32.

Thus, the above passages respecting Philo suggest that the duty of deciding on mapadelypara was in his time not yet transferred to a law-court; on the other hand, they do not refer to any hearing before the Council.

Nukav] 47 § 1.

tay d@\ov] The musical, gymnastic, and equestrian contests. Among the minor contests were those in evavdpla (60 § 3), the Pyrrhic dance and the Lampa- dedromia (see Michaelis, Parthenon, Anh. II §$§ 46—130, and Smith, Dict. Ant. s. v. Panathenaea). The special officials were the ten Athlothetae (60 § 1), who received subsidies from the raylat iepdv xpnpdruv Tis A@nvatas (CIA i 188, 1—7).

taplov Tay oTpatiatiKay] 43 § I-

§ 4. tots dSuvdrovs] Schol. Aeschin.

5

TIOAITEIA

CH. 49, 1. 18—CH. 50, 1. 2. 181

‘ D an a KeeveL TOUS evTOS TPLOY pYdY KEKTHUEVOUS, Kal TO dua TeTNpW- pévous date pn Svvacbar pndev epyov épyalecOar, Soxiyudteww ev thy Bovrnv, SiSdvat S¢ Snuocia tpopiy Sv0 dBorods éxdot@ THs re npepas. , > \ tA ,

kal Tauias éotly adtois KANpwTos.

avvdvorxed 8 Kal tails dddaws apyais Ta TreicO’, ws mos elaretv.

50. tad pév ov bd tis Bourys Suotxodpeva tad éartiv.

a Ni XN. © a 2 \ , y a y

KAnpovvras S€ cal iepav émickevactal déxa avépes, of KapBa-

28 5u’ 6Bodods K-w, B: Sto 68odods cum pap. K, H-L. 31 ouvé.oxet—elrety delet Herwerden utpote ‘ex capitis 47 initio maximam partem repetita, hic autem

incommoda’: eadem recte idcirco retinet K, quod talia Senatus officia nondum omnia sint commemorata.

post Bekkerum Dind.]. éAduBavov 6€ odrot Soxiuacbevres brd THs BouvdATs So éBodrovs Tis hpepas éxdorns [7 dBorsv], ws pyow ’Ap. év’AO. rod. Bekk. Ax. 345, 15 (cf. 200, 3): of pépos Te BeBrappevar Too odyaros ws wydé EpydserOat* of Kal éxopnyodvTo Ta mpds TO (fv mapa rhs mbdews, prcGopopovvTww abray (ad’rots cod.) ws (rdv cod.) évros tpiav pvav (om. cod.) meprouclay xexrnévwr. Soxisdfovro dé ol ddtvara. bd THs THY mevraxocluy Bovdns Kal éhduBavov THs Tuépas, ws uev Avaolas Aéyer, Boddy eva, ws

5e Dirdxopos, mwévre, "Ap. 5¢ Svo0 epy. *Arrixois.

Hesych. ol évrés xexrynuévor tpiav pvav mapa €\duBavov &é rapa r7s Boudys Svo dBodous (Frag. 4307, 470°).

i103, Kava pia (apuravelay?) éx Tod 5y- poolou dléora: rots dduvdrous moNlrais pic- 66s" dduvdrous 5¢ rdvras Né-youct Tovs drrwa- Snmorody Hx pewyevors mpds Emexouplay éav- Trav, At first it was only citizens who were disabled in war that received relief from the state. This institution is ascribed to Peisistratus in Plut. Sol. 31, 6 vduos 6 Tods wnpwhdvtas év mohéup Snuoola tpé- gew kehedwy. This limitation was after- wards removed. It is clear that the speaker in Lys. 24, brép tod dduvdrou, had never seen any service in the field ; otherwise he would have mentioned the fact (Gilbert, i 329). The speech is ad- dressed to the Bovdy on the occasion of an eloayyeMa. The Bovdy are there de- scribed as having given the grant (§ 7, ore, and in more general terms § 22, médat kowy rdvres ore wor). The grant had to be confirmed by each successive Bovdj, as implied in § 26, rH adrhy Yio OéoGe wep éuod rats dddaus Bovdais. It rested ultimately on a decree of the People, § 22,4 wédus qyuiv éyydioaro rodro 7d dpybpov, but it does not follow that the case of each recipient was settled by decree.

BY} Sivacbar pySiv epyov epydLeo Par] Lys. 24 § 6, réxvqu xéxrnuat Bpaxéa Suva- bevy dpedely qv abros wer Hon XadeTas épydvouat.

Soxiudfev] The fact is stated by

Harpocr., Bekker’s Amecd. Gr. 345, 18, and Suidas.

8vo dBodots] Hence in Harpocr. s. uv. dduvaro. the words 4 dBoddv must be struck out (as was suggested by Hulle- man, Quaestiones Graecae, p. 5). The text is correctly quoted in Bekker’s Anecd. Gr. 345, 15+

toplas] In B.C. 343/2, CIA ii 114, there were two BovAjjs raular. They su- perintended ra card Yydlouara dvadioxd- peva TH BovdAp (114 B61). Early in the third century we have an inscr. mention- ing only one; CIA ii 329 Nexoxpdrys Bov- Aevew Aaxwy—Kal raulas alpefels bd rhs BovaAfs els re Tas Ovolas TOUS........000+ ow pepuéptxey rots leporotots—xal dep Grdvrav ay gxovbunkey drodedbyiorae TH Bovdf dp0as Kai dixalws (Gilbert, i 254); cf. ii 431, 36.

§ 5. cvvdvorKei—mactoO’] 47 init.; 57 § 1, ws 8 eos elreiv—Storxel ovros macas.

ws eros elaretv] c. 2 w/t, ws eleiv, 57 § 1, Ws eros edetv.

L—LIII. Ox minor officials appointed

by lot.

L $1. tepdv émxevacral] ‘re- pairers of temples’; not mentioned else- where. The small sum allowed for this department (30 minae) implies that their duties were unimportant. The word is used in an unofficial sense in Dem. Androt.

69.

30

wm

Io

182 AOHNAIQN

COL.-26, 1, 20—31. t a \ A > A 2 , \ VOVTES TPLaKOVTA pyas Tapa THY atro[be|KTaY, émioKevalovawy Ta padiota Sedueva tav iepav, Kal dotuvdpot Séxa. TovTwv é2 mévre [yer] dpyovow év Vepaset, wévte 8 ev adores, nal tas Te avrntpibas Kal Tas Wadrtpias [Kai] Tas KiOaprotpias ovTOL oKo- Toda, OTrws un Trelovos %. Sveiv Spaxpaiy picOwOnoovra, Kav / \ ’ A x a La 8 fal a trelous THY avtTHY aTrovddcwar NaBeiv, obTOL Staxdnpodat Kal TH AayovTs pcOodcw. Kal dTws TOY KoTpoAGywY pNdels évTds SéKa atabdiov rod relyous KataBarei Kompov éripedodvTal, Kal Tas £ A v a. , € \ a € a 680s KwAvover KaToLKodopeiv, Kat Spupakrous imép Tév dddv L 3 ériocxevdfoves H-L. alc Apaym... (fortasse dpaxuaiy scriptum erat); dvetv Spaxuats idcirco retinet K quod in titulis Atticis dvefy cum plurali tantum iunctum sit, Meisterhans, p. 1627; dveiy cTa Spaxuaty K-w!, B; duoiv dpaxpaiy H-L, K-w?. 9 ENTOCIAIWN: &rés t cradlav

J E B Mayor (K-w, H-L, kK, B), évrds ¢ cradlwy <dmwd>malebat van Leeuwen. 10 KATABAaAH! ? ante corr. ETTIMEAONTAI.

6 TreIpael (K-W, B): Ilespacet K, H-L. 7 AYEIN

TESTIMONIA. L § 2 *Harp. dordvouos:...déxa gnow elvat rods doruvbuous Ap. év 77 7AO. won., ‘‘révre wey ev Tletpace?, wévre 8 ev dare.” rovros dé dyow pédew mepl re Tov avdAnTrpliwy Kat WadrrpiGy xal tiv Korpodbyuv Kal rev Tovovrw (Frag. 4087, 4483). Heraclidis epitom. Rose, Frag. 611, 8, xal trav 6d0v émipedodvrar

Orws uh Teves KaToKobopGow adtas 4 Opupdxrous Uireprelywow.

dmodekrav] 48 §§ 1, 2.

§ 2. dorvvdpor] Pol. 1321 4 18, érépa & empédea.., 9 Tov wept 7d doru Snpoclwy Kal lilwv, drws evKoopula 7, Kal TOY minrévrwy olkodounudruv’ Kal odav cw- Tnpla kat ddpOwors kal ray dplwy Tay mpods addAHAous... Kadodar & doruvoulay ol wrei- oro Thy ToaUrny apxyv, tb. 1331 bg Thy kadoupévyny doruvoulay. The fact that the dorvvduo. were appointed by lot is stated in Dem. 24 § 112. Cf. Gilbert, i 245, and Haderli, de Astynomen und Agoranomen (Teubner) 1886.

abdnrplSas] Hyperides, ii 4, 3, rAelovos picbobvres ras abdynrplias 7 6 vdmos Kedeve, Cf. Plato, Protag. 347 D (of the cupmrécca Tav patruv kal dyopalwy dvOpmmwv) ovTot tiutas Tooter Tds adAyTpldas, ToAdOD pio- Oovpevor ddroTplay purty Thy Trav aiduv. —6Orov dé xadol xdyabol cuumdrat Kai tre- madevpevor elaly, ovx dv tdos ore abdA7- rpldas obre dpynorplias ofre Wadrplas. The avaAnrpls (as well as the xOdpa) is to be seen at the symposium, in Schreiber’s Bilderatlas, i 76, 2 and 4; and the x- Oapiorpla and the Wadrpla in the mural paintings from the Farnesina garden in Baumeister’s Denkméler, figs. 1605, 1609.

kompoAdyov «rd.] Arist. Frag. 662 Kock, xompodoyet xépivov AaBdv. Schol. Dem. Zimocr. 735, 16, doruvdpos 6 Trav

Snpoclww émipedovevos Kal Tod Kabapdv elvac THv wodw. Cf. Wachsmuth, Stadt Athen, ii 282.

was Sots} A decree relating to the Peiraeus which was proposed by De- mades in B.C. 320(Ditt. no. 337) assigns to the dyopavouor some of the duties of the dorwéyo—requiring them émpednOfvat Tov ddav Tay Tharewy... eravaryKkasovruy 6é kal rods rdv xobv (rubbish) xaraBeBdy- kéras els Tas 6600s mdvras dvaipely Tpbrw ory dv erlorwvrat...uh ebeivar undert pire xovv KaraBdddew pyre dAdo pndev pyre Kompov mire €v ry dryopG wir’ év rails ddois Bndapyot. Cf. Meier and Schémann, p. 105—8 Lipsius.

KaroiKkodopety] [Xen.] de Rep. Ath. iii 4, Set 52... Seadixdtew ef ris... kaTorxodomet Tu nudcrov. The general superintendence of buildings has been ascribed to the derv- vouot on the analogy of the provisions suggested in Plat. Leg. 763 Cc, Trav re dduv éripedovpevor... Kal TG olkoSomiay. Cf. Polyaen. iii 9, 30, "Iduxpdrys év drople Xpnudruv Erewev "AOnvaious ra brepéxovTa Tov olkodounudruv és ras Snuoclas ddovs dmroKxdrrew 7} wumpdaKkew KTd.

Spuddkrovs] Balconies projecting from the fronts of houses. (Lat. maenzana, like that of the casa del balcone pensile at Pompeii; forbidden at Rome in A.D. 368

CH. 50, 1. 3—CH. 51, 1.4.

TIOAITEIA

183

if /. ae \ , ? \ fQ\ a” vw

brepteivev, Kal axeTovs peTempous eis THY Oddy Expouy éxov[Tas] a \ ‘ i lag

movi, Kal Tas Oupidas eis THy Oddv avotyew' Kai Tos év Tais

€ an hd an

odois arroyuyvoueévous avatpodauy, Exovtes Snuocious varnpéras.

51.

aévte & eis aotu.

KAnpodvTar S€ Kal ayopavopmo., révTe wey eis Iletpacéa, rovros be bre TOY vo“wv MpooTéTaKTaL THY

alviely émipercicOar wavtwv, OTws Kabapa Kal axiBdnra Te-

Anrac.

TESTIMONIA. LI § 1 * Harp. dyopavduor: of card tiv dyopav dua Stoodyres dpxovres...’Ap. 5 év ’AQ. trod. KAnpodobal pyot ‘wévre pev els Tletpaid, wévre 6é els

dor” (Frag. 409%, 4495).

and again by Honorius and Theodosius.) Schol. Arist. Vesp. 386 Sptpaxrov 7a viv raBAwrd (raBdduara Schol. Ey. 675) Kadotpeva, TA TOV olkodopnudrwr ebéxovTa toda, cf. 349 and 830 with Schol. éxerovs KTA.] the Aadpa: of Arist. Pax 99; cf. Wachsmuth, Stadt Athen, p. 284-5.

Oupibas els trv 68dv dvolyeww] Oupls is usually a ‘window,’ as in de Anima 404 a4and Probl. 913 @ 10, at did trav Aupl- dwv axtives, also in Arist. Vesp. 379, and Thesm. 797, €« Ovplos mapaximrTwper, Plut. Dion 57, mpds tats Odpas Tod olkov kai rais Ouptow, and Mor. 522 (de Curiosi- tate 13). The same meaning can be re- tained in Plat. Rep. 359 D, tov xakobv, kotdov, Ouplias éxovra, Kad’ ds éyxipavra Wetv évdvra vexpov, cf. Lucian, Hermo- timus, 20, Tov apxiréxrova émémAnge Tov “Heaorov, dudre wy Kal Oupldas émolnoev aitg Katd 70 orépvov, ws dvameracbecav xtd., and Plut. Mor. 2, 273 B, dud rl wd- Aqv play Ouplda xadrodor(riy yap pavécrpay Tolro onpatvew) and 2b. did Oupldos mpoxv- aca. I can find no passage in which Oupls meansthesame as #vpa. In Land S @upis is defined as a diminutive of @¥pa; but, of the two passages quoted, the first (Plato, /.¢.) is inconclusive, and in the second (Plutarch 7. ¢.) it certainly means a ‘window.’ In a Greek house the principal windows were in the peristyle, and any that looked into the street were on the upper storey. We must suppose that windows with shutters opening outwards on to the street were prohibited. Possibly such shutters were considered dangerous in the event of their being loosened by the wind and falling into the street.

The author of the Occonomica, 2, 1347 a6, says of Hippias, rd drepéxovra ruv breppwrv els Tas Snpoclas ddods Kal Tods dvaBabuovs kal rad mpoppdyuara, Kal Tas Otpas ras dvoryouévas téw érbdnoev (taxed, cf. Wachsmuth, Stad¢ Athen, ii 286); and Plutarch, Popiic. 20, infers from

the comic poets that in former days the doors of Greek houses usually opened outwards. Mr Kenyon, who regards

Oupls as synonymous with @pa, supposes -

that the adoruvéuo prohibited this. If so, it must have been in defiance of the daru- vouo. that the doors of Athenian houses, in the time of the Attic comedy, ‘ habitu- ally opened outwards.’ The fact is far from certain, but it does not concern us here, unless @upls is to mean the same as Opa, an opinion which, in the light of the general usage of Greek authors, we can hardly accept.—Oupidas and @upas are, however, sometimes confounded in Mss (see apparatus criticus to Aesch. 1 § 74, guykAgjovet Tas Odpas, where one MS has Oupldas).

dvatpoto] ‘take up for burial,’ Arist. Vesp. 386, Xen. Anad. vi 4, 9

LI § 1. dyopavépor] Pol. 13216 12, mpOrov wev oby érimédeca Tov dvayKatwy 9 wept Thy dyopdv, ep’ F Sel tia. dpxny elvac Thy épopdcav wepl re Ta cupBddraca Kai tiv edxooulay, and 12994 17. Lys. 22 kara T&Y otroTwray, § 16, éwl per Tots Gots dvlos darace Tods d-yopavéduous Kare- orhoare. In Dem. 24 Zémocr. § 112 the dyopayduos, as well as the doruvduos, is described as holding a kAnpwrhy apxjv. Arist. Vesp. 1407, Ach. 724, 968 and Schol. on 896; Xen. Symp. ii. 20. Cf. Meier and Schémann p. 101—4 Lipsius; Schémann, Azz. p. 416; Biichsenschiitz, Besitz u. Erwerb, p. 536; Gilbert, i 246; Haderli, die Astynomen und Agoranomen.

émupeActoOat...dmws...rodyrat] At the end of the next sentence the papyrus has émipedeioGat followed by drws xpjowvTat. In the inscriptions of the fourth century against 37 exx. of émws dy c. subj. we have only one of émws, CIA ii 115, 45 (Ditt. no. 106), émedeio@ar...darws... koulowvra: in the same inscr. drs dy occurs twice (Meisterhans, p. 2127). Cf. 29 § 3. In this respect the usage of in-

184 AQHNAIQN COL. 26, l. 31-42.

lf / \ Kdypodvras S& Kai petpovdpos, TévTe wey eis dot, TévTe é 2 eis Tlevpavéa: cal obrot Tov pérpwv Kal Thy cTAOpav erripeobvTat f mavrav, dTws of TwrodvTes ypnoovTas SiKaiors. 3 joa dé Kab octodraxes KAnpwTol, TévTe pev eis Terparéa, 3 , S > wv a 8 y BS > wy is 8 ? mévte 8 eis dotu, viv & elxoot pev eis Gotu, TevTEKaioEeKa O ELS f € cd Tlewpaséa. obtou 8 érripedodvtat, mpOTov pév dws O €v ayopd

LI 7 YpHCWNTal: xpioovras Sidgwick, Rutherford, Blass, H-L, K-w, k°%. 8 d¢xal <d¢ka> B; KAnpwrol <c’> ex Harp. addiderunt K-w. Quidni etiam in wv. 1, 5? Trepaiea: Tetparéa K, K-w, B; Tlecpadé H-L. 9 e1koct (littera ¢ evanida) k, H-L, B: elol te K-w. 10 TreIpalea K, K-wW, B: mepacd H-L.

§ 2 *Harp. perpovduor: dpxy tes "AGhynoly dorw 4 Tov perpovduwv...foav de roy dprOpdr 7, € wey els Hepa, € 8’ els doru (legebatur Tov dpiOpdy te, els wev rov IL. t, € dé els doru: epitomes ope correxit Dind, collato Voemelio in Bergkii Zphem. antig. 1852, p. 31): elxov d€ Thy émiéheray Srrws Sikara 7 Ta mérpa Tov mwdovvTwy, ws Kal "Ap. €v TH AO. mod. Snot. Bekk. Ax. p. 278, 25: dpxy res "AOjvynoe KAnpwrh t ray Herpovéuv, Séxa rov dpiOysv, dv wévre pev joav év TH Tletpacet, wévre be ev adore, odron Se ryy émipéderay elxov Omus dtkaa 7 Ta pérpa Tov mwArowwTwy. Photius: dpxovres joav déxa Tov dpiOudv, oy wate pev év dore, wévre 8 év Tlecpacet" nal elyov Tiv émpdAeay Orws—rwdrovvtuy (cf. Frag. 412, 4525).

§ 3 *Harp. ovroptdaxes: apy Tes qv AOjwyow, Fris éweuedeiro Srws 6 otros Sixalws mpabjoera kal 7a GAdura xal oi dpro. joay Se rdv dpipov i, € wey ev dorer (rdv dpiO dv ie pev ev dorer), € 8 év Tetpace?, ws “Ap. év AO. rod. Photius: dpx# Tis—dprot joay dé rov apiOpoy médar pev mere Kal déka év dove, wévre 5é év Il. torepov de TpidKovra wev év dare, wévre 0’ ev II. Bekk. Ax. 300, 19: apxovres AOyvnor kAnpwrot. ovra 8 émepedodvro srws —— ol dpror kara Ta wpicpévas Timds Kal Tov crabby

(Frag. 411°, 4515).

scriptions differs from that of ordinary literature. In the latter dws dy is less common; éws with the future indicative is frequent in both. See Goodwin’s Moods and Tenses, 88 339, 348, ed. 25 Madvig, Gk. Syntax, §§ 122—123.

§ 2. perpovopor] The numbers given in the text, five for the city and five for the Peiraeus, confirm the account in Photius, s.v. art. 1, and Bekker’s Axeca. 278, 25 (accepted by Voemel, and Gilbert, i 247). The mss of Harpocr. have: joav dé Tov dpiOpor u'e’, els wev roy Teipard ve’ 8’ eisdorv. Boeckh accepts 15 as the total, but assigns five to the Peiraeus and tentothecity. Dindorf corrects Harpocr. thus: Foav de rdv dpiOpdy e’, €’ wey els Tov Tletparé, «' & els dorv, and this is con- firmed by the text.

Tov pétpov Kal Tov oraOpav] These are the subject of a long inscr. in CIA ii 476, early in first century B.c., discussed in Boeckh, Staatsh. ii 318—332 Frankel. The dpxovres mentioned in the inscr. are doubtless the perpordpor.

éripehotvrat...dirws...xpyoovrat] The papyrus has xpijowvrat. ‘ Quicumque Codices Graecos paulo diligentius in- spexit saepissime vidit librarios érws et

érws why cum coniunctivi aoristis [primis] coniungere, ubi veteres indicativi futu- rum posuissent’ (Cobet, Vou. Lect. 266). Cf. 1. 3.

§ 3. otroptdakes] Harpocr. s. v. qoav dé rov dpOpdv ve’ (ce, «’ Valesius) mev év dare, e' & év Tetpace?, These numbers, as altered by Valesius, seemed to be con- firmed by Photius, joav 52 rév dpiOpdv médat pev wevrexaldexa, <u> é&v doret, e 8° év Tletpae?, and were accepted by Boeckh. But the text, which is Harpocration’s authority for his state- ments, shews that ¢’e’ must be separated in Photius, as well as in Harpocration, so that we get ro in all, § in the city and 5 in the Peiraeus. In Lys, 22 § 8 (of the crropidaxes), of wey récoapes (Bergk, for 540, a corruption of 6’) are contrasted with another member of the board, Anytus. Cf. Boeckh, i 105 Frankel; Gilbert, i 247.

KAnpwrol] Lys. 22 § 16, orropthaxas darox\npoire,

voy 8’ edkoot x7d.] Photius, vJerepov de N pev év doret, e’ 5’ év Tetpate?t. Here the total is correct, but the text shews that Photius ought to have said: «’ pév év dare, ve’ 5° év Il.

CH. 51, 1. 5—CH. 52, 1.1. TIOAITEIA 185 ciros apyos dios otras Sixaiws, ere btrws of Te wvAwWOpot mpds Tas Tiwas TOV Kp\Ody Ta addiTa TwAncOVoW Kal of dpToTa@XaL mpos TAS TLuas TOV TUpay Tos aApTous, Kal TOV aTaOuov ayorTas dcoy av ovTor TaEwowv 0 yap vouos TOUTOUS KEAEVEL TaTTELY.

4 épropiouv & éripedrntas bSéxa KdXnpovow' rovTous Sé mpoc- rétaxtat TOV T eutropiwy éeripedcicbat, Kal ToD ciTov Tod KaTa- mréovros eis TO Attixov éumopiov ta Svo pépn Tovs éeurrdpous avayxatew els TO dou Kopiterv.

52. K«abiordar Sé nal tods Evdexa KAnpwrors, émipernaope-

12 mwdjoovct H-L. 17 CITIKON K, K-W, H-L: ‘Arrixdy ex Harp. Torr; dorixéy quondam proposui coll. Bekk. Az. 255, 208, 284, 456; accepit B: nunc unice verum arbitror ’Arrixéy, etenim ourixdy et dorixdy oculi errore e proximis verbis olrov et doru videntur irrepsisse.

LIL 1 <ro’s> émipednooudévous Rutherford, H-1.; cf. Heracl. in Testimoniis.

§ 4 *Harp. émmedAnris éurroplov :...’Ap. ‘éuroplou 5° émehnras rod olrov Tod karamdéovtos els Td ’Arrixdy eumépioy koulfew ” (Frag. 409%, 449°). Bekk. 4x. 255, 22: éumoplov dpxovres foav KAnpwrol, déxa Tov dpiOudr, éxdorou eros Kabio- Tdamevot, ols mpoceréraxto Tay éumoplwy émiysedetoOa, Kal Tod olrov Tot Karamdéovros els 7d eumbpiov 7d dorixdy ta Sto wepy Tods eumépous dvarykdtey (reliqua propter duororéXevrov omissa)...ib. 208, 26 dorixdy éumdprov’ dmov ol dorol éumopetovrar. qv dé kal Gro Eevxdv, Grou ol Eévor (cf. 284, 6; 456, 3).

TESTIMONIA. LII1 Heraclidis epitoma; Rose, Frag. 611, 8: duolws 6 ‘‘kabcoraoe kal rods &vdexa” ros (secl. K-w; sed fortasse e kAnpwrods exortum) ‘ émiwednoouevous Tov év TS Secpwrnpiy.” Pollux viii 102: of evdexa: els ad’ éxdorns pudjs éylvero kal ypappareds alrots cuvnprOuetro...érepedodvro be “‘radv ev Te decpwrnpiy” Kal ariyov krémras dvdpatodtoras Awmrodvras, ef pev duoroyorev, Pavarwoovres, el Se pH}, eladtovres els Ta SixacTHpia, Kav Gwow, droKTevoivres. Bekk. Ax. 310, 14: ol &vdeka tods KAérras kal ros Awwodtras xal rods avdpatodiaoras dporoyobdvras pév

droxtwvbovew, dytidéyovras 5é elodyouow ‘els 7d Stxacrhpiov ” (Frag. 4293).

Phot.

otros dpyds] ‘unprepared corn,’ Hip- pocr. Vet. Med. 12, mupol dpyol. The position of dpyés (after, instead of before, stros) is defended by Zth. Nic. vi 4, 2, % Hera Abyou eis mpaxrixh erepby éore Tijs Herd Nbyou owntixfs ews, quoted by Dr Jackson to prove that part of a complex epithet may be placed after the article and substantive. Mr Newman adds Pol. 12525 27, 4 éx mhet6vaw Kopdy kowwvla TéXevos ods 707.

§ 4. éprroplov...éripednras] All that is known of these officials apart from the statement in the text, is that they were the proper authority to receive legal notice (¢dgvs) of any infringement of the law forbidding citizens and resident aliens lending money on the security of a cargo bound for any other port than that of Athens. Dem. 35 §§ 50, 51, édy TS... Xpiwara Saveloy els EdAo Te €pardprov 7 7d *Adnvatwv ; 58 §§ 8, 9 (Gilbert, i 248). Cf. Meier and Schém., p. 98 Lips. The eurbpiov extended over the greater part of the east shore of the harbour of the

Peiraeus; Wachsmuth, Stadt Athen, ii g6—esp. 114.

éymdpiov] After rod olrou the epithet oirtxov (which is first found in Polybius) is redundant. The variant ’Arrixdy in Harpocration’s quotation of this passage is supported by Dem. 34 § 36, ’A@qvage els 7d ’Arrixdv éumbpioy orrnyelv, and § 37, ef ris...dddooé roe otryyioeey 7] els To ’Arrixdv éum., 35 $ 28 Tod tbmerépov éumoptov (quoted by Mr Torr). dorexdv is suggested by Bekk. Amecad. 208, dorixdv éurépiov* 8rrov of darol éumopevovra, Tv 5é al dAdo Fexdy, Srrov of Eévor, cf. 255, 284, 456. One of the parts of the éuméprov in the Peiraeus was the orod ddgurérwds, also called the waxpa orod. (Dem. 34 § 37, cf. Thuc. viii go, 5, Wachsmuth, z. s. p. tor); but I can find no authority for applying the epithet oericdy to the éu- amépiov, or to any part of it, at or before the date when the text was written.

LII § 1. robs tv8exa] c. 7 § 3. Sché- mann, p. 414; Gilbert, i 243; Dict. Ant. i 942.

wn

To

186 AOHNAIQN COL, 26, lL. 42—52. vous Tav év TO Secpwtypiv, Kal Tors amayouévous KréTTAS Kal Tovs avdparrodictdas Kai Tos AwroduUTas, dv pev [duoroyalcr, Bavaro Enuidcovtas, dv § audicBntadcw, eiad£Eovtas eis TO Sixa- oTnplov, Kay pev arropiywow, adyoovtas, et Sé wn, TOTE BavaTo- covtas, kai Ta [a]roypadpdopeva Xwpia Kal oikias cicd£ovras eis TO Sicaotnpiov, Kal ta Sokavta S[nuloora eivar mapaddcovtas ois ToAnTais, Kal Tas évdeiEes eloaEovtas: Kal yap TavTas eiad@you- av of &vdexa. eiadyouor 8¢ Tav évdeiEedy Tivas Kab ot Oeopo-

Oérau. KAnpovot 5é Kal eicaywyéas wévte avdpas, of Tas eupnvovs 2 2 <xaxodpyous, Tobs Te> KAewTas, K-W, coll. Etym. Mag. 3 rods bis delent H-L. 3, 4 éay bis H-L. 4 ZHMIWOHCONTACENA corr K.

tyryepovla duxacryplov :...rois kvdexa Boar Aporas kal Awroduras Kal dvdparodiaras elodyyovot. Etym. M. 338, 31: «Anpwrot apxovres foav otro, mpoerryxéres Tot Seopwrnplov’ kal ro’s drayoudvous Kakotpyous ért Odvarov rapahauBavortes éfnulouy* rovs 6¢ dudicByrodvras elofyov “els Td Sixacrypiov” Kai Td yuwoOdy mepl abray érpatrov. elojyov dé “xal rd droypapbpeva xwpla <xai Schleusner> olxlas” «al ra “Onpbora elvac” SétavTa wapedldow rots modlrats (rwAytais Schleusner). elofyov 6é évias évdelfes. Bekk. Ax. 250, 4: ...kal rovs dyoudvous éwl Kaxoupyjuace mape- AduBavoy krémras kal dvdparodioras Kal govels. Kal rods pev ouodoyoivras Oavdryp efnulovy, rods 6& dupisByrobvras elofyov els Scxacrypiov. Schol. Arist. Vesp. 1108: % T&v evdexa dpxh Tods pev duoroyodvras kal dvdpamwodtoras kal AwrodvTas Oavdry éxddragov, Tovs dé dpvoupevous els Stxacrypiov elojyov. elofryov dé kal Tas évdel&ets. Schol. Patm. Dem. p. 11, 16, Sakkelion; Schol. Lucian. iv 170 Jacobitz.

§2 Pollux viii 101: elcaywyeis of ‘‘rds eupjvous dias” elod-yovress joav se

drayopévous kAérrras...a.v8parodic- tds...doroSitas] Isocr. Antid. § go, Todroy dmayayoy dviparodtarhy Kal KNér- Thy kal \wrodtrnv. Meier and Schom. p. 273—6, Lips. Pollux dvépamodiorys* 6 tov édebPepoy KaradovAovuevos 7 Tov GdNbrpiov olkérny braryduevos.

Kvérrat, dvdparodioral and Awmodvrat came under the general heading of xaxodpyot; cf. [Dem.] 35 Lacr. 47, Tot- xwptxous Kal Kdérras Kxal rods adAdous Kaxovpyous Tous ért Oavdrw otra: (sc. of évdexa) elod-youow, Androt. §§ 26—28. Cf. Meier and Schém. p. 86 Lips.

dv piv dpodoyaou xrd.] Aeschin. 1 § 113, of d€ vduor KeAevouct TOv KewTaY Tovds wey Suoroyodvras Oavdrw Snusodc Ba, rods 8° dpvupévous xplvecOar, and Dem. in Timocr. § 65, T&v...xakodpywy rods dpodoyodvras dvev xplaews xoddgew ol vouot KeXevovow. Schol. Arist. Vesp. 1108, 4 T&v evdexa dpxh rods uev dmodo- yodvras kal dvdparodioras kai Awrodtras Oavdry éxddratov, rods dé dpvoumévous els OixacThpiov eloffyov. These passages (quoted in Class. Rev. v 224) prove the incorrectness of the interpretation sug- gested in the Saturday Review, March 21,

1891, p. 359 ‘if (the Eleven) are wnani- mous...or if they disagree. See also the passages quoted in the Zestimonia.

@avdtw] Dem. 4 § 47, Tov dvdpatro- Oierav kal wroduray Odvarov...caxovpyou pev yap éore xpibévr’ drodaveiv.

ta droypadépeva, xwpia xrd.] Our knowledge of this part of the duties of the Eleven has hitherto been derived from the Etym. Magn. 338, 35, which is obviously quoted from the text: see Testimonia. Meier and Schémann, p. 88 Lipsius.

modyrais] 47 § 2.

tas éySelEeus}] Schol. Arist. Vesp. 1108, elojyov 6é xal ras évdel&es. Bekker, Anecd. 250, 11, TOV Se evéelkewn elaépepov els duxacrijpioy ds wey of evdexa, ds dé of Oecpobérar. Etym. Mag. 338, 39, eloipyor 6e évlas évdelEers (Meier and Schémann, p- 87 Lipsius). The text does not enable us to distinguish between the évdelges under the control of the Eleven, and those under that of the Thesmothetae. The general statement, xal yap tavras elodyousw ot évdexa, is modified in the following sentence.

§ 2. eloaywyéas] These officials are

CH. 52, 1. 2—16. TIOAITEIA 187

eiodyovat Sixas, dvoiv duraiv [€]cactos’ etal 8 gupnvou mpockds, édy tis dpeihwy pi amrode, xdv tis él Spax[u]i Savevodpevos dmootepy, Kav Tis év ayopa Bovdrdpevos epydfecOar Savelonras mapa [Tu]vos adpopynv’ ért & aixeias Kal épavixal cal xowwvical kal avdparrodov Kat brofuy[iwy] kal tpinpapxias Kal tpamebiti-

13 atroAw! (K) cf. Lys. 30 § 22 d¢0 rdAavra drodofvac: drodidg Blass, Kontos,

K-W, H-L; cf. Dem. 34 § 13 086 drodlSwor 7d Sdvetov. 15 alKE!Ac (K, H-L, B): aiklas K-w. KOINWNIKAC (K}, B): épavexal—kowwrixal Bury, K-W, H-L, K%, 16 TPIHpapXlac (K, H-L, B): tpenpapxixal Bury (K-w).

H-L. 14 év: EAN.

éuaroptxal, cf. Poll.’ (B).

éml Spaxya: vrep Spaxuny EPANIKAC— ‘ Desiderantur autem

TPATTEZITIKAC (B): Tparegircxal Bury, K-W, H-L, K%,

mpokds, épaviral, éumopial.

Hesych. eloaywyh (eloaywyis=-els Scaliger): dex

"AOhvnot Tay Ta eyxAjpara (leg. Euunva K-W) eloaydrruwy (cf. Schol. Dem. AZd. § 3).

mentioned twice in Pollux viii 93, dpxjjs KAnpwris svoua, and ror, eloaywyels of ras éuutvous Sixkas elodyovres, joav dé mpoxds, épavixal, éumopixal, But their existence was doubted by Meier. These doubts were dispelled in 1869 by the publication of an inscr. of B.C. 425/4 relating to the superintendence of judicial proceedings connected with the assess- ment of the tribute; cra i 37, 47, émt Trav ésaywyéwy (Meier and Schémann, p. 94 Lips.; Gilbert, i 396). The text shews that their number was five; not ten, as had been conjectured.

Pollux is mistaken in placing ¢uopical Slxae under the control of the eicaywyeis. These were under the Thesmothetae as is proved by passages in the Orators, and by c. 59 § 5, quoted elsewhere by Pollux himself. In cia i 38, frag. 7, certain émednral are appointed to attend to cases of delay in the payment of tribute, off dé émipednral écaydyrwr Euunva és To Sikaorjpiov, thus shewing that at that time (probably shortly after 432 B.C.) there

were some éupynvoe Slkat not under the,

care of the elcaywryeis (Gilbert, i 358).

tds éuprvous—8lkas] Lawsuits which had to be decided within a month (Meier and Schém. p. go6f.). They are first mentioned in B.C. 425/4, CIA i 38 (quoted in last note). The text mentions several varieties of such lawsuits that are omitted by Pollux.

tpotkds] actions for restitution of dowry. (1) If the husband divorced his wife, he was bound to return the dowry or to pay interest at the rate of 18 per cent. per annum (Dem. Agh. i 17, MNeaer. 52). The xtpios might enforce these claims by a mporxos Slxn (Isaeus 3 §§ 9, 78). (2) A similar action might be brought against the heirs who kept a widow out of her

rights. The dicate mporxés in the text are limited by the definition in the next clause, édy ris dpelhuv ph drodg.

Kay tTis—dtroo-repyj] The benefit of the expeditious process for recovery of debts is here limited to creditors who are satisfied with what in Athens was re- garded as the moderate rate of 12 per cent. (Dem. Aphod. i 23, 353 Aesch. Cites. 104; cf. Boeckh, i 156 Frankel). Those who charge higher rates, such as 16, 18 or even 36 per cent., are excluded from this privilege. Lipsius in Ledpzzg. Verhandlungen, 1891, p. 57 0.

addoppyy] ‘capital.’ The speech of Dem. pro Phormione is a waparypapy to a dixn d@opufis. The text refers to the case of a small tradesman setting up business in the market-place and refusing to repay the capital he had borrowed for the pur-

jose.

alxelas] Meier and Schom. p. 647 f. Lips. About B.c. 346/5, according to Dem. c. Pantaenetum 37 § 33, the tri- bunal in such cases was the Forty; cf. Schol. Plat. Rep. 464 E. The text implies that the tribunal had been changed.

épavikal] lawsuits for the recovery of friendly loans, or for the decision of dis- putes between various members of an épavos (Meier and Schém. p. 637—643 Lips.).

Kowevikal] suits against corporations (Meier and Schémann, p. 767 Lips.). In Dem. 14 § 16 Kowwvixd probably means property held by corporations (7. p. 602, Lips. note 321).

_ dvBpamo8wv] Dem. Callicl. 55 §§ 31, 34 (Meier and Schémann, p. 766). By the law of Solon quoted in Lys. ¢. Zheo- mnest. i 19, (the owner was liable) olkjos. kal SovrAns BAGBnv ddelrew, cf. Plat. Leg. 936 D. On troftvylwv «7h. see next page.

20

188 AOHNAIQN COL, 26, 1. 53—COL. 27, 1. 6.

kal, obTot pev ody Tavtas SixdLovow eupnvous eiady[ov]tes, of & amobéxrat Tois TeAwvaLs Kal KaTa THY Teaver, Ta pev péypt Séxa Spaxpav dvtes xvpior, ra § GAN eis TO StxacTHpiov eiodyovtes y éupnva.

53. xdAnpodor Sé Kxal rettapdKovta, téttapas éx Tis guais éxdaotns, mos ods tds dAdas Sixas Nayydvovaw: of 18 déka <(=dpaxpcr).

LITT 1 <rov’s> rerrapdxovra K-W.

@yYAHC €KACTHC é& éxdorns pudis K1; éx ris pudjs éxdorys K-W, H-L, K%, B. 2 adAac : lédias Wyse. :

1—2 €k THC pyAuc (casu obliteratum)

§ 3 Pollux viii 97: drodéxrat d& joay Seka, of rods Pbpous kai ras elagpopas Kal Ta TéAn bredéxovro, kal Ta wept ToiTwy dupioBnrovpeva edixatov. ef SE Te petfov ey, elafjyov els SixaoThpiov.

LUI §1* Harp. xara Simous dixacrds:...mept Tov kara Squous Sixacrav, ws ‘ mpbrepov wev—édlkatov,” elra éyévovro rerrapdxovra, elpyxev ’Ap. év Ty <’AOqvalwy addidit Meier> odtrelg. Pollux viii ror: of d¢ rerrapdKxovra ‘‘mpbrepoy pev joa Tpidxovra,” of mepudvres KaTa OAmous Ta wexpr Spaxuav déka eblkafov, rd Se Ywréep Tatra Tols Stattynrats mapedldocav’ ‘pera de ryv TOv TpudKovra Gdryapxlav”’ uloe Tod dpiOuod to tptdxovra terrapdKovra éyévovro. Phot.: kdypwry tis qv ’AOHrnow apxh jp (mera cod.) rdv dpiOudv, of ras ldwrixas Slkas édlkatovy ddAG Tas wey axpt “déxa Spaxuav avroredels” joav dixdfew, ras 5¢ Umrép ravras Trois Suarryrais wapedldovy. Bekk. Az. 306, 15: dpxy tls dare KANpwrh TecoapdKovra Tov dpiOudy mpds ovs al Wea Sixat éharyxdvovro Kal Ta ‘‘méxpe Séxa Spaxuadv.” “7a 8 bwrep rodro 7d Tiunua Trois

Gtarrnrats rapadidbacw ” (cf. p. 310, 223 Frag. 413”, 453°).

y

1.16. trofvylwy] actions arising out of damage done by beasts of draught or burden. Cf. Solon’s law in Plut. Sol. 243 and Plat. Leg. 936 E, dv brogiyov 7 trmos (Dinarch. c. Antiph. wept trrov) 7 xiwy (Lys. wept rod Kuvés ap. Harpocr. $.v. Kapklvos) 7 Tt TOV G\AwY Opeppdruv olvyral 7 Trav médas, Kara Tabra éxrivew Thy BddByv (Tov deordrnv). The special case of homicide caused by a brogiyiov 7 fgov &do 7 is considered 76. 873 E (inf. c. 57 ad fin.).

tpinpapxias] The speech delivered by Apollodorus against Polycles, [Dem.] Or. 52, belongs to this class. Polycles failed to join his ship for four months after the official year had expired, and his prede- cessor Apollodorus had incurred extra ex- penses for which he sues Polycles.

tpamefirixat] In the Zrapeziticus of Isocr. the banker Pasion is accused of re- pudiation and forgery.—éixat weraddixal and éuroptxal are not included in the list, probably because they came under the tryepovla, of the ae ra (Dem. c. Apol. § 12, and inf. 59 § 5).

§ 3.° Sikdfovew] es ‘have the pe, povla rod dixacrnplov in these law-suits,’ Meier and Schom. p. 43 Lips. Cf. c. 57 ad fin.

dmoSékrat] c. 48 § 1.

tots reAdvaus] ¢.g. the farmers of the public taxes were allowed to bring a gdo1s against any one suspected of de- frauding the revenue. They might even arrest him and bring him before a magis- trate. Cf. Gilbert, i 335.

LIII § 1. rerrapdxovra] a body of officials instituted by Peisistratus under the name of of xara Sious dixacral (16 § 5), revived in B.c. 453/2 (26 § 3), and (as stated in the text) increased in number from 30 to 4o after the time of the Thirty tyrants. They are mentioned in Isocr. Antid. 237, év 5& rats rav rerrapdKovra (cavicw dvayxatoy éveivat) rods 7’ év Trois lélors mpdymaow dédicobvras Kal rods py dixalws éyxadobvras. In Dem. Pant. 33 we are told that cases of aixela and ra ray Bialwy came under their jurisdiction. They are described as appointed by lot in Zimocr, 112, el pév ris dyopavduos 4 doruvduos 7} Sixaorys Kare Sihovs Kors év rats evOdvats éddwxev, EvOpurros mévys Kal ldubrys kal moAdG@y daretpos Kal KANpwriy dpxiv dptas. It was only in unimportant cases, where the matter in dispute was not above the value of 10 drachmas, that they were competent to decide on their own authority : other cases they referred,

CH. 52, 1. 17—CH. 53, 11. TOAITEIA 189

t 1. , \ \ ’ , 207 mpotep[ov] pév Hoav tpidKovta, Kal Kata Snpous Tepiuovtes diKa- Sov, peta Se tiv érl ray tpidxovta dduyapyialy] terrapdxoyta

(Col27.12 yeyovacw. xal ra pev || péyps Sea Spayudy adtoreneis eici

[xpivet|v, ta 8 brrép rovTO To Tivgnua Tois SvarTyTals Tapadiddacw. © 8e / “T% \ ¥ le) t

ot dé maparaBovtes, [élav wn Svvwvrar Siaddoa, yuyveoKover,

Kay pev aydorépors apéoxn ta yvwoobévra [Kal] eupévwow, eye t t f xX xt © b a lel > / > hy a

tédos 7 Sixyn. av 8 o Erepos ébp tav avtiixwv eis 7 Sixactypioy,

éuBarovtes Tas paptupias Kal Tas TpoKAHcELs Kal TOvS vdpoUS Es

éxlvous, xwpis pev Tas TOD SidxovTos, ywpis Sé Tas TOD PevryovTos,

3 TTEPIONTEC retinent K-w? (et B) coll. Hyper. i 13, 6 et ii 2, 12: mepudyres K, K-W!, H-L, 4 TTI supra versum, non habet Pollux. 7 PIPNWICKOYCI yeyvpoxover (coll. 54, 7 et Herondae papyro v 21) B: sed cf. Meisterhans, p. 141, 17%. 9 éay H-L.

§ 2 *Harp. dtarryral:...cat ef pév qpecxe rots dvridixors, Tédos eTxev H Slxn* ef 6¢ uy, Ta eyk\huara kal Tas tpokAnoers Kal Tas papruplas, ére dé kal Tovs vduous Kal Tas addas tiaras éxarépwy euBaddvres els xadloxous xal onunvdwevor mapedldocay rots eloaywyetor Tov Sixdv. Aéyer Se wept abrdv ’Ap. év "AO. wod. Pollux viii 126: 49" pects abrav el els Sixaorypov yévorro, els éxtvov ras Wipous (sic) éuBardvres lila éxarépas Tas TOU hev-yorros Kal Sudxovros kareonualvovro. Bekk. An. 235, 20.

11 *Harp. éxivos: gore wer dyyos Te els 6 Ta ypappareta ra mpds Tas Sikas érlOevTo... punpovever TOD dyyous Touro Kal’Ap. év 77 AG. ToA.... Phot. 1240 Naber, éxivor: of pév XaAxor, of 6é ex Kepduou’ els ods KaGcaouw ol StacryTal rd ypayparela Tv waprupiov & rwes éuapripyoay, kal karaonunvdpevot pera raira el éyxAnOeln 7 Slacra rots Suxacrais érel5ovv (fere eadem habet *Schol. Arist. Vesp. 1436, additis rod & dyyous rovrou kal Anuoobévyns pvnpovetovor Kal ’Ap.). Phot. éxtvos: xadloxos tls éore xadxods, els dv ai re waprupla kal ai mpoxdjoers eyypador éveBdddovTo brs Tov Sixafoudvwy Kal Kare- onualvovto wa wndels Kaxovpyjoy wept Ta éuBaddéueva (fere eadem Etym. M.; xal kareonuaivero 6 éxivos, wa pydels Kaxoupyjoyn mera 7d drat éuBdddecba, Bekk. Ax.

258, 6). Cf. Frag. 4157, 455°.

in the first instance, to the arbitrators, and, if necessary, to the law-courts. Cf. Gilbert, i 358.

Most of the cases concerned with the rights of property were supposed by Meier to come under the jurisdiction of the Thesmothetae. Lipsius, in his re- vised edition of Meier and Schémann, p. 93, (1) assigns them to the Forty; he also (2) identifies the dcxacral card d7- Hous with the dickacral concerned with the several tribes (#2. p. go n.). Thus they could act in their several divisions of four for each of the ten tribes. Lastly, (3) he holds that after a time they ceased to go on circuit and held their court in Athens. The first of these opinions is opposed by Caillemer in Daremberg and Saglio, Dzct. Ant. iii 200 f.; but all three are confirmed by the text. (1) is sup- ported by ras d\Aas dikas, whereby they have jurisdiction over all causes not as- signed to the Eleven, the elcayurye’s and drodéxrar. (2) by c. 48 § 5, ol Thy pudy elodyovres, 58 § 2, of tiv pudqv dixd- Sovres, and if. § 2, of rhv Pudi Tod

pev-yovros duxdgovres.

Aayxdvovery] sc. ‘the suitors.’

§ 2. péxpr Seka Spaxpov] In B.c. 445/4 (CIA i 29 and iv p. 12) we have mention of a court probably consisting of thirty members, appointed by lot from the «Anpodxo of Hestiaia and Ellopia and competent to decide cases of this kind. In fol. 1300 6 23 and 32, Ar. approves of the institution of two separate courts, according to the value of the matter in

- dispute: matters that are worth little

more than five drachmas need not be re- ferred els duxaorGv wd7Oos.

atroteXets] 3 § 5 ult.

Stavrntats] Meier and Schém. pp. 48, 1009—1015; Smith, Dict. Ant. s.v. The text shews that all private causes (except the guunvor dixat, c. 52) were in the first instance tried by the dcacryral.

épBadovres—exlvovs] Dem. 45 § 17, éxpyv aird 76 ypappareiov els tov éxtvov éuBaretv and 2b. 57, also 48 § 48, dvrl- ypaga (cwvOnkav) éuBaréobar els rdv Exivor.

paptup(as, Meier and Schém. p. 873 ff. Lips.; mpokArjoets, 2d. 871 ff.

on

I

wn

190

AOQHNAIQN

COL. 27, 1. 6—16.

kal TovTouvs Katacnunvapevor, Kal tTHv [yvdlow tov SvaiTynTod wa yeypaupévny ev ypaypateiw mpocapTycarvres, wapadiboace Tois Z ~ \ \ n Yj ! € gy térrapot Tols THY huArY Tod devyovTos Sixafovow: of 6é Tapa- AaBovtes eioayovaww eis TO SuxacTHpiov, [Ta wév é]vTds ythiwv eis &va Kat Siaxociovs, Ta 8 trép xiAlas els &va Kal TeTpakoaious. >» 2 of , ” , :, nat : r 2,52 ovn &Eeo[re © od]te vopsors ode MpoKANceds OUTE papTUpialts Ar ‘A fol a \ f H tals Tapa Tod SiartnTod ypHoO[ar rais eis] Tods éxwous éuBe- ” of a Brnuévats. Starrnrat & eialv ols dv éEnnootov eros %. Todro 8é

12 [yO]ow rob B; [xpllow roo K, H-L; [kplo]w <Thv> Tod K-W; in ectypo fere nihil dispici potest; yaow defendit Dem. 40 § 42 ard yrGow diarryrob, 21 § 2 diat-

THTOD yvSow, 33 § 22 ywOow—dialrys, 36 § 17 THs ywuooews. K3, B: rots él? K!; mdéAw K-W, -» evOUs H-L.

13 TOICA ? Tots 6 14 T(HC)pyA(HC) K1: rip gud

Wyse, K-W, H-L, K3, B, coll. c. 48 § 5, c. 58 § 2.

§ 3 Pollux viii 48 infra laudatus. $4 éfnxoordv eros.

Cf. Bekk. Az. 235, 3, infra laudatum, § 5 ris jAtklas Krh,

KaTaonpnvdpevor, cf. 39 § 17, Teonuac- pévov tev éxivev, 47 § 16, éonudvOncar of éxivot (and 24. mpoxAjoews éuBeBAnuevyns cot kat papruplas), and 54 § 27, TO mh onuavOfvar tous éxlvous.

In Meier and Schém. p. 904 Lips. it is assumed that the éxvos was-used for the reception of documents handed in at the dvdxpiors. Thus Dem. 28 § 1, éve- Badero Typjoas Thy TedevTalay ipéepar, is there referred to the ‘last day of the dvdxpicts.” Mr Wyse suggests that there is no reason why it should not refer to the arbitration. It may be doubted whe- ther in the Attic orators there is a single certain example of éxivos except in con- nexion with arbitration. To the pas- sages above quoted may be added 39 §§ 22, 373 34 § 46; 40 §§ 21, 28, 58; 45 §§ 8, 20, 31, 57, 58, 613 49 §§ 19, 55, 65; 54 § 30. There is nothing in the lexicographers which refers to the dydxpiots before the presiding magistrate : Harp. s. v. éxivos (=Phot. i, Suid. 1); Schol. Arist. Vesp. 1436 where ol dta- Tnrai are named, (=Phot. 3, éxivor— émedldovv, and Suid. s. v. éxtvot); Pho- tius, éxivos 2 (=Lex Seg. 258, 3, with trifling variants; cf. Atym. Mag. p. 404, 54); Harp. s. v. dsarryral; Pollux viii 127; Schol. Patm. Dem. 48 § 48.—It is clear from col. 31 1, 11 that Hesychius in éuajerns does not refer to the dvdxpe- gis as supposed in Meier and Schém. Z.¢. (Wyse).

Tpocaptyaavres] used in several pas- sages of Ast. An.

Tots tv udiy Tov devyovros SiKnd- Lover] 48 § 5; 58 § 2. Probably those of the Forty who belonged to the same

tribe as the defendant.

§ 3. évrés xtAlwv xrd.] The number of the dtxacral varies with the value of the matter in dispute : for property under 1000 dr. the court consists of 201 dixac- tal; for property above that amount, of 401. Pollux, viii 48, says of cases of pdots: elonyero 5¢ Ta pev evrds xiAlwy els eva al Staxoglous, Ta dé bréep xiAlas els Eva Kai rerpaxogtous. This statement ultimately comes from the text which shews that the distinction was not confined to cases of gdots. This conclusion had already been drawn by Heffter, Azt. Gerichtsverfass. p» 55, and Frankel, Att, Geschworenen- gerichte, p. 102. From Dem. c. Mid. 223 it has been inferred that the round number of 200 was the smallest number for a Sixacrijpiov: dv te Siaxogious dy Te xAlous dv 0 omdcous av % mods Kadloy (Meier and Schém. p. 170 Lips.).

ovk eore xrd.] In Dem. 45 § 57 Apol- lodorus charges Stephanus with having stolen an important deposition which the speaker expected to find in the éxivos. Cf. Meier and Schom. p. go4 Lips.

§ 4. &nkoorov Eros] z.c. on attaining the age of 59. As explained below, there was a cycle of 42 émrdvupnot TOv Huccav. All who attained the age of 18 in any given year had an érdvupos assigned to them. After completing 41 years, during which they were liable to be called out on military duty, they reached the age of 59 and then served as ésacryral for one year,—their ‘sixtieth year.’ The érw- vuyos assigned to the épnBor in each year was the éravupos of the dcarryral who had held office in the previous year.

CH. 53, l. 12—26. TIOAITEIA

191 fal Y nan > tf \ lal = Fa 3 ‘ 7 lg djrov [ele Tay apydvrwv Kal TdY éravipwrv. eicl yap érodvupot déxa pev of Tav purdr, dvo Sé Kal TeTTapdKovTa of THY HALKLOV' en 2 , 4 3 \ ? , oi 8 ébnBou éyypaddpuevos mpdtepov ev els NEAevKwMEVA Ypaypa- tela eveypapovto, Kat emeypddovto aitois 6 1 adpyav ed ob éveypadyoay Kal 6 érdvupos 6 TO Tpotépw [Erer] SedvarTyKes, viv 8 eis oTNAnY XaAKHy avaypddovtat, kai loratat 4 oTHAH TPO TOD

5 Bovre[vT]nplov mapa rods émwvipous. Tov 5é TeArevTaioy TeV

22 <ol> éyypapéuevoe quondam Blass (H-L); oi etiam Harp. omisit. 24 6 éravumos: éxavupos Harp. Trpotepw! (item Harp.): mpérepov K-w, Poland, B. AeAtaITHKWC (edd.): Sedecxrixws (Harp. codices plerique), dedinr7- xés Aldum secutus Dind., dedipxnxws Rose; émidednunkws Photius et Suidas. 26 ‘7’

(sc. rept) fortasse per errorem pro 7 (sc. mapa)’ K. epi dubitanter retinet K; mapa K-W, H-L, B.

ENTPad.

20—25. *Harp. orparela ev rots érwvipos:...tls qv 4 ev rots érwyvdmos orparela SedjAwxev "Ap. év AG. ror. Aéyuw “‘elot yap éemdvupor—éeveypdpycav (codd., item Phot. Suid., correxit Bekk.) xal érwvuwos 6 (kal 6 érdvupos 6 Aldum secutus Dind.; 6 émdvunos kal 6 Rose) r@ mporépw eres Sedinrynxeds (Aldum secutus Dind.; dederxricws G, -Gs BD, 5¢ deckrixs AC; TH mporépy emidednunxws Phot. et Suid.: dediwxynkas Rose,

A. P. p. 486)" viv é els rqv Bovdi dvarypdgovra.” Cf. Frag. 4297, 469°.

faery Ge Tav pvdAGdv] 21 § 6.

ay WAukiov] It has been sometimes supposed that the archon érdvunos of the year, in which a citizen reached the age of military service, was deemed to be the érwvupos of that citizen and of all who came of age in the same year. Thus the 42 é€mavupot would be the series of 42 archons corresponding to the 42 groups of citizens who were at any given time between the ages of 18 and 60 (Sché- mann, Ant. p. 423; Gilbert, i 300). But in the text the apxyovres are contrasted with the éxwvupor, and the latter divided into érdvuno ray Pudwy and ray prea. As the ér. rv guAGv derived their names from ten of the Attic heroes, selected out of 100 (21 § 6), the em. Tay WAiKuay were presumably selected out of the remaining go. The period of military service was in- cluded within a cycle of 42 years, each of them probably bearing the name of one of the Attic heroes. When a youth attained the age of 18, he was enrolled under the archon of the year and also under the epo- nymous hero under whom those of the citizens who had just completed their 42 years had been originally entered. This is Mr Kenyon’s view and it appears to be substantially correct, except that the 42nd year of service was really devoted to the duties of the diarryral which occu- ied the sixtieth year of the citizen’s life éénxoorév éros). It was when he reached the age of 59 (not 60, as Mr Kenyon

says) that the citizen served as an arbi- trator.

The lists were unfortunately drawn up on perishable material, at first on wood and afterwards on bronze, and no ex- ample of the o77An xaAxjj of the writer’s time has survived. Had marble been used instead, the result might have been different, and an interesting question might have been conclusively decided. We have indeed several lists of Suaurnrat, all on marble ; but these are for another purpose. Thus for B.c. 325/4 we have no less than 103 names with the super- scription: dcatryral of emt ’Avrixd[éous dpxovtos] dvébecay orepavwOévre|s Urd Tod Oqjuov (CIA ii 943); also (for an un- known year) a list of 88 names (2. 944); and there are lists of a few such names for B.C. 330 and 329 (25. g41—2). But none of these preserve any record of an eravupos Tis Hrxlas.

Acrevkopéva] 47 §§ 2, 4.

6 ém. 6B—SeSvaityKds] A brief expres- sion for the eponymus of the citizens who served as diacrnral for the previous year.

SeBtarrnkws] In classic Attic this verb usually has the double augment in the pf. and plpf., e.g. pf. Dem. 33 § 31 dedcy- ryka, 21 § 85 Karededuegrixe (Dind.) or xaraded- (Bekk.); Thuc. vii 77 dedeyrnuat, Dem. 21 §§ 85, 96 dro-, 55 § 61 xaTa-; pipf. édedyryro, Thuc. i 132 éé- (Veitch).

BovAeurnplov xrd.] Paus. is, 1, To B.... tAnolov Oddos éort Kadoupévy...dvwrépw

30

35

AOHNAIQN COL, 27, 1. 16—27.

192 erovipwv aBovtes of [TeTT]apdxovta Stavépovow adtois tds Siaitas, Kat éwsxdnpodow as Exaotos Siaitnce Kal dvayKaioy as av &xaoros Aayy Siaitas exdiatav, 6 yap vowos, dv Tis pn ventas SiasTynTi}s THs Hrtcias adT@ KaOnkovons, atipov elvas Kerevel, TANY cay TUN apxnv apx[@ly Tluv]a év exeive TO eviavT@ } amodnuav. odto 8 arenreis cial ovo. éotw S€ Kai cicay- yédXew els Tovs StautnTds, éav Tis adixnOn b7d Tov StavTyTOD, Kav TWOS KaTayvaow, aTipwovabaL KErEvoVaLY of vomot Epeots & éoti kal rovTos. xpavras dé Tois érwvipors Kal pos Tas oTpaTeias, kal Stay idKiay éxtéumwor, Tpoypapovaw amd Tivos adpxovtos

ary , t , a , kab émar[vpou pléxpt Tivev Sei otpatever Oar.

29 diairas (hiatu admisso) secl. K-w. aAAnv K}, res év Burnet (H-L).

et H-L qui alioquin els rovs dAXous dcacryras exspectarent). 37 TINWN: Twos Harp.

(K, K-W, H-L).

édy H-L. 31 Twa év K-W, K%, B;

33 AlalTHTAC (K-W, K%, B): dtkacrds Harp. (K},

36 a<: dard Harp.

§ 5 émixAnpodow—dripov elvat. Pollux viii 126 infra exscriptus.

§6 Harp. eoayyedla infra exscriptus.

dé dvdpidvres corjxacw jpwor, ad’ wy "AOnvalos Uaorepoy Tra dvduara erxov ai ural.

§ 5. émukAnpototy] Pollux viii 126, émexAnpodvro avrois ai Stara, Kal aria (cf. Urusov) ddapirro re wy Siarrjoavre Thy émuxdnpwieicay dtarravy. In Dem. Aphob. iii 58 a public (as contrasted with a private) arbitrator is described as xAnpwrés. Cf. Meier and Schém. p. 1012 Lips.

ékStattay] not found in this sense else- where. Cf. éxdikdfew in [Xen.] Rep. Ath. iii 2, Sikas Kai ypagas kal ebOdvas éxduxdgfew, and Lys. 17 § 5.

r7s jAcklas—KalyKotons] The age has hitherto been inferred from Bekker, Anecd. 235 (=Schol. Plat. Leg. 920 D), mdvres "A@nvator ols cEnxoordv eros Hy (§ 4), and from the less precise statements in Pollux viii 126, ék ray brép é&jxovra ern yeyovérwv, and Hesych. ol epi é&jxovra érn yeyovéres. The age of 50 is wrongly given in Bekker Anecd. 186 and Suidas, s. v. Searnral.

drupov] the severer form of driula is probably meant.

dreXets] ‘exempt’ from serving as dia ryral.

§ 6. eloayyéAdew els robs Starrytds] Harpocr. s. vu, eloayyeNla el yap Tes bd StairnTod adixnOeln, €Eqv Tobrov elaayyéd- Aew mpds (els K-W) Tods Sixaoras (SarryTas is Bergk’s correction), at ddods Ariuodro (cf. Bekk. Aneca. 235, 24=Schol. Plat.

Leg. 920 D, and Lex. Dem. Patm. p. 13).

We have an example of this procedure in Dem. c. Mid. 86, pudrdéias ri Tedevralav Tuépay Tay duurntav—, xaryyopGy Epnuov ovdevds mapévros, éxBddde Kal aripot Tov dvarrnriy, first explained in this sense by Bergk, Zeitsch. f. Alt. 1849, 273, supported by Frankel, Az. Geschworenenger. p. 73 f., as quoted in Meier and Schom. p. 334 Lips.; see also Daremberg and Saglio, iii 126. Cf. Dr Hager on eloayyeda in Smith, Dict. Ant. i 710 6, where, how- ever, it is accidentally stated that, in Harpocr. 4. ¢., Bergk ‘rather needlessly ’ alters dtacryras into d:caords : Bergk really altered Stkacrds into diatryrds, and the text confirms his alteration. The éta:- tyrat for any given year form a ‘college,’ or corporate body; they pass resolutions and decree rewards in the phrase édofev rots dtatrnrats (Hubert, de Arbitris, p. 253 Meier-Schém. p. 1013 Lips.). It is their president who is described as mpvravedwy in Dem. Mid. ic. Hitherto it has been deemed uncertain whether the eloayyeAla of an arbitrator came before the diaryral or before a body of dicacrai (Hubert, p. 55; Gilbert, i371). The text is decisive for the former alternative; but it also shews that the sentence was subject to appeal. In the latter event it would come before a law-court.

§ 7. mpoypddovow — orpareter ar] Lys. 14 § 6, cxéyaode dé rlves elalv ods det Tapeivat. ovx olrwes dy Thy HAuktay rabrqv

6

CH. 53, 1. 27—CH. 54, 1.5. TIOAITEIA

193

54. xAnpodou S€ kal rdcde Tas dpyds: odomovods Tévte, ols mpootéraxtas Snwoglovs épyatas éyovot tas dbovs émtoKxevatew kal NoytoTtas Séka Kal auvnydpouvs TovTos Séxa, Tpds ods” admavras avdyKn Tos Tas apyas ap[Eavt]as Noyov areveyeiv.

@ , ? , ¢ a oe , t \ odToe ydp eiar povor <ol> Tols drevOdvots AoyrLouevot, Kal Tas 5

LIV 5 <ol> ins, J B Mayor, K-w, H-L, K%, hiatu admisso.

TESTIMONIA. LIV §1 Schol. in Aeschin. 3 § 25 infra exscriptum.

§2 Bekk. Ax. 276, 17 Aoytoral: dpxovrds elot KAnpwrol, déxa Tov dpiOuby, ep Gv advres ol dptavres dpxhy hvtwoiy déyov drégepoy Tov Supxnudvwy (fere eadem Etym. M. 569, 32). 0. p. 310, 6: of Aoyioral ras evOUvas ardoas elofyov (cf. Phot. iyyeuovla dixacrnplov). Phot. edddvas: xuplws ds eladryousw ol royoral mpds rods Sétayras wy opbas dpka Tis wérews 7 mpecBetoat KaxOs* Kal Ta Sixacrypia wey ol NoyioTal KAnpodar, karnyopel 5¢ 6 Bovdduevos* Kal rots dixacrats épetrac TiyuGobae Tots adofow (eadem

Bekk. Az. 245, 6 et Lex. Dem. Patm. p. 142).

infra exscriptum,

*Lex. rhet. Cantab. Aoywral,

éxwow; Dem. O1. 3 § 4, évndloacde...xat rods péxpe mwévre Kai Terrapdxovra érdv abrovs éuBatver. Aeschin. /. L. 133, yypwapdvew tudv... Tos wéxpt TpidkovTa érn yeyovéras é&tévat, 26. 168, rpwrny 5’ e&ehOav aorparelav év rots pépeot Kadov- pémpy...cal ras GdNas Tas éx Staboyxfjs ébdous ras ev rots érwvipos xal Tots hépeoty €&9NOov (Gilbert, i 302, and Bez- trage, 51 ff.). Cf. Lycurg. Leocr. 39, al & ékrldes THs cwrgplas TE Shum év rors vrép mevtnkovTa éry yeyovéot KadeorhKecay. For mpoypddovory, cf. Arist. Av. 450, (rods émAlras) oxoreiy & Tu dy wrpoypadw- bev év Tots mivaxlots.

LIV § 1. 68o7ov0ts] mentioned in Aeschin. 3 § 25 (with Schol. ol émipe- ‘Nodwevo. THS KabapdryTos Tay dduv THs médews), and by a Comic poet quoted in Plut. Praec. Reip. Ger. 15 § 9, Myrtoxos pev<yap>aorparnye, M. dé ras b50vs, M. 8’ dprous éworrd, M. 6¢ réAqgura, Myridxw 6 wdvra xefrar, Myrloyos 8’ olpwkerar ascribed to Cratinus by Bergk; Meineke, rag. Com. iv p. 675). Boeckh, 11 x, p. 257 Frankel. .

§ 2. Aoyirrds] ‘ Auditors’; Pol. 1322 4 11, speaking of rhv Anpouevyy Noyio ud kal mpocevOtvovcay (apx7v), adotor dé rov- Tous of ey evOdvous of d€ NoytoTas ot 8 éeracras of 5¢ ovvnydpous. It had already been proved by Boeckh (11 viii, p. 239%) that the Aoyoral and evOuvo. were separate bodies ; and this is confirmed by the present treatise (cf. 48 § 4). Almost all the #eé@uvor had to send in their ac- counts to the Aoyral (Aeschin. c. Cites. § 20, eyypdgew Adbyov mpds Tos Aoyioras kat ebOdvas diddvas, § 22, AOyor daopépev pds rods X., Schol. on §§ 9, 15). CIA ii 444, 446, (an dywvodérns) darevnvoxev Nb-

S. A,

yous els 7d unrpGor Kal mpds Tods Aopioras Kal rds evOdvas Gdwxev. In B.C. 454, 452, 435 they were 30 in number (CIA i 226, 228 and 32). The number was subse- quently reduced to ro, possibly after the time of the Thirty. Gilbert, i 214.

ovvyyopous] mentioned in Pol. 1322 8 11, quoted above. The present passage is loosely paraphrased in Lex. Rhet. Cant. p.672, 20: A. &v 7H AO, aon. ob'rws héyer* Aoyoral 6é alpodyras [an kdnpodyrat?] déxa, map’ ols diadoyifovra macau al dpyal rd re Anmpara Kal Tas yeyevnudvas Samdvas* cat addot O€xa ovvyyopot ores cvvavaxplyovet robros' Kal ol ras evOtvas didbvTes rapa rovras dvaxplvovras mp&rov, elra épleyvrar els 7d OixacTyptov, els eva Kal ¢ (Rose, Frag. 447°). Mr Kenyon, however, re- gards this notice as ‘differing wholly from the present passage’; and Lipsius implies that the name of Aristotle is men- tioned by mistake. Wilamowitz places it among the spurious fragments.

odro.—rois drevOivors Aoyitspevor] It was the Aoyioral who received the ac- counts of outgoing officials; who exa- mined them conjointly with the ovr7yopor; and brought the accounts before a law- court of 501 dcaoral under their own presidency (Meier and Schém. pp. 257 ff. Lips.). These functions have sometimes been erroneously ascribed to the et@uvoc (2b. pp. 115, 208 and Lipsius in Leipzig Verhandl, p. 64). The procedure may be illustrated by the oath taken by the cor- responding officials in the deme Myrr- hinus, CIA ii 578, duvivar d¢ rdv Spxov Kai Tov hoya AoyreloOae & by pot SoH dvy- AwKévar, kal Tovs gurnyopous cuvyyopycew 7 ohuy Ta Sika Kal Wypretobard dv por Soxy Sukasdrara elvac.

13

10

194 AOHNAIQN COL. 27, 1. 27—34.

HOY ? \ f > / x t 3 > evOuvas eis To SixactHpiov eladyovTes. Kav pév TLVa KET TOVT

3 t * €EeAyEwos, KNoTHY of SixacTal KaTayuyvecKovar Kal TO yrwoobery

amotiverat SexarrAovv: éay dé Twa Sépa AaBovta éribeiEwour, cal katayvacw ot Sixactai, Sopov Timaotww, amrotivera, é Kal TodTO Sexatroby dv & ddixely natayvacw, adiclou Tiudow, amoriveras 5€é TobP dardodv, édv [pod THs] évadrns mputavetas éextelon Ts, eb 5é yun, SumdodTar: 1d <Se> Sexatrrodv ov SurodTat.

kypodat € Kai ypaupmatéa Tov KaTa TpuTavelay KadovpEVOY,

7 -PINWICKOYCI: ~yiww K-W3 -yryvw H-L, K3; -yryvy B, cf. 53, 7. [TNWCOEN (K, H-L): <xara>ywo0ey K-w, B. 8 emiAclZ: daodelé. K-wW. 10 éay HL. 11 EKTICHI: éxreloy K-W, H-L, K?, B: cf. Meisterhans, p. 144%, u. 1252.

12 <dé> ins. K (edd.).

10 décxlou Harp. infra exscriptus.

§§ 3—65 Pollux viii 98: yeanpareds 6 6 kara mpuravetay KAnpwOels b7rd Tijs Bovnfjs érmi Te TA ‘Ypdupmara puddrrey kal ra Yndlopara, Kal erepos él rovs vouous ord THs Bovdfjs Xetporovovuevos. 60° bd Tod Shou alpebels ypayparedrs dvaywwoxe TY TE Ohuy Kal TH Bovdy. dvrvypageds krX. (reliqua P- 195 b exscripta).

§$ 3, 4 “Harp. Ypappareds :., .0 ypaypareds mas Te Kabloraro Kal rt émparrev, ws Tov ypapdrey 7 éorl Kipwos Kal re Ynglouara Th yevoueva, gunarret kal ra dda dra, dvrvypdderar Kal mapaxdOyrac TH Povry, dedp~rwxev ’Ap. &v AO. Tor. § 4 *Harp. avrvypapets, Pp: 195 6 ) exscriptus. § 5 Suidas (e lexico Photiano) ypaupuareds (1): ovros modiews wev ovdeuids qv Kd plos, braveylvwoKxe 58 TH Boudy kal TO ojuy Ta mparroueva.

Bekk. Ax. 226 yeaupareds : aitg Kat 7h Bovdy* dvaryvavar”... (Frag. 399° » 439°).

kal oros ovdevds”

Kbptot, GAN 9 Tod yodpew Kal dvayvavat.

Kal Tov ‘Yeappar ea 6 Siuos yxetporovel, “dyaryvogbuevor 7d gtvodov aAdov ‘éorl Ktpios” Bekk, Az. 185, 14. joa roy dpiOudy Tpets, ypdgovres Ta Snudora.

q “Tob Suidas s.v. (2) kAnpwrol 5€ ovdevds 5é joav of ypayparels ofro

Tas ed0tvas—elordyovres] Dem. de Cor. 117, Ore pe elojyov of Noyioral, and F. L. 211.

KAomy] Snuoclwy xpnudtwv. Dem. c. Timocr. 112, ef pév ris d-yopavbpos 7 doru- vopos 4 Stkacrhs kara Syuous -yevduevos KXNomas ev traits evddvais EdAwKev,—TOvTW pev thy Sexamwdaclav elyat, and 127, auvédpou yevouevou Krom avrod Td dixac- Thpvoy Karéyvw Kal dexarddowov arérice.

KaTaytyveokover] the compound verb, in the special sense, is followed by the simple participle 7d -yywo0év, which, al- though more general in itself, has its meaning necessarily coloured by the pre- vious context. To repeat the prepo- sition is no more necessary here than in 57, 7, where diarl@yot is followed in the next sentence by rl@yo1. Cf. Dem. Timocr. 9, where rijs Bovis kareyvoKvlas is followed several lines later by 74 yrw- cbév0’ bd Tis Bovis. I may also refer to my note on Eur. Bacch. 1065, karifyev,

NYEY, ayer, where Hec. 168, drwhéoar’, ddéoar, and Med. 1252, xarlder’, tdere, are quoted.

Sapa...8exarAotv] This penalty is also

mentioned in Dinarch. ¢. Aristog. 17. The penalty of death (unnoticed in the text) is mentioned 2d. §§ 4,20. The two penal- ties are contrasted as alternatives in Di- narch. c. Dem. 6oand c. Philocl. 5 (Meier and Schom. p. 445, n. 723).

émBelEwoty] Pol. 1259 a 16, émdeitae ort. Aeschin. 3 § 228, rhs yap airlas aloxpov rov alrusperdy éare Td Epyov my exew émidettat.

aSixlov] here of ‘ maladministration.’ Plut. Per. 32, ere kdorfis xai Sdpww elr’ ddixlov Bovdord ris dvopndgew Tip Slwéw. The term is not found in the Orators, but is mentioned in Harpocr. s.v. éore 6¢ ovopua Sins. dtorlvurat 6¢ Todro a)otv, éay pd THs 0 mpuravelas drod00T' el 8e wh, Surdobv karaBddderat. Meier and Schom., p-424—8 ; Lipsius, Lepz. Verhandl.p. 64.

Sexamoiv od SurAovrat] This fact has been hitherto unknown.

§ 3. ypapparéa] The full title is 6 kara, mpuravelay ypayparevs Tis BovAjjs, with the shorter forms yp. Tijs BovAjjs or yp. kara mpuravelay. The regular form before the year of Eucleides was 6 yp. Ths Bovhfjs. As an exception we find in B.c.

CH. 54, 1. 6—15.

TIOAITEIA

195

N n 4

Os TOV ypapudtwv éotl KUpios, Kal TA [Wnldicuata Ta yuyvoueva - a ”- , 2 / \ , a

@vAaTTEL, KaL TaNAA TavTa avTuypadeTat, Kal TapaKdOnTas TH

14 [PAMMATEDN : Naber, K-W, H-L, K3. yev. Harp.

ypapmdrwy ex Harp. et Polluce Burnet, Bywater, Blass, <7’> post ypayudruv addidit B ex Harp.

TIN (K-w):

409/8, CIA i 61 (as restored by Kohler) mapahaBdrres rapa [rob [kara mpuTavelay ypoppajréws rs Bovdkfs. In the fourth century the title 6 ypaumareds 6 kara mpu- ravelay is first found in an inscr. of B.C. 358/7 or of 354/3 (CIA ii 61, where the other title 6 ypaupareds Tis Bovdjs is also found, and where mention is made of rods Gddous ypayparéas rovs em rots Snuoolos ypéupacw). The two forms are inter- changed with one another down to B.c. 322/1, when the short title yp. 7s BovAjs appears for the last time (CIA ii 186), while the title yp. 6 kara mpuravelay continues in use down to the Roman age (Gilbert in Philol. xxxix p. 131—6, and Gr. St. i 2543; also Miiller’s Handbuch, 1v i 167). This ypaupareds always belonged to a different tribe to that presiding at the time (CIA i 45, 46, 51, 61, 188; Gilbert, Philol. p. 133); but, in or after B.c. 322/1 (the date of the death of Aristotle), the yp. so called belonged to the pre- siding tribe.

The ‘full title’ cited at the head of this note is not actually found except in CIA i 61 (as restored); and there is much to be said in favour of the re-

storation proposed by C. Schaefer: rapa-

AaBdvres mapa [r]od [Baotkéws pera Tod ypapualréws ris Boudjjs. The special literature of the Athenian ypapmareis in- cludes (in addition to the works already quoted) two dissertations of ,1878 by C. Schaefer and C. A. Holle; and Hartel’s Studien, published in’ the same year; also an article by von Wilamowitz (in Hermes, xiv 148—153), who, like Stoientin, in Yahrd. f. Philol, 1880, 189~—202, rightly attributed to Aristotle the account which we find in Pollux. The dissertation by Kornitzer (1883) un- fortunately receded from this position, which is now proved to be the only tenable one.

Ypappdrwv—kuptos] ‘is responsible for all public documents’. According to the law quoted in Dem. c. Zimocr. 63, he delivered to the Oexuodéra: the decrees of the Council. td ynblopara—opvudrdrrer] ‘has the (general) custody of the public archives’ (in the Myrpgov). In Dem. F. L. p. 381 these are described as under

the (special) charge of a public slave: év rots Kowots Tots buerépos ypdumacw év 7G Myrpdy ratr’ éorlv, éd’ ofs 6 dy- pbovos Téraxrar. This ypaymareds is men- tioned by Aeschin. 3 § 15, Adyov Kal evOuvas éyypdpovor mpds Tov ypayuaréa kal tov’s Aoyiords, and by Chamaeleon, ap. Athen. 407 C, (Alcibiades) jKxev els 7d Mnrpwov, dmov trav dixkav joav ai ypadal kal Bpétas tov SdxrvAov éx Tod ordparos dundelpe riv Skyy rod ‘Hyhpuovos* dryavaxrodvres 5€ 8 Te ypaymareds Kai o dpxwy Tas hovxlas qyov bv AdKiBiddyy.

TaANa dvriypderat] ‘checks (or su- pervises) the transcription of all other public documents.’ Thus, in the inven- tory of the yadxoOyxy in CIA ii 61, ascribed to B.C. 358 or 354, EvxAfs 6 dnudotos is to enter all the items and the yp. cara mpuravelay is to check them (dv7vypd- gperbar 5é roy ypayparéa roy KaT& mpu- tavelav kal Tos dAXNous ypapparéas Tovds émt rots Snuoctois ypdupactv), and lastly, the ypaumareds TAs Bovdyjs is to record the list on a tablet and to make a copy (avrlypaga).

Pollux, viii 98, after describing the yp. 6 Kara mpuravelay and the yp. ém rovs véuous in terms borrowed in part from the text, continues as follows: dyrc- ypapeds mpbrepov pev aiperds abfis dé KAnpwrds qv Kal wdvra dvreypdpero Tapa- kabjpevos TH Bovdky. In Bekker’s best MS the following words, dvo 68’ joav, 6 peev ras Bouvdys 6 O€ THs SvoKjoews, come after the next heading Noyoral, and this order is approved by Lipsius; but Harpo- cration s.v. agrees with the other Mss in making them apply to the dyrrypa- gets :—6 xabiorduevos éml Tay KaTaBad- Advrww twd TH Wore Xphwara, wore avrvypapetOa Tatra (Dem. ¢. Androt. p- 615 and Aeschin. ¢. Ctes. 25). derrot bé Foav dvTyypadgels, 6 wey THS SiocKjoews, Gs pyot Birdxopos, 6 dé THs Bovdns, ws *ApisroréAns év ’AQ. mod. Cf. Bekker’s Anecd. p. 188, 6 6& karaypapbuevos Ta év TH BovdAn yevoueva. The present is the only passage in the treatise to which Har- pocration can refer, but it is remarkable that the title dvrvypapevs does not occur in the text.

13—2

ial

5

196 AOHNAIQN COL. 27, 1. 34-43. Bourg. mpdrepov pev odv obTos Av YetpoTovnTos, Kal Tovs évdo£o- tdtous Kal mistordtous éx[eplorovouvy: Kal yap év Tais otHhaus mpos Tais cuppayiats Kat mpokevilar]s nal odutelats odTos Ed f a \ D 4 n \ So SN AY avaypdderat viv dé yéyove KANpwTos. KANpotvat SE Kal éml Tods 4

20 vomous Erepov, Os TapaxdOntat TH BovdrH, Kal avtiypaderar Kal obTos mdvras. yepotrover dé Kat 6 Sfwos ypauparéa Tov 5

17 K(alattiCT: corr. K. e Polluce (edd.).

19—20 em TOYTOIC N[OJMON eETEPON: corr. K

8§ 4,5. Cf. Testim. p- 194+

ampdrepov] The date at which this official ceased to be xetporovyrds and became xAnpwrds is unknown. The office became annual between B.C. 367 and 363. The last example of its being held for a mpuravela only is in 368/7; the first example of its being held for a year is in 363/2. Possibly appointment by lot was introduced about the same time.

tods évBofordrous xrA.] For the period between 450 B.c. and 403 B.C., about 28 names are known (Hille in Leipz. Stud. i 240); but only one is at all familiar, *Arybppros K[odAureds], CIA ii 15 (404/3 B.C.). In the fourth century, down to B.C. 322, we have 38 names, not one of them ‘famous’ (see Wyse in Class. Rev. v 276).

orydats] cf. note on Dem. Lefé. § 36.

tats cuppaxlats] ¢g. in B.C. 433/2, the treaties between Athens and Leontini (cra iv 33 a) and Athens and Rhegium {CIA iv 13), Xaplas éypapudreve: also in B.C. 378/7, the second maritime Confe- deracy (CIA ii 17), KadAtBios Kngucopavros éypayydreve. The latest example now known belongs to B.c. 356/5 (CIA ii 66).

mpotevlais] ‘ grants of the title of mpé- £evos’ (cf. note on Dem. Lest. 60, and Gilbert, i 173). As exx. we have (in B.c. 4341/0) CIAi 45, IIpoxAéys ’ArdpBov Evwyv- Meds éypaupdreve.—dvaypaydrw mpdtevov kal evepyérnv’ AOnvalwy(’Acrlay roy’ Adedv) éaTHAn MOlvy 6 ypaupareds 6 THS BovdTS kal karaérw év wore. 76. ii 29 (Echem- brotos of Cleone)—Iiordtevos éypaypd- reve, and ii 3 (Amyntor, Eurypylus, &c) —AcélOeos éyp.—éredy Kabypedn 7 orpdy él rOv rpidxovra év 7 qv av’rots 4 mpo- fevla, dvaypdyar Thy oriAnv Tov yp. THS Bovdys. ii a1 (Eurytion) AloyvAos éyp., li fo (Philiscus, B.C. 35 5) evarns mpuravelas qi Tdvdios Xwkdéous e& Otou éyp.—dvarypd- wat rhde Td Whdiocwa Tov yp. THS BovATs. ii 119 (Apelles of Byzantium, B.c. 339)— dvaypdwat abrod Thy mpoteviay Tov yp. TOY kara mpuravelay. ii124 (an officer of Philip in B.C. 337)—dvaypdwat 5¢ rhy mpoteviay «TA. Cf. Monceaux, Les Proxenies Grece ques, p. 83.

mwodtrelais] ‘grants of citizenship. The oldest inscr. on this subject is that in ’E¢. *Apx. 1883, pp. 37, 38: “Immapyov &c "AOnvaios evar dvdpayadlas evexa rhs és *AOnvaios Kal pudgy xal Shuov cal dpa- tplav édéc0ar iv mep dv Bddwyrm kal dvarypdyas abros dorHAne MOlyye Toy ypape Maréa Tis Bodys. CIA ii 243—elvae ’Of- Oeuw (friend of Demetrius Poliorcetes)— — AOnvaiov—dvaypdyar 5¢ réde rd Wr giopa, Tov ypauparda Tov Kara mpvravelay. motrela is used of ‘a grant of citizen- ship’ in inscriptions of Ephesus, Ditt. no. 134, dvaypdwat 5¢ aire ray wodirelay els 70 lepdv THs ’Apréwédos, ov cal ai Aotral monrire[ia dvlayeypayuevar eloly, and 76. 315, dvarypdyat Srrov kat al Aowral woX- Tela dvayeypaypévar etot: See Sch6mann, Ant. p. 355; Gilbert, i 175; Dict. Ant. i 443; Hartel, Studien, p. 271—3; Rei- nach, PEpigraphie Grecque, p. 371.

dvaypdaderat] Thus, in a decree in honour of Thrasybulus of Calydon, the

-first two lines are inscribed in large

characters, Cla i 59: [émt TAavu«t]armov E[p]xov[r]os. [AdBwr éx] Kydd éypaypd- reve. Then follows the decree in smaller characters and the name of the ypapypa- revs is repeated in the second line, Ad@wv €ypaumdreve. CIA ii 51 (decree of citizen- ship &c B.C. 369) 1. 3—’Afnvieds eypaypd- Teve. CIA ii 54 (do. B.C. 363)—IahAqveds éyp.—rd 5¢ Wigdicpa réde dvarypdyar Tov ypauparéa rhs Bovdys. Mr Wyse (Class. Rev. v 276 a) points out that this style is not found in any inscr. between 356/5 and 320/19.

§ 4. éml rods vopous] Pollux viii 98, cat repos émt rods vduous Urd THs Bovdgs Xet- porovovmevos. The term xetporovodpevos applies to the first ypauyareds of an earlier time, and not to the second -ypap- pareus.

§ 5. tov dvayvwodpevov] It is probably the same official that is meant in Dem. Left. 94 (ofa new law),7¢ ypaypare? rapa- dotvar, Tobrov 8 év rats éxxAnolas dvaryry- vwoxew, When the letter of Nicias was delivered in Athens (Thuc. vii 10) 6 ypap-

CH. 54, 1. 16—28.

TTOAITEIA

197

3 ae dvayvecopevov avtd kal tH BovdAn, Kal ovTos ovdevos éoTL

KU[ptlos GANA TOD dvayvavat. .

6 «KAnpoi && Kai iepomoods Séxa, Tods emi Ta éxOdpata Kadov- pévous, [ot] ta te [wav]revta iepd Ovovow, Kav Te KaddLephoa

7 8én, KaANLEpodaL peTA TOV pdvTe[lwr).

KAnpot 8€ Kal érépous

déxa, Tovs Kat’ éviavTov Kadovpévous, of Ovaias Té TiVas Ovovar, \ \ i e if a \ t [kal Tlas wevternpioas amdcas Stovxodow mrAnY Lavabnvaiwr.

23 aAAA: GAN 7} Blass, Richards, Gennadios (e Suida K-w, H-L); dA\d defendit

K, sed dAN’ 7 fortasse praestat.

28 dtocxodor H-L.

§§ 6, 7 *Etym. M. leporool: xdypwrot dpxovrés elor Séxa rdv dpiOudv, of rd Te Havredpara lepoPerotcr (lepodtrow cod. Vv; lepoduroto. cod. D, Bekk. Az. 265, et Photius: of ra meuartevydva lepa Ovovorv Lex. Dem. Patm.), ‘‘xdy re kaddepjoae 6éy KadNepodor wera TOV udvTewr,” Kal Avolas Tas vourfoudvas émiredovar “Kal Tas mevraernploas amrdcas Sioxobo. why Tlavadynvalwy.” rafra dé’ Ap. loropet év rq ’AG.

Ton.

Pollux viii 107 leporoiol, p. 198 @ exscriptus.

hareds [THs méAews] TapehOay dvéyvw rots "A@nvatois, where Herwerden, Stahl and Hude bracket rs éAews. The margin of M (the Ms in the British Museum) has: brnpérny rov elwObra ev TG Kowy Shuw Ta ypdppara dvayvyyeoxew. We should have ries to find him named in cra ii 61, 26, dxovcacay dé Thy Bovdhy avravaryiyvw- okopevaw tLGv dvaryeypayuévev xTr.J. In CIA ii 114, 10 (B.C. 343/2) we read of a decree in honour of Phanodemus: dvavy- vova. r66¢ TO Wipiopa Toy ypaymaréa TQ Oyu. In [Plut.] ii 841 F, we learn that the orator Lycurgus required the yp. THs wédews to see that the authorised text alone of Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides was adopted in the public per- formances of their plays, [Plut.] ii 841 F, tov Tis méews ypayparéa trapavaywio- kew Tots HroKpwopévots.

GANG] =GAN’ Fin Ath. N. x 5, 1176 a 22, vii 13, 1152 6 30, Rhel. ii 23, 1402 a 27 (Index Ar.).

§ 6. teporovovs] ‘Commissioners of sacrifices.’ Pol. 1322 6 18, dAdo 8’ eldos émimedelas 7 wept rods Oeovs. olov iepels Te kal émipehnral ray ep ra lepd rod o@terbat Te 7a Umapxovra Kal dvopOodcba. Ta, mim- Tovra Tay oikodounudrwy Kal Toy ad\dwy doa réraxras mpds Tovs Geovs—(b 24) olov lepowotods xrA. The text is quoted in Etym. Magn., without any distinction be- tween the two boards. The article adds a reference to Dem. p. 47, 13, of Aoyorotol Tas Toumas ipiv roumevovor era TaY lepo- mov. The leporool are mentioned under the Four Hundred in 30 §2. Cf. [Dem.] 58 § 29, Thy wey apxiy iv éxeivos dpyuv eredeirncer, leporroids wy, Tapa TOUS vou“oUS HPXev ovTos, ob're Maxi or’ émiAaxdy. CIA

ii_741 (B.C. 334/3), é« 709 Sepuartxod—éx Tns Ovolas ry ’Ayaby Téixy mapa leporaav —ét’ AckAntielwy rapa leporoav—eéy Bev- b.déwv, Tapa leporodv. (B.C. 333/2), [ex Tlava]Oqvatwv rapa [teporad]y. B.C. 332/1 éx Tlavadyvalwy apd teporowwy, é& ’EXev- owlwy apd leporomv. Certain kinds of teporotol, however, were elected and not appointed by lot. Thus, Dem. c. A@Zd. §§ 115, 171 states that he had the honour of being ‘elected’ from among all the Athenians as one of the three deporoiol tev ceyvav OeGv. In an inscr. published in ’AOjvatov, 6 p. 483, we find 10 leporotol ol alpedévres bro rs Bovdns (out of the ro tribes), Gilbert i p. 249; Miiller’s Handbuch, v 3, 34+

éx@ipara] The word is hitherto only known in the sense of ‘ pustule’ (Hipp. Epid. 3, 1086 L and S). éx@vw, how- ever, means in act. to sacrifice, in Soph. Zl. 572, and Eur. Cyc. 3713; and, in middle, to expiate. In the text éx@tuara (if genuine) means ‘expiations.’ The corresponding phrase in an inscr. of B.c. 3209/8, in Eg. ’Apx. 1883, 110—126, B 82, is els Ta émiOboupa.

pavrevtd] ‘appointed by oracle.’ Xen. Anab. vi 1, 22, @Overo TG Act, dorep adT@ Havtevrds qv. Sacrifices are enjoined in the pavreiae quoted by Dem. ¢. Md. 52—$4- p

KadAvepjoon] [Xen.] Vect. vi 3, Tov- rows (rots Oeots) KadNepyoavras ApxerPar Tod épyou.

§ 7. tots Kar’ éviaurov] possibly corresponding to the émimednrds of 30

§ 2. _ amevrernp(Sas] These festivals are also enumerated in Pollux viii 107 (as cor-

s

3

eo}

198

AOHNAIQN

COL. 27, |. 43—45.

e[iot Sé] mwevrernpisdes pia [wer 4 ei]s Ajrov (gore 8é cai éx[re]- tnpis évtadOa), Sevtépa Sé Bpavpwwa, tpitn [6é ‘Hpd«rer]Ja,

29 e[icl 5¢] K, K-W, é (sc. wévre) [8 elol] H-L (8B).

mevrernplies <6’ > K-W.

rected by Rose), lepozocol* déxa dvres otro. €@vov Ovalas ras <vopitoudvas Kal (ras added by Kenyon)> mevrernpidas <diorxotor>, rhv els Affrov, Tiv év Bpav- pov, thy trav “Hpaxrelwy (‘Hpaxdedav codd.; corr. Jungermann), ri ’EAevatve.

ahi Tlavabyvatwv] At this festival the procession was marshalled by the

Ojpapxor: Suidas, s. v. obror dé dtexdc--

pow Thy éoprhy rév Tlavadyvaiwy, and Schol. Arist. Wud. 37, ofro: dé ri rop- ay Tov Tlavadnvatwy éxdopmovy. In CIA ii 741 leporovol are twice mentioned in con- nexion with a Panathenaic festival: @ 34, [éx Tlava]@nvaiwy rapa [ieporod, and c8, (é« Tla]vadnvalwy rapa lepofrodv]. The former refers to B.C. 333/2, the latter to 332/1, and, as neither of these is the 3rd year of an Olympiad, the lesser Pana- thenaea must be meant, and not the ‘ pen- teteric’ festival mentioned in the text. The difficulty is more serious in CIA i 188, 74 (Ditt. no. 44): d0d0éras mape- 660n és Ilavadjvaca Ta peydda (such and such a sum), lepomotois kar’ évt- auTév, Awdd@ ‘Epxee? cal cuvdpxovow és Thy éxaréuBny (5114 dr.). Boeckh, 11 p. 8 Frankel, supposes that, in the Pana- thenaea, it was the d@\o#érat who under- took the duties connected with the games, which were undertaken by the lepozotol in the other festivals, while the lepomocol were only concerned with making ar- rangements for the hecatomb.

els AnqAov] The ancient raviyyupis at Delos was revived by the Athenians in the spring of B.c. 425, Thuc. iii 104, 2, tiv wevternplia rére mp&trov pera Thy Kdbapow érolnoay ol APnvain, ra Anrua, Besides the mevrernpis mentioned in the text there was an annual @ewpla (Plat. Phaedo 58 B, Crito 43 C). Hermann, Gottesdienst, Alt. § 65, 31—34.

It was formerly supposed that the De- lian festival was held on the 6th and 7th of Thargelion= May-June (Boeckh, 11 p. 72 Frankel). The Delian inscriptions point to its having been really held in the month known at Delos as ‘Iepds, cor- responding to the Attic Anthesterion =Feb.-March (Robert in Hermes xxi 161, approved by A. Mommsen in Bur- sian’s Fahresb. 1886, 3 p. 335—8). It included musical (Plut. Vic. 3; Lucian de Salt. 16) and gymnastic competitions,

as well as horse-races (Thuc. iii 104; Dit- tenberger, 121, 16).

M. Homolle (Bull. Corresp. Hellén., 1891, pp. 149—155) remarks that ‘the in- ventories from Delos for 279 B.C. men- tion 30 of the cups that the Athenians gave every year, and 23 of the wreaths that they gave every four years... He also remarks that the inventories for 334 B.C., which come next in date, mention 11 of these cups and 20 of these wreaths, so that the last cup would have been -given in 315 B.C., and the last wreath in 322. He argues that, as the Athenians certainly left Delos before 310 B.C., the cessation of their gifts after 315 B.C. is attributable to their departure and marks the exact date. But then one would like to know why there was not a twenty-fourth wreath for 318 B.c. The new treatise suggests the reason. It states that the Athenians held a festival at Delos every four years; but adds parenthetically and every six years also, and then alludes obscurely to the archonship of Cephisophon in 329 B.c. Suppose that [after the festival in 330] the interval was increased in 329 from four years to six: the twenty-second and twenty-third wreaths would then belong to 324 B.C. and 318 B.c, and would pro- bably complete the series; for there is no other record of festivals at Delos every six years, and such festivals would pre- sumably have been recorded, had they existed for any length of time’ (Mr Torr in Class. Rev. v 277).

Bpavpdvia) The festival originally held at Brauron in honour of Artemis is men- tioned in Hdt. vi 138 (cf. Arist. Lyszstr. 646 and Schol.). It was afterwards held in the Brauronion on the Acropolis (Paus. i 23, 9; Wilamowitz, 4us Kydathen, 128 n. 47 f.). We have lists of dresses dedicated to Artemis by Athenian ladies (cla ii 751 ff., p. 113), one of whom ac- tually bears the name of Tevrernpls (2. 7561 15, B.C. 345).

here was also a festival held at Brauron in honour of Dionysus, Arist. Pax 874 with Schol. éxe? 5é kal rd Acov- vow ryeTo, kal Kal? éxacrov Sjyov. Hence the Dionysia are described by Suidas i 454 as having been held every four years at Brauron. But the country Dio nysia were celebrated annually through-

CH. 54, 1. 29—33.

TIOAITEIA

199

terdpTn 5é Ener cinta, [wéumrn] dé Tavabijpasa: Kal Tovreav ovdepia ev TO alta eyyl[yverat]. *[d6ra] 8¢ mpoxertas [*xata Ta 3 apn]gio[uara ra*] él Kngicopdvtos dpxovros.

31 “Edev[oivija, [€] 5¢ Wyse (K%, qui € pro réumry scribi potuisse ostendit, coll. c.47 § 4 ubi [4] pro évdrys recte datum; ‘dispiciuntur vestigia litterae €, et super eam

ductus transversus qui numerum indicat’ (B).

legit K; OYAETPIA, H-L; equidem puto primitus fuisse obdérepa.

’"Edevolma, Ta 5é K-W. 32 oYAEMIO EN?

ENT OLA TOT I~

NETAl: é&v Te adrg Braver K); & rp abr@ erer ylverac J B Mayor; éy TP abre

émaur@ ylyverat Blass (H-L). éo[caurp] ylve[rac] K-w; 32 ...... 6€ mplnernieiuids mise. oe

[r]a dé Tlavadyvaca [kat] TovTwy ovdemia ev TY a’T@ kal rovruw ovdeula ev re abr@ ev[iavT@] ylyve[ra] B. érl Kygpicopavros d&pxovros K, qui ante as aut ¢,

out Attica; and it is more probable that the festival under the control of the tepo- rowol was the distinctive Brauronian festi- val of Artemis. Hemsterhuys, Corsini and others refer the Brauronian zrevte- rnpls (cf. Pollux viii 107) to the Dionysia. K. O. Miiller points out that the exist- ence of a lépeta rijs "Apréusdos THs Bpav- pwtas (Dinarch. Arist. 12) does not prevent the festival being under the management of the ieporotol, and Rinck, die Religion der Hellenen, ii 105, refers it to the festival of Artemis. Hermann /. ¢. § 62, 14—20.

‘Hpdkrea] Dem. / Z. § 125, watdas kal yuvaikas éx Tay aypav karaKoul few éyn- gltecbe... Kal ra “Hpdxeva év doret Ouew, Harpocr. 5. UW. Today syTwv Tay kara Ty Atrix “Hpaxreluy vov dv 6 Anuo- abévys pynuovetor jrou TSv év Kuvocdpyet, Taira yap pdduora Sia Tims elyov ’AOn- vaio, The festival referred to by Dem. was probably held about midsummer, ap- patently in the month Hecatomboeon, at the same time as the Panathenaea: Steph. Byz. s. v. "Bxedldar* —rob TeTpa- Kdpiov “Hpakdelov, éy @ Tovs ‘yuprixovs dyavas éridecay rots Tavadnvatos (Boh- necke, Forschungen, p. 655). On the “HpaxXera at Marathon, cf. Paus. i 15, 43 Pind. O7. ix 95, Schol. Pind. O/. xiii 110. See also Hermann 2. ¢. § 62, 2I— 24,

*EXevolyia] A festival held (as the context shews) once in four years and therefore distinct from the Eveusinia in the ordinary sense of the term. A. Momm- sen, Heortologie, 1864, p. 243, doubted its existence. Cf., however, inscr. from Eleu- sis in ’E@. ’Apx. 1883, pp. 110—126 8 50, chumay xe[pararoy lepeGor kal] iepelacs els rip rpernplia trav "Hdevowlov kal els Thy mevrernploa, cf. 2b. 1887, P._3, V 25, Tis tmavy[yupelws Tov ’Edev[ot}vlwy trav neydhwv, It has been conjectured that the rpernpls and sevrernpis fell in the

second and fourth year respectively of the Olympiad. If the inscr. in CIA ii 741 (Ditt. 374) is correctly restored, the ieporrotol, presumably of xar’ évaurév, were concerned with the anual celebra- tion of the [Bdevolvia, cf. c 66 [é "EAe]u- cwlwv rapa leporow[y—], B.C. 432/1, the Jirst year of an Olympiad, and @ 74 é[& "Edevowlwv rapd]lepon[ousy—], B.C. 331/0, the second year ofan Ol. For the fourth year of an Ol., 333/2, the inscr. 4 39, as restored in the "Corpus, has [é& Tis Gua |las [ra Aqunrpe kal 77 Képy] 77 Aaelp[a rapa érmsedntaly. (Wyse, in Class. Rev. v 335 2.)

The inscr. in ’Ed. Apx. 1883, mention- ing the revrernpls Tov *Edevowlwv, refers to B.C. 329/8, the very year in which Cephisophon was archon. Payments are there made to the leporovol of kar’ éviavrov, B 8 and 38 (kara WHpioua Shyou [7]d [els O]vo[tas]), and to the teporo.ol é-y Boudfs B 67, 72, 76, 82 (els rd erica), y 4 (Wyse, 26.)

7 aan cee: the great Panathenaea ; c. 60.

év t@ att] probably means ‘in the same place,’ which is true, the festivals being associated with Delos, Brauron, Marathon, Eleusis and Athens respec- tively. ‘ At the same time’ is in itself a less likely interpretation. It is not at all probable that the festivals would actually clash in respect of date; but there would be no point in drawing attention to this.

- The Delian festival and the great Pana-

thenaea were alike in the third year of an Olympiad (Thue. iii 104). The Delia of 334 fell in the third year; those of 279 in the second year of an Ol. The Delia were probably held in the month of An- thesterion ; the Panathenaea (and pro- Bably the Heracleia) in Hecatomboeon ; the Eleusinia possibly in the fourth year of an Olympiad, and probably in the same month as the annual Eleusinia, z.e,

200

AOHNAIQN

COL. 27,1. 45—51.

Kdnpodar Sé Kai eis Ladapiva dpyovra, cai eis Ieilpacléa 8 35 Onplapylov, of rd Te Avoviora Trowodat ExatépwOt Kal yopnyods

aut fortasse p, scriptum fuisse arbitratus, conicit [ro0ro] dé mpdxecrar [ypag]ais [rais]

él rr,

so0e0d8 mpbxerras [ev ypalpats (cat B) [rats] éml xr. K-w. tat [rept rodrwy rebels] éwt xrd. H-L, invita papyro. erat [wdo]as [kaOdaep] él «rd. 3 vel [ev rais ypalpais [rats] éml xrd., coll. Plut. ii’

[vdu0s] 5é wrpdxec-

1134 A, 9 Tav Tlavabnvaluy ypaph rept pwovotxod dyavos; vel [x(ara) ras o(vy)ypalpas [ras] éml «rd. (coll. Dittenb. Sylloge, p. 24)3 vel potius [40a] 6€ wpdxerras [a(ard) 7a Wy]olo[yara ra] ért xrd.; sed Cephisophon Olympiadis in anno quarto archon erat, nec video cur in anno proximo post Panathenaea, potius quam ante ludos illos, nova praemia decreta fuerint ; eo meliore igitur iure réurry d€ Iavabjvaa delenda putat B.

34 Trel...€a, Ilepacéa K, K-w, B: Tetpacd H-L.

35 movodor etiam H-L.

in Boedromion. The month (and even the year) of the Brauronia is unknown. (A. Mommsen, eortol. 409, assigns it to the 16th of Munichion.)

The insertion of éviavrg is only pos- sible if we disconnect the Panathenaea from the four penteteric festivals. The text, as edited by K-W, implies that not one of these four is in the same year as the Panathenaea; which is only possible if the Delian festival had already been transferred to the second year of the Ol., and the Heracleia to the first year, leav- ing the Brauronia (and possibly the Eleu- sinia) in the fourth year.

1.32. d@dAa. St rpdKevrat] The suggestion ada is confirmed (in point of sense) by the context, and (in point of expression) by Pol. 1330 @ 33, Tots dovXos @Oov mpoxetaOar thy édevOeplay, Hdt. ix tor, deOra mpdkecrat, vili 93, deOAov exerro, 20. 26, 7d deOddv oe xelwevov, Plat. Rep. 638 C, mpoxelueva GOda, Xen. Cyr. ii 3, 2, GOdra mpbxerrat, i 6, 18 dOAa mporibels, Cf. inscr. found at Sestos, in Dittenberger, 246, 78 (before 120 B.C.), Tuels GOAa dv- twv Ttav GOA\nudrwy Tots Te véots Kal Tots édijBors. It is a welcome confirmation of this suggestion to find that d@A\a has been independently proposed by Mr Newman, Class. Rev. v 117

The inscr. already quoted from ’E¢. *Apx. 1883, pp. 110—126, describes the payments made to the leporool of kar’ éviaurér, B 8 and 38 Kara Widicua Siuou [7] [els @]uo[las], and y 7 xal rodro (more than 1000 dv.) leporrotoi’s kareBdopev Kara Yhgiopa Shuov 6 Avxodpyos elrev. The date of the inscr. is the archonship of Cephisophon, B.C. 329/8. It is clear that in that year, on the proposal of Lycurgus, there was a special decree of the people affecting the mevrernpls of the ’EAevolyia, The same decree added a horse-race to the contests, and we are told that the prize in that contest was 70 medimni, B 38, 48, els rhv lrmodpoulay tiv mpoore-

Ocioay kata Whpioua GOra pédiuvo. PAA. The suggestion in the text assumes that, under the active administration of Lycur- gus (cf. Diirrbach, Lycausgue, pp. 99— 102), prizes for the other festivals as well were the subject of decrees in the same year, but there is no evidence on this point. It mayalso be admitted that the 4th year of an Olympiad is not a very likely year for a decree to be passed affecting the Panathenaic and Delian festivals, which would not be held till three years later, in the 3rd year of an Olympiad. él Kydiorodavros] B.C. 3209/8, the latest date mentioned in this treatise.

§ 8. els Dadapiva dpxovra] cra ii 594 (127 B.C.?), v. 1, é[rt] ’Emexddous dpxov- tos év adore, év Ladapive dé Avbpovixo[u], v. 31, Atovuclwy tw év Zadapive rparyw- Sots. 2b. ii 469 (somewhat before 69 B.C.), v. 75 and 80, émi Ilv@éou dpxovros év Zada- pain, év doret 68 ‘Inmdpyxou, v. 82, Atovuclwy Tov év Zadrapin rpaywoav év dyave (cf. n. 470, Vv. §8). Before the discovery of this treatise there was nothing to shew how the archon in Salamis was appointed.. Cf. de Schoeffer, De Deli Insulae Rebus, p. 201: ‘ Archon Salaminis insulae fueritne ab Atheniensibus constitutus an a cle- tuchis electus, prorsus ignoramus; nomen archontis minime obstat quominus illud verisimilius videatur,’ Dittenberger, Sy//. Inser. Graec. n. 383, n. 2, on an ‘ar- chon’ in a decree of Scyros posterior to 196 B.c. (Wyse in Class. Rev. v 335+)

Salamis was not reckoned as a regular Attic deme, but as a community de- pendent on Athens. Hence (like Athens) it had an archon at its head (Hermann, pi a § ie 4)

els Tleparéa 84 ov] In cia ii573 4 we have a decree cite second half of the fourth century, placing the Oecpo- péptov in the Peiraeus under the protec- tion of the diapxes. In ii 573 the dypapxos is mentioned in connexion with a theatre in the Peiraeus. In an inscr.

equidem tentavi [a0Aa] dé mpé- |

CH. 54, 1.34—CH. 55,1.7. TIOAITEIA 201

kabiotaow: év Zaraluive] 8€ Kal ro [dvloua tod dpyovtos 36 dvaypaderac.

55. airas ev ovv ai dpyal Kdynpwral te Kal Kipiar Tov [eon|uévwv [mpayudrlov eiciv. of Sé Kadovpevor éevyvéa dp- Novres, TO wev €E apyhs ov tpdmov Kabicravto [elpyn|tar’ [viv] de KAnpotow Gecpobéras péev 8 Kab ypappatéa todos, ere & dpxovta Kal Baoi[déa] Kai rodduapyov, Kata pépos é& Exdorns 5.

2<rys> pudjs. Soxiualovtas & odtos rpatov pev év TH [Bovdg] Tois mevtakocioss, TAY TOD ypaypatéws, odtos 8 ev Sixacrnpio

LV 1 ‘an KAnpobvrar kal Kdpiae ?? K-w. 3 [elpn]ra: [750° vv] K, K-w, H-L: [etpy}rac’ [viv] B, cum versus proximi in spatio eodem non plus quam tres exstent litterae. 4 KAnpoto. H-L. 5 éxdorns <Tihs> B. 7, 10 <7r@>dixac-

typly hic et in c. 45, 7 K-w; idem in c. 46, 13 et c. 55, 10 articulum omissum non inserunt.

TESTIMONIA. LV §§ 1, 2, 4 Heraclidis epitoma; Rose Frag. 611, 8: elot dé kat evvéa dpxovres. Oecmoéra s’ (Coraes; Geouodérar al vel Gecpoberixol kal codd.) of Boxiwacbévres duvdovor Sixalws dptew Kal SOpa wh AjWeoOa Hf dvdpidvra xpucoiv dvabhcew.

§§ 2, 3 Pollux viii 85, 86, p. 202 4 exscriptus. *Lex. rhet. Cantab. decuoderav dvdxpiois: Kara ’ApiororéAny of Oeruodérar ex T&v 6 dpxdvrwyv, abrol & dvres. ol 6e haxdvres bd Tis Bovlfs Tov wevrakociwy Kal Tod diucacryplov ‘Soxemdtovrac” “*rdhv Tov "ypappwaréws ” épwrwevor tives adrav marépes, duolws Kal Shuwv rlywr etol, cal ‘el gorw” adbrots ‘° Aréddwy marpdos kal Leds Epxesos,” cal el rods “-yovéas” eB rowotat, kal el “ra réhy” redodor, Kal el ras wep THs warpldos orparelas éorparedcayro (Frag.

375°) 414°).

ascribed to the beginning of the 3rd cent., i. 589, one Callimedon has a place of precedence assigned him é& T@ Oedrpy Gray, moidot Tlepacets ra Acovticca—xal elowyérw airov 6 Shuapxos els 7d Oda- tpov. Lastly, in ii 1059, a lease granted by the ITepaceis is superscribed ém *Apxlrmov dpxovros (B.C. 321/0), Ppuvi- wvos Snuapxoi[yros]. Cf. Wachsmuth, Stadt Athen, ii 5. While, in the other demes, the djuapxos was elected by the members of the deme, in the important deme of the Peiraeus he was appointed by lot. Otherwise he would have be- come too powerful a personage.

Avoviowa] 7a Kar’ dypovs, celebrated in the month Poseideon, and on the grandest scale in the Peiraeus. CIA ii 589 (quoted above), 2d. 741 (Ditt. 374), 6, 72, 79, éy Atovyatwy ré&v év Tlepaced. Cf. Miiller’s Handbuch, v 3, 162, and Wyse in Class. Rev. v 276 6.

LV—LVI§1. Ox the nine Archons. Hermann, Staatsalt. § 138 ; SchOmann, Ant. p. 410—414; Gilbert, i 239—243; Dict. Ant. 5. v.

LV § 1. & dpxijs] c. 3 §§ 2-43 8§13 2285; 26§ 2.

kAnpotow- «7A.] The process is de- scribed in c. 8 § 1, Tals pudais TO Séka

KAnpodv éxdarny, et7’ éx robrwr xvameverw.

Geo pobéras—es Exdorrys THS puArs] It has hitherto been uncertain whether, in the annual appointment of archons, the hold- ers of the office were taken from different tribes. Those who (like Schémann, p. 410) accepted this view, supposed that one of the ten tribes was unrepresented. We now learn that the tenth tribe sup- plied the ypaypareds to the Oecuobéra:.

ypapparéa] The existence of a yp. to the ¢hesmothetae has hitherto been un- known. Pollux, viii 92, after stating that the three first archons select two mdpe- Spa each, adds: mpocatpodvra dé Kai ypapparéa, ds évvduw Sixacrnply xpiverar, but says nothing of any such secretary to the other six archons.

§2. Soxusafovrat] Harpocr. s.v. doxe- pacbels'—Auxodpyos 8 év T@ epi Stowxy- cews “ Soxipacta card Tov vouor,” pyoi, “mlvovrat, ula wev qv ol 0 dpxovres Soxt- pwagovrac «rr. Bekk. Amecad. 235, 11. Dem. Left. go describes the six thesmo- thetae as undergoing a double doxipacta, é re TH BovAg Kal wap wuiv év TO dixac- rnptw (cf. Lys. 15 § 2). Dem. 87 §§ 66, yo refers to the doxtwacta of all the nine archons. Gilbert, i 208; Schémann, p. 406.

10

15

202 AOHNAIQN COL. 27, l. 52—cOL. 28, |. 18.

Movov, Harrep of Arrow dpyor[res] (a[dvres yap Kal] of KrAnpwrol Kal ot YetpoTovntol Soxiuacbévtes adpxovaw), of & évvéa[dpyovtes [év] re th Bovdgy wal wddw ev Sixactypiv. Kal mpotepov pev ove Hpxev ovt[w dlroSoxypacesev 4 Bovry, viv 8 epecis eorw eis TO SiuxacryHpiov, Kal TodTo KUp.ov éote THS Soxi[paloias. é[7e]pwrd- 3 aw 8, brav Soximdlwow, mpa@tov ev ‘ris || cov watnp Kal modev [Col Tov Onpwv, Kal Tis TaTpos TaTHp, Kal Tis pAnTNp, Kal Tis uNnTpOS maTnp Kat modev TOV Snuwy ;’ peta bé Tadra, ei Eotw aiTe "ATroANwY Tatp@os Kal Leds Epxetos, cal mov [rladta Ta iepa éorwy, eita npia ei €otw Kal Tod Tava, éreita yovéas ei ed Trotel,

[cal] ra rédn TeAE?, Kal Tas oTpaTelas Ef CoTpaTEVTaL.

9 évvé’ K-w, B. K-W e Lex. Cantabr. coll. Dinarch. ii 18.

12 érepwrdou H-L.

TavTa &

16 épxetos edd. 18 <el> rede?

mavres—Soxrpacbévres dpxovoty] Ae- schin. ¢. Cées. SS 14, 155 Lysias 26 §§ | 6, 12, Pollux viii 44, doxcuacia &@ rots dp- xovow ernyyéddero Kal Tots KAnpwrots Kal Trois alperots, elr’ émerjdetol elow dpyew etre kal uy. The text statesthat, whereas the nine archons were examined by the Council and by the law-court, all the other officers (whether appointed by lot or by show of hands) were examined by the law-court alone. This is in exact agreement with the view put forward by C. Schaefer in Fakrb.f, class. Phil. 1878, 821 (the other views are stated in Gilbert, i 208, n. 3).

The passages bearing on the doxypacla of the dpyai Xetporovaral are Dem. 40§ | 34s Xelporovnodyr wy byuay éue raklapyov nKev avros éml 76 StxacTyptoy Sox.uacOno dpevos, and Aesch. Ctes. 15, xelporovnrds dp- xas,..dpxew Soxyuacbévras ev To Sixac- tnplw. In the latter passage it is added that the kAnpwral dpxal are ovk ddoxl- uagrot, but nothing is stated about the law- courts. Cf c. 45 § 3

§ 3. Tpatov pev xrd.] Dinarchus, A7is- tog. 17, avaxplvovres ToUs Nrep THy Koay TL péddovTas deorxety, tls éore Tov tdtov TpbTov, el yovéas ef moet, ef Tas orparelas rep rhs wodews éorpdrevrat, el lepa (jpla Baiter and Sauppe, coll. 8 18 marpds uvijpa) Tarppa, éorw, ef ra TéXn Tere. Xen. Mem. ii 2, 13, éav 5€ Tus -yovéas mh Oepa- revy, Tour Olknv re émerlOnor Kal d7odo- kydfoura ovk é¢ dpxew Tolrov... Kal édy Tis TOV youd Teheurnody rey rods tagous

cu Koout, kal ro0ro éterdtec modes ev tais Tov dpxdvrwy Soxiwaciats. Lys. 16 § 9 (of the doximacla of a Bovdevris), év rats Soximaclars Slxatov elvar mavTos Tod

Blov débyor Sdévar, Pollux, viii 85, 86,

gives a summary of the text, éxadeiro dé Tis Becpoberay dvdxpiors (Dem. Eubul. 66), ef "AOnvatol elow éxarépwber éx Tpt- yovlas kal rov Sfuov (corrected in margin of Cobet’s copy into 7év dyuwv, which is proved to be right by the text) ré@ev, kal el ’Amé\\wy eorw atrois rarpwos Kal Leds &pxetos, kal el rods yovéas e& mrotover, Kal el éorparevyrat brép Tis warpldos Kal el rd tlunua éarw abrois. In the quotation in Lex. Rhet. Cant. the clause last quoted is in closer accordance with the text, ef ra ré\y Tedobot: though the form in Pollux has been supposed to be the older form (Gilbert i 210, n. 1),

TaTpds TATIHP...uyTPOS TaTHp] Pollux vili 85, ’A@yvato.—ék rpvyovlas, not ne- cessarily part of an earlier formula.

*Aro\ov tratpdos—Zeds epxeos] The gods of the Athenian’s home. Dem. 57 § 54, masdlov dvra pw’ eddws Hryov els Tous pparepas,els Am bAAWY OS TAT PMoU Hyor, and § 67 quoted below. Cf. Harp. s. v Tov 6é’AméA\wva Kowas Tar pov TYyLoW “AOnvator ard” Twvos- Tovrou yap olkloavros Thy "Arrihy, ws "Aptarorédys pyot, Tovs "Ad. "Twvas wrxnOfvar xai’Ard\dwva a- Tpw@ov abroits dvopac OFp a1, and 5. Ep ketos Leds Aclvapxos év Tq kaTa Mocxlwvos

“el ppadropes arp kal Bwpol Ards épxelou kal "AméAXwvos warpyou elaty.”” epx. Leds,

@ Bwpds évrds epxous ev 75 addy lpurar.— es 6¢ rovrots periv THs modrelas ols ey Zevds epxetos, Sed7jAwke xal* Trrepeldns «Th.

yp(a] Dem. 57 § 66, domep yap rods Bea pobéras s dvaxplvere, ey Tov avrov Tpbmov enavrov dpiv dvaxpwO. (67)—olketol rwes eivas paprupodow adr@; rdvuye mp@rov wey ye Térrapes dveynoi,—elr "AméoAXwWVoOs Ta- rp@ov kal Ads épxelou yevyfrar, e160" ofs npta ravrd, (cf. Dinarchus, quoted above).

CH. §5, 1. 8—cH. 56,1.1. TOAITEIA 203 avepwtnaas, ‘K[a]reu,’ dnoiv, ‘rodtwv tods pwdptupas. érresSdy 88 mapdoxyntat Tovs pdptupas érepwrd, ‘tovTov BovreTai Tis 20

4 xatnyopetv ;’ Kav pev 7 Tus KaTHYopos, Sods KaTHYyoplay Kal aTroXo- ylav, oro didwow ev pev TH Bovdhh THY émuyepotoviar, év Se TS Sicacrnpio thy Whdovr édv Sé yndels Bodrntat Katnyopeiv, evOds SiSwot THY Wihdovr Kal mpotepoy pev els evéBarre tHV []hdov, viv 8 avaykn tavtas éotl Siandilecbat epi aitar, iva, dy Tis 25 movnpos @v atraddak~n tos KaTnyopous, emt Tois SixacTtais

5 yévntat todtov amodoxipacat. Soxwmacbév<tes> S& TobTov Tov Tporov, Badifovaww mpos Tov riOov éd’ o[6] Ta Tops’ éativ, ef’ ob kal of Starrntal dudcavtes amodaivovta, tas Siaitas, Kal, of paptupes é€ouvuvtas tas paptupias. dvaBdvres 8 éml rovrov 30 duvvovaty Sixaiws apfev Kal Kata tovs vdmous, Kat Sdpa pr} Anperbas THS apyns Evexa, Kav Tt AABwot, avdpiavta avabnoev

xpucoby. évredbev S opudcavtes eis axpdrodw Badifovew Kal / a " a fed

mad €xel TavTa duvvovol, Kal peTa TavT eis THY apynV

eioépyovTau,

56. AauwBavover dé nai mapéSpovs 6 Te dpywr Kai 6 Bact- Ly peop PX

20 BoyAeyTal: corr. K. 25 WW’ dy H-L, pacdév<res> Rutherford, Richards, Blass, K-w, H-L. (Tami?) éorw K1; 颒 ob ra rou éoriv van Leeuwen (H-L, K3); 6’ G@ rh. Bs OG (“EH an y¢ incertum ; utrumque libri Pollucis’) @ ra réuc éoriy K-w. mihi quidem littera Y cum @ connexa potius quam € scripta videbatur (sed € posse legi censent K et K-W) ; sequitur o potius quam litterae w initium. 31 duvvovet H-L. 32 Ad- Bwow H-L. 33 Badlfover H-L.

LVI 1 xai 6 Baccdeds om. Harp.

27 AOKIMACOEN (K): doxe-

28 Up G Ta Tamed

§ 5, 28 *Harp. AlOos (cf. Testim. adc. 7, 5).

TESTIMONIA. LVI § 1 Pollux viii 92: md pepo. 8 dvoudtovra: ovs alpobyras dpxwy kal Baotheds Kal rohéuapyos, dUo exagros ods Botherat. Soxipacbfvar 3 abrous éxpav év rots mevtaxoctos, elr’ év dixacrnply. {mpooapobvrat 6¢ kal ypayparda, ds éwéum Stxaorynpl kolvera.. *Harp. md.pedpos : "Ap. & & 7H’ AO. ror. pyol “rap- Bdvovor 5¢ Kal aapédpous 6 re pxwy <xal 6 Baotheds Rose, coll. Meier Att. Proc. P. 573 Bull. de Corr. Hell. vii 158> kal 6 wodéuapxos, vo éxdrepos (€xacros Rose) obs dv Bobhnrat, kal Ot eal — ma ped psletily ” (cf. Suid. s. v.). Frag. 3897, 428°.

eee 4: Pe hgadl Meier and Schom. p. 35 ff.

FR eal Dem. ¢. Zimocr. § 37, & dradhdaén ris tov ériordvra, and dmradddéas kal dtapelpas, also And. de Myst. 122, supra c. 27 ad fin.

§ 5. ampos tov AlOov] Dem. 54 § 26, mpos tov NGov (Harpocr.; Bwpdy MSS) d-yovres kal éopxlfovres. | Plut. Sol. 25, pvvey dpkov éxacTos Tuv Oecuoberuv év dyop¢ mpds Te NOy.

eh ot td Tépr eéorlv] Dem. 23 «. Aristocr, 68 (the prosecutor in a case of homicide before the Areopagus) 3urucw...

oras él rev Toulwy Kampou Kal Kpiod Kal tavpov. Arist. Lys. 186, kal moe dérw ra rouid Tis. The archon’s oath was taken (Pollux viii 86) mpds TH Baotdely orog, émt Tod Alou tp @ Ta Tapela (ita codex Schotti; é@’ @ 7 ceteri: éf of ra Toma bés corr. Bergk, Zp. crit. ad Schiller.,

131). = de ecedora dvabyoev] 7§1. Gilbert, i 211, n. 3.

LVI § 3. ‘apé8pouvs] In [Dem.] 59

§ 72, and in CIA ii 597, the mdpedpos to the archon faciAeds is mentioned. Gilbert, i 218, n. 4.

I

204 AQHNAIQN COL, 28, 1. 18—33.

‘\ 2 Aevs Kal 6 morAduapyos dvo0 ExacTos, os dv BovAntat, Kat obra

ft ? A 7 \ Ul f ‘ 2>Q/ Soximalovra, ev tO Sixactnpiw mpl Tapedpevew, Kat evOdvas

5

°

SiSdacw érdv rapedpebowow. ;

kal 6 pev dpxewv evOds eicehOdv TpATov pev KnpUTTEL, boa Tis elyev mpiv adtov eicedOelv eis THY apxnv, TadT exew Kai kpateiv péxpe apyns Tédous. emevta xXopnyods Tpaywdois Kabic- thot TpEls, €€ aravtwv “AOnvaiwy tols TAOVTLWTATOUS TpPOTEpOY dé kal Kwopdots Kablorn révte, viv 8& TovToUs ai pudral dépovary. éreta tapadaBev Tos xopyyovs Tovs évnveypévous UTd THY gvardy eis Avovicta dvdpacw kai traciv Kal kwppdolils, Kai eis @apyjrda avdpdow cal raoly (clot & of pév eis Avovtowa Kata

2 éxacros: éxdrepos Harp. (K}). dv: €AN. 4 ETTAN: éreidav H-L.

9 TOYTOIC K et H-L, ‘i.e. Tots Kwpmdois xopyyous Pépover’: Tovrovs Wyse coll. Dem. 39 § 7 (K-W, B). 11—12 dvipdow—ratol—dvipdot H-L.

§ 3 Lex. rhet. Cantab. érdvuuos dpywv :...eceu 5¢ émiédecav xopyryovs KaTaoricar “els Acovdowa” kal “ Oapyidua,” émepedetTas d¢ kal Tv “els Afjtov” Kal ray dddAaxdce

meutropévay AOjnvnbev xopOv...

éxacros] éxdrepos is found in the cita- tion in Harpocr., where, however, kai 6 Baordrevs is omitted. It was conjectured by Meier (4t¢. Proc. p. 71 Lips.) that it was owing to this omission that &acros had been corrupted into éxarepos. We now see that this was actually the case (Lipsius, Leipz. Verhandl. p. 53, n- 35 was accidentally led to state the contrary by the reading in Mr Kenyon’s first edi- tion, éxarepos). §§2—7. The Archon. § 3. xopnyots] Dem. Leds. Introd.

iv—vii; Haigh’s Attic Theatre, p. 71—75; Albert Miiller’s Buhnenalter- thiimer, Pp. 193.

tpaywdois] Lys. 24 § 9, Karacradels Xopyyos Tpaywdots, 19 § 29, Tpaywoois dis xopyyiioa. Cf. Kiihner, § 426, 2.

tpets] In tragedy the number of com- petitors was limited to three. In the extant notices we never find more than three tragic poets competing, e.g. B.C. 467, (1) Aeschylus, S. C. 7. &c, (2) Aris- tias, (3) Polyphradmon. B.C. 431, (1) Euphorion, (2) Sophocles, (3) Euripides, Medea, &c. B.C. 428, (1) Euripides, Hippolytus, &c, (2) Iophon, (3) Ion. Cf. sane Attic Theatre, p. 19.

kwpwdots—révre] In comedy the num- ber of competitors during the fifth century was three, as in tragedy: thus Aristo- phanes, in producing at the City Dionysia the Clouds, the Peace and Birds, during the latter part of the fifth century, had in each case two competitors. ‘The same

p-

was the rule at the Lenaea. With the beginning of the fourth. century .the number was raised to five at both festi- vals (cf. Arg. Arist. Plat. and CIA ii 972, Haigh, /.c. p. 30—31).

tobrovs—hépovorv] Dem. p. 996, 22, obkodv...otcoval ne, dv xopyyov 7 yupvacl- apxov 7 éoridropa 7 édv Te rev GAdKwy pé- pwow; It is only in the case of comedy that the @vAal nominate; and even here it is a recent innovation. The xopyyoi con- cerned with the production of tragedies were not nominated by the tribes; cf. Lipsius, Leipz. Verhandl. 1885, p. 411.

Avovicia] év dove. Elaphebolion 9-13.

dvSpdow kal waurly] At the City Dio- nysia, besides the dramatic contests, there were choral competitions, between cho- ruses of men and boysrespectively. There were five choruses of men and five of boys, each chorus being provided by one of the ten tribes, each tribe being represented by one of its members as xopyyés. Haigh, Zc. pp. 14, 15.

@apyrjAva] On the second day of the festival, about May 25, there was a com- petition among the cyclic choruses of men and boys. Lys. 21 § 1, OapynAlots vixjoas dvipixw xopy, Ant. de Chor. §§ 11—13, of a xopds waldwy, CIA ii 553, ef Tes dAdos vevixnxev dm’ Hixdeldou &pxovros raw 4 dvipdcw Acoviowa 7 Oapyjdca x7h. Dem. Mid. § 10 (lex), OapyyNwv ry rour7 Kal 7@ dyou. Cf. A. Mommsen, Zeortol., 414-424.

CH. 56, 1. 2—20. TIOAITEIA 205

gurds, eis Oapynrva [Sé] dvoiv puraiv els: rrapéyer § ev pléper] éxatépa Tay purGy), TovTOLs Tas avTiBdcess TroLE Kal Tas cKNpELS ? t PA nx , fal a A

eio[ayel, éd]v Tis 7 AEAnTOUpyn[Ké]y[ar] GH w[po]repov TavTyv \ , a3 \ 5 \ es

Thy AnToupy[iav, 7 a]TeAys elvar NeAn[TOUpyNnKds élrépav AnTOUp- yiay Kal Tov ypovev adt@ [THs ated]eias pn éEedy[Av]Oo[Twr, 7 Ta Tetrapaxovta] Ern pn yeyovévat: Sef yap Tov Tots qrai[alv yopn]- yoouvta bméep TeTTapalKov|ra ern yeyovévar. KaOlatnor dé Kat eis Afrov yopnyous, Kal apy[O]éa[pov T]6 tpiaxovtopiw TB rods

13 dé, quod in lacuna absorptum censet K, in codicis imagine videre sibi visi sunt H-L, B:

m[p]érepov K-w. 16 AE€ITOYPPIAN (vel AOYTHPLIAN pr.). q djredhs elvace NeAyroup[yyxévac yap] K-w ; 7 d]redns elvac NeAy[ToupyyKas K? (B). 17 dv xpévev ara [ris dreA]elas wn ébeAn[Av]O6[Twy, 7 7a uw] ery K?; eadem (omisso ~ quod olim protuli) B; é&edyAvO67wv non accipiunt K-w. Locum totum 15—19 ita constituunt H-L: édv rus 4 Aéyn wévys elvan H mpods Erepov ravrny Tiv AyToupylay waddov dvjKew 7 Anroupyeiv On érépay Ayroupylay 4 Trav xpdvev air@ evexa...clas uy eeivar, dia Td Ta vojiupa @rn ph vyeyovévar. Melius K-w: édy ris AeAnroupynKévar Aéyy mpdrepoy Tabray Thy Anroupylay, Hf dredys elvar* NehyToupynkévar yap érépay AyToupylay Kal rdv xXobvov aire THs dredelas wh ékeAOelv, F 7a vou’ (incertum) éry wh -yeyovéva.

18 raici H-L. Lipsius, Frankel, K-w, B.

20 dpxuGewpovs Torr coll. CIG 158 @ 33 (H-L, K°); dpxbéwpov Cf. Boeckh, ii 84%, n. 391. :

19 *Harp. dri véuos dorly brep Tecoapdxovra TH yevouevov xopyyely maciv Aloxlyys te &v TH Kara Tiudpxov Pyot cal’ Ap. év 7H’AO. wor. (Frag. 4317, 4713).

Svotv pudaiv ets] Ant. de Chor. 11, Xopyryos karecradny els Oapyndia Kal éda- xov Kexporlda gudiw mpds TH éuavrod. Schol. Dem. Legt. 27, é& rots Oapyndos dvotv pudaty els wdvos Kabicraro xopnyés.

dvri8does] Lys. 24 § 10, el—xara- oradels xopyyos—mpoxarecaluny avrov els dyridoow. Dem. Left. §§ 40, 130, and Or. 42adv. Phaenippum. [Xen.]de Rep. Ath. ili 4, xopyyots Siadixdoar els Avoytora Kal Oapyjdkta. Cf. Boeckh, Iv xvi, Meier and Schom. p. 738 Lips.; Dzct. Ant. s.v.

Tas ene elodyet] CIA ii 809 (of the orparnyol, who dealt with dvridécecs in the case of the trierarchy and property- tax, just as the archon did in that of the xopyyia), drws 8 dy calal oxywpers eloax- Aor. Meier and Schémann, p. 743 n.

AeAyroupyykds érépav Ayrovpylav] Dem. 50 § 9, Tovrwy éyw obdeulay mpb- gacw rodpuevos drt TpinpapxG, Kal ovK dy dwvatuny dSvo0 AnTroupylas AyToupyeiv, ovde of vouor édow.

Kal Tov xpdvev—pr} eAnAvOdray] ‘or owing to the period of his exemption

having not yet expired.’ The obligation to perform a Ayrovpyla recurred only every other year, Dem. Left. 7.

trip rerrapdKovra érn] Aeschin. c. Timarch. § 11, Kedeve. Tov Xopnydov Thy ovolay ri éavrot dvadioxew brép rerTapd- kovra &éry yeyovdra Todro mpdrrew, iv’ dn év Ty cwppoveotary avrod Hrukla ay, o'rws évruyxdvn Tots buerépors tacty.

els AyjAov xopnyots] lex. Cantab. 670; "AOnv. vii p. 480, no. 3 (Gilbert i 240); Thue. iii 104, §§ 3, 6; Xen. Mem. iii 3, 12, xopos... 6 els AfjAov meuropuevos, Lucian de Saltat. 16, év Ajrw 5é ye ov dev ai Ovalat dvev dpxjoews, GAG odv radry Kal pera povoixfs éyiryvovto’ twatdwy yxopol cuved- Obvres bm’ avr Kal KLOdpg, ol uev éxdpevor, vmwpxotvTo 5€ of dpirrot mpoxpibévres ef ad’rwy. On the Delian wevrernpis, cf. 54

8 7.

Tagitdapoul Plut. Wize. 3 § 5.

T® TpiaKovTopiw KrA.] Xen. Mem. iv 8, 2, ews av 7 Oewpla éx Andou éravédOy, Plat. Phaed.p. 58 A; Plut. Thes. 23, 7d whotov, dv @ pera Tav HiOéwy erdevce kal wédw

o

5

206 AOHNAIQN COL, 28, l. 33—42.

21 n0éous dyovtt. rowdy 8 érmerel[ras THs Te] TO “AcKANTLD 4 yuyvouévns, Stay oixovpdor pi[a]tas, nal ths Avovyciov tav [Meya]Awv pera radv émipedntey, ods mpdtepov pev 6 S4uos

mOéous K. 22 TIN (K-W), <ol> pw. K-W, -vy <ol> uw H-L.

§§ 4—7 Pollux viii 89: 6 6¢ dpywv diarl@nor wév Acovdora nal Oapyyria ‘werd trav érmednrav,” dlkar dé mpds abrov AayxdvovTa ‘‘kaxwoews,” ‘ rapavolas,” ‘els baryray (Siaryr&v codd.) atpeow,” émerporijs éppavav, émirpbrwy xaragrdcews, ‘ Kd7}- pov Kal érixAnpwv émidixaclar. emyedretrar dé kal” “ray yuvackGv” al dv Pdow én’ dvépos TedeurG Kvew, Kal rods olkous éxpicdot Trav dppavdv. § 6 Lex. rhet. Cantab. érwvupos dpxwv :...rayxdvovrat d¢ mpds avrdy (Dobree: cod. rap atrdv) xal ypagal- kal dlkas els Td dixacrhpiov elodye. Bekk. An. 310: mpds Tov dpxovra Kaxdoews édayxdvovro ypapal kal TO yovéwy, el rovrous Tis alrlay exo Kaxody, kal, rav éppavav (2. 269). ere d& wapavolas kal dpylas, («djpwv add. K-w) émidixaclae kad emexdjpor yuvaixav. Phot. yyeuovla duxacrnplov: roils apxovow ot rdoas maow epetro Slkas elodryew * GAG TE wey dpxovTe Tas Tav éppavay Kal Tas THs wapavolas Kal Tas Tov émuKdjpwy

émidixaclas.

AdayxdvovTo Stkat). Frag. 381°, 420%. YX! £3

Harp. jpy. dux.: ... pds wey Tov dpxovra al ray éppaygv kal ray émixkMjpwv

éowOn, riv rpaxdvropov. Cf. Boeckh, See- urkunden, pp. 76—79; A. Mommsen, Heortologie, p. 402. Inthe Class. Rev., Vv 123 a, Tptaxoyrépiov is described as an ‘entirely new word’; but it is actually found in a contemporary inscr. of B.C. 325/4, CIA ii 811, p. 261, col. 2, 180, Tpia- KovToplwy Kwras.

O€ous] trisyllabic in Attic, Eur. Phoen. 945, ov yap éorwv HOe0s, and Eupolis Jrcert. 332 Kock, el wy Kdpy Sevcee rd orais 7Geos. The Homeric form 7lGeos is re- tained by editors in Plat. Leg. 840 D, 877 E.

§ 4. TO’ AokAyme KTd.] Philostr. Viz, Apoll. iv 18, ra 6é "Eridavpia wera mpdp- pnolv re kal lepeta Sebpo mvety "APnvators mdrpiov éml Ovala devrépg, TouTl 8 évduroav *Aokdrntiod evexa, dre 57 éudnoay adroy jkovra "Hmdavpiber dye uvornplwv. The night of the 18th Boedromion, the eve of the festal march to Eleusis, was probably spent by the devout in sleeping in the temple of Asclepius, S. of the Acropolis (Mommsen, Heortologie, p. 253, ap. Dict. Ant. i718 4).

Avovvelwv] The roumh was on the gth of Elaphebolion (about March 28). In it the statue of Dionysus Eleuthereus was carried from his temple in Limnae to another of his sanctuaries, near the Academy (Paus. i 29, Philostr. zt. Soph. ii 15); and then brought back again and placed in the theatre. The procession included the priests and civil officials, the knights and the citizens in their tribes, as well as the efhedi, and the canephori (Schol. Arist. Ack. 242). Daremberg and Saglio, iii 242.

TOV empeAnTav] sc. THs wourfs. In

Dem. c. A@d. 15, they are described as elected by open voting, (Mecétas) kedetwy éaurov els Atovicra xeiporovely émipednTiy. In Phil. 1 § 35, Dem. implies that the functionaries concerned with the Dio- nysia were appointed by lot: 7m pep tav Tavabnvalwy éopriy xal ry ray Ato- vuolwy adel Too KabyKovTos xpbvou ylyverOat a re dewol Adxwow dv re lddra of rovTwy éxarépwv émtedovpevot, The first Philippic falls in the first half of B.c. 351. The speech against Midias is assigned by Dionys. Hal. Zpist. Ammon. i 4, 4 (A. Schaefer, Dem. ii 103) to B.C. 349/8; the Dionysia at which Midias insulted Dem. fell two years before, early in April 351 or 350; and Midias must have been elected émtpeAnrys either for 352/1 or 351/o. As the appointment of the ém- pednTal by lot had come into force in the first half of 351, Midias must have been elected émiweAnrys for 352/1, and the change was probably made between the Dionysia, early in April, and the end of the civil year, about June.

After the time when the text was writ- ten, the appointment by lot was appa- rently given up. In B.c. 281/0 (AO%p. vii 480, no. 3) we have 10 émipeAnral ris mourfs T@ Avoviow representing only 6 or 7 of the tribes, and therefore probably elected out of the whole body of citizens, instead of being taken by lot, one from each tribe. After B.C. 265 (CIA ii 420) they are described as of yeiporovnbévres émipednral ris mous and their number is 24 (two for each of the 12 tribes of that time). Daremberg and Saglio, s. v. iii 682—4.

CH. 56, 1. 21—32.

TIOAITEIA

207

2 4 é v d A bg \ \ > t ’ éxetpotover déka dvtas, [Kal ta] eis THY Tomy dvadkouata Tap [a by a 2 a a a avtav juleycjov, viv 8 eva rhs urls éxalorns KAnpol, Kat 25 ‘4 a 5 dwow els THY KatacKevny éxatov pas. emyed[elrar] Sé Kal

THs els @apyyrdua Kal THs To Aut TH Lorhpr. ayova TH[v Atov]uciwv obtos Kai’ <tov> Tov Oapyyriov.

6 pev ovv erripereitas TovTwD.

tal \ 9 x Siotxel 66 Kal TOV éopTov

ypadal d[€ cai dlixas NayydvovTa

mpos avTov, as dvaxpivas eis tld Si]xaotTHpiov eiod[yer, yolvéwy kaxdoews (atta S€é elow atnpior TH Bovropervm S[ewx Jer), épdavev K[axwloews (attas § eicl cata rév émitpoTwv), émi-

25 HN[erK]ON? (K, H-L), ANHAICKON ? (K-w), [4]#A[tox]oy B. Awy] H, K-W, B: ré[y rGv Atov] H-L sed spatium non sufficit. 30 er [els] K; elr’ [els <rd>] H-L; els 7[6] K-W (B): scriptura in- yowéwy Wyse, Blass, K-w, H-L, K%.

K-W. certa.

28 ra[v <riv> Trav O.

ékarov pvdas] Probably the sum granted to the whole body.

§ 5. THs els OapyyAta] sc. roumrns. On the second day there was a proces- sion, as well as a cyclic chorus.

ays To Avt TO Bwrrpt] This festival, ‘which included a public sacrifice, was held on the 14th day of Scirophorion, the last month of the Attic year,eitherin Athens in the Cerameicus (so Hermann-Stark, Gottesdienst. Alt. § 61, 21; Boeckh, ii 117, 125 Frankel; A. Schaefer, Dem. iii 337, n. 2; A. Mommsen, Aeortol. p. 453), or in the Peiraeus (see esp. Wachsmuth, Stadt Athen, ii 143). The text does not help to decide the dispute as to the place where the festival was held. It should probably be distinguished from the 6vaia to Zeds Zwryp on the last day of the year (Lys. 26 § 6), which was also superin- tended by the archon. Shortly before B.C. 268 the sacrifice of the elowryjpia for the BovdAy and dyuos was offered not by the archon, but by the priest of Zevs Zwrhp (CIA ii 325—6).

§6. ypadal «rd.] The archon eponymus succeeded to many of the judicial func- tions of the ancient kings, and was spe- cially regarded as the public protector of those who were unable to defend them- selves. This is shewn by the duties here assigned to him. Cf. Dem. 25 Lacr. 48, émixdipav kal dppavay cal rav TroKéwy TE dpxovrt rpooréraxrar émisedetoOaz, and the Law quoted in Dem. 43 Macart. 75. In the following list we have no clear dis- tinction drawn between ypadal and dixat.

dvaxplvas] Dern. Olymp.'31, 0 dpxwy dvéxpwe wacw tuty rots dupicByTotow. Meier and Schém. pp. 43, 823 Lips. ; Dict. Ant. s. v. Anakrisis.

yovéwy Kakwoews x7h.] In Bekker’s Anecd. p. 269, Ss. v. Kaxdoews, the three kinds of kdxwots are all mentioned in the same order, and in the same terms, as in the text: 7 Toal’rn dlky otrws drepépero yovéwy kaxwoews, dppavary kaxwoews 7 olkov éppavikod kaxwoews. On the various forms of kdxwots cf. Meier and Schom. p- 353—360 Lips.

“xdkwots yovéwy was committed by those who struck or reviled their parents, or even were disobedient to them; by those who refused them the means of support... or did not bury them after their death and pay them proper honours’ (Dict. Ant. s. v.); Xen. Mem. ii 2, 13, édy ris yovéas wh Oeparety, Tovrw dlknv re émirlOnot xai drrodokiudfovoa ovK ég dpxew Tolrov... édv Tis THY yovéwy TEhev- TyodvTuv Tovs Tdgous ui) KooUy, Kal ToiTO éterdfvec ) mons ev Tals TOv apxdvTwy Soxt- wactas. Dem. Zimocr. 107, (the laws) of kal (Gvras dvayKkdfover Tovs watdas Tovs yovéas tpépew, Kal, éredav droddvwow, brws Twv voutfoudvuw rvxwow. Diog. Laert. i 5 (lex Solonis), édy res uh rpépy Tovs yovéas, driuos éorw. Isaeus 8 § 32, (the law of kdxwows) Kehever Tpépev Tods yovéas. Hyperides, pro Hux. c. 21, pares gore mpds Tovs éavTod -yovéas’ 6 apxwy él Tovrov KaOyrat.

df{rjprol] Dem. 37 Pant. 46 (in a case of émixdjpou Kdxwows), Te émebcovre per’ ovdemuds (nulas y Bonen.

éppavav Kakdoews] committed by those who wronged orphans. Dem. Ma- cart. § 75, 6 dpyuwy émipedelsdw rav dp- gavav cal ray émixdjpwv. Schol. ad Dem. Zimocr. 6 dipxwy émemedetro... Tw épparav.

3

on

208 AOHNAIQN COL. 28, 1. 42—50.

KMjpov Kaxwoews] (adtar Sé ciate xara [Tov] ériTpéT@V Kal THY cuvorkovyTav), olxov dphavixod Kaxacews (eiol bé cal [abtas naTa Tov] éritpo[ mov), Tapavotas, éav Tis aiTtaTal Twa TapavoobyTa

Ay € Z > , 5) a Y 24 \ ta [bmdpyovta alrodAvr[as], eis Satntadv aiperw, édy Tis wn "Oé AY So» L s > 2 a ‘ >

edXy [klowa [ra dvta véuerOar], eis emutpoTrns KaTacTacwy, eis emitporns Siadicaciav, eis [éudpavev xatdotac|w, }éritpotov

36 ra [éavrod xrjuara] K, decem tantum litterarum spatium relictum con- fessus; 7a [wrarpgGa] Wyse (H-L), 7[dv olkov] K-w, sed plures litterae flagitantur et Ta fortasse legi potest; fortasse recte igitur ra [dardpyorra] B. AIAITHTWN ¢ Sarnr&v K (K-W, H-L, B) ex Harp. et lex. Cantabr. 38—39 el [meloves ris abras

36 *Lex. rhet. Cantab. es Saryrav <alpeow>:...éml Trav diaveudyTwy ra Kowd Tisw, ws’ Ap. év THA. Ton. ‘‘Sikat Nayxdvovra: mpds” Tov dpxovra dAdat Te (Dobree ; aAX ef ris cod.) kal ‘els darnrav alpeow,” dray “wh Oé\q Kowa Ta bvTa veuerOat. *Etym. M. darynrys: map’ Arrixots 6 Scaveunrys. “Apiotorédns. * Harp. dareioOa...7d 6é els darnrav alpeow eldds re Sleyns éorlv. dmbre yap Kowwvotév Ties ddd*jdots Kai of ev Bovdowro StavéuerOar Ta Kowwd, of 6€ wy, EdtKagfovTo of BovAduevor Tois ph Bovdopévors mpooxadovpevor els Sarnrav alpesw, Avolas év re mpds ’Adeéldnuov ef yrows, kal ’Ap. év 77AO. wrod. (Frag. 383, 4223). Addit Suidas, s.v. dareioOa: darnral kuplws ol ra Kowd Stavéworres Tots wh BovAopévars. :

38 aut hic aut alibi in eodem capitulo (velut v. 37, ante els émirporfjs xardoracw) excidit els éupavav kardoracw. Cf. * Harp. s.v. infra exscriptum (Frag. 3822, 4213).

émukArpov KaKdoews] committed by the guardians of poor heiresses; or by their nearest relatives, who either de- clined to marry them or give them a dowry, or who kept them out of their wedded rights. Law in Dem. Macart. 54,75. Isaeus 3 § 46, odk av elowyyed- des mpds Tov dpxovra KaxodoOa Thy éml- KAnpov...d\\ws Te kal povwy TolTwy TeV Sixav dxvdbvev rots Suwkovew oiawv Kal éfov Te Bovromevp Bonfety rais émixd7}- pos; and 2b. 47 (cf. Meier and Schom.

é Lips.). . ae nav émurpémov xrd.] These are the ordinary cases, but the statement is not exhaustive. Dem. 37 fant. 45, 47t- dgaro éxelvov—éml ras émixAnpous elredOeiv Kal Thy pntépa Thy atrod.

otkov épdayikod] ‘an orphan’s estate,’ the regular technical sense of ofos, Xen. Oec. i §,=8oa tis ew rijs olklas xéxryras, and vi 4,=«rfjots } ovuraca. Thus, in Dem. 27 § 15, olkov pucOobv is ‘to let the orphan’s estate,’ whereas in § 16 we have olxav olxlay in a different sense.

awapavolas] This suit might be insti- tuted by a son (or other relative acting on his behalf), against one who had be- come mentally incapable of managing his own affairs, Plat. Zeg. 928 D; Arist. Nub.844 ff.; Xen. Mem. i 2,49; Aeschin.

c. Ctes. 281. Meier and Schom. p. 566 Lips. : els Sarytav alpecwv] If, in a business

held in partnership, any one or more of the partners wished to retire, and the partners could not agree, those who in- sisted on the winding up of the concern might bring an action for the appoint- ment of liquidators (Harpocr. s. v. dar- eau). It has been conjectured that Saryrat might be appointed even in cases not involving partnership in business, ¢.g. in disputes as to the division of an inhe- ritance, and that this was the original object of the legal process (Meier and Schém. p. 483 Lips.). This is confirmed by the context, which refers to matters of family property and the duties of guardians. Probably it was only in the case of the inheritance of a citizen that the archon eponymus was the responsible official. Daremberg and Saglio, s. v.

émitporis Katdoractv] ‘constituting awardship.’ Inthe absence of directions by will, the next of kin acted as émlrpoo: if authorised by the archon (e.g. the elder brother, Lys. c. Zheommn. i 53 or the uncle, Isaeus, Cleonym. § 9). Failing re- latives suitable for the duty, the archon selected some one from the general body of citizens. Dict. Ant. Apitropus,i 751 b; Meier and Schom. p. 552.

éritpoys Stabikaclay] ‘deciding be- tween rival claims to a wardship.’ Meier and Schom. p. 471 ff. Lips.; and Lipsius, Leipzig Verhandl. p. 50.

els €ubayay katdoraciv] This clause

.CH. 56, 1. 33—44.. TOAITEIA .. 209

7 avtov éyypayart, KAnpov: Kab émixAnpov éri[Sixacias, émipe-. Nerja: Sé Kai tav [opdlavdv Kal tév emiKAnpwv, Kal THY 40 yuvaicdv baa. dv rerev[tijcavtos Tod avdp]os ox7[rrelvra avely' Kal Kupios éote Tois adixodow ériBad[Acw, 7 elodryey 2 ‘ / n BY \ y n 2 a eis] To Stxalaty]ovov. pucOot 8& Kab rods oikovs Tév dphavav kal tov émi[KAjpav, gos. av tus tertaplaxaide[Ké]ris yévntas, bé\wolw éxlrporov abriv eyypdwar K?; dy mdelous dua ebéd\wolw énltporov <Tdv> airoy éyypdyat H-L: é[dv ris dudicByrq dejiv Lipsius (Poland). els [éugavadv xard- ‘oragjw ex Harp., émlrp[orlov abrév éyypdyar K-w, K3, verba tria ultima non ine

telligi posse confessi (B); e¢ fere certum, etiam eds vix ambiguum. 39 ENrpayal. 42 7 elodyew Lipsius, K-w, kK, B: {nulav 4 dyew K! (H-L) sed spatium vix sufficit. H

44 post émtkAjpwy lacunam indicant K-w. akadld...TEIC 5 Oarn]ris K3 6...7ys K-W; éav wy adrds 6 émlrporos Sioxyrhs yéynrae aut simile aliquid expectabat Her-

werden. [&ws dv ris rerrap]axatde[Ké]ris yévyrae optime B.

is suggested by Harpocr. s. v.,6 dé ’Ap, & 77 °AO. tod. mpos Tov dpxovTd pyot hayxdver Oa radryy Thy Otknv, Tov dé dva- xplvavra eladyew els Td Stxacrypiov. It is placed here by Kaibel and Wilamowitz, by Mr Kenyon (ed. 3), and by Blass. But there is something to be said in favour of placing it (with Lipsius) before els émirpomfjs kardoracw, and filling up the lacuna with words that agree with the sequel, émlrpomov abrov éyypdyat.

Isaeus, 6 § 31, dayree Tov Tlv0ddwpov 7d ypapparetoy Kal mpooexadécaro els éu- gavav kaTdotaciv. Karaoryoavtos Oé éxelvov mpds Tov &pKovTa xr. Dem. 53 §$ 14, €& éugavay karacracews. A man in possession of goods or documents, which another person either owned or had a legal right to inspect, might be required by the latter to produce them, éu¢avf -Karaorijoa. If he refused, he might be fined ; on the other hand, the party sum- moned might disclaim possession of the things required or decline to admit the obligation of producing them. In either case the person demanding their produc- tion might bring an action els éudavadv kardoraow. Meier and Schém. p. 478 Lips.

In the present context, the phrase can only refer to procedure connected with cases of inheritance (2d. p. 59).

KAipev Kal émucdrpov emsicaclar] Dem. 43 MMacart. 16. When a person claimed an inheritance or heiress adjudged to another, the former summoned the latter before the archon, who brought the case into court. Meier and Schom. pp. 603—617 Lips.

_ $7. tav épdavev «rA.] The archon As éruc\jpwv xal épdavav xtpios (Lysias, 26 Evand, 12). Cf. Dem. 43 § 75 (lex), 6

S. A.

apxwy émrimedeloOw Tov éppavay Kal tov emixhypwy Kal rOv otkwy trav éfepnuov- pévev Kal Tay yuvaikwr, doar mevovow év Tots otkots Tay dvdpwr Tay TeOvynkétww pdc- Kovgat Kuely. Tovrwy émmedelcOw Kal wy édrw UBplfew unddva mepl rovrous. édv dé tis UBplgy H mrovg Te mapdvomor, KUpios 2orw émiBddrew kara 7d Tédos. [Dem.] 35 § 48; Aesch. 1 § 158.

proBot] Isaeus 3 § 36, micdodv éxédevoy Tov dpxovra Tovs olkous ws dppavav byTwv, Ores... Th aroTypara Karaorabeln Kal Spot TeDeter, 2 § Q, meTarxav TOU otkou Ths picbdcews T&v traldwy rod Nixtov, and r1 § 34, Lys. 32 ¢. Diog. 23, eff aire xara rods véuous of xelvrat mepl Tuy dpdavuv... pacOaca. Tov olkov. Dem. 27 Aphob. a 58, déqv (rp émirpdrrw) under Exew TovTwv TOY Tpaypdrov ucOdocarte Tov olkoy, and 29 § 60. The income was often more than 12 per cent.

The lessees had to give security (drort- wnpa) for the property leased to them. The archon sent certain persons (dor- pntal) to value the security and deter- mine whether it was a fair equivalent for the property leased (Harpocr. s. v. drrort- pynral? of mucBovmevor Tods Tay dppayuv olkous maph Tod dpxovros évéxupa Tis mio- Owoews mapelxovro’ ee. 6 tov dpxovTa émiréurey Twas droTyunoopéevous Ta évé- xupa. Ta wey ody évéxupa Ta arroTimyeva édéyorro drrorimyjuara kTd.). On land thus offered as security a pos was placed, with an inscr. stating the person for whose property it served as security, CIA ii 1135, 8pos xwplov kat olklas dmrorlunua masdl éppav@ Atoyelrovos IpoBalAcclov]. Meier and Schém. p. 362—3 Lips. ; Schulthess, Vormundschaft, pp. 139—173-

verrapakadeétis] If this restoration is correct (and none better has been pro-

14

ba haag

210 AQHNAIQN COL. 28, 1, 51—COL. 29, 1. 7,

45xal Ta drotyunuata AapBdvr[e* Kai Tos émetporrous], éav pln aro|éao01 tols taicly Tov aitov, ovTOS eiompaTTel.

57. xal 6 [uev dpywv emipedeirjas tovt[wy, 6 Se] Bacirevs TpPOTov pev wvoTyplov émiperel[Tar peta THY émiwednTay ods] o Shulos y]esporovel, Sv0 wey €& ’AOnvatwy diravtwv, &va 8 <éE> [Evpormday, éva] S é<x> Knp[vcw]y. erecta Avovuciay tev éri

45 xal rods émurpérous E H Brooks (K-W, H-L, B); xal ol émirporo: (hiatu ad- misso) quondam conieci. EAN (K, K-W, B): of dy (ex of édv) van Leeuwen (H-L). 46 [d2o]8ao. et Wysio et mihi olim placuit (K3): [6:]6Go. K-w, B, droddGor H-L.

LVII 1 6 uév dpywy Blass et Herwerden (K-w, H-L, K%): ofros uév of K} 3 éxe:poréve. Harp. (K?). 4 Eipodmléwy K ex Harp.: é& Etiyodrliw»—éx Kyptxwv Gertz (K-W, H-L, B).

TESTIMONIA. LVII § 1 *Harp. émiedyrhs Tay wvornplov: map ’AOnvalos 6 Aeyduevos Bactreus...’Ap. év’AO. ror. @yolv ovTws’ ‘6 dé Bactteds—ruv pvornplov— xetporovet (Bekker et Miiller ; éxetporéver codd.) éva 8’ ét Hipodmliwy, tva & éx Kyptxwy. Suid. et Etym. M. résoapes 5¢ joav, do pev é£...els 5é éx...xat els ex (Frag. 386°, 425). Pollux viii go: 6 d¢€ Baotdeds wuorynplwy mpoéornke “wera Tay emiehnTov” kal Anvalwy kal d-ydvev rev él Aapmdds (cf. Lex. Dem. Patm. p. 11) kat (add. Schol. Pl. Zuthyphr. p. 325) Ta wept ras warplous Ovatas docket (cf. Heraclidis epitom., Rose Frag. 611, 8, 6 6€ Baotheds Ta Kara Tas Ovolas Socket. Schol. in Plat. Praedr. 235 D, 6 dé Bactheds wvornpluw mpovoeirar Kal Tas Ovolas ras warplous Storxe?). Bekk. An. ‘Pp. 219, 14: ...6 68 Baorreds “nuornpiey emiedetrar wera TEV emimEdnTar obs 6 Sfuos” éxetporévnce. Phot. Hyeuovla dixacrnplov, ad fin. 6 Bacideds al Tov pvornpluy dua Tots émimednrais mpotarara. Cf. Frag. 385%, 422%.

posed), we here have the age at which the émix\npos ceased to be under the care of the archon. Nothing has hitherto been known on this point (Schulthess, p- 177). Isaeus (6 § 14) simply tells us that one Callippe would naturally have ceased to be under an ézirpomos at the age of 30 (rpiaxovrofris).

drotinpata] here of lands offered as security by persons who had the estates of minors leased to them. The term is also applied to the security which a hus- band gives the «upios of his wife as a guarantee that her marriage-portion (of which he has the usufruct) will remain intact (Meier and Schém. p. 518). [Dem.] 49 § 11, 6...€v medly dypds drorlunua To Tradl Te Hipyrldov xadeorjxe. Cf. Schulthess, /.c. p. 157, and see note on picOot, above.

ctrov] Pollux viii 33, otros 5€ éorw al Sperhouevan tpopal. Cf. Harp. in Zestim., and Meier and Schém. p. 525—6 Lips.

LVIL. Zhe archon basileus.

§ 1. Bacwreds] The archon basileus succeeded to the religious duties of the ancient kings. Gilbert i 241; Meier and Schom. p. 61 Lips.

prornplov] [Lys.] 6 ¢. Andoc. 4, dv... Adxn Bacireds, dAdo Te 7} bmép judy Kal

Ovelas Pica Kal edxas etkerar xara Td mdrpia, Ta pev dv TE évOdde Edevowly, ra dé év TG Edevoivt lep@, kal ris éoprfs émi- pedjoerar pvornplors ;

émipeAntav] sc. Tov wvoryplwv. Dem. 21 § 171, éxewporovycate roirov (Mi- dias) pvornplwv émiedntiv. We have decrees in honour of these émpedAnral in cia ii 315 (=Ditt. 386, 26; B.c. 283/2 or 282/1), and 376 (before end of 3rd cent. B.c.). In each of these de- crees the compliment is paid to the two érsedynrat elected out of the whole body of the citizens, and not to those belonging to the Kijpuxes and Evpodmtéa. Cf. CIA ii 741 (=Ditt. 374, 10), B.c. 334/3, [ey] Avovuclwy rév [ért A}nvalule wlapa pvorn- plwv éripedynruv.

Knpvtxev] cra ii 597 (a decree of the Kyjpuxes, about the age of Alexander): éredh Ev@vSnuos 6 mdpedpos Tot Bacthéws Kaas kai didoriuws pera Tod Baciréws Kal Tod yévous Tod Knpixwy éreped}0n rw Tept Th VOTHPLA KTV.

tov émt Anvale] held in the district called Aluvar, S. E. of the Acropolis, about Jan. 28—31 (Dict. Ant. i 638). It was the festival at which Comedies were generally produced, e.g. the Acharnians, Equites, Vespae and Kanae.

CH. 56, 1.45—CH. 57, 1.13. TOAITEIA 211

ce ~ + inl Anvaig: tabta § éoti [rou Kal povorkns ayov. TtHv] wéev odv

7 lal F fol. 29.] wopmrny Kowwy mépl|rovcw & Te Bacidrcds Kal ot émipedntal’ Tov

by el - a d¢ ayava SiatiOnow 6 Bacire’s. tiOnos S& Kal Tods TOY Nap- t 2 a“ ef J na madov aydvas dravtas: as 8 Eros eimeiv [kal] tds rartpiovs , a ¥ 2 Gucias Store’ odt0s macas: ypadal Sé Aayyavovtar mpods avTov py t v € Y ’ a 1 ; , aceBelas, Kay Tis lepewovvns audicBnTH mpos twas [Scabdi]xaler ¥ a re nw Ls lel . 8€ ai Tots yéveot Kal Tois iepedor Tas augicByntHoEs Tas Uép -~ A , ~ [Trav yelpav dmacas obtos. Aayydvovta 5é Kal ai Tov dédvov t a \ nw a Sikar wacat mpos TovToy, Kal 6 mpoayopevwv cipyerOar Tav

5 AHNAIW@N. [roprh xal dye. Thy] H-L, kK’, B: [moumh Kal povoikis dyav. thy] K-w. Supplementum illud parum multas, hoc parum paucas, litteras habere arbitratur K, sed (nisi fallor) fere viginti litteris spatium aptum est, ut TIOMTTHKMOYCIKHCOPWNT litteras undeviginti continere possit. 7 TI@HCI (K, B): <6ia>7l@yo. Richards, Gertz, K-w, H-L. 8 xal del. K-w, H-L. 9 ‘quidni ofros dcoxe? ?’ B. 10 1epwc lepewotvns K-W, Meisterhans, p. 36%. TTPOCTINA (K-W, H-L, K3, B); diadcndger addendum putat B: mpooriug Bekk. Avec. (K}). 12 -yelpdv k e Bekk. An. 219 (K-W, H-L, B): lepv (quod etiam in ectypo videt B, coll. Bekk. 47. 310), Richards.

§2 Pollux viii go: dikac 5é rpds adrov AayxdvovTa doeBelas, lepwotvns dudisBn- Thoews. Kal Tois yéveot kal ois iepedor (e schol. Pl. Bekk.: lepots libri) w&oww adrds ducdfer. Bekk. Ax. p. 219, 16: “-ypagal dé Aayxdvovrac mpos adrdv doeBelas. Kal av ris lepwodvns” dugiaBynrion mpooting. ‘Siadixdgfer 5¢ kal rots yéveou Kal rots lepeior ras dudicBynrices Tas bmép Tav yepav. ayxdvovrar de—mpds Tolrov.” Phot. ipryewovla dixaornplov:...7@ pévror ye Baoidel tds Te gpovixas Kal Tas ris doeBelas Kal ay ris lepwodvns hupurByrer, wpoTepov bé Kal Tas wept Tar -yeptw (lepwv codd., corr. Meier) rovs lepeDow dudutByrjces. mponydpeve Sé kal Tov vouluwy elpyecGat Tos év alrig. Pollux viii go mpoaryopever dé Tors év alria dméxeoOar mvotnpluy Kal Trav GdrAwy voulwwv KT). Bekk. Az. 310, 6: 6 Baotreds elod-yer Tas Povixds amdoas, éwel Kal mpoaryopever Tov dvipbpovey elpyerOar Tav vbuwv (leg. vouluwv), Kal mepl tov lepdv (leg. yepav) Kal ros yéveou Sixafer.

Tropa KTA.] ‘law of Euegoros’ in Dem. c. Mid. to, 4 émt Anvaly moumh Kal of tpaywool kai oi kwuwdol. Cf. Plat. Protag. 327 £, and Schol. Arist. Zy. 547. The mistake in the MS (Anvalwy for Anvaly) possibly arose out of such phrases as évixa ols éxt Anvaiwy (Schol. Aeschin. 2 § 15).

SiarlOqor...7l@nor] See note on 54 § 2, KarayryveoKouct...7d your bev.

AaprdSev dyavas] At the Panathenaea (Mommsen, Heortol. p. 169 f.) and Thesea (2d. 282), and the festivals of Hephaes- tus (3. 311 f.), Prometheus and Pan. Plut. Sol. 1 ad fin. The expenses con- nected with the torch-race were borne by a yuuvaciapyos. In CIA ii 606 we have a decree in honour of a yupvaclapxos re- citing the names of certain Aapradndpbuor (about 350 B.c.). Law-suits concerning the yuxvaciapyot came before the archon basileus (Dem. 35 § 48).

ds Uros elretv] here modifying mdcas. Cf. 49 § 5; and 2 § 3, ws elev, with oddevds,

twatplous Ovolas] Pol. 1285 4 16, al marpiat Ovolar KaredelpOncay rois Bact- Aefor pdvov, Plat. Politicus, 290 E, TO Aaxdbyre Bactte? Pace THde (at Athens) ra cepvorata Kal pddwoTa warpia TaY ap- xalwv Ovovev drodedbcOa. Athen. 234F, xdy Tots TOD Bacthéws 5é vouos yéyparrat’ Overy To ’Amwd\AwWHE TOS ’AXapyéwy Tapa- otrovs.

§ 2. ypagal xr.) Meier and Schém. p- 61—64 Lips.

doeBelas] Hypereides, pro Zux. c. 21, doeBel Tis wepl Ta lepd; ypapal dceBelas elai pds Tov Baoihéa. Meier and Schém. pp. 62, 367 Lips.

iepewovvys] « hereditary priesthood. Cf. c. 42, 36, Kav run Kara 7d yévos lepewovvn yernrat.

tov yepav] Bekk. Anec. 219, 16 (ra iepdv, 2b. 310, 6, and Photius), quoted in Testim.). Cf. Aeschin. c. Ctes. 18, rods iepets rovs Ta “yépa wovov NauBdvorTas.

dpyerOar av voplpwv] i2/. § 4, elpye- ra. raw lepov. Soph. O. 7. 236 ff.; Dem.

14—2

wm

-

°

15

212 AOHNAIQN COL, 29, 1. 8—16,

vopipwv odtds eat. eiat 5& hovlov] Siar Kal tpavparos, dy pév é« mpovotas aroxtelvy } tpdlaln, év Apei@ mayy, Kal papydxar, éav dmoxtelvy Sots, cal mupKaids: [tad]ra yap 7 Bours). pova Sixdterr trav § dxovoiwv Kal Bovrevoeas, Kav oixérny arroKteivn

14 day H-L. 16 tpélc]y K-w, quod fortasse legi posse recte (ut videtur) censet K: ENP ? éyyp[ddera] K; <Tis>, ypdgera H-L. PapMakON (K, H-L, B): @apudkwv K-w Pollucem secuti. 16 rupkgas B. p6v7n van Leeuwen (H-L).

§ 3 Pollux viii 90: kal ras rod pévou Sikas els"Apesov wd-yor elodyet. ib. 117 “Apevos mdyos: édikage 5¢ pévou kal rpavuaros éx mpovolas, kal rupkaias, kal papydkwv, édy ris droxrelyy Sods. Bekk. Ax. 311, 9 wept ’Apelov mdyou: atirn xplvet ras povixds Slkas kal pappdxuy Kal rupKaias.

17—18 *Harp. él Taddadly...dicarripiov otrw kadovmevov, ws kat Ap. év’ AO. mon., év @ dixdfovow dxovolov pévou ol épérat. Hesych. dixacrypioy évOa edlxafoy ol épérar Tots dxovolwy pbvwy dixagfoudvos. Eust.in Od. p. 1419, 53: edtkatov 6¢ xara Tavoaviay éxet dxovolov dévov oi épérar. Bekk. Am. 311, 8: Stxdfovor 8 év rodrw ol epérar (Frag. 417°, 457°), Schol. in Aeschin. 2 § 87: émt rotrw éxplvovro of dxovoror povor. of dé &v rovTy TH dtkacrnply Sixdfovres éxadodvro épéra, dtkagov 5é dxovalov Pdvov kal

Bovrctcews kal olkérny q mérotkov 9 E€vov daroxretvayti.

Cf, Poll. viii 118.

17 *Harp. BovAevoews, infra exscriptus (Frag. 418%, 458°).

Lept. 158, (Apdxwv) ypdduv xépviBos etp- yecbar Tov dvdpopbvov, cmovdwy Kparipwv lepdv dryopis, Ant. de Chor. 34, 40, Herod. Io. Pollux viii 66, elpyovrac ltepwy kal dyo- pas ol év xaryyopla pévov, axpt plows" kal rodro mpoaydpevors éxade’ro, Dem. Macart. 1069, mpoemeiv, The text shews that we are not justified in restricting the mpéppyots to the next of kin, to the ex- clusion of the archon basileus (as urged by Philippi, Aveop. p. 70).

§ 3. pdvov Slkat] Pol. 1300 4 24, povixod pep ody edn, dv 7 ev rots abrois Sixacrats dy 7° év &dXots, wept re THY ex mpovolas Kal mepl rwv dxovolwy Kal Soa duodroyelrar pev adugicBnreira: 5é repli rod dixalov, réraprov dé 80a Tots devyouow emi Kabdy éripé- peras pbvou, olov ’APjynot Aéyerat Kal 7d ev Ppearrot dixagriptov. Meier and Schom. p- 376—387 Lips.

tpatparos] Dem. p. 1018, 9, Tpavpards pe els “Apevov mdyov mpocexadéoaro, 54 § 18, tpatuaros ypadai. Aeschin. /. Z. 93, Ctes. 51 and 212, rpavmaros éx mpovolas ypadds ypadéuevos. It was only ‘ wounding with intent to kill’ that was classed with dévos; in the absence of proof of such intent, the case was one of unlawful wounding (alkela, 52 § 2).

é« mpovolas xrd.] Dem. 23 ¢. Aristocr. 24, yéypamras yap év udev TH vouw Thy Bov- Anv Sixdfew povov kal rpavparos ex mpo- volas kal mupxaias kai dapudkwv, édv THs dmroxrelvy Sods. Lucian, Amacharsis 19.

gappdkov] Philippi, Aveop. pp. 41, 51. Meier and Schom. p. 382 Lips.

édv daroxtelvy Sods] Ant. de Chor. 17,

el rov ddvra 7d Pdppaxdy pac alriov elvat, éyw ob atrios. It was probably essential that actual death should ensue, and that the poison should have been administered by the person charged be- fore the Areopagus: ‘etenim qui ger alium curasset ut venenum daretur, eum oportuit Bovdetcews accusari’ (Forch- hammer, de Aveop., p. 30). Similarly Antiphon, Ov. 1, Karzyopla Papyaxelas, ‘is really a case of BovAevors, which would be tried by of émt Taddadly.

éx mpovolas applies to papudkwy as well as to pévou x.7.A.; Magn. Mor.i 16 (17), pact roré twa yuvatca pldrpov rit dotvar me, elra Tov avOpwrov arofavety brd tod pidrpov, Thy 5 avOpwrov ev ’Apelw twdyy dropuyev’ ot mapodcav 6&8’ obfey ado dréduoav 7 Sidre dk éx rpovolas.

mupkaias] Meier and Schém. p. 387 Lips.

dxovelwy xrA.] Schol. Aeschin. F. L. § 87, édlkatov 8 dxovelov dbvov Kal Bov- Aedoews Kal olkérny 4} wérotxov 4 E€voy dtro- kreivat (MSS; dmoxrelvavTt Sauppe; Kel rts olxérnv—admoxrelvece Wyse).

Bovdetorews] ‘conspiracy (against life).’ Harpocr. (and Suidas) s. v.—éray é& ém- Bovdjjs rls tu karackevdoy Odvarov, édv Te amobdvy 6 ériBoudevOels édv Te w.— bdprus "Ioatos év rp mpds Hvxdeldnv, émt TladAadly Aéywr elvar ras Sikas, Aelvapxos 6é & re Kara Ikorlou év ’Apely mary. *Aptororédns 8 &y Ty AO. ron. TE Ioaly ouuguve?. Hesych. 7d émiBeBoudevxévac Odvarov otrws "AOjyynow édéyero. And. de Myst. 94, Ant. de Chor. 16. Meier

CH. 57, 1. 14—23. TIOAITEIA

213

x tL a Tis 4) mérotKov 7) Eévov, [oi émt ]a[AA]adio: édv & arroxreivas i c a Lal $ Hév Tes Opmoroyy, GH SE Kata Tos vouous, o[fov] porydy NaBav 7 ? A 2 i xn 2, BL 3 A / 2 ON €v Toke ayvonoas 1 év OAM aywvilouevos, Tovlt@] él Acrguvio Sudfovow dav 8€ devyov guynv dv aldecis éotu, , a ai[riay &yy] aroxteivar i} tpdcai twa, rovt@ & év Ppedtov t is ¢ \ = ta U 3 Ps Sucafovaw: 6 6é [droAoy]eiras mpocopyicapevos év Tole.

18 OleTTITTAAADAI|@I ? K versus prioris parte ultima litteris evanidis scripta. rotr[w mev et] II. k-w, sed neque spatium sufficere neque litteras tour cerni posse censet K. [ol épéra: éri II.] Brooks, H-L, sed ne his quidem verbis satis spatii relictum, 20 rou[rw ev ro] él K1; rov[rw] éml Brooks, H-L, K?, B: rot7[w] 3” [ér]! Lipsius (K-w), sed neque A cerni posse neque spatium litterae aptum superesse putat K. 21 alA(supra scr. p)ecic. 22 alrlay éxy dmoxretvar K-W (K3, B, coll. Dem. 23 § 77): alrlay mpoodkdBy Kxreivat K (H-L). peatoy K-w, B coll. Dem. 23 §$ 77, 78, ubi @peacrov pr. S; nomen dé tivos Spedrou jypwos, xabd Pyotr Oedppacros, deducit Harp.; ®pearot Harp., Ar: Pol. 1300 29 codex Ambrosianus, Helladius in Phot. 8262. 535 @ 28, Suidas; és Bpedrov et év Ppedr.. Hesychius: @pearro? Pollux, Bekk. Amec. 311, 20 (K, H-L).

18—21 *Harp. éml Aedqpuwig:...dicdgovra: Sé évraiba of Guoroyotvres pev arre- krovévat dixalws dé memornxévar To0To Adyovres, ws Anu. év Te Kar’ "Apioroxpdrous Sydot cal’ Ap. év r7’AO. rod. Pollux viii 119:...00s dpordyer wey daroxreivat, dixalws 3 eb robro Sedpaxéva:. Eustath. in 7. p. 1221, 30: dixacrihpiov “AOjvnow éml ray duodo-

yotrray pact dedpaxévar ev pévovy, xara vouous dé.

Phot. emt A., Hesych. (Frag. 419, 4595). 22 év Ppedrov.

Bekk. Az. 311, 13. Suid. ex

Cf. Poll. viii 120 infra exscriptum.

and Schém. p. 384—6 Lips.; Philippi, Areopag, p. 29—50; Dict. Ant. s. v.

fas Tad naBle} Dem. 23 § 71, dixac- THptoy 7d Tav axovolwy dbvwv... Td éml TladAadly... évradé’ vroKeira: mpwrov nev Siwpocta, Sedrepov dé Adyos, Tplrov dé yaots to Sixaoryplov... rov addv7’ émt dxovoly dbvy ey ricw elpnuévas xpdvors drehOely taxrhy bddv Kal pevyew ews dv alééonral twa Trav év yéve. rod removdbros. Paus. i 28, 8. Philippi, Aveopag, p. 23.

The Palladium and the Delphinium were probably S. E. of the Acropolis, near the Olympieum (Milchhéfer in Baumeister’s Denkm. p. 179 f.).

poixdv AaBav xrr.] Dem. 23 § 55, av ns év dOdos daoxrelyy Twd, ay év to- Muy dyvojoas, 7} ért Sduapre 7 emt unrpl 7 Ovyarpl, 7 érl radraxy qv dv ém’ édevdépois wal éyy. Cf. Lys. 1 § 31. Philippi,

P. 55+ - él Acdddwin] Dem. 23 § 74, a ris bporoyy uev xretvar évvduws b& py Sedpa- xévat, Paus. i 28, 10, Pollux viii 119, lpdcGar bard Alyéws déyerar ’Aréd\d\wrE Acdduly,

édy St dhevyov—riva] Dem. 23 § 77, dixagrypiov 7d év Ppearrot. evravda... kehever Stkas Uméxew 6 vduos, édv tis ex” dxovoly dbv@ repevyws, unr Tov éxBad-

Abvrwv adrov yoecuevaw, alrlay éxy érépov gévov éxovolov. Meier and Schom. p.

79 f. : - Ppedrov] /.c. § 78, eri Oaddrry (near the harbour of Zea). Paus. i 28, 11, éore 6& rod Iletparés wpds Oaddrry Ppearris. Philippi, Aveop. p. 48. There can be little doubt that the place derived its name from ¢péap, and was so called long before the invention of the eponymous hero @péaros. Ulrichs puts it west of the entrance to the harbour of Zea, at a point where there is a very small bay with a landing-place to the S.W.; near the latter is an oval depression, resembling a slipper-bath, hewn out of the rocky shore, with a small round pit in front of it, both of them filled by a spring of fresh water, called +d Tiprovép. (Reisen, ii 173). Milchhofer, with perhaps more probability, prefers assigning it to the southern ex- tremity of the tongue of land east of Zea (Baumeister’s Denkmdailer, p. 1200 a).

év mAolw] Dem. 23 § 78, 6 mev &v rol mpoomdedoas Aéyel, THs yas ovxX amréuevos, ol & dxpodvrar Kal dixdfovow év ry yi. Paus. i 28, 11, ol repevyéres... mpds dKxpowuévous éx THs yas dad vews drodoyobvra. Harpocr. s. v. év Ppearrot (fpedrov libri). Pollux viii 120, rdv év

n

fe]

214

AOQHNAIQN

COL. 29, 1. 16—18.

24 Sixafovar 8 of Naydvtes taldta éepérat], wAnY Tadv év ’Apeiw 4

24 ra[dra épéra:] ex Harp. K, K-w: ra[fra dicacral] Paton (H-L, B); 7a[éra

mdvra] Lipsius.

24 Harp. épérac infra exscriptus.

alrla mpoomdedoavra ris yijs ob mpocamrs- Mevov amd Ths vews éxpiy drodoyeirOa, Mar’ droBdOpay wir’ dyxvpav els THY yh Baddéuevov. Helladius in Photius, B20/. 535 @ 28,...€v Ppearot'—(6 xpwwduevos) emi yds tEwev rol Tletpards drodoyovmevos dykupay kale. Bekker, Anecd. 311, 17, é&y Zég* rémos éort rapddos. évraiéa Kplverat 6 éml dxovoly pev ivy pevywr, airlay 6&@ éywy é’ éxovoly pbvy.—ev Dpearrot: of én’ dxovciw povy pev-yovres, én’ Gd OE rive xpwduevor’ of éxl mroly éor&res drodoyotvrat.

épérat] Harpocr. s. v. of ducdfovres ras ed’ aluare xploes éri Taddhdly cat émt Tpuravely xat émt Aedpiviy cai ev Bpe- arrot (ppedros libri; Ppearot Epitome) épérac éxadodvro. It is agreed that Harpocr. derived his information from this treatise (Philippi, Aveopag, p. 210), and this is the only passage where the term can be inserted. -

The épéra: were 51 in number (law in Dem. Macart. 57); they were more than 50 years of age and were selected from noble families, dpicriviny aipebévres (Pollux viii 125). The égéras and the Areopagus were probably among the primitive institutions of Attica, being certainly earlier than Solon (Plut. So/. 19) and perhaps earlier than Dracon. According to Lange, de Epheten, the 51 épérat and the g archons formed the pre- Solonian Areopagus. But (as has been shewn by Mr J. W. Headlam, Class. Rev. vi 249—252) all our evidence respecting the égérat is derived from legal and judi-

cial documents, and there is no proof

that they ever held any constitutional position outside the law-courts. The épéra: are named in CIA i 61 (B.C. 409), in a quotation from a law of Dracon in- corporated in those of Solon: éau wh’ wpovolas kr[elvy ris Twa, pevyew. de]kd- fev 58 rods Baciréas alriav pbvov 7 [édv ms alridrat rv Bov]\evoavra, rovs be épé- tas Stayvdvar (cf. Dem. Macart. 57 and Aristocr. 37). Solon reserved the dovixai dtkac for the Areopagus, leaving the épé- Tat to preside in the four courts held in the precincts of the Palladium, Delphi- nium and Prytaneum, and ‘in Phreatto.’

One of Solon’s laws quoted in Plu- tarch’s Solon 19, runs as follows :—ém- thuous elvac mAnv dooe é& 'Apelou md-you

H doo éx rav éperav 4 éx rod mpuraveiou karadicacbévres Und Tov Bacitéwy ert povy i opayaiow f émt rupavvlde Epevyov. Here émi pévy refers to cases under the cognisance of the Areopagus, opayaiow to those under that of the é¢éra:, and érl rupavvid to those under that of the court sitting zz the Prytaneum to try offences against the Constitution. This law is incorporated in the decree of Pa- trocleides (Andoc. de Myst. 78) after the time of the 400, where we find excluded from the privilege of dde.a all the names éréca év orihas yéyparra Tay wh evOade pewdvrav } e ’Apelov rayou 7 Tav éperav i éx mpuravelou dikaceiow bd Tov Bact- Aéwy rl pbvy rls eat. pryh 4 spayaiow qtupavyt6. (So Droysenand Lipsius. The MSS, followed by Blass, have: i é« mpu- ravelov 4} AeAguwlov éiixdoby 7 brd Tov Bacthéwy, 4 ert pbvy ris dort pvyy, 7 Oavaros xareyvicbn, | ocparyetow 7 TU- pavvots. But 7 AeApuwiov must have been added by some one who confused the court for trial of Constitutional offences held zz the Prytaneum, with that for trial of inanimate things held in its pre- cincts; and, since the archon basileus presided in the Areopagus and Pry- taneum, as well as in the four courts, the BaowNe’s cannot be contrasted with these courts as is implied by 7.) In Dem. Aristocr. 38 it is stated that, in the event of a banished manslayer being killed, the épéras were to have cognisance of the matter, diayeyywoxev,—a term not necessarily implying that they acted as judges, but not inconsistent with it.

In Isocr. c. Callim. §§ 52, §4, « trial for homicide, held ért TlaA\adly, is stated to have come before a tribunal of 700 di- casts: (uayns yevouerys) éx Tod rpavuaros packovres drodavely Thy dvOpuTov hayxa- vovow alte gévov Slkny érlt TadAadly. Similarly in [Dem.] c. Meaeramz § 10 trial émt Ila\d\adly came before 500 dicasts. Hence it has been inferred that the é¢érac had been deprived of their jurisdiction in that court (Gilbert, i 360 n). The first speech of Lysias is connected with a case of justifiable homicide, but there is no- thing to shew whether it was delivered before dixacral (Schémann, Scheibe, Froh- berger, Blass, Philippi), or before épérat (Forchhammer and others) in the court of

CH. 57, |. 24—26.

“i 4 ’ / +7 i mayo ytyvonéevwyv: eiaayer & 6

TIOAITEIA

215

Baowred’s xai Sixafover[y *év o5

yarjai[g]* «ai draiPpior. Kal 6 Bacireds btav Sindty mepias-

a5 [N]...-atLo]i K?: Suedgover cxorato: olim conieci (H-L), coll. Luciani locis infra

exscriptis.

Ceterum cxorafo cum litterarum evanidarum vestigiis non congruere

nunc confiteor, et hac certe in clausula Areopagitarum iudicium excludi videtur. tptratot Lipsius; cf. Schol. Aeschin. 1 § 188, rpets rou rod unvds huepas Tas povixas i

§ 4, 26 Pollux viii 118 (“Apecos rd-yos): dralOpior 5’ edixagov. 26—27 Pollux viii go: kal rov orépavoy darobéuevos adv abrois Sucdger.

the AcAgivov. The text implies that the é¢érac had not lost the privilege of trying such cases ; possibly they retained it only in a formal sense as a kind of presiding committee, while the actual voting was in the hands of the dicasts. This is consistent with the statement of Pollux viii 125, Kard& puxpdv 5¢ xareye- AdoOy Td Tuy epercv Stxacripiov.

SikdfLouer xrd.] To restore the missing word is a difficult task. According to Lucian, one of the courts of homicide, that of the Areopagus, held its sittings during the night:—Aermotimus 64, "Apeomayira. év vuxrt kal oxét@ biKd- gover, and de Domo, 18, e& ris...év vuxri wamep ) é& ’Apelou md-you Bou Tovotro tiv axpbactv. This suggests the emenda- tion gxoraiot, proposed by me in the Academy, Feb. 6, 1891, and accepted in the Dutch edition; but this proposal assumes either that the writer now re- verts to the description of the procedure before the Areopagus, or that, if (as is more probable) he refers to all the courts of homicide, this particular detail in the trials before the Areopagus was also adopted in the three courts which have just been mentioned.

Again, if we refer to the account in Pollux viii 117, we find that the court of the Areopagus sat for three consecutive days before the last day in each month, Tpidv juepav édlkagov éetis, Terdpry P~Olvovros, tplry, Seuvrépa (cf. Schol. Aeschin. 1 § 188). Then (after a sentence stating that the court of the Areopagus was composed of those who had been archons) he continues: vral@pin 8 édi- kagov. This suggests rprraiot, which has independently occurred to Lipsius and Mr T. Nicklin: the sense would then be ‘they give sentence on the third day’; but dixagew naturally means ‘to try a cause’ and not ‘to pass a sentence,’ ynolterOa. |

Both the above suggestions are open to the objection that they do not suit the faint traces still visible in the Ms. These traces point to some word beginning with

ad or ed followed by something resem- bling «y preceding the termination. Such a word is ddeewol (from adda). Hdt. ii 25, dAecewis Tis xwpas éovons, Opp. to wouxewds Xen. Cyr. x 6; epithet of écOhs in Pol. ii 8, 1, éoOijros edredods pev ddeet- vis d€ ovx ev TH Xetwdve pdvov dA Kai mepl: rods Oepwovds xpdvous. Cf. Hesych. ddedfw (adifw Kuster): a@poltw. dredtwv" Sixagduevos, and Atala either from dded- ferOae (dOpotfecOar) or from UaratOpov elvar Tov rémov kal ydofcba. This assumes that an epithet usually meaning ‘lying open to the sun, warm, hot,’ can here be applied to a tribunal holding its meetings in the sunlight, as well as in the open air. If so, the three courts are contrasted in this respect with the court of the Areo- pagus. But such an application of the epithet is quite unprecedented.

As a better alternative one might sug- gest &v quale, [enHAIai[a]i, which is found without the article in Arist. Zy. 897 év jdtalg, Posidippus ap. Athen. 591 C els HAaiay 7AGe, and Diog. Laert. i 66. If this is right, the collocation of baral@prot supports the view of those who connect qAcala with 7Awos: Et. Mag. ». vw 1: els 70 UraOpov mpocKadnuévwy Tav diKacTav’ mapa rd vralPpov' Kal mpoiirorlOerac qdov elvar mapa Td Woicba Tods éxel dOpotfouevous, and at end of art. 2: Hrid- feoba Kal prlaots éori 7d ev Aral dixd- gew (Welcker, Gr. Gétterlehre, i 403, and Wilamowitz, dus Kydathen, p.go). The term 7\tala is indeed suggestive of a large body of dxasral, and it is so explained by the grammarians. Harp. s.v. men- tions 1500 or 1000; and Pollux, s00 (at least). Cf. Paus. i 28, 8, 7d d€ wéyiorov kal és 8 melorov cuvlacw ‘“HAralay éxd- Aouv, where it is comtrasted with the courts for the trial of homicide. But we kriow of trials émi Ila\d\adiw coming before 500 to 700 dicasts (p. 214 4); and such a tribunal may well be called ‘a heliastic court.’

UmalOpror] Antiphon, de caede Herodis, 11, dravra Ta Sixaorhpia ev vralbpw duxd- fe Tas Sixas Tou Povov.

216 AOQHNAION COL. 209, 1. 18—27:

peltas Tov otépavov. o dé tHv aitiay éywy Tov wey addov Xpdvov elpyeras TOV lepdv, Kal ovd eis THY a@yopay S[ixavoy é]uBareiv avrg tore 8 els 1d tepdv eiceXOdv amodoyeiras. bray Sé pu 30 6109 Tov TomjoarTa, TO Spacavtt Nayxavel. Suxdter 8.6 Bacireds kal oi puroBacirels Kal tas TaY dxpiywv Kal TAY ddrwv Cowv.

Slxas édtxagov. Sed exspectares potius rpidv juepar (Poll. viii 117) vel rprolv qpépacs, aut terdpry pyvt (Ant. De Chor. 42) vel denique év marl rerdpry (ENMHNIY). Lit- teram secundam z vel 2 fuisse suspicantur K-w, sed in papyro litterae neutrius appa- ret vestigium. aAIH vel EAIH aegre discerni posse putat G F Warner; post dixd-. Soucr[y] litterarum vestigia evanida hanc fere speciem habere testatur Kenyon:— €Alil..a1.1, prima praesertim littera obscure scripta. Legendum fortasse év jAale sc. [en HAL alfa). 28 elpyerar H-L. vd’ els riv dyopdy Wyse, Blass, van Leeuwen, Hartman, coll. Dem. 23 § 80 et 24 §§ 103, 165 (K-W, H-L): oddels ry alrlay K}, d[tkatov] van Leeuwen (K3), vel potius ear (Wyse): d[vvarac] K}; d[é5o7ax) Gertz (K-W, H-L, B). EMBAAEIN (K, H-L, B): éuBddArew. K-w. 29 MH (K, K-W, B:) wdels H-L, sed spatii non satis est. 30 «lig Wyse (K-W, H-L, K%, 8). Post Aayxdver ‘intercidit fere 6 mpoojkwy érl mpuravely’ K-W. 31 ZWWN. Desi- derantur ofrou Suxdfover cal ra Katayvwobdvra wrepoplfover, coll. Poll. viii 120, K-w.

29—31 Pollux viii 120 infra exscriptus.

tov orépavov] characteristic of the office of archon. Aeschin. 1 § 19, dy Tus *"AOnvalwy éraipjoy, py eéorw abrg ray évvéa dpxbvruv yevér bat, bre oluat crepary- gbpos 7 dpxy, and Schol. ad Joc., ol yap évvéa. dpxovres orépavoy épbpovv pupplyys, with Hesych. s. v. wuppivav, and Pollux viii 86, muppivy 8 éorepdvwvro. Hence in Photius, s.v. iyewovla Sixacryplov ad jin., (of the archon Paocwreds), exer dé povos Kal orépavov should be corrected into éxeu 6¢ wupplyns orépavov. Cf. Lys. 26 § 8 (of the archon), [Dem.] 58 § 27 (of the Gecuobéra:). Hermann, Szaatsalt. § 124, 12.

elpyerac] § 2.

ovd" els tiv dyopdy xrd.] Aeschin. 1 § 164, érecra éuBaddets els riv dryopdy F orepavol 7} mparres Te TwY adTay july s F. L. 148, ob xabapds dv ras xelpas els rip dyopiy éuBdddes. Lycurg. Leocr. 5, els Thy dyopay éuBaddovra Kal trav Kowav iepdv weréxovra. Dem. 24 ¢. Zimocr. 103, éay Gdods THs Kakdoews Tu yovewy els Thy d-yopay éuBaddrp, and 165, els Thy dryopay poBotr’ éuBareiy,alsozs. 6oand Androt. 74.

Grav St prj elSq x7A.] [Dem.] 47 ¢. Euerg. 69, cupBovrevouev co... dvouacrt wev pndevt mpoaryopevew, Tots Sedpaxdbor 6é xalxrelvacev. Plat. Leg. 874 A, eay 5é reOvews wev ad ris pavy Kat py duedus Snrotcw dvedperos ylyvyrat, Tas uev mpop- phoes ras abras ylyverOat Kafdmrep Trois GAXots, mpoaryopevew St rdv povov TG Spa- cavrt kat érdtxacdpevoy ev ayopg knpigas ‘rp Krelvavre Tov Kal Tov Kal dpdyKére povoy wh ériBalyer lepav’(Wyse). Pollux,

viii 120, 7d él Ipuraveiy dicate: rept rov droxrewavrwy Kav Gow apaveis.

& BPacitels Kal of gvdAoBacrAcis] Pollux, viii 90, says (of the BaotNeds), dixd- fe ras rv dwtxwv Sikas. In § 120 he says (of the puAoBacrAeis), mpoeariKeray 6¢ rotrov rod duxacrnptov puvdoBacrels, ods det 7d éumecdy awuxov trepoploa. These statements have hitherto been re- garded as inconsistent with one another, and it has been supposed by Philippi, Areop. p. 18, that the duty of the @udo- Baovreis was simply tocast the condemned object beyond the bounds of Attica. The text shews both the statements are correct and that the BaotAeds and the @udoBaaihels jointly presided over this court.

The trial was held in the precincts of the Prytaneum. Dem. Avistocr. 76, dav NOos 7 EdAov @ olSnpos 4 Te Towwlroy ep- weoov wardty, kal tov ev Baddvra dryvon tis, avd dé eldy Kal Exy Td Tov Pdvov elp- yaoudvor, robros évraida dayyavera. el tolvuy ray dydxwy xrrd. Pollux, viii 120, To él TIpuravely dixdter... rept raw ayu- xov Tay éurecdvrwy Kal droxrevdyTwv. In the ceremony of the Bovdédyia, the priest who slew the ox fled after flinging away the axe, ol dé dre rév dvipa bs Z5pace 7d Epyov otk elddres és Olkny Umdryoucr Tov eg (Paus. i 24, 4, cf. 28, rr and vi II, 6).

kal roy ddAdXwy Ldwv] Plat. Gorg. 473 C, ord Tov wodtray Kal Tov dddwv Févuv (Kiihner § 405 4 n. 1).

The fact that animals could be tried has been hitherto unknown. But the

CH. 57, 1. 27—CH. 58, 1.6. TIOAITEIA 217 € y : \ a .

58. 0 dé woréwapyxos Over wev Ovoias thy te TH’ Apréusds

_—_f 2 L \ a? 4 4 a \ by , Th aypotepg cal TO Evvarie, SiatiOnor § dydva tov émitadiov [ai] rots rereNeuTnKdaw ev TO Toru, Kal “Appodip cab ’Apioro- 2 yelrove évayiopata Trovei. Sixat d€ Aayyavovtat mpos avTov iSias pév, at Te Tois weToiKows Kal Tois icoTedéou Kal Tois mpokévoss yeyvowevat’ Kat Set TodTov AaBovTa Kai Svaveiwavta Séxa pépn, TO LVIIIT 1 6yeImen ? (K%, K-w, B): TrOlEITAI? K! (H-L). rH Te TH: TH TE K-W.

ENT

2 EnyadiwiENydAtaot ? "Evuadig K (K-w, B): "Evvadly ri énavolay H-L. 3 Kal

secl. K (H-L, B); retinent K-w, commatis signo post émirdgiov, non post moddnp posito. r@: 7» Rutherford ‘ vix recte.’ 5 M(EN) K, H-L, B: pdvov K-w. 6 fINOMENal (adscr. otc). :

TESTIMONIA. LVIII§1 Heraclidis epitom. (Rose, Frag. 611, 8): kal 7a wodéuia. Pollux viii gt: 6 5 modduapxos Over wey” Aprémrde ‘*dyporépg xal ro Evvadly, biarlOnor” 6é Tov éwirdgiov dyava trav év rodéup dmodavdvruv, kal rots sept ‘Apuddiov evaryiger. (§ 2) Slkar dé rpds adrdv ANayydvovrae perolkwy, lroredGv, mpokévwv. kal diavéuer 7 Aaxdv Exdory pudy Te (7d? Bekk.: sine dubio leg. ry puvdy) Mépos, Td wey dwaryrais mapadidovs, (§ 8) eladywv 5¢ dixas drocractov, ampocractov, KAjnpwv

on

case is provided for in Plato’s Laws, 873 E, édy & dpa vrofi-ycov # Swov dAdo Tt povetoy Twa... éwetlrwoay ev ol mpoor}- Kovres TOU Pbvou T@ krelvayre, Sadixafdvrav 6¢ ray dypovduur olow dy Kal omdcos mpoordéy 6 mpoojkwy, 7d be &pdov Ew Tv ’ Spwv THs xXwpas daroxrelvavTes dioploa,

Then follows the case of things without life: dav 5€ dwuxdv re xrd.

LVIII. Zhe Polemarch.

§1. wodépapxos] Hermann, Staatsalt. § 138, 8—10; Gilbert, i 242.

Ove—Hyvadl» xrd.] a survival of the duties performed in early times by the Polemarch in his military capacity. *Ap- réut6.] The sacrifice to Artemis was in memory of the battle of Marathon on the 6th day of Boedromion, Xen. Anad, iii 2, 12; Plut. de malign. Her. 26; Aelian, V. H. ii 25 (wrongly ascribed to the 6th of Thargelion) ; Schol. Aristoph. £4. 660 (Hermann, Gottesdienst. Alt. § 56, 3. and 5; Mommsen, eortol. p. 213).

dyava tov émurddiov] Plat. AZenex. 249 B, dyavas yuurixods Kal larmixods—Kat Houotnfis maons, [Lys.] 2 § 80; Philostr. Vit. Soph. ii 30 ad fin. év rq axadnulg, ob rlOnot Tov dryava él Tots éx Tay Troe LwY Oamropuévors 6 modkéuapxos. Cf. Suidas, 5.v. Oeusorokdéous raises. See Mommsen, Heortologie, p. 281, and Daremberg and Saglio, s. v. Zpitaphia, iii 727, where this commemorative festival is connected with the Oyceia and assigned to the 7th of Pyenepsion (end of October), cf. CIA ii 471, 22, romoavro dé kal roils ériraplos

Spbuov év Srdows—xal daedelEayro ev rots Srdots Tots Te Onoelos Kal emcragptos. In this part of his duties the ‘Polemarch was assisted by the orparyyol ; Gilbert, Bez- trige, p. O1.

évaylopara] ws jowt. Cf. Paus. ii 11,

7 (of Achilles); and ii 10, 1 (of Heracles).

The offerings consisted of libations of wine, oil, milk and honey. Hermann, Gottesdienst. Alt. § 16, 143 Miiller’s Handbuch, v 3 p. 98.

§2. S{kav.. VStar] Meier and Schémann, pp. 64—70, 619; Lys. 23 § 2, mpooexade- cdunv abrov mpos Tov modduapxov voulfwv pérowkov elvat.

mpokévors] the addition of févwy, after mpotévwy, proposed by Meier in the cor- responding passage of Pollux, is proved by the text to be unnecessary. éévo. who were not resident in Attica, could only be concerned in dlkat dad cupBodwy or Slxar éuropixat. By mpotevo. we must here understand the privileged class of foreigners presented by Athens with rights such as those of @yxryous, drédew and mpoedpia.

The privilege of the Polemarch’s pro- tection is expressly granted to a mpdéevos in CIA ii 42, mpdcodov adre@ elvar mpds Tov o\éwapxov Kabamrep Tois dddows mpotévors. In 131, we also have the grant of dré\ea

kal yijs kal olklas &yxrnots. Meier and Schom. p. 70 Lips. AaPdvra] ras dias. Stavelpavra—

Hépy] 21 § 4.

.

10

218 AOHNAIQN COL, 29, 1. 2736.

Aaxov Exaoty TH PAG pépos TpocOeivar, Tods Sé THY HuAnY SiKa- fovras rolis] Startnrais arrodobvat. avtos & eisdyer Sixas Tas Te 3 [rod] a[rocrac]iou nai drpoatacifov] Kal KAnpev Kal érixdnpwv Tots uerolKous, Kal TAAN boca Tois moditas 6 dpxwv, Tabra Tois

KETOIKOLS 6 TrONe“Apyos.

59.

ot b¢ OerpoOéTas Tpa@Tov pev TOU Tmpoyparrat Ta SiKa-

aTNpla eit KUpLoL, Tiow Huepass Set Sixatery, [€r]e[era] Tov Soovar

7 pépos secl. K-w.

Meroixwy (Frag. 3872, 426°). “dyava Tov érirdiov.” § 3 *Harp. wodduapxos:...”

9 rod secl. K-w; habet Harp. Bekk. An. 290, 28:

“Kal tp "Evvadly barlOnor” Tov

‘Ap. 8 &v 77 ’AQ. mon. BueLeAOav Goa Stone? 6 roNguapxos,

mpos radra, pnolv, airés re ‘‘elod-yer dlkas rds re Tov darograciov Kai dmpooraciou Kal

KAjpwy—radra rots werolxos 6 ToAguapyos.”

Tepl Tod wodeudpxou ypdmer TauTt* KMjpwv Kal émixAjpur.” “Kal KXjpwv Kal ércxAjpwv Tots peroixots *

kal TadAa doa Tois” tots merolkos tapéxerae (Frag. 3887, 427°).

*Harp. drooragiou:...’Ap. 8’ év AQ. moh.

“otros 6& elodryet Sixas rds Te ToD drocraclov Kal

Bekk. Az. 310, 9:

6 modéuapxos (elodyer Sixas) droctraciou daorois 6 dpxwy, ovTos Phot. #yeuovia Sixacrnplov:...7@ tode-

wdpxw 5¢ boa drocraclov ypaphy epepov er. why Kal doa 6 &pywy ev Trois dorois, 6

Tohéuapxos Tors peToikors OujTa.

TESTIMONIA. LIX Pollux viii 87 :§ 1 dig 5é of perv Oerpobérar mpoypdpouae wore bet Sud few re dixarripia, (§ 2) kal “ras eloayyedlas eloaryyédNovow els Tov Sijpov cal Tas”

xetporovlas ‘ ‘kal Tas mpoBodas”

elodyovot kal Tas Tov mapavouwy ypadds, Kai et

Tis wy emerbecov vouov ypdweev, “Kat orparnyors evOivas”’ (cf. Schol. Aeschin. 1 § 1, p- 253 Schultz, 4 6¢ e00vva—oloy peo Belay, orparnyiav KTA.).

*Harp. decpodéras :. Siépxerar Soa odrot mpdrrovaw.

.6 5¢ "Ap. & rH (a addit codex Angelicanus) ’A@. trod. Phot. Oeou.:...ras eloayyedlas eloyyyeddov els Tov dfuov Kal ras xetporovias Kal rds mpoBoras amacas Kal ypapas mapavduuv..

. Schol. in

Plat. Phaedr. 235 D elxov 5é ékovaolav Tol broypdyat Ta Sixaorhpia, Kal Tas eloayyedlas

eloffyov kal ras xeporovias Kal mpoBodrds Kal ypadds Tapavduwv kal drwy Twdy.

Cf.

Schol. in Aeschin. 1 § 16 in p. 219 @ exscriptum.

Tovs tiv uvAtv SixdLovras] z.c. the four dtxacral assigned to each tribe, who introduce private actions concerning mem- bers of that tribe. As resident aliens are not members of any tribe, the lawsuits in which they are concerned are distri- buted by lot among the ten groups of four dixaoral each. This shews that pé Toko. were in no way enrolled in any particular deme, as once suggested by Wilamowitz, Hermes, xxii 211. Cf. 53 §1.

The quotation of this passage in Pollux is unintelligible, and none of the various corrections (enumerated in Hubert de Arbitris Atticis, p. 29 f.) are satisfactory (Lipsius, Leipaig Verhandl., p. 55).

§ 3. dtrortaclov Kal dmporractov] The former designation was applied to the case in which a wéroixos deserted (or acted without the sanction of) the mpo- ordarns under whom he had been enrolled ; the latter, to that in which he had no mpocrarns. Dem. 38 Lacr. 48, dd’ 6

moh€uapxos eloater. dmpooractov.

On the dfxy drogractov, see Meier and Schom. p. 619—623 Lips.; on the -ypagy sat ort ib. p. 388—39I.

kAyjpev Kal rat ea ois perolKors] [Dem.] 46. § 22, émdixaclat elvan rw émikAnpwy aracay Kai tévwv kal doray cal Tepl ev THY ToNTeY Tov dpxovra elodyev Kal émmedcioOar, rept d¢ ror perolkuw Toy mohéuapxov. Pollux, viii g1, has kAjpwv werolkwy, corrected by Meier into «Ajpwv érexdhjpuv perotkos (or merotxixav). The general purport of this correction is con- firmed by.the text.

LIX. Zhe Thesmothetae.

§ 1. Oecpo@érar] Meier and Schém. p- 72—81 Lips.; Gilbert, i 243; and Dict. Ant. s. v. Archon.

tlow rpépars Set Sixdfev] c.g. Dem. c. Mid. 47 (of a ypagdh UBpews), of 5 Peopo- Gera eloaryévrev els Thy Atalay Tpidxovra qimepav xr. (Meier and Schém., p. 906 Lips.).

drooractov ye Kal

N

CH. 58, 1. 7—CH. 59, 1.6.

TIOAITEIA

219

tais apxais* nad’ 8 te yap av odo. Show, Kata TodTO ypavTaL. ért 5é Tas eicayyeNias eicayyéAXovew els Tov Shor, cal Tas KaTa- xetporovias Kai tas mpoBoras dmdca[s] eiadyovow od[ro], cal ypadas rapavopwr, Kal vowov pi érruTpSecov Oeivas, eal mpoedpixny

LIX 4 eloayyéddovew els rév Sov secl. K-w ; retinent K, H-L, B; eloayyéAovow defendunt Pollux et Photius: eled-youvew Schol. ad Plat. Phaedr. 235 et ad Aesch. i 16

(Gomperz).

6 <rod> véuov J B Mayor (H-L).

§ 2. eloayyeAlas] The statement of Pollux, viii 87, that it was the decuobérac who laid elcayyeAlat before the popular assembly was doubted by Boeckh (K7eine Schriften, v p. 163); but it is now clear

that the ultimate authority for the state--

ment was the present passage. Cf. Schol. Aeschin. 1 § 16, ol Oerpobérar dAXKa pev rowotor xown, lola dé, wore def Sixdvew ra dikaoripia kal ras eloayyeNlas elod-yeuw els tov Sijuov, kal Tas xetporovlas Kal Tas mpo- Bodds elodyouot kal ras Tay tapavduev ypagds Kai érepa.

Karaxetporovias] they bring forward all cases of ‘removal from office by the votes of the people.’ In Dem. c. Md. 6, the noun is applied to the preliminary vote of condemnation called mpoBod}: karaxetporoviay 6 Shuos éeroujoaro, and similarly with the verb in §§ 2, 199 and twice in § 175. In 51 § 8, in a speech before the BovA%}, it is applied to a case of mpodocia: mapedixare els 7d StkaoTHpiov, KaTaxetporovicayres mpodedwKévar Tas vais kal NeNourévar trav Tdéw. In the text the reference is to sentences passed by the éxxAnoia. on the occasion of an eloayyeAla, and then referred to a court of law (Lip- sinus, Leipzig Verhandl. p. 48).

mpoBodAds] cv. 43 § 5. Preliminary de- cisions of the éxxAnola directing public prosecutions to be instituted, Dem. c. Mid. §§ 9, 11. Isocr. 15 § 314, mpoBoras & r@ Snuw érolnoar.

mpoBodal were only resorted to in case of offences against religion (Dem. c. M@d.), complaints against magistrates (Harpocr. 5. U. KaTraxeporovia), and against gvko- gdvrae (43 § 5). Meier and Schém. p. 335—344 Lips. The supposition that mpoBodrai could only be, brought against magistrates at the émixeporoviac (Scho- mann, de Comit. p. 231 f.) is founded on passages of grammarians connecting spo- Bodat with xarayxetporovia, and this sup- posed connexion may have originated ina misunderstanding of the present passage. The statement that the tyyeuovla dixac- tnplov belonged to the Oeomobéra is confirmed by Dem. ¢. Mid. 32, Trav Geouoberay robrwr.

ypadds wapavépov] c. 29 § 4, Hy- perides, ro Luxenippo, c. 21, 27, wapa- voud tis év TH wove ypdde ; Oeapoberav auvédpiov éort. Dem. Left. 98, 99-

vopov pr) émurySeov Octvar] It has sometimes been supposed that a ypag? mapavouwy could be directed against wndlouara, as well as against véuo, on the ground of znexpediency, as well as on that of zlegality.

This opinion rests on passages such as (1) the spurious law quoted in Dem. «. Timocr. 33, éav 6é tis AUoas Twa TOV vouwy tov Kerevan erepov dvTiOq why émt- THdevov TO Shuw To ’AOnvalwy 4 évavrlov Tov Keydvay Ty, Tas ypapas elvat KaT’ avrod xara Tov vouov ds Ketrat, édy Tis M7 émirjdecov O47 véuov. (Here inexpedient and contradictory laws are confusedly blended together.) (2) Pollux viii 56, trewpocla 6€ éorw, bray Tis 7 Wipiopa 7 véuov ypapévra ypddyra: ws dvemiTiSe.ov, and 44 (in a ypaph rapavduwv) Sipreyxev ore tore wapdvouov 7 Edikov 7 davppopor.

It was urged by Madvig (Kleine Schraf- ten, p. 378 ff.) that, in the case of vémor, no less than in that of Wydlopuara, the argument from inexpediency was really irrelevant, the only legitimate ground of attack in both cases being that of illegality. This opinion has, however, been contested by Scholl (Svtzungsber. d. k. 6. Akad., Miin- chen, 1886, p. 136). Relying partly on the passage in Pollux viii 87, which proves to be quoted from the text (see Zest¢monia), he contends that, under a ypag? rapavd- pov, a Widipa could only be impugned on the ground of illegality, whereas a véuos might be formally attacked on the ground of inexpediency, as well as on that of illegality (Dem. c. Zimocr. 61, 68, 108). Cf. Gilbert, i284, n.13; Meier and Schom. p- 431 Lips.; Dict. Ant. ii 340 a.

Lipsius, who formerly supported Mad- vig, now holds that the text confirms Schéll’s view (Leipzig Verhandl. p. 48). But it will be observed that in the text the reference to inexpedient laws is intro- duced by «at, which (unless it is merely epexegetic) makes the following clause an additional item in the enumeration.

an

foe)

220

AOHNAIQN COL, 20,]. 36—43.

\ : Fe , \ ‘ Kat ériotatinny Kal otpatnyois edOivas. iol 5& ‘Kal ypadat 3 , wv Mpos avTovs dv mapdctacis TiPeTat, Eevias Kal Swpokevias, ay Tes

a ” “ 4 ca \ : Spa Sods amodiyn tiv’ Eeviay, nai svnopavtias Kai Sopwv Kal

8 ‘tevlas bev, édv Tis Karnyopiras tevos elvat, Swpotevias Se lex. Cant.—dv ris—tevlap glossa?’ K-w. 9 ri Eevias Meier, Att, Pro. p. 73, H-L.

§3 “Harp. mapdoragis:...’Ap. 5 év AO. mod. rept Oecpoberav Aéywr pnaly otrws “‘elal 6¢ ypadai—ri kevlay,” “kal pevdeyypapis—porxelas.” *Harp. dwpotevia:...cat *Ap. 8’ év 7G’AO. Ton. wept Tov Oecpoberav héywy ypder Tauri ‘lol 5¢ Kal ypadal— droptyy Thy” ovxodayriay (‘ex sequentibus errore arreptum pro fevlay’ Rose). *Lex, rhet. Cantab. tevlas ypaph xal Swpokevias diapdper. "Ap. év THAD, od. pyot mepl Ta Oecpober Gy Siareyduevos *‘elot 5¢ kal ypagal mpds (rept cod.) abrods dy rapderacts (repiordoes cod.) riBerar, Eevlas nal Swpokevias.” tevlas wey éay tis Karnyophrac Eévos elvat, Swpokevias dé “édy ris SGpa Sods dropiyy Tip Eeviav.” Pollux viii 44: Swpotevias Se ea ris tevlas xpwopevos Sapa Sovs daopt-yo. (Hesych. dwpogevias 7d éml teviay Kahovpevoy amopuyev Sapa Sivra). Harp. qyeuovla dtxaornplov :...rpds dé rots Geo- Hobéras ai rijs Eevlas re Kal Swpotevias (éhayxdvovro Sika) kal ovxopaytias kal Swpwv kal pevdeyypadiis kal UBpews cal porxelas xal Bovredoews xalddrdwv. Bekk. Az. 310, 12: of Oeop. elofyov Eevlas cal cvxodaryrias kal ddpwv Kal pevdeyypapys cal UBpews kal porxelas kal Bovrevoews. Phot. Hyeu. dikaor.:...0l Peon. cvxoparrias Kal Swpuv Kal UBpewr Kal porxelas xal Bovdevoews (cf. Frag. 3797, 418°). Pollux viii 87: ylvovras dé ypapal mpds abrovs Eevlas, Swpotevias, Swpwy, svxopayrias, pevdoxdyrelas, pevdeyypa-

pis, Bovredcews, dypadlov, porxelas. 33 Swpotevias dixn.

Cf. etiam Bekk. Ax. 238, 24 Swpokevia; 240,

This fact is in favour of a separation of legal proceedings on the ground of inex- pediency from the strict procedure of the ypaoh mapavéuewv. We may accordingly suppose that the ypagdy mapavéuwy was originally intended to be directed against Ynolopara, as well as véduor, on the sole ground of illegality; and that, subse- quently, fresh powers were granted for the institution of formal proceedings against véuo alone, on the sole ground of inexpediency. This new kind of pro- cedure is the subject of the additional clause cal vouov wh émirpdecov Oetvar, tpocdpixijy] the later form of the ypadh mpuravixy which is mentioned together with the yp. émirarixh by Harpocr. s. v. PNTopiKh ypapy.—h Kard pyropos ypawar- tbs Tt] elardyros } mpdéavros mapdvouor, domep héyerat kal mpuraviny y KaTd mpv-

+ ravews, Kal émusrarixy 9 Kar’ émiordrov.

Cf. ve. 44.

orparnyots evOivas] Lys. 9 § 11; 14 § 38; [Dem.] 49 § 25. Generals might even be called back to give account be- fore the expiration of their office (Lys. 28 § 5). Meier and Schém. p. 263 Lips.; Gilbert, Bettrdge, pp. 26—28; Scholl, de Synegoris, pp. 12, 143 Wilamowitz, Aus Kydathen, p.62; Hauvette-Besnault, les Stratiges Ath. pp. 56—63.

§ 3. ypadal] Meier and Schom. p. 437 ff. Lips.

Tapactacis]

the fee (probably a

drachm) paid to the state by the pro- secutor in certain public causes. The present passage (as quoted by Harpocr. s. vu.) has been the authority for the causes in which ‘it was paid ; but the list is probably not exhaustive. The fee was not paid in an eloayyedia Kaxdoews emte KAjpwv (Isae. 3 Pyrrh. 45). Meier and Schém. pp. 799 f., 813—4 Lips.

€evlas] a prosecution for usurping the rights of citizenship. Meier and Schém. PP. 437—442 and 95—98, Lips.; Dict. Ant. s. a.

The Lex. Rhet. Cant, adds the need- less explanation: édv rts karnyopfrat Eévos elvat.

Swpofevias] If a person tried on the charge of fevia was ‘acquitted by fraudu- lent collusion with the prosecutor or wit- nesses, or by any species of bribery, he was liable to be indicted afresh by a yp. Swpokevias’ (Dict. Ant. ». v.; Meier and Schom. p. 441 Lips.).

cvukopavrlas Kal Sdpwv] omitted by Harpocr. and the Lex. Rhet. Cant. in their list of causes in which mrapdcracus was paid. Lipsius (Att. Proc. p. 73) was led to propose the addition of these causes by Bekker’s Avecd. p. 310, 14, where cuxogdarrias, Sdpwy, UBpews are inserted. On the yp. cuxopayrias, see Meier and Schom. p. 413 Lips.; on the yp. ddpwr, P. 444+

CH. 59, l. 7—16. TIOAITEIA 221 spevdeyypadijs Kal apevdokrnrelas «ai Bovretioews Kal dypadiov 4xal potxelas. eladyouow S& nal ras Soxyac[ials tais dpyais amdaais, Kal Tovs drewndicpevous Urs Tay Snpotay, Kal Tas 5 Katayvacess [Tas éx tis BovaAns. elodyovar 8é nab Sixas idias, eurropixas Kal weradrrduKds Kat Sovrav, dv Tis Tov éXedOEpov KaKas Aéyn. Kal éuxdnpodor tais dpyals obtot Ta Sixactypia Ta ida 6 Kal Ta Snpocta. Kal ta cbuBora Ta Tpbs Tas TOAELS OUTOL KUpOdaL, 11 _xal JBpews ante cal morxelas ins. Harp. s.v. tyeuovla duxacrnptov (cf. Bekk.

An., Phot.); non inserit Harp. s.v. wapdoraois. elod-yovot H-L. 14 édy H-L. 15—16 kal éwixAnpodc.—dypudcia secl. K-w3 defendit Pollux viii 87. 15 OYTOITA

(K-w, K3, B): mdvra kK}, wdvra To H-L, 16 Kypoyci (K, K-w, B); idem habet Pollux: <xara>xvpoio. Wyse (H-L). :

§§ 4—6 Pollux viii 87: (§ 4) elodyouor &¢ xal Soxiuactay rats dpxais, Kal rods dreyngiopévous, kal Tas éx Tijs Bovdijs Karayvioes. (§ 5) Kal Slkas eumopixas Kal Heradduxds, Kal édy doiAos Kakds dyopedy Tov édevOepov, kal Tals dpyats éwexAypodat Ta Oixacrhpia 7a Wdia Kal Ta Snudora, (§ 6) Kal Ta gUuBora Ta mpds TbdELs KUpODoL, Kai

dixas Tas dd oupBddrAwv elod-youer Kal Tas Tay Wevdowaprupidv Tov ef’ Apelov rdyov.

pevSeyypadys] a prosecution against a public officer for making a false entry in the list of debtors-to the state. Meier and Schom. p. 415 Lips.; Dict. Ant. s. v.

hev8oxAyTelas] a prosecution for falsely appearing as witness to a summons. Meier and Schom. p. -414 Lips., and Dict. Ant. ». v.

Bovdevoews] a prosecution instituted by one who was wrongfully inscribed as a state debtor against one who had so inscribed him. The distinction between this kind of yp. BovAedoews and the cog- nate yp. pevdeyypagijs is stated as follows by Boeckh, p. 390 Lewis: ‘whoever falsely declared that another had been regis- tered was liable to the action for false registration (Wevdeyypagijs). If, on the other hand, a man who had been a state debtor had paid all that was due, but his name was not erased, or, having been erased, was re-entered, the action for con- spiracy applied (BovNevoews).’ Meier and Schém. p. 415 Lips.; Dict. Ant. i p.

4a,

dypadtov] a prosecution for non-re- gistration of a name in the list of state debtors, instituted in the event of the name being improperly evased before the debt was paid. This action might be brought either against the person whose name was improperly erased, or against the officer who omitted to register the debt. If the name of a debtor had not been registered at all, he could only be pro- ceeded against by évdeéis, and was not liable to the dypadlov ypagy (Dem. c.

Theocrin.67), Meier and Schom. p. 447— 9 Lips. ; and Dict. Ant. s. v.

potxelas] Meier and Schom. p. 402—9 Lips.; Dict. Ant. i 29 4. _ $4. Sonpactlas] 55 §§2—4. Gilbert, i 210.

drrapypirpévous xr\.] Those whose claims to citizenship were rejected at the diuayygiots, held by the members of the deme, might appeal to a law-court. 13 § 53 42 § 1; Meier and Schom. p. 989 f. Lips.

Katayveoes] 45 § 1, Tas KaTayvaces elodyew Tovs Oecpobdras els 7d StxacTyptov.

§ 5. éprropixds] commercial law-suits heard during the winter, when the sea was closed to mercantile enterprise. These, as well as the weraddxal Sika, belonged to the class of @upnvo dikac, which were decided within a month. Meier and Sch., p. 635 Lips.; Dict. Ant. i p. 730 a.

peradAukds] mining suits, Dem. Pazz. 35. Boeckh, Ox the Silver Mines of Laurium, § 12; Meier and Sch., p. 634 Lips.

ovAwv] It was only in the event of a

dikn xaxyyoplas being brought by a free- man against a slave that the Aecuodérar presided over the court. In other cases, it came before the Forty. Meier and Sch., pp. 80, 628 Lips.

éruxAnpotow—Sikacrrypia] Cra ii 567 5 (in a decree in honour of a Geopobérns) émedetrac dé Kal THs KAnpwoews TOV b- xaornplwy. Meier and Sch., p. 160 Lips.

§ 6. Td ctpBodra td mpds Tas wéAets]

222 AOHNAIQN COL. 29, 1. 44—51. kai Tas Sixas Tas aro TOY cvpBorwy eicdyouct, Kal Ta Yrevdouap- Tupia <td> é[E] "Apetov mayov. rods 8€ Sixactds Kdypodou7

- e9 # ” t ad \ € a mares oi évvéa apxovres, Séxatos 8 6 ypapparteds 6 TOV Oecpobe-

20

TOV, TOUS THs avTOD duAts ExacTos. 60. tad uédv odv wept Tods evvéa apxovtas TovTov exer TOY

TpoTrop.

a £ ¥ guns éExdorns. 17 ra Y. Tac mutatum in Tay.

Tas Toy y. TaY K-W.

Schol. Arist. Vesp. 775.

KAnpotat S€ cat GOrA0OETas Séxa [d]vdpas, va Tis obtot 5é Soxyacbévres dpyovot tértap[a é]rn, 18 <7ra> Bernardakis, K-w, H-L, B coll. Poll.

18—20 rods 5¢—txaoros secl. K-w, cf. 63 § 1; defendit 19 TTANTAC K-W; mdyvres corr, K, H-L, B.

17 *Bekk. Ax. 436 dd cupBdrwv Sixdger infra exscriptum (Frag. 3807, 419%); cf.

Harp. infra laudatum.

18—20 Schol. Ar. Ves. 775: Oecuobéra: xal Séxaros 6

dikacras rods Tijs abris muds Exacros.

x

ypaupareds KXynpotot rods

TESTIMONIA. LX § 1 Pollux viii 93: dO@AoBérar 5éka pév elow, els xara pudrv, Soxipacbdvres 5é dpxovow ern rérrapa éml 7G diadetvar ra Tlavadqvaca, Tdv Te povorxdy

<add. dydva> “Kal roy yupriKdy

” “Kal chy larmodpoptav.”

ib. 87 (ol evvéa

dpxovres...€xovow e£ovalav) kdypodvy Sixacras cal dOA0GEras, eva xara pudrdy exdornr.

‘international contracts.” Such agree- ments were finally ratified by a heliastic court. In [Dem.] 7 § 9, Philip claims that they shall-be ratified ov« émeday év T@ Sixaornply Tg rap’ uly KvpwOy Worep 6 vouos kehevet. Cf. [Andoc.] 2 Alcib. 18. They secured to the citizens of the con- tracting states the reciprocal right of suing and being sued; fol. 1275 w 8, (among those who are not citizens are) of rév dixalwy peréxovres otrws Wore Kal dixny brréxew. kal dixdgecbat’ Tovro yap brdpxe kal rots dd cupBddwv Kowwvoicor.. The decision was given in the court of the defendant’s city, and in accordance with laws agreed upon in the ov¥pBoda.

Tas Slkas tds dd trav cupPddov] These were mainly commercial suits; but while, in the ordinary dixat éuropixal, the suit was tried in the state where the con- tract was made, and in accordance with the laws of that state; in the dlxac dard cunBodrwv, it was tried in the defend- ant’s state and in accordance with the laws agreed upon in the eJuSora. Thus, on the reduction of Chalcis in B.c. 446/5, the inhabitants retained their own ju- risdiction except in the case of offences punishable by disfranchisement, exile, or death. These were to be sent to Athens for trial: mepl 5¢ rodrwy Epeotv elvar ’AO7- vate els Thy jAtalay Tov Becpoberav.

In Bekker’s Anecad. i 436 we read: *"AOnvator dd cupBdrwy Edlkafov Trois bmrn- xoows’ otrws *Apororédys, and similarly (so far as regards the first statement)

Hesych. s. v. dmd cupBdrwv ducdtew ; but it will be observed that the text says nothing of tmjxoo. Cf. Pollux viii 63, dd cuuBorgwy dé, bre ol cUppaxor dikd- govro. Harpocr. cvuBoda: ras cuvOqxas ds dy al modes GAAHACUS Oduevar TdTTwoL Tots moniras wore didovar kal AapBdvew 7a dixaia, and similarly Phot. and Etym. M. On this subject cf. Meier and Schom. Pp- 994—1006 Lips.; Goodwin in Ameri- can Journal of Philology, i 1880, p. i—16; Dict. Ant. ii 734—6.

td, Wev8onaptipta] this form has hith- erto been found only in Plat. Zheaet.148 B, &voxos Tots Wevdouapruplas. In the case of dixat Wevdouaprupiav in general, the management of the suit was in the hands of the same authorities as the trial at which the alleged false witness was ten- dered: it was only in the event of false witness before the Areopagus, that the case came under the cognisance of the Oecpobérar. Meier and Schoém. p. 485 f.

§ 7. Tods 8t Sixacrds KAnpotot] 63 § 1. Meier and Sch., p. 160 Lips.

6 ypapparets] 55 § 1; 63 § 1.

LX. The Athlothetae.

§ 1. dOAoBéras] The lists of payments from the treasures of Athena for public purposes include the following items: CIA 1183 (Hicks, no. 53), 7 (in the British Museum), d0r00érais és Havadqvaa, in B.C. 415, 9 talents ; 2d. 188 (Ditt. no. 44), § (in the Louvre), d0AoGéraus és Tavadjvaca Td meydda, in B.C. 410, 5 talents, 1000 drachmae.

vv

CH. 59, l. 17—CH. 60, 1.7. TIOAITEIA 223 kai Sioxovor tiv Te moumiy Tov Tlavabnvaiwy Kal Tov dyava Ths povarkns Kal Tov yumYiKoY ayava Kai THY immoSpoulay, Kal Tov TéThOY TOLObVTAL, Kal TOUS awopels TrovodVTaL peTa THs BovAts, kal TO €XaLov Tois GOANTais arrodubdacL. auANEeyeTaL SE TO EXaLov

LX 6 AMOPEIC TIOIOYNTAI (K): du@opets Gennadios, (K-w, H-L); movodvrac

retinet B, commatis signo post prius rovodvra: addito, et coll. c. 49 § 3. 7 de- reTal TOA EAdION: ouAdéyerar dé 7d Aacov Gennadios, Richards, Gertz, H-L,

k-w}, K5, B; 7d 0” €Aacovy oudAdé-yerat R D Hicks (K-W?).

§ 2 *Schol. Soph. O. C. yor: 6 6€ Ap. kat rots vixjoact Ta Tlavadjvaa édalov Too

éx Tv popiay ywoudvov dldocbal gnaw.

Schol. Arist. Wad. 1005.

Cf. Phot. s.v. woplac (Frag. 345%, 383°).

topmy tov ILavabyvalwv] Thuc. vi 56—58. Michaelis, Parthenon, p. 327.

Tov dyava TAS povotkys] Plut. Ze. 13, @tAroriodmevos 6 6 Tlepixdyjs rére mparov éyndloaro povoikis dyava ois Tlava@nvators dryecOar Kal diératev adbrds aOroberns aipefeis, Kad7t Xph Tovs aywvt- Souevous avr&7v 7) Gdev 7 KOapltew. Phry- nis of Mytilene won the prize ‘with the xOdpa in B.C. 456. The prizes for «- Oapydol were a crown, together with 500, 300, 200, or 100 dr. (schol., Arist. Av. 11); and for the dvdpes addwdol, a crown and 100 dr. This competition is men- tioned in Plut. ii 1134 A, de Musica, 8, év dpxn yap eAeyeia meuedomrornudva of atdydol Fdov* TolTo b¢ Sndot 7 Tay Ilava- Onvaiwy ypagdy 4 Tepl TOO Koverkod dyGvos. The prize for the dvdpes xOapicral was a crown, or 200 or 100 dr.; there was also a prize for the avdAnral, probably a crown (Michaelis, Parthenon, p. 322). A crown won at a povoixds dyav is represented in an inscr. published in "Epyu. ’Apx. 1862, 219 (copied 2. p. 318).

yvupvikdy dyava] mentioned in docu- ments quoted in Dem. 18 § 116 and Hip- pocrates iii 830 Kiihn, also in CIA ii 331, 177 (c.B.C.270), avadqvaluv rev meyadw TP yuuviK@ ayov.. The contests included running, wrestling, boxing, and the 7év- taf\ov and maryxpartov (Michaelis, 7. c. P- 323).

imroSpoplav] The horse-races were held at Echelidae (rowos ’A@nvyot ora- Slow éxrd, év g al immodpoylar, Etym. M.). The race is mentioned in Xen. Symp. i 2. Cf. Athen. p. 168, vixjoavros tmmos Tay- afjvata (cf. Michaelis, pp. 324—5). wéthov] 49 § 3. Schol. Arist. Av. 826, 77) ’AOnvg modudd: oben wér)os éylvero mapmoixtdos, dy dvépepoy ev Ty Tomy THY Tlava@yvatwv. Among the mythological subjects represented on it was the battle of Athene with the Giants. Michaelis, Zc. p. 328.

dudopets] In the athletic contests the prize was a garland from the sacred olive- trees, together with a vase filled with oil from the same. Pindar’s ornate descrip- tion of the prizes is well known : Mem. x 62—66, ddetal ye wey duBordbay év rede- rais dis’ Adavalwy py déudal kopacav’ yaig 5é kavOelog trupl Kapros édaias évodev "Hpas Tov edavopa radv év dryyéwv epkeow raptrot- «lots (with Schol.). Cf. Simonidesin Anth. Pal. xiii 19, 3, xat Tlava@nvalos orepd- vous Nae wévr’ éx’ déOdors éffs (z.e. in the Pentathlon) dudidopets <7’> édalov.

Many of the Panathenaic vases have been found in Italy, Sicily, Greece, and at Cyrene. They have the figure of Athene on one side, and a representation ofthe contest for which they were awarded on the other. The earliest Panathenaic vase, now extant, known as the “ Burgon Vase” in the British Museum (Vase Room Il B 1), is ascribed to the 6th century B.c., and there are 14 others in the same room; in Room Iv there are ro of the 4th century, to which the majority of such vases belong, varying in date from 368 to 313 B.C. One of those in the Museum, bearing the inscr. rév "AOqvnbey Ow, belongs to B.C. 328, about the date when the text was written. Many of these vases are reproduced in colours in Monumenti del? Inst. Arch. x; and single vases in Birch’s Ancient Pottery, p. 430, Duruy, Histoire des Grecs,i 762, and Murray’s Handbook of Gk. Archaeology, p. 104.—A Panathenaic amphora, with a spray of olive rising out of it and with three crowns beside it, may be seen on a table in front of a gnarled olive-tree, represented in relief on the outer side of several marble stalls found at Athens (see cut in Michaelis, Parthenon, p. 29).

§ 2. eAatov—popiov xrr.] Arist. Vad. 1005, GAN’ els "Akadyuecay Kariov vrd Tails poplais drodpétet, and Schol. wepi adrdv &°

Io

224 AOHNAIQN COL. 29,1. 5r—COL. 30, 1.8. 2 \ n a. , \ \ AY if Z 2. [a]ro Tey pwopidv’ eiaomparTer Sé Tos Ta Ywpia KEeKTNmévous év ols ai popias cicly 6 dpywv, tpi’ HixoTvALa aid TOD aTEAEXOUS éxaoTov. mpotepov © émw@des Tov Kaprrov 7 TOdS* Kal el Tis éEo- pl&eev édaiav popiav 7 xatakeev, Expwev 1% é& ’Apelov maryov

, y n , a 2 / 2 @orv oy Bovan, cat ef tov katayvoin, Oavat@ Todrov eCnulouv.. é€ ob dé To

- éXavov 6 Td Ywpiov Kellernwévos arroTives, 6 Mev vomos éaTiv, H dé (Col. 3

\ in kptows Katadédutat, Oo 8 edLavov] éx Tod KTHwaTOS, OvK amo TOY a ‘ =z lol

oTeANeY av, €oTl TH Wore. avANEEAS odY 6 apywv TO ep éav[Tad] 3 yeryvopuevov, Tois Tapiais Tapladid]wow eis dxpoTrodw, Kal ovK éore kJ BA 4 ? ‘0 A. ] , t A [4 a ao n

vy avaBivas mpotepoy eis ["Ape]vov rrayov mplv av arav wapao@e

" a 3 Tots Tapias. of 8 Tapias Tov ev ddrov xpdvov THpodow ev axpo-

9 TPl HMIKOTYAIA (B); Tpla u- K, H-L3 Tpenptxoridov. K-W. del. Rutherford, éAdav (deleto moplay) H-L.

11 éhalay A\alav (K, K-W); éAdav B; éAala habet

Soph. 0.C. 7o1; ¢dda Aristophanes, cf. Eustathium p. 84,9 Tiv éAalay éAday drri-

k@s; formam utramque defendunt tituli (Meisterhans, p. 247). 14 <7r6> ék« roi H-L. €k) TOY KTHMATOC (K-wW, B): KAHMATOC legerat K (H-L).

B), omiserat K!; [[uév ?] K-w.

12 Toy (H-L, K3, atto (correctum in 16 TiIrN (edd.).

joav al dvrws lepal édatac THs Geod, al xa- Aodyras poplar? €& ay 7d Edatov THv Tava- Onvatwy. Lucian, Anach. 9; Schol. Plat. Farm. 127 A; Suidas s. v. popla (Mi- chaelis, Parthenon, p. 322).

dompdrre—kextnpévous «rA.] Schol. Arist. Wud. 1005, rd rats woplas: did 7d wavra dvOpwnrov kext nmévov édalas dvary- Kafer Oat wépos re rapéxew els Ta Tavadjvara KK.

wel’ jpukoridta] 2 pint; the KordAn being about 4 pint.

apotepoy 8” eden Tov KapTov 1 TéALS] Lysias 7 de Olea Sacra § 2, rods éwvn- wévous Tovs Kaprovs Tay popiav. The speech is not.earlier than B.C. 395 (Blass, Att. Ber. i* p. 591): thus rpérepov here refers to a time not earlier than the ar- chonship of Eucleides.

el ris &opvteev—Bovdy] Lys. Or. 7 is addressed to the Areopagus, who (besides attending to the sacred olives every month) sent overseers (yvwmovas) to examine them every year (§ 25). In§7 the speaker states the charge on which he is being tried: Thy 8¢ < play> poplar, qv obdx oldv 7’ qv Aadety éEopvEavra, ws ddavlfwy vuvt xpl- vomat.

@avdrw] The terms used in Lys. 7 § 3, wept marplios kal mepi ris ovolas d-ywrl- cacba, and § 41, marplios—orepnbels, imply that the penalty at that time was (as in other cases of doéBea) banish- ment with confiscation of property. This shews that, even before the time when the state, instead of selling the olives,

exacted from the tenant the delivery of a certain quantity of oil, the capital penalty had already become obsolete.

Kriypatos] The delivery of the oil has now become a regular tax on the fro- perty, t.e. either on the xwploy or on the store of oil manufactured by the pro- prietor. The alternative reading xAjparos draws a distinction between the ‘ fresh shoots’ (Xen. Oec. 19, 8, Tov BAacrév Tod kA\jparos), and the trunk of the tree, im- plying that the state insists that the oil supplied to it shall be from the former. But this proviso, even if intelligible in theory, would be difficult to insist upon in practice. Besides orédexos is the ordinary term applied to the tree as a whole.

orehexdv] Dem. 43 Aacart. 69, rabras (ras édaas) efdpurrov Kal éterpéuritov, rev } xia aredéxn, SOev Edacov odd éylyvero. Hadt. viii 55, BAaordv éx rod orehéxeos.

§ 3. ép éavrod] ‘in his own year of office.’

roplats] 4$2; 7 § 3; 8§ 15 and esp. 30 § 2 and 47 § 1.

otk tory dvaBrvat «rA.] the archon could not take his place among the mem- bers of the Areopagus at the close of his year of office until he had handed over to the treasurers (of Athene) the full amount of olive-oil due for the year. For dyvaByvar cf. [Dem.] c. Meaer. 80, éyévero 7a lepd tafra cal dvéBnoav els “Apecov ma-yov ol évvéa dpxovres Tats cabnkovcas huépats.

CH, 60, 1. 8—cH. 61, 1.2, TIOAITEIA

225

monet, Tots Sé Tlavabyvaiows drrouetpobar toils dOdobéraus, of 8 aOrobérar Tois vindst TOV aywvicTav. &at. yap AOXa Tois wév THY povoLKHY viKaoW apyipia Kab xpvoia, Tois S& THY evar- Spiav aorises, tois 8&8 Tov yuuvexdy aydva Kal Thy lmmoSpoulav

éX\atov,. — — —

61. yerpotovotcr dé Kal Tas mpds TOV TOAELOY apyas aTracas, \ tL 4 Af 34? 4 2 a lol oe otpatnyous déxa, mpotepoy pev ad’ <éxaoryns THs> purijs eva,

21 apryplak xpyca (K1): dpyvpia Kal xpvola (H-L, K3, B); dpytpioy Kal xpvod

(K-w), dpyup& kal xpuod (Rutherford).

23 ‘interciderunt magistratus creati in

quadriennium, cf. cap. 18’ K-w; idem coniecerat Weil; c. 43 §1 et c. 61 § 1 (xetpor. é¢ xal) confert B, qui addit tamen nihil amplius Polluci notum fuisse.

LXI 2 A(e)k(at) K!; déxa, Richards, Gertz, K-w, H-L, B, K3.

(K-W, H-L); éxdorys Tijs B.

éxdorns add. K

TESTIMONIA, LXI Pollux viii 87 (ol évvda dpxovres...éxovow ekovelav), (§ 1) orpa- Tyyods xetporovely ek drdvTwr, (§ 2) kal Kal? éxdorny mpuravelay érepwray el doxel Karas dpxew Exarros (rév 5 droxeiporovndévra xplvovow), (§ 4) Kal immdpxous vo, (§ 5) kal

gpuddpyous déxa, (§ 3) kal rakidpyous déxa.

2 *Harp. orparryol :...01 cad’ Exacrov éviavrdv xetporovotmevor orparnyol déxa joav, ws pabeiy Eorw &x te rdv ‘Lrepidov Kar’ A’roxNéous kal éx THs °AO. wor. "Aptororédous

(Frag. 390%, 430%).

mV povoikiy vikaow dpytpia Kal xpuola] The prizes recorded in inscrip- tions are crowns and sums of money varying from 100 to 500 ar. (Ditten- berger, no. 395: Michaelis, Parthenon, p- 322). dpytpia, in pl. of ‘sums of money,’ Arist. Av. 600.

eavSplav] This contest is mentioned in Andoc. 4 § 42, vevixnkws evavdplg, Xen. Mem. iii 3, 12, Athen. 565 F; also in Harpocr. s. v. and Bekker’s Avec. p. 257, 13. Cf. Thumser, de Civium Ath. Mu- neribus, pp. 81, 97—9- domlSes] In the early part of the fourth century the prize was an ox; CIA ii 965 (Ditt. 395, 75), edavdplas pudfe vixdoee Bots. We do not know the date when the ox was super- seded by the portable prize mentioned in the text. The ‘shields’ are not named elsewhere.

yunvuxey dyava Kal rHy trmoSpoplav] In the above inscr. ll. 2370 we have the record of the number of dudopis éAaiov awarded (1) to the boys, and (2) to the youths, who were victorious in running, wrestling, boxing, or in the pentathlum or pancratium; and (3) to the victors in the horse-races. The part enumerating the prizes given to the men is lost.

LXI. Officials elected by open voting (Military Officers).

§ 1. Xeiporovoto.—rds mpds Tov dXe- pov dpxds] 43 § 1 ad fin.

dg’ Pellerin éva] This was the case on the occasion when Cimon and his

S, A.

colleagues were called upon to act as judges in the dramatic contest of B.c. 468, when Sophocles gained the prize against Aeschylus: Plut. Cimon 8, describes the generals as déxa dvras, dwd guARs mas &xaorov. At some later date, which is not specified, the generals were chosen out of all the citizens (€& drdvrwy) without distinction of tribe.

It was held by Schémann (Azz. p. 420), Boeckh (on Antig. 190, and CIG pp. 294, 906), Sauppe and others, that the generals were elected by the several tribes alone. A. Schaefer (Denz. ii 182) held that they were elected ¢& dardvrwy (as attested by Pollux). The view that in earlier times the generals were elected xara gvdjv, and afterwards é& drdvrwv, was held by Bergk, Lugebil, Miiller - Striibing and others (see Gilbert, i 220, and Beztrége, pp. 16—20). This is proved by the text to be right.

Gilbert (Bettrage, pp. 21—23) accepts the narrative in Plutarch’s Cimon, but does not admit that on that occasion the to generals belonged to the ro different tribes, although this is the obvious mean- ing, as in the phrase in Pollux viii 94, of pirapxot Séxa, els dard pudfs pias Exacros. In 440/39 two of the ro generals, Pericles and Glaucon (FHG iv 645), belonged to the same tribe, Acamantis; this is our earliest evidence for a departure from the older system; possibly the change was due to a desire to elect the ablest men,

15

226

AQHNAIQN

COL. 30, 1. 8—14,

ae iy ry eo? ‘ ‘ , ! a sg \ viv 0 é& drdvtwv' Kai TovTous SvatdtTover TH YeipoTovia, eva pev — \ ¢ na

emi Tous omhitas, ds iryeiras TOV o[wAL|TaY, av éEiwot, Eva S eri \ n a , n 1 9 a , t na

THY XWPAaV, Os GuAATTEL, KAY TOE LOS EV TH YwP| Yryvyntar, TorEpeEl Ld

obtos* Sv0 8 éri Tov Ietpaséa, rov pev eis THY Movmyilay, tov §

on

4 0...T(WN) érdrGy H-L (K%, B): A(?)...T(@N) mlod]rav K-w; d[nuo]rav x},

édy H-L. 6 TIN (K-wW). B): Iecpaa H-L. MOYNYX-

TIOAEMEL: ayyetrat K-W.

6 TrEIpalea (K, K-W,

such as Pericles, independently of the tribe to which they belonged. But, even after the change, nearly all the tribes were in practice represented on the board. Thus in B.c. 433/2 out of seven generals, six belonged to different tribes ; in 424/3, out of six whose demes are known, five; in 418/7, all the six whose demes are given; in 417/6, all the five; and in 357/6, six out of the seven. There is no example of more than one tribe being represented by two orparnyol in the same year (Hauvette-Besnault, Zes Strateges Athéniens, pp. 24—29).

Statdrrovot] The fact that about this time the duties of the orparyyol were distributed over several members of the board was already known. The five officers charged with specific duties had already been identified, but it was not known that there were only five. The date of this change was supposed to fall between 334 and 325. In 334 B.C. (CIA ii 804 A 63) the orpar7yol are still acting as a body in reference to the cvypoplat, whereas in 325/4 we hear of a orparyyds émtrds cvppoplas. Cf. Hauvette-Besnault, Les Stratéges Ath., pp. 139 ff. (Gilbert, i 220, and Busolt in Miiller’s Handbuch, Iv i162), The latest date actually men- tioned in this treatise is B.c. 329; but it does not follow that the change in ques- tion took place earlier than that date, as the treatise may have been written in any year between B.C. 329 and 325.

émt tovs émdlras] In Lys. 32 § 5 we have what at first sight appears to be a mention of this officer: xpévy 5é Uorepov xaradeyels Arddoros werd Opa- ovddou 700 él r&v éwhir&v (B.C. 410)3 and we know that Thrasyllus was elected a orparnyos in the spring of 411. (Thuc. viii 76) and held office for 410/9 (#4. 104); but the words rof émi are omitted in two MSS, Florentinus and Ambrosianus, and the construction is parallel to caraeyeis Tpnpdpywy in Isaeus, de Afoll. her. 5.

The decrees in the De Corona mention 6 éml ray dirdwy arparnyds (§ 38), Tov éml trav Srdwy (115) and 6 émt ray émdirav

(116), but these are forgeries of a later date (Hauvette-Besnault, p. 160 f).

In CIA ii 302 (c. 294/3 B.C.) Philippides is described as [xetporovy]Oei[s orpar}ryos [é]mi ro[ds ordiras brd rot Sywov). In ii 331 the career of Phaedrus is described: in 296/5 he was twice elected orparyyds érl rhv mapackeujy, and was often elected orp. éxl rhv xdépay and thrice emi rods févous. It was probably after 272 B.C. that he was elected émi 7a érha oTpirnyés and was afterwards yeporornfels ert ra 8rda mpGros brd Tod Syuwov arparyyés. After the end of the fourth century this oTparyds was the foremost member of the board. Ultimately in the theatre of Dionysus the only stall reserved for any

‘of the orparyyol was inscribed with the

title of orparnyot éxi ra 8rdka.—The orp. émi robs omXlras probably acted as presi- dent of the orparnyol (cf. Gilbert, i 222).

éml rHv xdpav] Plut. Phocion, 32, Aep- ktdAov Tob él rijs xdpas orparnyod (B.C. 317). CIA ii 331 (quoted above), and 1195 (towards the end of the 3rd cent.).'

gvAdrra] The gvdakh ris xdpas in- volved placing patrols at important points in the interior and along the coast; Thuc. ii 24, puAakas KarerTHoavTO Kara yh Kal kara Odd\accav. In Xen. Mem. iii 6, 10, Tepl pudaxis THs xwpas, mention is made of PuAakal and @Ppoupol. In B.c. 445 this gvdaxh extended as far as Euboea; CIA iv 27 a, wepi 6€ pudakijs EvBolas rovs orpa- Trryovs émimedetcOar ctr. In B.C. 342, [Dem.] 7 §§ 14,15, it has expanded intoa Tis Kara Oddarray pudaxk7s in a still wider sense. About B.C. 265, CIA 334, we find a decree in honour of those who émééwxay els Thy cwrnplay Tis wodews Kal THY PuAa- Khv Tijs xwpas. In the time of the text this duty, which had once been shared by all the orparyyol, was apparently divided between the orparnyos érl rHv xwpav for the interior, and the two orparyyol émi ov Iletpacéa for the coast, —assuming that gvdaxs is the rightreading in the passage referring to the latter.

ém\ tov Tleparéa] In B.c. 324/3, CIA ii 811 ¢ 434, Atkacoyévys 6 orparnyds is

CH. 61, l. 3—10.

TIOAITEIA

227

eis Thy “Axrnp, ob Ths plv]raxhs éripedodvras kal tdv év Tepaced &va & émi tas cup[polpias, ds Tovs Te Tpinpdpyous KaTadéyer Kab Tas ayTiBdces avtois Trost, Kal Tas Stadixacias alit]ois eiodyer’ 2 Tods 8 dAXous Tpds TA TapdvTa Tpdyuara exréwmovoew. erexeL-

7 @-AHC 2 B[u]\js (vel pudAak%s) K1, PudAaKHs K-w et B deleto kal (pudfs et PudAa- «fs Thucydidis in codicibus saepe confusa esse monet Wardale, Class. Kev. v 273).

xis Torr (H-L, K3). Kw

[at] K-w (B), fortasse recte. 10 mpd-yuara supra scriptum delent H-L.

9 alterum avrofs secl.

8—9 Phot. Hyep. dix. TE orparnyy wep rprnpapylas Kal dvrddcews.

mentioned in the same context as the overseer of the vedpia. Between B.c. 318 and 229 the Peiraeus and Salamis were under an officer called the orparnyds éwi rod Teparéws xal tov dd\d\wy Trav TaTTO- pew pera tod Tepaéws (Bull. Corr. Hellén. vi 326). About 100 B.c. we read of three orparnyol émri rov Tlepard (CIA ii 1207), and the archon of B.c. 97/6 is described as ’Apyetos ’Apyelov Tpcxo[pu- aws] orparnynoas émt rév Ilepalia], 20. 1206.

es tiv Movvixlay] In B.c. 3238/4 we find Philocles mentioned by Dinarchus, 3§ 1, as orparnyds bp’ buay érl Thy Mov- nyxlay Kalra vewpia Kexerporovnudvos. On Munichia, cf. 19 § 2; 42 § 3.

es rv “Akrrv] possibly identical with the officer called the orparnyds émt rhv Xwpay rhy wapadlav in CIA ii 3, 1194 (the son of an official of B.c. 382/1), and 1195 (B.C. 241). The latter inscr. was found at Sunium. On ’Axri cf. 42 § 3.

vdakys] sc. THs xapas THs wapadlas, the rest of the duAaky being assigned to the orp. ért ri xdpav.

éml rds ouppoplas] B.C. 325/4, CIA li 809 @ 205—210, drws 8 ay al cxnpers elcay Odor, rods Deo pmobéras rapalrA lnpwoat Oixacrypia eis Eva kal Staxoclous rw oTpa- THYO TG érl Tas gupmoplas ypynuery. The oxipecs mentioned in this inscr., and ‘in c. 56 § 3, are the pleas put forward by one who maintains that another is better able to bear the expense of a trierarchy and who therefore challenges him either to undertake it or to exchange proper- ties. It may also refer to any plea of exemption. It is used elsewhere (CIA ii 804) of the reasons pleaded by a trierarch - for being unable to restore to the state ' the vessel confided to his care (Hauvette- Besnault, p. 143). For the relations of the board of erparyyol to the cupypoplat and the rp:ypapxia before the distribution of offices among the members of the board, cf. Dem. 39 § 8, tiva 8 ol orparnyot Tpbrov éyypdpourw, av els cupoplay éy- Ypidwou, 7 dv rprppapxov Kaforiow, and

35 § 48, (ol orparnyol) rpinpdpxous Kabia- Taouv. dyvri8dcres—otet] [Dem.] 42 § 5, (on the and of Metageitnion, August) ézolow oi orparyyol Tots rptaxoclos Tas dvTLddcets. Suid. s.v. yyewovla duxacryplov. Siabixaclas] ¢g. [Xen.] de Rep. Ath. 3, 4, Stadixatev, ef tis THY vady wy ém- oxevdter. CIA ii 795 f 39, Tpenpes at émi Atoriwou apxovros (B.C. 354/3) deedixdo- Onoay Kal okay kara xewwva dapOapyvac, 26. 1. 60, dpiOues Tprnpwr Kal oKevay Tov Otadedixacuévwv. Boeckh, Seeurkunden, p- 214; Meier and Schém. pp. 467f. In [Dem.] 47 § 26 (B.C. 339) we read of the droorodels and the vewpluy émipednral, that these were the officials who elojyov rére (c. B.C. 344) Tas Siadicaclas mepl Tw oxevwy. Cf. Meier and Schém. p. 475. tovs 8’ dAdous] This shews that the above list of special posts is complete by the time when the treatise was written. In the spurious decrees quoted in Dem. de Cor. §§ 38, 115 an officer called 6 émi THs Svoxjoews is mentioned (in the former decree immediately after 6 éwi rav émrdwy orparyyés, in the latter after tov éml ra&v érdwv). It was once supposed that this

was the title of one of the orparyyol, but -

it is now agreed that this was not the case (Boeckh, note 322 Frankel; Sché- mann, p. 421 n. 3). Again, in CIA ii 331 Thymochares, the father of Phaedrus (who held office between B.C. 296 and 272) was xetporovnbels orparnyds bd Tod Onuou ért 7d vaurixdy. In the same inscr. Phaedrus is described as orparnyds ért THY TapacKkevqy and éml rods évous. The orp. 6 él Thy wapacKkevyy is mentioned in CIA ii 403—405 in connexion with melting down the rumo dedicated to the pws larpés (2nd century B.C.); also 2d. 839. The decree in Pseudo-Plutarch ii p. 852 describes Lycurgus as yetporovyfels émi Ths Too wok€uov Tapackevyjs, but this does not prove that he was a orparyyds; and, in any case, these last titles belong to a later date than the text.

§ 2. émxetporovla] 43 § 4, at the cupia

152

228 AOHNAIQN COL. 30, l. 14—24. potovia § ali]rav dott xata thy mputavetay éxdatny, ei Soxodow Kadds dpyew' Kav tia amoxepotor[nlowaw, Kpivovaw ev TO Sicacrypio, Kav pev GO, Twdow 8 Te -ypy Tabeiv } arror[eio lat, av & drropbyn, [r]ad[wv] dpyer. xdpros dé eiow, drav nydvras, Kai

15 Ofjcat tw araxtobvta Kai <éx>[xn]pdfar nat émiBodjy ém- Barrew: ove cidOace 8&8 ériBdrrew.

Xetporovoias bé xal ra Ele dlpxous déxa, &va Tis pudfs éxdorys" 3 ovtos 8 Hyeltas TOV Punenan) Kai Aoyxayous xaGlo[ |gow.

xXepotovotct Sé Kal immapyous S00 é& dravtav' ovTa 8 4 11 doxofor H-L. 13 aAA(supra scr. w)o!. 14 diy H-L, = wd Aey ? K-W (k3, B) ; 7a [Aouad] K!; [2r] H-L. kUpto. 6° H-L. 15 TIN: Tw’ K, B: Tov K-w, H-L. KHpyZal (K): <é«>xnpdiae Blass, Lipsius (k-w, H-L). 16 8 H-L.

§ 3 Bekk. Az. 306, 12 raklapxo.—: dpxovres tryovmevor Tav Twohirav Kara pudAqp, xetporovnrol, déxa Tov dpiOudv, ols UreréraxTo Td THOos Kara pudjvy. § 4 Pollux viii 94 twrapxoe 6¢ S00 é& AmdvTwy AOnvaiay alpedévres emipedodyrat

trav todduwy. *Harp. trmapxos:.. trréwy dpxwy*

Phot. trmapxot :

Aéyera 6@ map "AOnvalois tmmapxos Kal 6 Tar

b00 8 gay otro, ws Any. & 8 Pidurmnav pot kal "Ap. évAO. Ton. dv0 joav, ot trav imméwy fyotvro, “ dteAduevot Tas pudas” éxdrepos ava,

wévre* emipedyral 6é clot ray imméwy <ol purapxor additum ex Poll. viii 94> xa@daep oi ratlapxor déxa dvres els ef’ Exdorys pudjijs TU owdTov (Frag. 3917, 431°).

éxxdyola, émixetporovely el doxodat Kahds dpxev. This procedure must have been instituted with special reference to military officials ; hence the fulness with which it is treated here in comparison with 43 § 4 (Lipsius, Leipzig Verhanail. p. 49).

tynaoww] It was a len tyunrds (Meier and Schém. p. 213 f, Lips.).

8yoat] During the Sicilian expedition Lamachus put to death a soldier who was caught signalling to the enemy, Lys. 13 § 67; and Iphicrates at Corinth transfixed with his spear a sentinel whom he found asleep at his post (Frontinus iii 12, 2). In Dem. 50 § 51 even a trierarch fears he may be put into bonds by a orparnyés: PpoBovpuevos wh Seelnv. Cf. Xen. Mem. iii 5, 19, Tovs émNlras kal rods lrireis— dreWeordrous elvar ravTwv.

éxknpdtéar] One Simon, who arrived too late for the battle of Corinth and the march to Coroneia, had a scuffle with the taxiarch and struck him, cat ravorparig roav wodtrOv éedObvTwv, Sbtas dKkoopmd- Traros elvat kal movynpdraros, ndvos 'AOy- valwy brd Tov orparnyav efexynpux On. This implies that the offender was ex- pelled from the army, after being publicly aera unworthy to serve as a soldier. Lys. 3

eripadev] [Lys-] 15 § 5, xpi yap avrods (robs orparnyovs) elrep dXnOF A€-you- ow dvaxadeiy péev Ildudidov bri ddarpav

Tov trmrov inméws dmecrépe Thy wow, éweBdrrecy a rp Prrdpxy, bre ég- ehavvwy Adc Beddqy éx Tis pudns axvpov émole. Thy ToUTwy Tdéw, Kerevew Sé Tov tailapxyov ékadelgew avrov éx Tod Tay omhtr@y Karanbyov.

§ 3. Tafidpxous] commanders of the Io rages of hoplites corresponding to the 10 gvAal. They were instituted after 490 B.c. Dem. 4 § 26, ovx éxeporovetre Oo & tpav atrdv déka rakidpyous Kal orparryyovs Kal pudAdpxous Kal larmdpxous ovo; each of the taxiarchs commanded the hoplites of a single tribe, Dem. 39 § 17, raétdpxwy ris pudjs, Aeschin. /.Z. 169, Teuevldou rod rijs Tlavéiovldos rakidp- xov. tyetrat Tov uderav] As a rule the taxiarch was a member of the tribe which he commanded, Thuc. viii 92, 6 "Aptoroxpdrns jv ragvapy dv kal Thy éaurot puny éxwy, CIA ii 444, 446 (Gilbert, i 225).

Aoxayots] Isocr. 15 § 117, Isaeus 9 § 14. The text shews that they were appointed by the raglapyou, and not, as has been supposed (Gilbert i 225), by the orparnyol.

§ 4. twrrdpxous] Their importance is implied by Lys. 26 § 20, dvri rovrwy abrods 6 Ofuos rats weyloras rimats rerlunker, immapxety kal orparnyely Kal mpecBevew brép abrav alpovjevot. 800] Dem. 4 § 26 supra, CIAii 445, 15.

CH. 61, 1], 11—28. TTOAITEIA 229

e n a € Fa

nyobvTat Thy imméwv, Svehoufevor] Tas PvdAds mévTe ExaTeEpos* 20 fe x. Sod > a > a a

koptoe S€ Tév adTav eialv, dvmep of oTpatnyol Kata THY Omd[Tav.

émruxetpo|tovia bé yiryveta <Kxal> TovTwv.

5 xetpotovodc. Sé kal durapyous <déxa>, &va Ths duds, Tov e , a ig 4 4 e y, a € « aylnoo|wevo[y] <Tov imméwy>, woTrep of Takiapyo. THY OmALTO?.

6 xeltpotovodar dé ai eis Afjjuvov immapyoy, ds émipler]eiras 25

a e f a 2 4 Tey im@mewy Tov ev Anuve.

7 xXetpotovodce 6é kal tayiav ths Tlapdnov Kal drdov ths

[rod "A]upwvos,

21 WNTTEPEICIN: eloly dvrep van Leeuwen (H-L, K-w, K%, B); ovmep Gertz.

22 TIN (K-W).

TOYTWN K: <xal> rotrwy Gertz, Lips., K-W. H-L, B.

23 post

guddpxous add. déxa Richards, K-w, H-L, B; post dé xa excidisse antea putabam. 24 rév lmméwv Pollucem secutus add. K (K-w, H-L, B).

§5 Pollux viii g4 of d& PvAapyor Séxa, fs dd pudjs éxdorns, Tay larméwy

mpotcravTat, Kabdmep of ratlapyo. Tay dodo,

*Harp. pvAapyos:...6 Kara pudipy

éxdoTay Tod immxod dpxwy, Vroreraypévos dé TH lmmdpyw, ws Ap. év 77 AO. Tod. Pyal

(Frag. 3927, 4323).

§7 *Harp. raplac:...elcl 5 rwes xal ray (lepdv) rpifpwy Taplar, ws 6 abrds girdcopds (sc. Ar.) dnow (cf. Suid. raula art. 2). Phot. s.v. elot 8¢ cal ddAow raylas, apxovres Xetporovnrol éwi ras lepas kal Syuoolas rpuppers, 6 mev él Thy IIdpadov, 6 b¢

éml tiv Tod “Aupwvos.

Pollux viii 116 raplas éxddouv rovs Tals icpats rpufpeot AetToup-

yotvras, dddous H rpinpdpxous (cf. Frag. 402, 442%),

*Lex. rhet. Cantab. I[dpados cal Zakapwla: ravras Tas Tpuppers elyov Sud mavTds apos Tas érevyovoas brnpeclas, ef als kal raulac twes éxerporovodvTo... ApiaroréAns dé *Aupwridda Kai Tdpadov ofde. Schol. in Dem. p. 636, 16 Dind....xcal’Appmwrids ered)

Te “Appwre OV” abrijs Tas Ouvolas éreurov.

Cf. Phot. s.v. Tdpado. et Idpados, Harp.

s.v. "Apupwvis, Lex. Dem. Patm. p. 150 (Frag. 403”, 443%).

tds vAds wévre éxcdtepos] Xen. Hipparch. 3§ 11, drav ol trmapyxoe hyOvrat tats wévre pudais.

kiptot] The disciplinary powers of the trmapxot are illustrated by Hesych. s.v. immdpyou rivaé érel ol tmmapxor ev mlvake Ta évouara tev draxrolyTwy ypdporTes TapernperoovTo. ;

§5. dvAdpxous] In cia ii 444, 445 the gbdapxot belong to the tribes which they command.

§6. els Atjpvov Urmapxov] This officer was in command of a corps of Athenian cavalry stationed in Lemnos. That island had long been in the possession of Athens and was held by Athenian xAy- podxot. Athens had recovered possession of Lemnos, Imbros and Scyros before B.C. 387 and her right was recognised in that year by the ‘peace of Antalcidas’. Hyperides, gro Lycophrone, c. 14, bpets yap me, @& dvdpes Sixacral, mp@rov pev gtrapxov éxeporovjoare, érera els AFu- vov lrmapxov, Kal ypia pev atrdde 6d’ rn rév wood’ immapxnKérwv pbvos, mpoc- karéuewa, 6¢ abr60e Tov rplrov éviaurév ob Bovdéuevos moNiras avépas émt Kepadhy

elomparrew Tov pic Odv Tots irmedow dmépws Otaxeuévous. arepavas dé tpioly éore- pavdbnv bd rob Syuov rod év ‘Hpaorig kal érépos bd trav év Muplyy. Dem. 4 § 27, els uev Afjuvoy Tov Tap buwdv trmapxov Sef wheiv. CIA ii 14 (B.C. 387/6), [trmap- X]oivros év Anuvy. CIA ii 593 (a decree passed by the «Anpodxo: at Myrina after the third Macedonian war), émi 6¢ Ajjuvov orparnyobvros Pidapxl6ou Tacavcéws lari- apxodvros 7d devrepov Tedeotdjuov rod "Auwlov'Exadjdev. Cf. Gilbert, i 424—5}3 Hauvette-Besnault, pp. 169, 170.

§ 7. taplav tis Ilapddov] In Dem. Mid. § 173, Midias is described as saying: immdpxnka, THs mapddov Taplas yéyova, Demosthenes adds: ris wév mapddou Ta- puevoas Kugixnvav nprace miei i} mévre tédavta. §174, Midiasallowed the Paralus to be outstripped in speed by one of the ordinary triremes, otrws eb rhy lepav Tpiipy waperxevakcer. The raulas Iapddov is mentioned in CIA ii 804 B 66 (B.c. 334/3), and probably also in 808 a 79 (B.C. 326/53). The rauias provided for the sacred trireme at the cost of the state all that, in the case of ordinary vessels,

230

AOHNAIQN

COL. 30, |. 24—32.

62. ai dé KAnpwral alpy]al wpotepoy péev joav ai ev per évvéa adpxovtor é[«] Tis pudAms OAns KANpovpevar, ai § ev Onceio

LXII 1 met (K, K-w, B): pera Tv (u'7’) Gennadios, H-L.

was provided by the trierarch himself. The ship was entirely manned by Athenians (Thuc. viii 73, 5) who were paid 4 obols a day (Harpocr. s.v.). Cf. Boeckh, 305 ff. Frankel. The Paralos and Salaminia are mentioned in Arist. Az. 1207 and Thuc. iii 33, 2: the Salaminia was sent in pursuit of Alcibiades in vi 53, 1 and 61, 4 (cf. Arist. Av. 147). A state- ment in Photius (s.v. wdpador), Néyerat 5é 7 avTh Kal Zadrapuvia, led Boeckh to accuse Photius of confounding the two triremes with one another, which is inconsistent with the same lexicographer’s article on mapados. Mr Marindin, in Dect. Ant. ii 827 a, understands 7 adr} as meaning ‘of a similar character’; but I should prefer attributing the mistake to a careless cita- tion from the Schol. on Av. 1204, where we are told that, if, instead of IIdpaXdos 7 Zarapwla, we read Idpados } Zadayevia: éorat 7 av77 Tdpados kal Zarhapvia.

1.28. rot” Appovos] It follows from the passages quoted in the Zestimonia that the state-trireme, formerly called the Zadrapwla, was superseded by one named after Zeds “Auuwy and known as the "Aupovls (Harpocr.) or “Apywrids (Lex. Rhet. Cant.). It was specially intended to convey @ewpla: to the coast of Cyrene, on their way to the shrine of Zeds*“Aupwv. Cimon sent from Cyprus to consult the oracle shortly before his death (Plut. Cz. 18); in the Aves, 716 and 618, Ammon is mentioned by the side of Delphi and: Dodona; and it is therefore possible that Oewplat may have been sent there as early as 415 B.c. In [Plat.] Az. ii 148 E, the Athenians consult the oracle on the ques- tion why they were constantly being beaten by the Lacedaemonians. We have a record of a sacrifice to”Auyuwy on the part of the orparnyol in B.C. 333 (CIA ii 741, 32); Boeckh ii 118—121 Frankel. Thus it seems probable that the oracle was originally consulted by Athens in connexion with military undertakings, and this custom may account, not only for the sacrifice offered by the orparzyol, but also for the connexion in which the vessel is mentioned in this chapter, at the close of a description of the military officers of Athens.—Hesych. s.v. ’Apudy (Auud- via?) has éopry ’"AOjnvnow dryoudyy, and it would benatural that the general interest in

the oracle should be increased by the visit paid by Alexander the Great in B.C. 331. The sacred trireme ’Auuwvis was men- tioned by Dinarchus in his speech against Himeraeus (Harpocr. s.v. ’“Appwvls), which may be assigned to B.C. 324 (Rose, Ar. Pseud. p. 397).

It has been suggested (by Rose, /.c.) that the name of the sacred trireme Salaminia was changed in consequence of the revolt of Salamis in B.c. 318 (Paus. i 35, 2; Polyaen. iv 11, 1; Diod. 18, 69; CIG i p. 418), but the text shews that the "Auuwvis superseded it at an earlier date.

The name Salaminia was in itself not uncommon. Thus, in B.c. 357/6 there were two ships bearing the name Sala- minia (one belonging to the second class, CIA ii 793 33; the other, one of the vijes ébalperot, 2b. c 32); a trireme named Salaminia foundered at sea shortly before B.C. 325/4 (CIA ii 809 @ 29 and 811, 89); and a rerpypys of the same name occurs in an inscr. of B.C. 323/2 or shortly after: CIA ii 812 2 123. In the same inscr., @ 25, and 42, there are two triremes named Tlapadta (not Iidpados). All these, how- ever, are warshtps. Not one of the sacred triremes is mentioned in the naval archives of Athens. Cf. Boeckh 11 xvi, vol. 1 p. 306—7, and note 448 Frankel.

LXII. Salaries.

§1. at pev per’ évvéan dpxdvrwy] It is not known what offices are meant: Mr Kenyon suggests that the phrase in- cluded ‘all the various boards of ten.’ A similar phrase occurs in the épxos fcag ray in Dem. c. Zimocr. 130, Trav évvéa dpysvTev kal Tod lepouvjpovos Kal boar (dpxal) wera tay évvéa apxdvrwy KvapevovTa Tatra TH (TH adr TH?) Nuépg, Kal KApukos Kal mpeo- Belas kal cvvddpwr.

at 8 év Onoelw KAnpovpévar] ‘the offices assigned by lot in the Theseum’ (c. 15 § 4). In Aeschines, ¢. Cres. § 13 (B.C. 336—330), the offices to which the people elect (xetporove?), such as those of the orparyyol and trmapxo, are con- trasted with those ds of Oecuobéra: aro- KAnpodow & re Onoely. It might be inferred from this that the Theseum was the only place in which the allotment was held; whereas the text implies that the archons were appointed elsewhere. The place is not known.

CH. 62, 1. I—1I0. TIOAITEIA 231 KAnpovpevas Senpodvto eis tods Syulolus’ ered) 8 eardrovv of dquo, Kal tavtas €x Ths Pudns OAns KANpodcL TAY BoureuTaY kal dpouvpav’ tovtous § eis Tovs d[nmor]as aodiddact. 5 pa Oogopodar Sé rparov [wey 6 Ojos] Tals wev AdAXaLs exKdyoi- ais Spaxpny, TH de xupig evvéa <dBorovs> erevta-ra dix[aorypia] Tpels GBorovs’ €0” 4 Bound mévte 6Borovs. Tois dé rpuTavevovew els altnow [dBords t]poctieras [Séxa mpoctiPevta]]. éresr eis aitnow AapBavovaw évy|éa dpyov|tes TétTal pas] 6Borovs ExacTos, 10 3 <al> dinpodyro Gertz, H-L. 7 évvéa <dBodovs> K-W, H-L. 9 dBords

Blass (et K3), deletis quae sequuntur 5éxa mpoorl@evrat: scilicet scriptum erat | Trpoc- TIGeTAI, ubi | significat els 6BoAds, sed male intellectum pro déxa erat acceptum;

inde exortum additamentum 6écka mpoori@evrat.

spatii relictum si 10BoAoc scriptum erat. K, K-W, B, coll

2 Ve be

efs 6Bodds Rutherford, H-L; satis 10 <ol> évvéa Gennadios, H-L; évvda

Sippodvro] ‘used to be distributed over’ the demes.

wArv BovAevtav] This shews that the preliminary appointment of members of the Council was made by the demes. The fact that the demes lost the pre- liminary appointment to certain offices, owing to their being corrupt, makes us understand how it was possible for Aeschines to taunt Demosthenes with having secured his appointment as Bov- Xevr7s by bribery and intrigue, Aesch. zz Ctes. 62, obre Aaxdv. otire émtAaxdy GAN ék Tapackevfs mptduevos, 73, BovreuTys wy éx Tapackevijs. ‘

The lists of Prytanies for the fourth century (CIA ii 864—874) prove that the number of members of the Council be- longing to each deme varies with the size of the deme, and that the number appointed from the same deme is constant. It was inferred from this that a certain number were appointed from each deme, and not from the whole tribe indiscrimi- nately (Kohler in W/z¢theil. iv 97; Hauvette- Besnault in Bull. Corr. Hell. v 361; Head- lam, On the Lot, pp. 55, 56). This inference is confirmed by the text. Pro- bably each deme nominated twice the requisite number; half of these were appointed by lot, and the rest held in reserve to take their places if necessary (Headlam, p. 188). Even in the case of offices filled by lot something of the nature of candidature is implied by Lys. 31 § 33 (of one who had drawn the lot to be a BovAeurys), mpodUuws KAnpwodpevos Hc, 6 § 4, av ZOy KAnpwodpevos Tov eévvéa dpxdvrwv (cf. 20 § 13), and Isocr. 15 § 82, KAnpotoOa Trav apyav evexa.

povpév] possibly the 500 ppoupol

vewplwy, mentioned with the 500 BovAeural in 24 § 3.

§ 2. Spaxprv] At the end ofc. 41 the highest sum named as the puoOds éxxAy- c.iaorixds was 3 obols. The text implies that this sum had been doubled. In Arist. Vesp. 691 and Schol. a drachma is the sum paid at that time to the cuvyyopot, but there is no probability that that is the fee here meant.

tpets 6Bodovs] In 27 § 3 the institution of the pucOds dtxacrixds by Pericles is mentioned ; but the amount is not named. It was raised to three obols by Cleon. (Schol. Arist. Vesg. 88, 300; Gilbert i 325—6.)

mévre 6BoAovs] one obol more is the amount named in Hesych. s. v. Bovdjjs axeiv? 7d Naxely Bovrdeuryy Kal dpaxynv THs juépas aBetv. Hesychius has pro-

_ bably confounded the five obols paid to

the ordinary BovAeurys with the six paid to the rpuravers. Thuc. viii 69 mentions the yic8és without naming the amount. Gpxovres xTA.] This shews that the archons, amongst others, actually re- ceived something of the nature of a stipend. It was supposed by Schémann (And. p. 402) that the ‘executive func- tionaries ’ (dpxovres) as well as the ‘ com- missioners’ (émeAnral), as contrasted with the ‘subordinates’ (vwnperat), ‘served without pay.’ Boeckh, 11 xvi p. 304 Frankel, more cautiously describes this as the ‘original’ distinction between an dpxy and a tmnpecla. v. 24 § 3 mentions the 7oo dpxal évdnuor as in receipt of pay ; and inc. 29 § 5 the board of Thirty appointed in B.C. 411 propose Tas dpyds duloOous dpxew dmrdoas ews dv 6 mbdeuos th, TM Trav évvéa apxovTwy Kal Trev mpv-

232 AQHNAIQN COL. 30, lL. 32—40. kal Tapatpépovot knpvea Kal abdyrnv: erect’ dpyev [els Lara]- Kiva Spax[unv] tis juépas. aOrobéras 8 év rputavel@ Sevrvodct Tov éx[aTouBlaava phva, O[rlav 4 7a avabjvaca, apEapwevor azo THS TeTpados iatauévov. ayul[piletvoves eis Arjrov Spaypry Tis huépas éxactns éx Andov <AapBavover>. AapBdavover 6 cal doa arooréAXovrat apyal eis Lapov 7 LKdpov 7 Ajjuvov 4 "IuBpov

t eis oitnaw apyvpuov.

dpyew 8é Tas wey Kata modepwov apyas é[Eeo]rs mreovaxts, TAV

Qo oy:

12 <rg> mpvravely H-L.

13 o[T]an (K-w, K%, B): @ dv K}, H-L. Bdvover> add. K (K-wW, H-L): nihil addit B.

drov ovdeulav, Av Bovredaas Sis,

15 <)ap-

ravéwy of dy dow,. rovrous 5¢ pepe Tpeis 6Borous Exacrov rhs nuépas. This implies (as observed by Mr Kenyon) that ‘the magistrates named, and others who are not named, received pay.’ [Xen.]de Rep. Ath. 1, 3, Says that the dyuos is not eager for offices like those of erparnyés or trrapxos, —éréca & elo dpxal picopoplas evexa kal wpedelas els rdv olkov, Tavras fnret 6 Ojos dpxetv.

KrpuKa kal adAnrrv] Both the xjpué 7g dpxovrt and the avAyr7js are mentioned in CIA iii 1005 and 1007 (Gilbert i157 n. 4).

aoxey els Dadapiva] 54 § 8.

dOAoPérat] 60. éxaTrouBardva] The principal day of the greater Panathenaea (54 § 7; 60 § 1) was the third from the end of Hecatombaeon. Probably the lesser Panathenaea were also held in the same month: in Dem. ¢. Zimocr. 28, the Panathenaea (of Ol. 106, 4, B.C. 353) are at hand on Hecatombaeon 11th. In the text the greater Panathenaea alone appear to be meant.

dpducrioves els Andov] the Athenian Commissioners of the funds of the Delian temple, called dudixrioves because in theory they were the deputies of the "Tovey re kat mepexridver vnowrav (Thuc. iii 104). The ‘Sandwich marble,’ now in the library of Trinity College, Cam- bridge, records their accounts from B.c. 377 to 374, beginning rdde Erpatay du- gixrboves ’AOnvatwy. Each Amphictyon administered the temple for one year, beginning with Hecatombaeon, the first month in the Attic civil year (Hicks, GA. Hist. Inscr. p. 142—148; CIA ii 814).

é« AxjAov, from the funds of the Delian temple.

Zdpov] Athenian «Anpodyor were set- tled in Samos after its conquest by Timo- theus in B.C. 365. «Anpotxoe were also

sent in 361 and again in 352 (Aeschin. 1 § 53; A. Schaefer, Dem. i? p. 99 n, P- 474 0). :

After the autumn of 322 the Athenians were no longer in a position to send dpxal to Samos; at that date the island ceased to be under their control, and the Samians banished by Athens were restored by Per- diccas, Iiod. xviii 18 (F. Cauer in Berd. Phil. Woch. 9 April, 1892, p. 458).

Zkipov .. Ajjpvov..”IpBpov] The ypayu- parevs ToD Sjuou for each of these islands is mentioned in inscriptions published in Bull. Cor. Hell. 1879 p- 63, CIA ii 592: and Conze’s fezse, p. 88, respectively; also, in Scyros, a raulas rod Sjwou (Bull. Corr, Hell. l.c.). Cf. Gilbert, i 424.

§3. Tds piv kard wéAeLov—rrAcovadKts] Thus Pericles was general for 15 years, and Phocion 45 times (Plut. Fer. 15, Phoc. 8).—In Pol. 1371 6 24, (it is character- istic of a democracy) 7d ph dis roy abrdv dpxewv pndeulay 7 ddcyaxts 7} ddlyas Ew Trav xara wédNenov, Dem. Prooem. p. 1461, 9, dewdrara yap cor’ ddedéoOat wev bo’ duty Urdpxe, Kal vouous mepl rovrwv Ocivat, dv Tis doruvopyjoy dls 4 7a Toabra, orparrnyelv 8 del rods abrovs éav, . Timocr. 149 (8pkos HAtacriKds), ovde Sls Thy adrhy dpxhy tov adrov dvdpa xaracricw. Pol. 1299 @ 10, wy Tov adrdy dls dA’ drat Bévov. 1275 225, dis Tov avdrov ovk tkeorw dpxew vias (dpxas).

The effect of the rule forbidding more than one reappointment to the Council was to give every Athenian citizen at some period of his life a seat in that body. At the time when the number of citizens was at its highest (about 30,000 in 460 B.C.), it is probable that the number who reached the age of 30 in each year, and thus became qualified for the Council, was rather less than 1,000 (Headlam, Ox the

Le)

coll. c. 59 ult.

CH. 62, 1, 11—CH. 63, 1.4. TIOAITEIA 233

63. puaas, elood0L

Ta 8€ Sixacrrypia [K]An[podcw] of évvéa dp[yolvtes Kata 6 8€ ypaypareds tdv Oecpo[Oerav Tis] Sexatyns pudjs. 6é eicw els Ta Sixac[rTH]pia Séxa, pla TH Pur Exdory, cal

ehn[ pwr pea] elxoot, S[vo TH] pudAgR éxadoty, ab KiBodtia éxartor, COT EI ME

LXIII 1 ran clics corr. K. amdnpotow Dareste. 2 <rols> Tis H-L, 3 dixacrjpia: an KAnpwrhpia?

TESTIMONIA. LXIII Schol. ad Arist. Vesp. 775 (v. Testim. c. 59 ult.). Schol. ad Arist. Plat. 277, p. 340 w 21 Diibner: (§ 4) epxeras Exacros els TO <dtxaorhprov > mivaKtoy exwv ‘érvyeypaupévoy 7d dvoua” adrod kal ‘‘rarpddev kal rod Syuov” ‘‘Kat ypduua ev” re “péxpe rod x,” did 7d mada Séxa Hudrds elvac AOHvyot, Suppyvro yap “kara gudds.” (§1) era of Oecpobéra kara purty exaoros Kal déxaros 6 ypappareds éxAjpouy Ta yoduuara wéxpt ToD x Kal Ta AaxdvTa toa Tov dpiOudv Tots péddovEL Kdnpodobat Sixacryplos, (§ 5) brnpérns pépwy éridea kad’ Exacrov dexacTHprov ev" elra wadw dmrexdAnpodvro ol Ta elAnxdra ypaypmara exovres Tlves Suxdcovat kal rives ot. 7b, 972 ’AOnvator yap drd Tuv puduy érolowy Tods SuxacTas Kara ypaupa, olov ] mpwry 7d a

exe onuctov, kai h devrépa Td B, kal ai dAdat duolws ews To K.

Lot, p. 50 n). Each of these might be a member of the 500 twice in his life, but not oftener. In the few cases in which the names of the BovAeural from the same deme are preserved for more than one year, only one case of reappointment is to be found, viz. Avoviavos‘ Hpacorlwvos of the deme @:Aatdaz, (in the middle of the fourth century) CIA ii 870, 3, and (in B.c. 341) 872, 17.

Boeckh, ii 515 Frankel, states his con- viction that no one could be’a member of the Bovd7 for two consecutive years : the text proves that it was possible.

As regards other offices, we know the names of a large number of raulat, éAdy- voraulat and émimednrai ; but we never find one man holding the same office twice (Headlam, p. 91).

LXIII tothe end. Zhe Law-Courts.

On the Athenian procedure for the distribution of the dicacral over the se- veral ‘duxaoripia, see Sch6mann, De Sor- titione Iudicum apud Athenienses, Opusc. Acad. i 200—22g; Schémann, Azz. p. 475 E. T.; <Adt. Process, pp. 146—162 Lips.; Frankel, Att. Geschworenengerichte, 1877, pp. 92 ff. ; Gilbert, 13747; Busolt in Miiller’s Handbuch, 1v i 180; and Cail- lemer in Daremberg and Saglio’s Dict. iii 191.

§1. Stxacrrpia KAnpovowv] Pollux, viii 87, mentions as one of the duties of the archons, kAypoby ducacrds. A distinction must, however, be drawn between xAnpoiv &xaords, which refers to the original as- signment of dicasts to a heliastic division by means of the lot (c. 59 § 7), and «Anpody dikaorhpia, which refers to the allotment of the several law-courts to the dicasts so

appointed (24. § 5). [Dem.] 47 § 17, KAy- poupdvar Trav Sixacryplwy, and 37 § 39, Tov Ouxacrypluy émixexAnpwpevwv. kar

gvAds is not meant to imply that each dixacrhpioy was allotted to a different tribe, but that representatives of all the tribes sat in each dixaorypiov. Hitherto: it has generally been supposed that the daily allotment was not ‘by tribes,’ but

_ by heliastic divisions or ‘sections’ (Scho-

mann, At. p. 475): ;

§ 2. elooBor x7A.] the separate en- trances for the members of the several tribes would not only facilitate entrance and exit, but also make it easier to detect personation. It may perhaps be inferred that the members of each tribe sat to- gether in the court.

It seems premature, however, to men- tion the entrances to the law-courts at this stage of the description; it may therefore be suggested that dicacryjpia has been written by mistake for xAnpwrjpia. The efcodos in 1. 7 is clearly the entrance into the pair of kAnpwrijpa assigned to each tribe.

KAnpwripia] either (1) ‘vessels for holding lots’ (zsnes @ lots, Reinach); or (2) ‘rooms in which the dicasts have their several courts allotted to them’ (so Kaibel and Kiessling, Poland, and Haus- soullier). Mr Kenyon gives in the text of his translation ‘twenty vessels for holding votes,’ adding in the note the alternative rendering, ‘rooms in which the jurors are elected.’

(1) is the preferable sense in Arist. Eccl, 682, BA. 7a 5€ kKdypwripia rot tpéwes; IIP. és rh» dyopay karabijow" KGra aThoaca map’ ‘Apuodly KAnpiow

234 AOHNAIQN COL. 30, 1. 40—49.

5 béxa TH PAR Exaaorn, Kai Erepa KiBwrtila Séxa, els & é]uBadrerar TOY AaXovTwY Sixalc]Tav Ta w[wal]Ka, Kal bdpiat dvo’ Kai Bax- tnptas maparidevrar Kata Ti e[icodor] éxdorny Scourep of SiKa- [o]rat, cat Bdravos eis THY Udpiav éuBarrAovTat toast Ttais Baxty- plas, [y]éypamrrar S& év tais Badavous Tév oTorxelwy amd Tod

10 évdexdtou, Tod » [[Tpiaxootod], Scamep dv pédrn [T]a Sixacrypra TAnpwOncerOar, Sixdtew 8 éEeatw Tois tmép Tpidxovta ery ye- :

5 els d B: ols K etc. 8 rais Baxrnplas: an Tots dixacrnplocs ? CTOIXeId (K1, K-W, H-L).

del. K (K-W, H-L, B). EAN.

6 BakTHplé corr. K.

tod évdexdrou delet Rutherford (H-L).

7 OYCOITTEP corr. K. 9 T(WN) cToyel) Blass (K3): [ra] 10 rptaxocrod

dmavras (where the Schol. absurdly ex- plains kAynpwripia as ras KAnpwras dpxds). kAnpwrpis means an urn for holding votes in Schol. Arist. Vesp. 674, KAnpwrplée rv Wihpwv, and 752, Tod Kypukos THy KAnpw- tplda mpoocpépovros, éBadov ras Wypous. Both senses are recognised in Pollux x 61, KAnpwrnpiov® el yap Kal érl roo rémov ouxev elpfjcOa rodvoua ev 7H npg ’Apio- Topavous, add Kal éml rod dyyelou dav évapydceev. The sense is uncertain in Eubulus ap: Athen. 640 B, KAyT7pes .. Map- Tupes .. Slkat.. KAnpwrypia .. KAeWUSpat, vb- Hot, ypadal, and in CIA ii 441, [ava]-ypapar 6é 76d€ [7d Wagioua ——] KAnpwrypiov LB [e - —]tov.

(2) is supported by Plut. ii 793 D, mpec- Bbry—érlrovos kal radalrwpos 7 mpds wav Hey del KAnpwrypioy drayraca pthapxla, mavtt 6 épedpevovoa Stxacrypiov Kapp Kal ovvedplou wodvmrpayunoctvn, Pollux ix 44, KAnpwrnpia évOa kAynpodvrat ol dikacral, and Bekk. Anecd. p. 47, kAnpwrnpia: évOa KdXypodvrat of Stxacral. It certainly has this meaning in col. 31 1. 18, 6 dpxwy tv pdm Ka[de els 7d k)Anpwrapiov, and it therefore seems best to understand it in the same sense in the present passage. It is not obvious why each tribe requires two KAnpwrypia, unless we are to sup- pose that one of them was merely an antechamber serving as a waiting-room for the other.

KiBaria] ‘small boxes,’ Arist. Plt. 711. The number of the first set of «- Buria is 100, 10 for each tribe, because the dicasts in each tribe are distributed over all the ten divisions into which all the dicasts are divided. In each tribe, all the tickets (riwd«ia) bearing the names of the dicasts in division A are placed in the first «Bwriov, those of division B in the second, and so on for all the ten divisions. According to the number of

dicasts required, an equal number of tickets is drawn by lot from each of the 100 kiBwria. Each ticket so drawn has a court assigned it by lot; and the tickets are now placed in the second set of 10 xiBaria, all tickets of dicasts assigned to any given court being placed in the xBd- twov which bears the letter corresponding to that court. The names of all the di- casts who are selected to serve are thus distributed over the several courts that are to sit on the day in question. The process is described in detail in col. 31.

amuvaKua] see note on § 4.

Baktnplat] ‘batons’ serving the dicasts as badges of office. The Baxrnpia was marked with the same letter and colour as the court assigned to the dicast, who gave it up on entering the court when he received a otuPodov (or ‘token’) instead. This ovuBorov enabled him to claim the TpidBorov. See zz/ra col. 32 1. 3—15, and cf. Dem. de Cor. 210, (def) mapadapBa- vew y dua 7H Baxrypla kal Te cupBory 7d Tijs wéNews voulfew xacrov buadr, bray Ta Snusowa elalinre Kpwotvres. Bekk. Anecd. p- 185, Baxrnpla Kal otpBodrov: pdaBdov Karetxov ol Sixagovres, kal cvuBorov éddu- Bavov dvrid.d6vres dia 7d Kouloacbat 7d Tpiw- Bodov. Pollux, viii 16, oxedy dé SixacriKxa, ovuBorov, Baxrypla, <mivdKtoy >, muvdKioy TianTiKor.

BdAavor] either actual acorns or (more probably) ballot balls of metal shaped like them. In either case the Bddavos had the letter of the court scratched upon it.

aAnpwbrjcer Oar] to be made up to their full complement of d:kacrat. Dem. ¢. Timocr. 92, Sikacrypia wrypotre. Mid. 209; Lys. 26 § 6; Isae. 6 § 375 CIA ii 395 (of the Oecpobérat) bray mp&rov mdn- pwow Stkacrypiov els &va Kal aevraxoolous Sixacras. Cf. Meier and Sch. p. 156, note 18 Lips,

CH. 63, 1. 5—18. TIOAITEIA

235

, 4 teh \ 2 f- ‘ yovooty, door avtav [pu] odeidovew TH Snwooiw 7) ATipoi iow b , * é édy 5é Tis Sixaky ols pun eEeotuv, évdeixvutat Kai [els] Td StxaoT1- ~ 2

ptov eioayert[as], dav S ade, trpootim[aow avt]@ of

G Stxacrat, 6 tu av Sonn a&tos elvar wabe[iv] 4) azoteicat.

édv S€ apyupiou TipnOy, Set avrov SedelcOar], Ews dv éxteion 76 Te mpoTepov bdXn- pla eld’ @ evedetyOn, cal 6 te dv adt@ mpoctiunon T[6 Six]aory-

> 4 ptov. exe & Exactos Sixactys mivakiov wvéwvov, émvyeypappéevov

13 olc: @ Richards (H-L).

18 ekasros <6> B.

KAIMEICAPETAI K-W, K3, B: pov eloayyeda K! (eloayyeg Fraenkel, H-L).

Kara 7d dikacry- 15, 16 ATTOTICAIM—EKTICH.

§ 4 Hesych. xadxobv mivdxiov: "AOnvator elyov exacros mivdkcov mvécvov ém-

yeypapuevoy 7d bvoua 7d (rod cod.) adrod Kal rod Shou warpdder.

Schol. Arist. P/ut.

277. Photius mivdkcov’ ovpBorov dixaorixdy, xadxoby 7} wvEwov.

§ 3. tpidkovra ern] Pollux viii 122, éblxafov ol bwép rpidKovra ern éx Tay ém- thu Kal un dperovrwr TO Snuooly. Cf. Dem. ¢. Zimocr. 123 and Law 2d. 50.

The text lends no support to the opinion that the number of dicasts was limited to 6,000 annually appointed by lot from the general body of duly qualified citizens. On the contrary, it favours Frankel’s view that all duly qualified Athenians might be enrolled on the list of dicasts. At Ardettos, near the Pana- thenaic stadium, dnuoolg mdvres wWuyvoy *AOnvato. tov Spxov Tov éxxAnovacrixdv (Harp. s.v. "Apdnrrés). Frankel, Az. Geschworenenger., esp. pp. 14—20. The number 6,000, however; occurs in c. 24, 13 with reference to the previous century.

évSelkvurat] évdeéis was primarily put in force against debtors to the state (Dem. Androt. 33, Nicostr. 14). In Dem. c. Mid, 182 Pyrrhus is prosecuted by éy- deigts for acting as dicast. Cf. Dict. Ant. 17346, |

Tportipaciv of Sixarral] In cases where a person illegally acted as dicast, it was left to the court to impose the penalty, Dem. c. A@¢d. /.c.; similarly in the event of a disqualified person speak- ing in the éxxAnola ([Dem.] Aristog. i § 92).

§ 4. mwdkwoy] All the extant rudxa are of bronze; those of boxwood, men- tioned in, the text, having presumably perished. The specimens from the British Museum are given in Hicks, Hist. Zuscr. p. 202. Out of the 65 collected in CIA 11 875—940, seventeen are mere fragments : the. remaining 48 exhibit in the upper left-hand corner one of the first ten let- ters of the Greek alphabet:—A(4), B(6), T(5), A(g), E(8), (4), H(z), O(6), 1(3);

K(r). Two of them (g14—5) were found in the same tomb, both bearing the same letter and the same name (with a slight difference in spelling). Cf.g17—8. Appa- rently each dicast remained permanently in the division first assigned him; so that the annual «Ajpwors dixacrSv only affected those citizens who on reaching the age of 30 were assigned to a particular division for the first time. The rwdxia are discussed by Dumont, Rev. Arch. 1868, p. 140; C. Curtius, Rheiz. Mus. 1876, 281; Klein, Fahrb. des Vereins von Alterthumsfreun- den in Rheinland, 1876, p. 57—3; P. Girard in Bull. Corr. Hell. 1878, p. 523 —; Frankel, Azt. Geschworenenger. pp. 94, 95, 105; Meier and Schomann, pp. 151—2, Lips.; and Caillemer in Darem- berg and Saglio, iii 189 f. The mwdxcor reproduced (as fig. 1) at the head of the frontispiece bears the name of Acovdacos Atovu[ctov] éx Kol[\ns]; in the upper left- hand corner is the letter of the division, A; below this, an owl between A and 9, being part of AOH, for ’A@nvalwy ; towards the right are two owls between A and A, and to the right of this is a gorgon’s head (CIA ii 876).

The use of the mwaxtoy in drawing lots for certain public offices is mentioned in Dem. 39 (adv. Bocotum de nomine) § 12, ri dé, av dpa...arepos nudv melcas Tov ere- pov, édv AaXy, mapadoivat alte Thy apxnv, orw KdXypobrat; 7d Ouoty mwvaxlow Tov éva. KAnpotcba tL ddd éoriv; That this m- vaxcoy was of bronze is proved by § 10, dv & adpxny jwriwodv 4 wbds KAnpot, olor Bounds 7} Geopobérov 7 Tay dhAwy, TG SAdos 6 Aaxwv ora; WA el onuetov, WoTeEp Gry twl, Te xarkly mpocécra. The mvdxiov is sometimes called the ypaupa- Arist. Plat. 277, €v ry cop@ vurl Naxov Td

20

236

AOHNAIQN TIOAITEIA COL. 30, 1. 49—53.

70 dvoua To éavTod ratpobey Kal Tod Sypov, Kal ypaulua] &v trav

orouyelwy péxpe TOO K' vevéunvrar yap Kata pudas Séxa pépy ot

Sixacrat, mapard[not los tooe év éxdote TO ypap[ualre. érevdav

5é 6 Oecpobérns érixAnpdon Ta yp[ap]uata, & Sel mpoatraparibe- a , af L co. fos 249

cOat rots Sixactnploss, éréOnxe pépwv 6 vanpérns ep Exactlov

70 Sixjactnpiov TO ypdppa TO Naxov.

19 EayTOY: 7 adrod H-L.

K1 (K-w, H-L). 23 éxacrov Td B.

22 tTrpoctr(apa)TIOEc@al Blass (K%) : —riNecOal

ypdupa cov duxafew, od 5 ob Badltes, 6 6é Xdpwv 7d odpBorov Sliwow. Lb. 1166, “ypauua is synonymous with the section of dicasts indicated by a particular letter : ovk érds dravres of Stxdfovres apd orev- Sovow év moddois yeypapbar ypdupacivy (Meier and Schém. p. 150, note g Lips.). érvyeypappévov—Srjpov] Cf. Plat. Leg.

753 C (in the scheme for the election of magistrates), els mudxioy ypawayra rotl- voua marpodev kal pudjjs Kal Sjpou drdbev dv Snuorednra..

vevépnvrar ydp Kard uAds Ska pépn] z.e. are divided into ten sections distributed over the tribes. The ten pépy did not coincide with the ten tribes, but each bépos had a nearly equal number of di- casts from all the tribes. The extant mwdkia prove that members of different tribes belonged to the same section (Benn- dorf, Gétting. gel. Anz. 1870, p. 276—).

&dore TO ypdppart] A, B, I, &c to K.

§ 5. Qeorpoérys] Pollux viii 88, (ol Gecpobérat) Tais dpxats émixnpotct ra du- KacTypia Ta téua Kal Td Syudcta. CIA ii 567 d (inscr. in honour of a @ecpoérys), émysedeirai—ris KAynpwcews Twv Sikaorn- pluv, ib. 809, 206 (B.C. 325/4), Tods Oeapo-

béras mapalrA]npooar dixacryjpia els Eva ~

xal dcaxoglous. The decpobérns draws lots assigning the letters (A, M, N, P, &c)

to the several courts. The letter thus allotted was placed over the entrance of the court. Herice ypduua is synonymous with dicacripiov in Arist. Eccl. 683—, KAnpoow mavras, tws dv eldus 6 daxov arly xalpwy év droly ypdupare Secrvet, In the next three lines the letters B, 0 and K can only refer to the ten heliastic divisions (A to K) severally marked on the dicast’s wwdxiv. In line 688 we have another sense of ypduwpa: bry 5é 7d ypduua ph ’EedkvocOG KTA. Here (as in Plut. 277) ypéuua is synonymous with the mvaxcov, which has the letter of the heliastic division stamped upon it.

Even the original allotment of the citi- zens to the several heliastic divisions was under the superintendence of the decpodé- rat (cf. 59 § 7). This would involve the use of a set of balloting balls or counters marked with a letter indicating the several divisions (A, B, T, A, E, to K). It is probably specimens of these that have sur- vived in two bronze counters having on the one side four owls arranged diagonally and encircled with the word decpobérwy, and on the other the letter A or E (Frankel in Sallet’s Zeitschrift f. Numismatth, iti p- 383 f, and Caillemer in Daremberg and Saglio, iii tg1). See figs. 2 and 3 in fron-

‘tispiece.

5

,

FRAGMENTA

ex papyri paginis ultimis.

Kol. 31] t]a 8 [xtBdria *rais pudrlais [katatidevrar*

mpoabev [*raév apyovtwv® KlaQ’ éxactny rH[v dv- rqv. emlelyé[yparras 8] én’ abtav ta orole- xeia péxpe tlov x. érjedav & éuBarwow [To- vy Sicaor[O]yv [a muvaxla eis To KiBorifor, 24) e KN oe 33: f ‘ 4 ép ob} av 4 émi[yeypaluuévov ro ypdplya

A > A b \ cal f by # td *. To avTo Onlelo é[wt Td m]waxiw éoriv, alro Tév ototxeio[y Staloeicavtos Tob v[mrn- pérou EdKet 6 [OeopolOérns && éExaarov

fel / t oe GM ‘ tod xiBwtiolv mwalxov év. ovtos 8é

Fragmentorum in lacunis supplendis post editorem primum multum praestiterunt H-L et Haussoullier (Revue de Philologie, xv, 2); etiam plura contulerunt K-w et B, quem in rebus dubiis plerumque secutus sum; ipse nonnulla olim tentavi, quaedam nunc primum protuli.

Pag. 31, 1 (=pag. 32 K-w; sed non satis causae’ apparet, cur paginam unam pluresve intercidisse censeamus). Paginae huius partem sinistram et dextram, ectypi in editione prima ordine inverso separatim expressam, coniunxit K. r]a 6¢ [K«Pdrea

" K-w. in medio fere versu AAOC H-L3 ANA K-W, B: ac? [rails puA]ais [xara- rlOevra.] mpbcbev [ray dpxdvrwv] scripsi, coll. Plat. Rep, 618 A (animarum de sortitione) ra r&v Blwy mapadelypara els 7d rpbcOev opdr Ocivar ert rhy yhy, et pag. 31,

35. 2 mpocGev (sic) Hauss., k%, B, litteris Oey obscure scriptis. 3 émeyéyparrat

K-w, Hauss:, K?; émvyeypappmévas K}, -va H-L. 4 rot « supplevi coll. 63, 20; AEM

idem suppleverunt ceteri. BAQBwCcIN. — [rév]|[[ re] S&cxacr[S]y K-w, [rdlv

dxaor[G]y H-L, K3, of duxacr[al] B. supplevi cum K-W (?), H-L, K3, B.

6 émi[yeypa]uuévov Hauss. (edd.). 8 dtaceloavros K-w (Hauss., H-L, B).

7 a[rd]

col. 31,1—7. rd 8 «iBdtia] These are the 100 boxes arranged in sets of ten; the boxes in each set being distinguished by the first ten letters of the alphabet; the first box contains all the tickets of the first heliastic division, the second those of the second, and so on. Each box is shaken in turn by the attendant, and the presiding official, the ecpodérns, draws one ticket out of each box.

2. tav dpxdvtwy] the ten officials mentioned in c. 63, 27z2¢.

7. dad trav oroixelwv, ex ordine litte-

rarum (Blass). .

8. Svaceloavros] Cf. the Homeric «h%- pous waddew, L/. 7, 17I—189; 15, 1913 23, 353—4, 861; 24, 400; Od. 10, 206.

9. xe] “Ed. Apx. 1888, p. 114, v.

5, 6 Bacreds EXxéTw Tov K[arrire]poly éxdre|po[y é]u wépe. Cf. Eustath. p. 675, 53, (Epuod xAfpos) qv 6 pnOels KAfpos Pirrov datas & kara Timi To Oeod eics- Gecav euBddrew Kal mpwrov avédxecy, also Photius ».v. ‘Epuod xdfpos (Wyse, Class. Rev. ¥ 335 @).

To

15

20

238

AOHNAIQN

COL. 31,1]. 1I—23.

A > Kanrei[rlae eulanery]s, cab éumnyvuer \ ’ a Ta mwaxia [Ta éx Told KiBwrtiov eis THY i ’ kavovida, [ép’ is TO aldTO ypdppa ereotiy

drep él tod [xtBwriov.

KAnpodrat 8] obTos, va py ael

€ > ‘ % ra lol y_ \ 6 avTos éun[nyrtwr] Kaxoupyh. eiol &é kavovides [Séxa élv éxdotw Tov KAN-

pwrnpiov. [éreddav 8] éwBddy tovs KiBous 6 dpyov, THY

gurny Karel els TO x] AnpwTrpLov.

cial

8é KvBou [EvrAwvo1, wé]Naves kal AevKol’

dcous 8 dv Sé[y rAaxetv] Sixacrds, Tocod-

Tou éuBddrovr[ rar Aev]xoi, <olov> Kata mévTE 4 ¥ \ x \ 2 \ f

muvaxia els, ot O[é wérlaves TOV avToY Tpo-

mov. émedav & €[Earph] tovs xvBous, Karel

11 €N..... C et ENTTHENYCI: évirynkrns K-W, B; dum. H-L, K%. 14 xiBwriov scripsi cum Hauss., K-w, H-L, K%.

cum H-L, Hauss. (K*,B); 颒 7 K-w.

13 颒 7s scripsi

kdnpodra 5’ propter sententiam addiderunt K-w, vocis ante lacunam superscriptae

vestigia agnovit K. H-L, K3) 5 éva[yyvdwv] K-w, B.

16 éua[nyrirns dv] K}, éum[jxrys dv] Bywater, (Hauss., 17 éray 6€ H-L.

17, 21, 29 ENB (K-w, B).

19 ya[Axoi K* litterarum vestigia valde obscura secutus, [fUAwo. K-w (BR), color talorum albus et ater cum ligno magis quam metallo congruit; [soA\ol H-L, [Aloe

Hauss. kara wévrTe B.

20 Naxelv H-L (B), éxdorore K (Hauss.), evar K-W. 23 éfaipq B; é&é\y Hauss., K-w, K?; an éfé\xy? Wyse, coll.

21 <olov>

Arist. Eccl. 688 rw 8¢ 7d yoda ph EedxvoOG Kad’ 8 devrvjoe: éuBddy H-L.

TESTIMONIA. Pag. 31, 11 Hesych. eumferns’ 6 Ta Sikaorind ypayparldca (ypdu- wara 6a cod., corr. Musurus) mapa rob Oecpobérov (Oecuoddpov cod., corr. K-W)

apBavew Yanpérns kal ricowy els Thy Kavovléa (kavevvlda cod., corr. Iunius).

*errat

grammaticus: nam decem sunt e tribulibus éumrfxra:’ K-w. Bekk. An. 258 éuarqxrys

6 Oecpobérns.

22 ‘hinc nati errores in scholio Iunt. ad Ar. Plat. 277 p. 339 4 47 (Diibner)’ K-w:—(44) 200s of dd (45) wacdy r&v gudGy dixaoTas KaGlfew* elra dad (46) peas éxdorns éhduBavov avdpas révre rods émionuorépous’ (47) Kal wddw éx trav mévre Eva Tov

KAnpw Aaxovra eroiouy dindfew.

11. éparyxrys] This designation is here applied, not to the Secuodérns (as sup- posed by Hesych. and Bekk. 4z.), nor to the bmnpérns. There is a separate éumjxrns taken by lot from each heliastic division.

13. kavov(Sa] probably a wooden frame fitted with a number of ‘straight rules’ or parallel ledges (xavdéves), stretching horizontally across it. We may sup- pose that the upper surface of each of these ledges was grooved and that each mwdkiv, as it was drawn, was inserted with its lower edge in the groove. In each KAypwrhpiov, or balloting chamber, there were ten of these frames, one for each of the heliastic divisions.

14. KAnpotrar] not mid. but pass., ‘is

chosen by lot.’ The object of this, as we are told, is to prevent the jobbery that might arise, if the éwmrjxrys were always the same and were therefore known beforehand.

19. «¥Bor] wooden dice (or lots) of two colours, black and white, but differing from ordinary dice by not being marked with any pips. One out of every five lots was white, the rest black. The number of white lots is equal to the number of dicasts required. The archon draws the lots in succession; if the first lot is white, the bearer of the name on the first - vdxwov is considered to have drawn the lot to serve as dicast, and so on; the names of these dicasts are then called out.

Gol. 32.] Tov] ely

COL. 31, 1. 24—COL. 32, 1.2. TIOAITEIA 239 Tovs eiAnydtas 6 [dpywv]. dardpyer Sé eal 6 ep- mxtns els [d]v [adtaly. 6 S& KrNOels Kal d eihn]x[@s] dr[x]eo [Bdravolv x rijs SSpias,

cat *[ar]po[Set]Eas adrily *dvéylov ro ypdupa, S[ei- kyvow Tploce\Owrv] 7S apyovtTs TO e[h]ec-

TyxoTl. 6 O& [apywv éredaly Sn, guBadrree 76 mwaktov aldTod eis TO K]uBwriov, Srrov

av 9 érvyeypap[pévjov To avTd orovyel-

ov dmep ev TH Barlave, ty eis ofov dv ayn

eioin Kai wn eis o[fov] dv BovrAnras, pnd’ é[v-

H ouvayew [eis] Suxactipiov ods dv

Botrnrat Ts. mlapaxe|ras Sé TH apyovTe Ki- Berta, 60° dv del [w]é\Ay 7A Stxactipia mrypwOncecOar, [éyolvta atouyeiov é-

xagtov, Orep aly 7] Tod Sixaorypiov éExac-

blrnpéry 1

24 dpywy K-w, K%, B; Umnpérns K!, H-L, Hauss., adversante spatio. 25 els [a]v [atrdy B; els adray vel els adtav dxAnpwros desideraverat Paton; els rov [réro]v K. 26 [elAn]x[s] B; non x sed A€ legebat K; mapeards fortasse scribendum ; omnia in- certa putant K-w. @\xec dubitanter agnoscit K. 27 Kal .po.éas K3, KAITTPO.. ZAC

K-W; fortasse mpodelias scribendum. _ ....wy edd.; dvéxwv supplevi. 28 mpar[ov peév] K, H-L3 pw (mporelvas?) K-w; mp[oceNOdv] B. 29 roiro éreday Hauss.,

H-L, ENB (K-W, B). K3, B. Hauss. (K-w, K3), OYAHTAI). unde é&|7 Hauss. undely B. ouwd-yey K-w, kK,

33 EICEIH.

30 8rofev H-L. AYTOYCTOIXEION: ard orotxefov Richards et Herwerden (edd.). [oto dy K-w (K3, B). post ude aliquid scriptum fuisse videtur ; dé [év|j K, wd’ é[v|y malui; 34 CYNAPAPeIN (Supra scr. Tar); cuvayayeiy K}, B; els H-L, B; els rd Hauss., K-w, KX Hauss., (edd.); doamep exspectabant K-w.

31 restituerunt Hauss., K-w, 32 BaAHTAl (suprascr.

36 del Herwerden, 37 NTACCTOIXEIONE.

Pag. 32. Etiam haec pagina in partes duas sinistram et dextram discerpta; in medio

litterae complures exciderunt. K-w.

1 elx.. TTA “Y (supra scr. €) K-w.

2WC..NW

26. Bddavov xrd.] The dicasts having now been determined, it has still to be settled in which court each is to sit; each of them, when called, draws out of the urn a ballot marked with a letter de- noting one of the courts and shews it to the presiding official, who now puts the ticket of the dicast concerned into the box marked with the same letter as the ballot which the dicast has drawn. The number of these boxes is as many as the number of courts that are to sit

on the dayin question. This ensures the dicast’s taking his seat in the court he has actually drawn, and makes it im- possible for him to choose his own court or to arrange to sit in the same court with certain others who are drawn as dicasts.

36. 60° dv—mAnpwlrjcer Oar] See note onc. 63, 11. These passages shew that (as in Ar.) the future, as well as the present, is found after wéAdew in the ’A@. Ton.

30

35

I

tr

co}

240

AOHNAIQN

COL. 32, lL. 3—14.

- wc 6 8é varnplérns Sidwow atte Balernpiav O]ucxpov ro [S]ixalornpio ep’ ob Td adtd] ypaywa dlrep év TH Badavy, i[va dvay]|xaiov 7 aite elicerOeiv eis [70] éav[rod Sieact]jpuov: édv ydp elis Grepov ei[oin, éEeréyyetas vd Tov] xpapa-

tlo[s t}is Baxrnpias.

[Tots yap Sixacrnpliow ypa-

Pla[rla ésiyéypart[as *raow] ert To ofy-

Klick rhs eia[odlov.

[6 dé AaBav tHv] Baxrnpi-

av] Badife: eis [ro] SumalotHptov 70] ouoxypar pev 7H Baxt[npila, [you Sé To adto] ypappa

[dcrep] ev TH Badavo.

ér[evdav © eicédOn], Tapadrap-

Baver cipBorov Sn[yocig] mapa tov eidn-

3 OC K, K-W (?), H-L.

nv K. 6 atrod K-w, éavrod B.

xpGua rescribi vult ypdupa, id quod vel adiunctum verbum postulat.

3—7 restituerunt K-w, coll. Bekk. Az. 220. €xovr.] 7d ab7d yp[d]uua K-w; [é¢ od 7d adrd yp]duma Bsuadente spatio.

# [rp 5: 8 “‘rectissime Hemsterhusius pro Quis enim,

inquit, Graece sciens dicat émeypdpew ypua?’? Schémann, Opusc. Acad. i 208. 9 mla(tla: (xpopara K); xpGua K-w (B)e schol. Ar. éxdorw propter spatium K-W (B): ép' éxdorw K e schol. Ar.; propter hiatum scripsi maow. 14 CyNBOAON K-W, B.

Pag. 32, 3—15 Bekk. Am. 220 Baxrnpla: dudxpwpor rots dtxacrypros €dldovT0 Baxry- plat, wad AaBav olovéy xpwuaros Baxryplay els 7d dudxpwyov eloéAOy Sikacriprov Kal wh els €repov whavaras 614 Td TWoAAG elvat TA Sikacrypia.

Suidas (‘e lexico Photiano’) Baxrnpla kal c¥uBorov. ol Naxdvres Sixdfew EAduBavoy rapa Tav Snnoclwy imnperav ciuBodov kal Baxrnplav kal otrws edlkafov. Thy xpbav dé dpolay elye TH Baxrnpla 7d Sikacrhpiov. 7d pévTor cvuBorov pera Thy Kpiow amoddbvres éxoulfovro TpisBodov' Grep kal Stxacrixdy yéyoveyr. Cf. Bekk. An. 185, 4: pdBdor karetyov of duxafovres, kal cUuBorov éAduBavoy dvTibddvres bic. 7d KoploacOa 7d Tplw- Bodov. Lex. Dem. Patm. p. 144. Schol. Arist. Ves. 1110 édtdovro 5€ kal Baxrnplac Tots dixacrais d6udxpoor Tots Sixaornplors, Grou Exagros elceAOdvras Sixdfeww ee, iva Tov dtapaprdvovra dmeddyin 7d xpwua, Pollux viii 16.

Pag. 32, 8—15 *Schol. Arist. P/wt. 278 (om. cod. Ravennas et cod. Venetus) zrepi Tod mapadidouevou Tots eloofow els 7d Sixaoryprov cuuBddrou Ap. év 7H AO. Tod. olTw

col. 32, 3. 6 8& tarnpérys] The attend- ant gives the dicast a small staff of the same colour as that assigned to the court in which he is to sit. The colour on the staff is thus substituted for the letter on the ballot, as it is obviously easier for the doorkeeper to see that each dicast, as he files in, has a staff of the right colour than one marked with the right letter.

Baxryplav] Dem. de Cor. § 210 quoted on c. 63 § 2.

4. opdxpwv] Each of the courts is marked outside with the colour corre- sponding to that on the several staves. We read in Paus. i 28 of two courts that derived their name from their colour: tov (rd Schém.) pév ody Kadovpevoy Tlapa- Bvoriov xal Tplywvov, rd wey ev dagavet

médews 6v,—7d 52 dwd Too oxjparos exe To dvopa’ Barpaxtody dé cal Pow- Ktoby ard xpwudrwr, Cf. Schdmann, Opuse. Acad. i 226.

9. odykloKe] ‘the lintel,’ pe ily J , Steph. 7% us, Vii 1606 Paris. Cf. CIA iv 3, 225 ¢, p. 168, opyxtoxoe dd ris orods kaOypnuévor (at Eleusis).

14, otpBodov] Dem. de Cor. quoted on c..63§ 2 Baxrnplat, and Arist. Plut. 279 quoted 24. § 4 rwdxiov. Cf. Etym. Mag. 5. u. 5 éduBavov ol dixacrat els 7d dt- xagriptov elovdvres’ elra Toro Sévres, 7d Stxacrixdv exoulfovro.

It has been proposed to identify with these otuBoda certain leaden counters stamped on the one side with a design resembling that used for the reverse of a

COL. 32, 1. 15—24. TIOAITEIA 241

t xXo]Tos tadtny tHv alpynv, *xalra [rT] ra[Ew dao- d0d]s* tv Baxtnpiav .. . tHe [*rov ali[tov] tpdmov ........... TecToIcA.. @ —: Aa)ylyavove[:] .... Ar. ..... orkeaTtepykp — ¥ , ear e¢ t e 7, ON 7a] mivania, ob b€ danpéras 96 Snpocia [*imép tis Pudms éxaorns m[apadi|Scacw Ta «([0- Boria, &v émt 76 Suxalotnpliov éxacrov, é[v ols] early Ta ....a.. [THs] hudjs Ta dvt[a 2 € , a 4 ba év éxaotp t[ ov Se]xaloTnpilwv. mapadidca[or € Tots eiAny[dow arrods|bdvas Tots Si[Kac- 15 versus in fine ére:]ra [r]yv re— B; .. Ta. mv Ta... K9; scripsi [ka]ra [r]hy rd[éw arodov}s coll. 37, 1—4. 16 post lacunam pa...THC K®; paTayTHC K-W.

tov supplevi. 18 TOAI

17 versus in initio rév] ad[rdv] rpdrov.. ITTE K-W.

K>. Post lacunam O1K..1TEp. K. K3 QIKTTETTER K-w. (K8). ol 6€ banpérac B (Kk). OIAHMOCIA (deleto a et suprascr. W?) Al..B; Snuoolats K-W. Versus in fine w7ép scripsi, quod manus tertia per compendium & indicat, cf. p. 21, 24, p. 23, 22. 20 [apadi]idacw B; a[rodi]ibacw K-w, K3; scriptura incerta. 20—21 7a x. Bwria B(K%): ra[és]... K}, K-w. 21 &y éni 7d K-w (K%, B). 21—22 6|rég[a] éorly K-w. 22 An 7a [rw]d[xia]? 7a évr[a K-w (K3, B). 23 restituerunt K-w (K%, B). 24 mjap[ad:]oovar K-w (K3); dmrodibévac B.

ypdpe ‘rots yap—apxyv” (8—15). Frag. 490°, 460% Cf. Schol. Iunt. ad v. 277, P. 340 @ 40 Tots Aaxovor ducdoar elrehOotow Exdorw gbuBodoy Sidorar Snudciovy mapa Tis émt rodrw eldnxulas dpxijs, lv’ of é&cdvres Kal Todro mpoogépovres auBdvorey Tov dikarrixdy pucbdv, b 4 édldou 5 6 Kfjpvé abrols p4Bdov, iris Hv obuBodov Tod dixdfew, iva ékagros al’ éomépay drrodibods TG mpurdver THY Pa4B5ov TpLwsBorov AauPdvy pioOdy THs

19 mwdka agn. K-w

Sixdoews,

tpiwBodovy, and on the other with one of the first ten letters of the alphabet-(Benn- dorf, Zeitsch. f. d. Oesterr. Gymn., 1875 p. 601). See figs. 4 and 5, frontispiece.

The fact that letters after x are not found on these counters shews that the letters do not indicate the courts, but the heliastic divisions. If the courts had ten entrances each, these would correspond to the heliastic divisions, and all who left the court by the proper exit would receive counters marked with the letters corresponding to their own division. They would take these to the place where they had had their court allotted to them, and there receive payment in the chamber in which the allotment took place (col. 37 ult.).—In c. 63, 3, if the text is correct, the courts are actually described as hav- ing ten entrances, each of them, however, corresponding to one of the tribes, and not to one of the heliastic divisions.

15. tiv dpxiv] The official’s title is not given. According to an inscr. of B.C. 34t/o (Mittheil. ad. arch. Inst. vii 103), the diddoots rav cuuBddrwy in the éxxAnoia

S. A,

was entrusted to the ovAdoye?s Tol Sjuou (Rose, Frag. ed. p. 299 n). Schémann, Opusc. Acad. i 206, suggests either the KwAaxpérat or the officials presiding over the trial, inclining to the latter; but it seems more probable that the ovpBoda were distributed by a person of less im- portance than the presiding officials, per-

_haps by a ‘public slave’ (A7¢t. Proc. p.

162 Lips.). In the time of Aristophanes it was the xwAaxpérac who paid the di- casts their fee of three obols: Schol. Av. 1541; Vesp. 695; Bekk. An. 275, 223 lex. rhet, Cant. 672, 15. But there is no

‘proof of the existence of the cwAaxpérat

after 403 B.C.

16. Baktnyplav] This line must have stated something about the dicast’s de- livering up his Baxrnpla in exchange for the obpBorov.

19—24. The tickets belonging to the

dicasts in each court have been sorted.

out into ten boxes; these boxes are taken by the attendants of each ‘tribe,’ and handed over to the proper officials at the ten entrances of the court, to be re-

16

15

20

242 AOHNAIQN COL, 32, 1. 25—33, 1. 12. 25 Tals éxaoTm — 4 — — — [T]o dpiOue t[ aly

s arro[6i- mavra [Tadra

mapa TH 4... TOUTOV ...., YN «ae Swor tov [wic]Odv. yfiyveras] 88 kata SucaoThnpia Tp ..... ENT — — Sixacrnpiov [7] S[e]eac[Th loca nal — — wn 30 €[arlesr’ emi ta kat repo Kv[Bole ev of[s.....] tav ap[x]av TI

Tae — — — — — — — — — 70., tov [Becpo- berdv — — — — — — — oye Tods Kv[Pous Badrovow 6 TENT..... 710 — — [8tKao-

la ¢ * led > La

35 Thptov. 6 5é Tav apxlovT]oy — — LAOe see TH Aves e ens Gpyav € — — — — KHpy — . — — — > Oo he So ap BD Slevrepg. kal. — — — — — va.. Sade ius == — ah AJiang . leka = — — — — — oe. 5 pl) Go ...N — — — — — ow. card Sid) ao ef € f Tnpim éxadore — — — — — KBlo- © Tiov WiwaKkiov — — — — — ess [é- KaoTns THS GuLARS — —— — 4a. 10 érepov Kevov — — — — — — Tov. tous merous 6 — — — — — ero[b- dwp TéTTapas — — — — — — ovs..

25 ekacTw! vel EKACTWN. 26 mapa TE u...ToUTov.....uv...8 K33 Tapa TOV oesTQ. TQ seeee ouv..v (suprascr. C) K-W 35 wets intactum religuit B. 27 Tov jus Oby K-w (K’, B). post wdyra T K-W, TT kK}. 28 versus in fine N dis- pexit K; 29 versus in fine kK (x). "30 Kew el’ éml ta K5 EICITIETTITA K-W ;

[reir ért 7a. B. .-Tat (kat K-W)....6...K00....., 31 Trav aco i“ ? K-w;

Trav dpx@v T.... K. 82 Tw €....€.. ETO. cae TO..TOY [Beopolberav K; Oy... THa...V apxav K ; Ad... BHO siaie ot WN APXWNE K-w. Pag. 33. Fragmenta @ et 4 una collocarunt K-w; in nonnullis certe versibus

(6, 7, 18) litterae extremae cum subsequentibus congruunt. 5 init. .ws K%. 6 TACTTAPAAOM K-W; Tat % apy K. K-W (K%); [U]dwp rérrapas B.

3 .emia..oe K% 12 dwp rérrapas

turned by them to the dicasts to whom 31. trepou Kou] The pur pose of this

they belong. fresh set of ‘dice’ or ‘lots,’ as distin- 26, 27. drroSl8wo. tov picddv] At guished from those of col. 31, 19, is not this point we have mention of the official clear. Possibly they were used to dis-

paying the rpiwBodov.

27, 28. -ylyverar.—Bixacrrjpia] Dem. 23 § 63, rabra mdyra éml révre dikacrnplos ylyverat mpooreraryuéva, rots vouors (Blass).

tribute the superintendence of the courts among the thesmothetae (or some other officials).

COL, 33, l. 13—34, 1. 15.

Bnoeis Tapady bSwp pyre Ton - + HTQ Topica .. seeeee. ABKOVT atrodapBavoular Tov picOov

tat at dural [é]ralyov — — —

\ 1g Sav Sixacwor Ald . ATON VO Tov Te cuUYN

nm 7 >

taita & ét éTav pev Ta

ae f TO apiOup

. TOD vopolv

> 9, \ Los ets avTo TO Tl paywa — — —.

ounevs

TIOAITEIA

243

ci. eloe 6

+. TAC (sequuntur versus fere sex prorsus evanidi)

(2)

(desunt versus decem)

BS SS es Se

, ONTI| KaloT) — — — —

15 ..4Ta..apeo K, ...HTA.TAP- Cd (vel Ta) K-W.

21 dia ra Tov K%;

Ala.A.alott K-w (litteram tertiam et quartam inductam putat B, qui dud Tov véuov

conicit), tadra vd K%.

22 rotro ow K ; Tod Te auvnydpou ? K-W.

23 TAYTAYTIOTOY K-W;

Pag. 34. Fragmentum a paginae 33 fragmento 4 adhaeret. Frustulum 4 ex incerta

coniectura adiunxit B.

15—23 (B)=p. 78, col. 34 6 18—25, et p. 79 5 1—9 (K-W):

illud non descripsit K; hoc dedit in p. 199, col. 34, frag. 2 (K3).

col. 33a 17—19. Cf. col. 37 uit.

27. els avo T6 mpdypa] Dem. 57 Zu- bul, 7, els abro Td mpayua mdvTa dé-yew, and 60, ép@ 8 els aird 7d mpayya. As the archon Bagt\eds is apparently men- tioned in the next line, the present pas- sage refers to the procedure before the Areopagus, in which irrelevant matter was excluded: Phet.i1, 5, Kwrdovow ew rod mpdryuaros Néyew, KkaGdmep Kat év ’Apely

mary, Lycurg. Leocr. 12, 13, wh émerpé- mew Tots éw Tod mparyuaros Néyovow (with Rehdantz, p. 126 and Meier and Schém. p- 933 Lips.). On the other hand, the mention of Uéwp in Il. 12, 14 suggests that the text may refer to the procedure in a ypady mapayduwv, Aeschin. 3, 1975 7d 5& Sedrepov dwp TH Thy ypapiy ded- youre kal rots els aro Td mpaypya Aéyouow.

16—2

15

20

25

30

15

244 AOHNAIOQN — COL. 34, |. 16—35,1. 2. (2) (2) to 8ix|acrnplie — — —

Siacta | vres — — — — — eliot.. | man — — — — amr[@] | évoy.. — — —

20 ..kar|oda. T9 — — — (C) [avay- Kkalog|t Tobs — — — A- orav [r|d]lv Sux[aotnv — N.N oe | - NOK -——- — — Y...ON Cig ame een Nee a idiov

ay ee a ee es ay |evev ye ee ee ON wages i fh ee ey a 86 Ta Sypo- cial — — — — — — - KAIK — — — — — — — — -ayous [8]é

3000 Oe COAEI . TEA Steed sae aes aos al HCYTT . OTFep gaa) as ee, es émtayous 6€ SSeS a wn Kal Sdixous —- — nal dixo[u]s éEayolv

See epov Aoy[o]s oYas¢

—-— — — — wc émiAapBaver Tov alvAicKoy, émetdav dén petakv Tay Aloywv (0)

pap[tupias 7) vopous v1rd ToD ypayplatéws

(2)

418 WCIK K-w. 20 AEKdA K-w. 21 aZHM K-W. 618 MHTE K-w.

Fragmentum ¢ cohaeret cum p. 35 frag. d. 34, ¢ 20—36 (B)= 35, 1—16 (K-w) =34

frag. 4 (kK). ¢23 YC..WN K-W, To]ds.. das K%, versus in fine suprascripto Aac (K, K-w) vel ac (B). 24 lSlous K, ldw[T]ns K-w. 25 WNTWN K-W, wr[w]y K, 26 A...01 KS. 29 ‘suprascriptum ¢, legendum igitur yées’ K-w.

30 6 & els rol K-W; TOY pr., TEA superscr., inducta illa, B. 31 es u...mep K3; qs brep ? B. 34 éfdyous K, K-W. 35 Uorlepoy Adyos od ws ? K-w. 36 an Wwcierti ? B.

Pag. 35, 1—37 (B)=36 2+4, p. 80,+fragmentum incertum p. 79 @ (K-W)=34 (3) +-nil+ 34 (1) (K). a1 €Nd K-W; va K, 1—4 supplevjt B. 61 NJomon K3 (ap. B). @2 pap[rupiac] vel udp[rupes] K-w.

col. 34, 32—34. The terms érrdxous, Slxous, éEdxous refer to different intervals of time as measured by the xAeywdpa. The word dtxous is quoted from Posido- nius by Athenaeus, HavaOyvaixd péyiora Ta per Slyoa Ta dé welfova (p. 495 A), and é€dxous is found in Plutarch (So/. 23).

36. émdapBdver tov abdlokov] The avAloxos is the short neck of the xAewyu-

dpa. The attendant could stop the flow of the water by placing his hand on the top of this. Ar. Probl. 16, 8, p. 9146 12, wy elovdvac Td YSwp éridnpOévros Tod avdod, and 4 14 and 27, émiaBow roy av- Aor, p. 866 4 13, (7d wvefua) kwrver eéévat, dorep 7d vowp 7d éx Tay KNepvdpuv, bray TARpes odoas ériAaBy Tis.

COL. 35, 1. 3—12. TIOAITEIA 245 dvayi<y>v[doKecOar . erreddv Sé 4 pds] Svape- petpy[wévnv Thy juépay 6 ayer, TéT]e dé ov[«] é- mthapB[averar. — — — — — — — v bdwp T® Te Ka[THyop- — — — — — — — — —

Siapet[p — — — — — — — — — [TIoct- Sedvos — — — — — — — — — — [na- Kpov Tol[y — — — — — — — — — — .TAaKTO — — — — — — — — — — aypa.. (6) Si[«las — — — — — — — — elic[t]v Su’ [é-

KacToL & — — — — — — Karty lopos

6 T@ Te KaTnyopw ? K-W. 8 € suprascr. TLoovdedvos K-w. In CIA Ilooidedy (syllaba secunda brevi) quattuordecim in locis scriptum (Meisterhans, p. 42°). 9 XPWNT K, K-w.

Pag. 35a 3 *Harp. diapyenerpnuévy qucpa: uérpov rl éorw vdaros mpds mewerpnuevov tuepas Sidornua péov. éwerpetro d¢ 7G Tocededve (melius Hooded.) unvl rpds dy TooTo qrywvlgovro of wéyorot kal wept rdv weylorwy dryaves. Suevéuero S€ rpla pwepy 7d Vowp, 7d wey TE OtedKovrs, 7d dé TG Hevyorrt, Td dé Tplrov Tots Suxdfover, Tadra dé cadésrara adrot of phropes SednrAdkacw, wowep Kal Aloxlyns év Te cata Kypicoparros (§ 126). Ap. & év rH’ AO. mon. SddoKxer wept rovTwy...(Frag. 423%, 463°).

Schol, ad Aeschin. 2 § 126 “‘mpds &vdexa yap dupopéas ev dtapeuerpnudy TH Tuepg xplvoyar”: gaol bri ras Hudpas Tod Tlocedewvos pnvds émhetduevor (exAez. K-wW) of *"AOnvaioe wis cupuerpovs Kal dvvapydévas xaréxew evdexa dpumopéas, mpds aras cal rats adras Tuepas (ras dAdas judpas cod., corr. Sauppe) éoxevatoy rhv kreybdpay, pmeydAou mpdypnatros Ondovére aywrifouévou (yuuvafouévou cod., corr. K-w). dmevéuovto dé ob &vbexa dudopets kara 7d Tplrov rots dvrlkows Kal Tots Suxacrats., Aliud schol. rots rept Tay peylorov dywvifouevots Sinpetro y juepa Kal €6ld0To adrois qusov wey TH KaTnyopw, qucu b€ TP drodoyoupnevy, Kal Stewerpetro Td VSwp 8cov érapkel els Tas wWoas TOD yuloous

Hépous THs judpas. Tolro dé did pis wpas.

Hesych. d:anenerpnucvny juepav’ ért tov

Beydhuv dixdv rhy hudpay évéprfov els Stacrjmara.

col. 35, 3,4, Stapeperpnpévyv] Dem. FLL. p. 378, pds Staneuerpnucyny thy juépav, Aeschin. 2, 126, mpds évdexa yap dudopéas év Siapeuerpnuevy 7H Nuepa Kpl- vopat.

6. tT Te Katnyop-] Aeschin. 3, 197 (in, a -ypagx) rapayvéuwv the day was di- vided into three parts), éyxe@rat yap 7d hey mp&rov biwp Te Karnyopw Kal rots vouos kal 7H Sypoxparia, +d dé Sevrepov Udwp rE THY ypagiy Pevyovre Kai Tois els airé 70 mparyua déyovow (col. 33a 27)... 70 rplrov Udwp eyxeirae TH Tysjoes.

7, 8. TIoow8eavos] The use of the xAey- Udpa in courts of justice is mentioned in Arist. Ach. 692, Vesp. 93, 857, and in the Orators, Dem. de Cor. 139, & T@ Cup Wart, c. Leoch. 45, édv éyxwpy To vdwp. Steph. i § 8, «. Conon. 36 érthaBe ro tdwp, and (at the end of a speech) pvo Phorm. &épa 7d tdwp. The structure of the KAeydpa is described in Ar. Prodi. 16, 8.

It was observed that the length of a

short day in one of the winter months was equivalent to the time in which eleven dudopets successively could be emptied of their water. The standard adopted was a day in the month of Posideon (Dec. —Jan.). To ensure perfect accuracy it would be necessary to make allowance for the fact that the rate at which the water flowed would depend on its tempe- rature (cf. Athen. p. 42; Plut. Quaest. Mat. c. 7). I learn from Mr J. Larmor that, when the level of the water in a water- clock is maintained constant, the rate at which it percolates through narrow tubes or pores of any form depends only on the degree of viscosity of water. Ac- cording to the experiments of Poiseuille (Mémoires de I’ Institut, X), the rate of percolation is increased by about one- thirtieth for each degree Centigrade of rise in the temperature. Thus a rise of 1°C. should make a water-clock go faster by about two minutes every hour.

10

15

20

246 AOHNAIQN COL. 35, lL. 13-29. (6) @rei0el 3 pos éEa- (0) Oety rods — — — — — — — to: vdwp AapBay — — — — — — — — Emel .. €TE pos Tos 6 — — — — — — — ajyololuv év 8€ trois — — — — — — — — — — t]@ Svatr[ps — — — — — — — Lee. élri trois — — — — — — — Tos Tpoa- elore Seop[os — — — — — O]jmevors xlenedrov =— — — — — d]tt yp male liv (2) 4 | dqorei[ca, — — — — — Sixlaornpiov éore — — — — —- — — v Tie OTaV AeAe — — — — — — ei |loaryaryety ou — — — — — — — TaNHNM — TaA — — — — — — — — — — tpla — — [Wador Sé elt yarxai], airic-

xov [€yovoa év TO péow, ai pev H]uioerar Te- Tpulwnudvat, ai O€ juioerat wAHnpes’ ot] Sé Na-

¢14 y supra v. 618 A et a supra v. 20 e€cc! pr. 22 ‘H est in d, aTTOTI in c’ B 23 ‘post éort sequebatur numeri nota, bipartita ut vid.’ B. 23 6 NHNOTAN K-W. 25 5 PANHNAal K-W, evqy pe K. d 27—35 ex Harp. restituit K. 28 MICIAL.

28 *Harp. rerpurnuévyn: Aloxlvns xara Tydpyou (1 § 79, Tw Wipuv 7 rerpurnuevy, 8rqp Soxet reropvetobat Tiuapxov, % 5& mAYpns, OTw wh). “Ap. év AO. wor. ypdde Tauri “Wijpor—rapBdvwow.” Codices meliores, ABCD, post mAjpets in v. 29 inserunt pujre tain (raira A) drouelvas: quae depravata esse ex ure rdvTy Terpumnevas (vel potius

ex pire Terpumnpévas) in v. 34 indicat Dind.

In v. 34 post wAyjpers habent A et B

Mire TavbTy (C Tatras), in A etiam lacuna significata: in archetypo igitur erant pijre tabr7y sotwen AauBdvwow, unde in deterioribus codd. exorta wire mavty TerpuTnuévas (K-W). mdvTn Om. ETD et Photius; ra’ry apud Suidam in codd.

Phot. rerpurypévy’ trav Yipuy obcdy xadkGv kal abdrAloKxoy éxovody al peév Foor

Terpurnuévat, al dé mAnpers [arpvrnror] doar Aplecay rods Kpivouévous.

Bekk. An. 307

Ter. Pidos: Tav Wipuwv odowy xadkav kal atAloxov éxovewy al pev Foay Sac rerpuTn- pévat, Soar kareyndltovro, ai dé mdhpes [drprynror] doar Adlecav Tods Kpwopévous...

(Frag. 4247, 464°). drpirnrov.

Pollux viii 123 yygous & elyov xadkas dvo0, rerpurnuéryyy Kal Bachmann Avec. ii 333, 15—25 et 373, I—I0. 7

27. bao. — rerpumnpevar—rArpers] In Aeschin. ¢. Zimarch. 79, the herald standing by the side of the orator is de- scribed as proclaiming that of the two votes given to each dicast, that which was perforated, ray Widwv 7 rerpurnuery, Orw doxe? xrd., was the vote of condem- nation; that which was not, the vote of acquittal, 7 6é rAnpys, 6rw 7 (with Schol.). Cf. Plut. Lyc. 12, rHs rerpnyevns (You).

These Wngor are identified with certain small discs of bronze which have been found at Athens, pierced with a short

metal stem. In the two specimens given in figs. 6 and 7 this stem, the avAlokos of the text, is in one case perforated, in the other not: the former is clearly a Wipos rerpurnpevn, the latter a y. tAnpys. On one side of the disc are the words wWigos Snuocla, on the other is punched a letter of the alphabet (I or K in the only two specimens at present known to us). These letters probably correspond to those of the heliastic divisions (A to K). Cf. Meier and Schém. p. 936 Lips., and Daremberg and Saglio, iii 196.

COL. 35,-1. 30—36, Lar. TIOAITEIA 247

(2) xovres [eri tds wnpous, éreiddv eipnué|vos (5) dow [oi doyou, wapadidoacw éxadotw T]édv Sixacr[dv Sv0 Wious, rerpuTnpevyn|y Kal mrpn, [pavepas opdv trois avTidixous, Ulva pr- Te WAH[pers ante TeTpuTrnuevas] a[udo]répas

Aapflavacwy — — — — — — [A]éyolouw atTOAa M.ICOM. . YHOIZ OKO...

Gol. 36.]..... Tov Y arrodid[@ dav ylap y Nap[B]avy, [Fy] Wndi-

fovtals waves: o[v ya]p éore AalwPave[v] o[d]uBorov ovder]i, dav un Wditnrar. iol [8]. dudopels

dvo Kei]uevor ev TH Suxactypio, 5 wev x[a]dxods,

6 dé Ev]Awos, Svasperol [Bras [u]n [Teve]s varo[B]dArwr- tat Wwhplous, eis ods Wydilovtar of Sixacrali], 6 ev xarxov]s kuptos, 6 Sé EvAuvos axup[os]. ey[er 8. 6] yar- kods éjriOnwa Siepp[ivy|uévov, dor adlr]yv

povn|y xwpelv thy Whdov, [a p]y Svo [o] adtds euBdarln. érecdav 5é diandil[ferOar] pér[A]oow

oi Sixac]ra[i], o kAipvE ayop[ed]es mpartov, dv é[m]ucnn-

35 6 ay [A]éxwolw K-w. 36 0 M..TIOAL... K-W.

Pag. 36, 1 .....700 ¥ drodid[wo[c..y]ap ¥ Aapl[B]dve, Uva] Yydli[fwwra]e rdvres K-W. ..+..700 Y dmrodidous [yap ¥ AauBave ..yg......rdvres K3, 2 raluBa [ew K-W, Aa[uBdvje[y K%, Aa[B]ety B. versus in fine 1BOPON vel -BOION K apud B. a[¥]yBodov B. 5 S}rws ph [rpoluro[B]édkwvra K-w; b]rws pwh...bm. K3 6 Widol, els K-W; ...es K3; YHplous, els B. 7—9 e schol. Arist. rest. K. 10 wa ph dto 6 adros éuBdddq van Leeuwen ;—éuBddry B;—BddAQ K-w, K3. 11 of articulo spatium non superesse putat K. aN: [U)’ H-L. CKE: correxit K-w.

Pag. 36, 3—9 Schol. Arist. Zy. 1150...Uorepov d¢ dugopets do taravro ey Tois dixacrnptos, 8 wev Yarxods 6 dé EVALvos, cal 5 wey Kvpcos Hv, 6 & dxvpos. exe dé “6 wey yaAxods,” ws pnow Ap. Sceppivnwévor érlonua els TO adTHY wbyny THY Wijpov xaGlecOac, Pollux viii 123 xal Kddov (elyov) @ knuds éréxecro 5’ of Kadlero 4 Wipos: acs dé St0 dupopels d wev xadkods 5 de EvAcvos, bev KUptos 6 Se Gkupos. TP Oe XaAKG erhv erldqua mig Whpw xwpay exov (Frag. 4267, 466%).

col. 36, 1. ¥ AapBavy] + seems to refer to the Baxrnpta and the two Wjpor received by each dicast during the trial; not to the three obols paid him when it is over. ‘» et rpels et Tpls esse potest’ (Blass).

8. ‘dpdopets] also called xadoe or ka- Sloot; Pollux viii 17, Kadloxos’...7d dy- yelov G Tas Whdous eyxablecay. Harp. kadloxos : “Ioasos év Tw mepl Tod ‘A-yviov kdjpou (Or. 11 § 21 52s), dryyeibv 7 els 6 évngdopopour of Scxacral...Bekk. Anec. 275 kadtoxor: bdplac xaAxai, els ds Kablevro ai Viigo. trav Sixagouévwr. Schol. Arist. Vesp. 321 &c (Meier and Schém. p. 938

—g42 Lips.). Lys. 13 § 37. Cf. the bSpiac of Xen. Hell.i 7, 9, and CIA iv 1, 116 A, p. 24.

8. érlOnpa] also called knuds Arist. Vesp. 754 (Pollux viii 16 60’ od Karjeoar al Wipor émixeudvov TH Kadloxw), 2b. 123 Kadov, B knuds éwréxerro, dv od Kablero 4 Widos. Cf. Meier and Schém. p. 938, n. 492—3- ; :

11. 6 «ypvé] Arist. Vesp. 752, Keite yevoluav, W 6 Kipué pyot, rls dyndroros ; anorTdc0w. ;

émokymrovrat] Plat. Leg. 937 B, ém- oKimrecbar S& Tov avridixwy éxérepov dy

30

Io

15

20

25

248

AQHNAIQN

COL, 36, l. 12<-29.

mrov|rar oi avTidicot Tals paptupiass: [Se]? yap mpotepov] émisxypacbar [ad]rali]s mpiv [r]dvra[s] Scayrn-

gicac Oat,

érevta madw [dvaxnlpvtre[e] “1 Te-

tpuTn|uévn Tod mp[o]|repov [AéyovT]os, 4 [5é] wAz-

pns Told varepov réyo[v] ros.”

[6 8é de]eaoz[s] ra-

Bov]... [x] rod Avyvetou tas >ypous, mué[Yer] 76 pécorv] THs wou, cal od Sevxviwy [rots a- youilo]uévous ote ro TeTpumnuélv lov

obte TO] mAHpes, euBddrer THY ev Ku[pialy eis Tov yar]xobv dudop[éla, tHv Sé axupo[y] eis

tov EvA]wov. Ta.....+.-

1. ee. @ OF bE

retay]uévor, KaBlolyres [80 b]anpéz[as,.

Tov aludopéa tov Kipiov [éradp]iaouy [én] aBa-

Ka Tpu|rhpata éyovta [dlo[acrrep] eiai[y] at [W]i-.

pot]. . ayTal... HY. Pees eee ees. TOD Alp ]OuA-

cat... | Kai ra [Sedeleva [adt]av [cal] ra wArjpn Syr[ot

Trois dv|r8[t]Kors.

of O[é émi] tals] Wwypous [et ]rn-

xores] Sia[piOpotow auras [eri tod &Baxos,

12 Tac MapTypiac corr. K-w (K%, B).

13 aTaic scriptum fuisse videtur,

B. abrods] érik. [ad]ralts rply m]dvra[s K-w; —[av]ra[i]s wply [w]avra{s] K*: —

[ad]ra[ts } d}rayras B.

14 6 Kfpvé knpirre K, K-W, adversante spatio. TacT..gTa K®; A. aTAC- CTA (aTos pera ?) K-W.

16 in fine 17 ex] rot B; mpdcO]ev rod K%.

wWapous [é]mi &€xac]rov K, Pipous....€kagrov K-W. cum N supra TO scriptum sit, 7d

[uéoov] conicit B. ..CA K, ds & K-W, [r]ois d- B (K¥). K-w. scriptum esse TTAA testatur K (ap. K-W). 23 AaBely ras ...Urnpérar K, K-W.

dBalka] B; ava K, K-W. 26

18 KAIOYAIK.YWN B (K%); Kal 6 decviov kK! (K-W).

24 ....act K3 éorhkjace K-w ; [éragd]aor B.

aYTA &-EYA. 1OMO! K-W.

pot Ta] aUTd...al..pr..e. varev A[p]Opol K3. 27 ljra [kal] ra wAnpy Sydr[ot rots dv]rid[E]k[os K5; 28—29 ous [el]An|xdras] dua K; Poyc.AH|—AIA K-w.

.. Tov a.axas K%, [éx]t roG dBaxos B (quod nunc probat K).

dv}rld[e]x[o. iam K-W. 29 OYA. aKAC K-W;

TH paprupla Kal pepe, édv/rad pevda oF Twa penaprupyKévar, mply Tiy dlkny diaxe- xplo@at (Meier and Schom. p. 488 Lips.).

15. Tov wpdrepov Aéyovros, the plain- tiff: rod torepov, the defendant. Cf. 1. 32—33- Similarly in the trials of the generals after Arginusae, Xen. Hell. i 7, 9, the votes of condemnation are placed in what is briefly called the wporépa vdpla; those of acquittal, in the borépa; cf. Lys. 1 38 37.

17. Avxvelov] a ‘lamp-stand,” probably with two’ branches, each of them sup- porting a flat disk, or pan (maxtor, Pollux, x 115). In the ordinary use of

the Avyxvetor, the two pans would be the proper place for the Avxvor; in its present use, or rather in the metaphorical applica- tion of the term to part of the machinery of the law-courts, the two pans are the place for the two sets of wngo. The contrivance probably resembled a very simple type of epergne.

18. ov Sakviov] Cf. Dem. /. LZ. 239, KpuBinv WnpltecOa, Meier and Schom. p. 937 Lips.

24. dBaxa] ‘a reckoning-board,’ Pol- lux x 105—6, here used to count the votes. Cf. Arist. Vesp. 332, 7 dira AlOov pe tolnoov éd’ obras xouplvas apiOpodow.

COL. 36, 1. 30—37,1.8. -TMOAITEIA

249

Xepis] pelv TA]s wAnpes, yo[pl]s Se Tas Te-

tpuT nuevas. Kal dvayoped[e] 6 xhp[vE] Tov

apiO pov Tdv Widwr, Tod pev [S]id-

xov|tos Tas tetpumnpévas, Tod Sé d[edyor-

Tos TA]s wArjpers: dmotépw 8 dv wrcboly ylévy-

tat, ov|ros wed. adv 8é [icac], 6 [pevywv]. e[rrelita md- 35 [Col. 37] Auy Tiwor, av Sén Tiunoat, Tov adTov

TpoTrov Whdiouevor, TO pev cvuBodov

amobdiddvres, Baxtnpiay S& madw rrapadapu-

Bavovres. 1 88 tiunois éotw mpos Hplyouv.

bSatos éxatépw. émevdav 5é adtois 7 Se- 5

Sikacpéeva Ta &k THY vomwv, arodap-

Bavovow tov urobov ev TO péper od

élayov Exacrou.

30

30 versus in fine €EICYW..C..AEZAME K-W. 84 dv mwrelw [y]évnrac K; [ay trelwy y]évqras (sic) B; wAelous yévwvras e lex. Cant. K-w, H-L.

Pag. 37,1, 4 TEIM. 5 EKATEPON pr. 6—8 claudit librum coronis ingens ante hos versus infraque porrecta; unde apparet hoc in loco opus ad. finem fuisse perductum.

32—35 *lex. rhet. Cantab. loa: al Wigor abradv’ éyévovro dé toar Whpor, ws’ Ap. év rH "AO. Ton.* Kal Hoav “rot uev SuwKkoyros” al rerpuTnudva, ‘rod dé pedyovros” ai wArjpers, “érorépw & dv mielous yévwvrat,”” otros évixa, dre 68 “icat, 6 pedvywv” dmépuyer (Frag.

2st, 4658). Schol. ad Arist. Ran. 685.

Harp. kav toa, Hesych. toa pio: et xdv toa, Append. prov. iii 30, 42,

35. toar] Probl. 39, 13, dud rh more, bray rw pevyorre kal TY SuwxovtTe palywv- Tat al Wijpor toat, 6 pedywv vik; and 15. Aeschin. 3 § 252, Ant. Herod. 51, Arist. Ran. 685, Aesch. Hum. 732—3 (Meier and Schém. p. 938, n. 495 Lips.).

col. 37,1, 2. Tip@o1—rov adrdy Tpdrov Wyprfspevor] [Dem.] Aristog. 1, 83, Oavd- Tov Tow ériparo...cal Tadra mply THY Tpw- Ty Pidov SevexOjvat. Aeschin. 3 § 197, Dem. /. Z. § 290 (Meier and Schém. p.943 Lips.). In Plat. Afo/. cc. 1—24 are sup- posed to have been spoken éml ris rparys yyoov, and 25—28 ev ry Tywhoer (Shil-

pernpiov, col. 31, 18

leto on #.Z., Z.¢.). Cf. Ar. Probl. 953 @ 4, Tlunors Tl xpyn wabety 7 drorioa.

2. obpBodoy, col. 32, 14.

3. Baxrnplav, 25. 3. The dicast has received the a¥uBodov which entitles him to draw his pay; but, as a second voting is necessary and he is not entitled to his pay until this is completed, he gives up his otpupodov and receives his Baxrnpla instead.

4. mplxovv] The xois was equivalent to 5°76 pints.

7. & 7@ pépea xrd.] ze. in the Kry- Cf. also col. 33 @ 17—I9.

250 AOHNAIQN TIOAITEIA

HERACLIDIS EPITOMA.

1. "A@nvaios 75 pev && dpyts éxpovtTo Bactdelg: ovvorny-

cavtos 8 "Iwvos adtois, Tore zpatov “Iwves éxAynOnoay (cf. frag. wa 7 3

1). Tlavdiov 8& Bacirkevoas pera "EpexyOéa Si€verme Thy apynv

tois viois. 2. kat Suetérxovv obdros atacidtovtes. Onoeds dé

5 éxnpvte xal‘cuveBlBace tovTous én’ lon Kat cpoia (cf. frag. 2).

a \, > a 2 , > \ \ n ey odtos éXOwy eis XKdpov éredevTncer wWabels KaTa TeTp@V 70 Avkopndous, poBnOévros un ahereplontas tiv vicov' *A@nvaior 8¢ borepov peta Ta Mndixd petexopscav avtod Ta dara (cf. frag. 4). 3. amd 8é Kodpidadv odxére Bacireis npodvTo, Sia 7d

10 Soxeiv Tpuddy Kal paraxods yeyovévat. ‘Imrropévns 5é els Taev Kodpidav Bovropevos dracacbat tiv StaBornv, AaBwv emi +H Ouyarpt .Aepmovyn pooryov, éxeivoy pev avetrev brrofevEas [wera Ths Ovyarpos] TO apwati, THY O€ trm@@ cuvéxdecev Ews aT@NETO.

4. Tovs peta Kurwvos dia tHv Tupavvida émi tov Bopov Tis n / ld ra > £ % \ x

15 Oeod mrehevydtas of rept MeyaxAéa aréxtewvav. Kal tovs dpa-

cavtas as évayeis HNavvov (AO. Tod. Cc. 1). 5. orwv vowoberav AOnvalous nal ypedyv atroxotras érroince, Thy cercdxXOerav Karovpévnv (681). ws 8 évoyrouv adT@ tives + fal - > f 3 yy Tept TOV vowwv, amrednunoer eis Aiyurrrop (11 § 1).

20 6. Tleototpatos tpidxovta Kal tTpia érn Tupavyncas ynpdcas améBave (17 § 1). “Immapyos 6 vios Ilevourtpdrov tradi@dnys jv kal épwrtxds Kal pidopovaos, Becaards 5é vewTepos Kal Apacs (18 § 1, 2). Todtov tupavvotvta wn Suvnévtes avereiv “Imr- apyov dzéxreway tov abeApov avtod (18 § 3). ‘Immias 6é

25 TuKpoTata éTupavvet (19 § 1).

\ \ x > lal ‘a ? Ef a ES ‘ 7. Kal Tov wepl ootpaxtopod vomov eionynoato, ds éréOn Sid Tovs TUpavuL@vTas. Kal drdoL TE WoTPaKicOncay Kal RavOvmmos kal Apioreidns (22 § 1, 3, 5, 6). 8. E@uadrns (25) tovds iSious dypods drrwpitery mapeiye tois F > \ ¥ f 30 Bovaropévots, €& dv troddovs edeimvete (27 § 3).

Ediderunt Schneidewin (Heraclidis politiarum quae extant, 1847), Carolus Mueller (FHG ii 208, 1848), Valentinus Rose (Ar. Frag. 611, ed. 1886, p. 370); item ’A@. rod. in appendice K-w et B. 2 avrov’s K-W, coll. ’A@. mod. 41 § 2. 3 Cf. Strab. 392, schol. Arist. Lys. 58, 59. 4c. 41 §2. 5 pwolpg sive Ting in codd. additum delevit Schneidewin. 8 werd K-w (B) coll. frag. 4: mepl codd. 9,10 Cf.c.2§ 2. 10 Cf. schol. Aeschin. i § 182. 12, 13 perd 7. 0. del. Koeler. 13 ws dmwdero B; ws dmbAnrat codd.; darws dwd\ynTrar K-W. 18 éé Subydouv codd.; 8” évdyAouww K-w (B) coll. c. rr § I.

HERACLIIDIS EPITOMA 251

9. Kréov raparaBav SiépOepe Td rworitevpa (28 § 3), Kal ért wGAAov of per’ avtrav (28 § 4,5; 35 § 3), of mavta avoulas évérrAnoay, kal dvetrdov ovK edacaous xidiwv $' (35 § 4). TovTey b€ katadvbévrwy OpacvBovros Kai ‘Pivwv mpoeotiKecav, ds Av avnp Karos Kal ayabes (37 § 1; 38 § 4). 35

10. @ewsorokAfs wal ’Apioteidns (23 § 2). nal % é& "Apelov maryou BovAn TroAnda edvvaro (23 § 1).

Il. «ab tadv odav émimedodvrat, OTws pn TWes KaTOLKOSO- paow avtas 7 Spupdxtous brepteivwow (50 § 2). spoiws de Kabiataat Kal tos &vdexa tovs émipednoomevous Tav ev TH 40 Secuarnpio (52§ 1). eiot dé cal évvéa dpyovrtes, Oecpobéras 5’, of Soxipacbévtes opvvovar Sixaiws ape ‘nal Sdpa wy ArjpecOat ) avépiavta xpucoby avabjoew (55 §§ 1, 2, 4). 6 S€ Bactreds Ta Kata tds Ovolas Svockel (57 § 1). Kal td rrorgusa (58 § 1 ?).

FRAGMENTA

ex prima libri parte I (Rose, .Frag. 381°)

tov Amodwva Kowas tTatp@ov Tinaaw “AOnvaior amo “lwvos: TovTou yap oiknoavtos thy ’Artixny, ws “ApseatoTrérns dna, tovs ’A@nvaious "lavas KrnOjvar cal "AmoANwva TraTp@ov avTois évopacOjvar. Harp. An. warp.

matp@ov Tyndow “AmodAava AOnvaior, érel “Iwy 6 Toné- 5 papyos ’A@nvaiwv é& AodAwvos Kal Kpeovons ths Rovlov <yuvaikos> éyévero. schol. Aristoph. Av. 1527; cf. Bekk. Ax. 291 = schol. Plat. Huthydem. p. 369 Bk. Heracl. epz¢. 1.

3 2 (384") ére Sé padrov avéjoas tiv modw Bovdopevos (Theseus) bs / > , + x an y \ # a3 ” J 9 éxdden wavtas él Tois icots, Kal To ‘Sedp’ ite, wavTes NEw 10 knpvywa Onogws yevécOar faci rwavdynpiay twa Kaioravtos. ov pny a&TaKxtov ovdé pemiywéevnv Tepieidey Ud TAHOouS émuyv-

32 of mdvras (révra B) dvoulas évérdnoay codd.; om. K-W. 38 dvorx. codd.; em. K-W (B). 40 évdexa [rods] K-w; evdexa <xAypw>Tods, B. 41 Oecpobérar s', ot Coraes (K-W, B); Geopobéra kal ol, GecpoBeriKol kal of et similia, codd.

7 yuvackds add. Rose (B).

15

20

25

30

35

45

252 AOHNAIQN TIOAITEIA

Oévros dxpitou yevouérny thy Snuokxpatiav, GAXa TpaTos arroxpl- vas xepis ebrratpldas Kal yewpdpous cal Snucovpyovs, edratpidais 88 ywookew Ta Oeia cal mapéyew dpyovtas drodods Kal vowwv diSacnddous elvar Kal dolwv kal lepav éEnyntas, Tois adddows monritas Somep eis loov xatéatnoe, SdEy pev edrarpiddy, Xpela 8é yewudpwv, wAjOer S& Snuscoupyav imepéxyerv Soxovyvtwy. re 8¢ rpdros dréxrve Tpds Tov dyrov, ws Apiotorérns Hot, nat ddjxe TO povapyeiv, Cove paptupeiv Kal “Opnpos év vedv Kataroyp (547), wdvous "AOnvaious diuov mpocayopevoas. Plu- tarch. Thes. 25. Cf. Heracl. efit. 2; AQ. aon. 41, 10.

3 (385°)

yevyntat mara To Tov AOnvaiwv wrAHO0s, mplv 7 KrevoGevy Siotxjcacba ta mepi tds hudds, Suypynto eis yewpyovs Kai On- puoupyovs. Kal dural tovtav joav 8, tdv b& duddv éexdorty poipas elye y', as patplas Kal tpurtias éxadovy. TovTwy dé éxdotn cuveroTiKer éx TpldKovTa yevav, Kal yévos ExacTov avopas elye Tpidxovta Tovs eis Ta yévn TeTaypevous, oltwWes yervnTaL éxadovvto, <退> adv ai lepwovvat <ai> éxaoTows TpoanKoucat éxdnpodvro, olov Eipodridar cab Kypuxes nat ’EreoBourddat, ws isotope: év TH AO. mod. “Ap. Aeyav oUTws: pPudds Sé adTar cuvveveunobar 8 adtopspnoapévav tas év Tots éviavTols @pas, éexagtnv Sé SunpjaOat eis Tpla pépn Tov Huda», éres yévnta: Ta Tavta Swdexa pépn, KaOaTep of pHves eis Tov éveauTov, Karelabas Sé adTa TpLTTIS Kal hatpias. eis 5€ tTHv hatpiay tpiaxovta yévyn StaKexoopnabat, Ka- Oamep al jpépar eis TOv pHva, TO Be yévos elvas TpLadKxovTa avdpev. Lexicon Dem. Patm. p. 152 Sakkelion (Bull. de Corr. Hellén. i 1887). Cf. schol. Plat. Axioch. 3719: “Apsoro- TéEANS Hyoi TOD drov wANHOous Sunpnuévov "AOjvycw els TE TOvs ryewpyovs Kal Tovs Snutoupyous, pudras adtav eivar Técoapas, TOV dé hurdv Exacrns polpas elvas tpeis, As TpiTTVas Te KadovaL kat dpatptas, éxaorns S& TovTwY TpLaKovTa elvar yévn, TO S€ yévos é« tpidxovta exacTov avdpav ovvectavat, Tovtous 8%} rods eis TA yévn TeTaYypEvous yevyijras Kadodot.—Harp. TpeTTUVs:

15 <Td>yuwuonev K-W. <Tols> dpxovras K-W. 17 woAlrats : rovs mwoNlras K-W. 24 dijpyro ex ceteris testibus em. K-wW et B: dcypetro cod. els <evmarplias xal> -yewpy. e frag. 2, 14, K-W, sed edarpldas et in schol. Plat. et in Moeride omissos esse monet B, cum de plebe tantum sermo sit. 29 <ét> et <al> ex Harp. K-w, B. 32 dd Tv picdwoapévwy cod., ex Suida correctus.

FRAGMENTA 253

TpiTTus éore 7d Tplrov wépos TAS Huds: abrn ydp Sujpytas eis tpia wépn, tpitTds ab €Ovn Kal parpias, bs dnow Ap. év rH "AQ. wor. Cf. Pollux viii 111; Moeris, Suid. Harp. s. v.

yevunrat,

4 (frag. Rosio ignotum)

*Apictorérns ioropel, étt EXO@v Onceds eis Lxdpov er) kata- 50 oxomny eixoTws Sid THy Aivyéws ocuyyéverav éterXeUTNTEV waOels Kata rerpav, hoBnévtos Tod Aveoundous Tod Bactdevovtos <p.) adgerepiontar tTHv vncov>. ~AOnvaios S& peta Ta Mndixd xara pavteiay avedovTes Ta doTa adtod @Oaav. Schol. Vatic. ad Eur. Hp. 11 Schwartz. Cf. Apollod. bibl. iii 15, 5, @vsos 55 Aiyéa Zxvpiov elvat dAéyouow. Plutarch. Thes. 35, Cim. 8; schol. Lycophr. 1326. Frag. attulerunt K-w, B.

dubia 5 (cf. 394%)

AuKérrodas Exadovy, Os pev "Aprotorérns, Tos TAY TUpavVeY Sopupopovs «tr. (Schol. Arist. Lys. 665); cf. Phot. Numdarodas. Quae scholiis in eisdem (Lys. 665—6) de Leipsydrio com- 60 memorantur, éx Aristotele (c. 19 § 3) revera hausta sunt; qua. ex causa fortasse etiam Avxdmodes Aristoteli per errorem ad- scriptum.

6 (447°) Lex. rhet. Cantab., s. v. Noysorat, ad c. 54 § 2 laudatum.

7 (456°)

TO 6€ TapaxataBarropevoy eri Tay épécewy, Strep oi viv 65 mapaBorLov Kadrovot, mapadBorov ’Apiatotérns réyet (Pollux viii 62). Res prope finem libri fortasse commemorata erat ; sed mapaPodoy nusquam alibi inventum et iure suspectum ; srapa- Borvov condemnat Phrynichus.

8 (389°)

Photius, s. v. wedarat 2, of ptcO@d Sovdevovtes, érrel Td Tédas 70 2 rf + 8 \ f a > 7A EX f. éyyus, olov éyyota Sid treviay mpoowovtes peororérns (cf.

52, 53 suppletum ex Heraclidis epitoma, v. 7.

254 AOHNAIQN TIOAITEIA

Testimonia ad c. 2,5). Quamquam weddra in libro scriptum est,

"ApiororéAns tamen K-W ex ’Apioroddvys corruptum putant,

cuius inter glossas politicas haec inventa sit (61. Fresen., Miller, 75 Meél. de litt. Gr. 433).

aliena 9 (382°)

picturam Aegypti (invenerunt) et in Graecia Euchir Daedalo cognatus, ut Aristotelt placet (Plin. N. H. vii 205).

10 (386°)

Epimenides qui postea Buzyges dictus est secundum Artsto- telem (schol. Lemov. ad Vergil. Georg. i 19).

11 (392") 80 4 8é 8) Stacropa Kxataxavbévtos abtod (Zodwvos) THs Téppas mept TH Zarapivioov (al. -iav) vioov gore pév—pvOedns, avayé- yparrat 8 td 7 dddwv avdpdv a€vodoywv cal "Apratotédrous

tod dirocdgou (Plut. Sol. 32). .

12 (399°)

ménucpual...cuvas yevéoOat dtrodeométas BavOimov rod

85 Apidpovos- petorxifopevwv yap tév ’AOnvaiwy és tds vads, jvixa ToD xpovov 6 Ilépans Tov méyav modepov él thy ‘EXAdSa eEnnre, kal deyov of xpnopol A@ov eivas Tois "AOnvaiou Thy ev matpliia amonureiv eriBnvat 5é TOY TpLNpwy, OSE Of KUVES TOD mpoepnuévov aredeipOnoav, adda ouppet@xicayvto TH Fav- Clare kat StavynEdpevoe és tiv Zahapiva amréBnoav. déyerov 8é dpa tadra “Apiotorédns kai Dirdyopos (Aelian. Vat. Hist. xii 35, ex Alexandro Myndio, ut putant k- “W). év ols iaro- petra, xvov BavOimrrov tod Ilepixdéous tatpos obk dvacxépevos Thy am avTov peices evadéoOat tH Oardrry cal tH Tpuhper 95 TApavnKXo LEvos Sper els THY Zahapiva Kab Marobupsjoas amobaveiy ebOUs' od Kal To Secxvdpevov &xps viv Kal Kadodpevov Kuvos ofa tddov eivas Néyovow (Plut. Themist. 10, capite in eodem et Aristotele, c. 23 § 1, et Cleidemo nominato). Fortasse in zoico quodam libro Aristotelem haec narrasse putant K-w,

FRAGMENTA 255

‘sicut in Azst. An. Z 24 mulum ab Atheniensibus immunitate donatum commemorat, quem Plutarchus in eodem capite Ca- tonis (Cat. maz. c. 5) cum cane Xanthippi componit’. Rectius fortasse narrationem Philochoro tribuit J. H. Wright (cf. Jntrod. § 3 init.).

13 (401°)

"Aptototérns dé mapa TvOowreidy povoreny StarovnOhvar tov dvdpa pnoiv (de Pericle Plut. Per. 4).

14 (415°)

mammou TONS TaTHp mpoTammos:...raxya 8 dy ToUTOY TpI- toratopa "Apiototénns xadot (Pollux iii 17, ex Aristophane Byzantio, ut putant K-W).

15 (frag. 436 Heitz, a Rosio consulto praetermissum)

metas poaxous, dvtt tod éralpas: édéyovto yap Tues odTaS bs Apuotrorédns &v TH [odureia Tas ywpis dpydvor. KavOapos Suppayia ‘atrntpida melyv’ Kat Evronus ~Koraks. Photius, a Rosio (Arist. Pseud. p. 446) laudatus, coll. Hesych. s. v., Etym. Magn. efai, Schol. Eur. Ad. 447, Theopomp. ap. Athen.

100

05

IIo

xii 532. Aristotelis nomen fortasse ex alio eiusmodi fonte de- 115

fluxit, qui e capite 50 § 2 (ras te addntpidas Kai Tas Yadtpias Kat Tas KUOapiotpias) erat derivatus.

256 AOHNAIOQN TIOAITEIA

FRAGMENTORUM IN PAPYRO LONDINENSI INVENTORUM INDEX.

Fragmentorum numeri e Rosii editione Teubneriana (1886) repetiti, editionis Berolinensis (1870) numeris in parenthesi praepositis.

1870 1886 °AO. ron. 1870 1886 ° AO. rod. 1870 1886 ° AO. aod. (345) 383. 60 § 2 (378) 417,89 (404) 44454. § 6 (349) 387 8§3 (379) 418 = 559 §3 (405) 445 48 § 4 (350) 388 783 (380) 419 59 §6 (406) 446 48, 54 (351) 389 2§2 (381) 420 © 6 §§ 5-7 (407) 447-54. § 2 (?) (352) 390 7§1 (382) 421 56 § 6(?) (408) 448 5082 (353) 391 8§5 (383) 422 56. § 6 (409) 449 51 § 1 (355) 393-15 $3 (384) 423, 556 § 7 (410) 450-51 § 4 (356) 394 19 §3 (385) 42457 (411) 4510551 § 3 (357) 395 =. 19 88 41 5 (386) 425 57 § 1 (412) 452, 51 §2 (358) 396 = 19. §6 (387) 426 58 (413) 453-53 81 (359) 397. 21 § 5 (388) 427, 58 § 3 (414) 454-53. §2 (360) 398 = 23. § 1 (389) 428 = 56 § (415) 455 53. §2 (362) 400 30 § 2 (deest) 429-52. §1 (437) 4575783 (363) 402-27 §3 (390) 430 61 § 1 (418) 458 578 3

| (365) 403-27 § 4 (391) 431 «61 § 4 (419) 459 55783 (366) 404 25 § 3 (392) 432, 61 § 5 (420) 460 ~— p.. 32, 8-15 (367) 405 25 § 4 (393) 433-43 §2 (421) 461 = 28 § 35 62 § 2 (368) 406 = 28 § 3 (394) 434 43: §§ 3-6 (422) 462-28 §3 (369) 407, 28 § 5 (395) 435 43: $8 3) 4 (423) 463 pp. 35, 1-8 (370) 408 = 34. § 1 (396) 436 43. §$ 4, 5 (424) 464 =p. 35, 27-35 (371) 409-27 § 5 (397) 437. 44.81 (425) 465 —p. 36, 32-35 (372) 410 = 33. § 1 (398) 438 = 44. § 2 (426) 466 —p. 36, 3-10 (373) 411 34.83 (399) 439 ~—-54. $8 3-5 (427) 467, 42.82 (374) 412-55 §§ 3, 5 (400) 440 = 48 §§ 1, 2 (428) 468 = 442 § 5

(deest) 413.3 §5 (401) 441 47 $$ 2, 3 (429) 469 53. § 7

(375) 414 55 §§ 25 3 (402) 44247 §1 (430) 470 49 § 4 (377) 416 7813 5585) (403) 443 6187 (431) 471 556. § 3

GREEK

INDEX.

Chapters 1—63 are quoted by chapter and line; columns 31 to 37, by column

(col.) and line.

** The double asterisk denotes words not found elsewhere ; * the single asterisk, words not found in the /udex Aristotelicus, or only in the corresponding fragments of

the AQ. mod.

*aBat col. 36, 24, 29 : dya0és* dyao0 moAlrov 28, 38; . dvdpas kadovs Kdryabovs 28, 31; moAAGv aya- ‘Oav 5, 16 (Solon); v. dpioros, BeATiwy, BéArioros dyadua THs AOnvas 47, 5 dyavaxray emi rots yeyvoudvors 36, 1 dyaravras (?) 7d adréuarov 8, 28 "AyyedOev 34, 3 *dypdaTd: iyyndret 20, 8 dynrot 12, 6 (Solon) dyvootct 14, 10; dyvoav 16, 13; dywojoas 57, 20 "Ayvuv 28, 19 dyopd’ év dyopG@ 51, 10; 52, 14; els THY dyopdvy 38, 4; §7, 283 Tals dryopais (rav puderav) 48, 16 dyopdger 42, 27 dyopayduoe 51, I dyopever col. 36, 11 dyos 1, 23 20, 7 *dypagtov 59, 10 dyporkoe 13, 9 aypbs: pl. 2,6; 16, 163 24, 3 *dyporépa 58, 2 Arippios 41, 33 f Ayxluoros 19, 26 dye (1) dyayer—od diérpBev 25, 16; dyayotons ws Tov Sihpiov 45, 2. (2) vies ppoupovs (?) Gyoveat 24, 19; TH Tpla- kovroply 7 Tods yOéous dyovTt 56, 21. (3) of weight ro, 8, 83 51, 13- (4) dyovow Tov évaurdv 43, 103 THY ToA- relav—dyew els abrovs 27, 6; elpyynv dyew 34, 9; ert mépas ayaye THY elphyny 38, 24 dywryyyor 2, 7 (in different sense in AZeteor. 359 2 8 7d Tov dywyluwy Bdpos)

S. A.

dydv' (1) wovoixfs 57, §; 60, 4; dyava yumvixdv 60, 5,223 Stocce? 56, 28; dia- TlOnow 57,73 58, 23 AanTddwy ayavas rlOnoe 57, 7. (2) *dyavas émipépwv* 255 7

dywvifsuevos, vy aOAW 57, 203 Tols arywu- foudvars col. 36, 18

dywvicrys 60, 20

adder 18, 11

ddedpés 18, 36; 19, 2

adlknua 48, 21

*dduxlov Tyo 54, TO

ddua ddixelv SbEn 46, 9; Soxyg 48, 123 KaTay@ 45, 8; Karayviow 54, 10; dducotvra epi rov pepioudy 48, LL; Tots adixodow 56, 42; map’ bv ddicetrae vopov 4, 233 TG GOckoumevy 4, 213 THY ddtKov- Mévew 9, 43 dduKnOn rd ToD Siacrnrod

53, 33

d5ixws 12, 9 (Solon):

ddbxiuos 49, 4 (omitted in Jnudex Ar.; found in [Ar.] Oec. ii 1347 @ 8 70 vouicua—abdxipov érolnce)

advvarot 49, 25

Gbw* Roov ev rots cxodlots 19, 14; 20, 21

*dSwpoddxynros 25, 5

del §, 19 (72. c.); 13, 113 16, 255 19, 7, 10, 21 &c; dei waddov 27, 23; TOY del BovNevévrew 30, 11 (decree); 60° ay det uédAy col. 31, 36

deckys 12, 7, 40 (Solon)

*depuylav, Epvyev 1, 3

aghpuos 56, 31 (Rhet. 1372 @ 12)

*AOnva. 14, 24; Tihs AOnvas, raular 47, 23 dyadua 475 §

"AOfvae 19, 223 "AOjvyct 28, 29

"AOnvaior 16, 393 19, 32, 373 20, 9; 21, 18; 22, 17, 333 23, 9. Twv AO. Kat

17

258

Tov perolkwy 43, 25. AOnvalwy, ol eb€dovres 29, 243; Tovs Bovdouévous 39, 2 (decree); rots Suwvarwrdros 29, 34, é& amdvrwy AO. 56, 8; &’ AO. amdvTww

56, 3

aOdyTIs 60, 7

dOrobérat 60, 2, 19; 62, 12

Gov" Dl. 49, 223 54, 32 (?)3 60, 20

*GOdos" év dOAw dywrifduevos 57, 20

GOpolfw" rods aOporsouevous 25, 173 XpN- pdrov 7Opoocmévww 24, 2

GOupeivy 15, 29

ala? 19, 15 (scol.)

Alyeds frag. 4

Alyéds rorapol 34, 15

Alyumros 11, 5

*atdeots 57, 21

alkelas (lk) 52, 15

alxioOeis, rodvy xpévov 18, 23

alpeois Trav dpxdvrwv 3, 373 26, 14; (Trav orparnyav Krd) 31, 10 and 15 (decree). els Sarnray alperty 56, 36

alperol 22, 23

alp@ Ndtov éddv 15, 15. mid. alpoduat (‘elect’)* alpodyra 38, 5; 42, 9, 153 alpetoOar 30, 11 (decree); alpoupévur 3, 20; ypodvro 4, 5; 22,8; elAero II, 143 elhovro 5, 43 30, 23 38, 183; EAwvrar 31, 4 (decree) ; édéoOar 13, 8; and (in decrees) 29, 10, 373 31, IT, 143 30, 113; éAdouévy 46, 8. pass. ypé0n 38, 323 npédncay 3, 193 38, 73; alpedels Epxwy 13, 6; rods alpebévras ris Bovdifjs 25, 16; of alpedévres 29, 21; 30, 1, 33 32, 1; 38, 18; and (in decrees) 29, 17; 31, 125 nonuevwy 47, Lo

airta: (1) ‘cause’, did Thy adrhy alrlay 13, 5;—Todvd’ alrlay 19, 8;—rabrny rip alrlay 23, 8;—-ravras rds alrlas 13, 13 rh *altlavy dvdare* rots movalos 5, 19. (2) ‘charge’, pevd7 ri alriay elva 6,213; alrlay yn 57, 22 ;—exov 57, 273 Tas mept Tov mporépwv airlas é&jdenav 40, 19

atrios’ vavwaxlas alrla 23,5; alrlwy pd- Ara yevoudvww 32,9. alrubrarot 20,

185 33) 9. . alriGpat’ c. inf. alri&rac 56, 35; alrudvrar 27, 22

alrodvros, Tlevovarpdrov Thy pudakiy 14, 9

“Axagros 3, 10 f.

*GxlBdnros 51, 3 (Rhet. 1375 5 6 KlBdnrov dlkasov)

*dxdnpwrl 30, 30 (decree)

dxodovbety 49, 3

axovrifew 42, 23

*dxoopodvras, fnmodoa Tods 3, 36 (Pol. 1272 68 dxooula trav dvvaray)

a&kovavos 57, 17

dxobw' dkovoavres c. gen. 37, 18; and (in decree) 29, 19

axpirov daroxreivat 40, 12 (Meteor. 361 b 31 dxptros kal yaderds 6 Qplwy)

GREEK [INDEX

dxpémo\s* (1) with article, xaréoxe Thy 4, 14, 6; 7d mpémudov Tis d. 15, 193 karéguyov els rhvy d. 20, 13; Thy a. éppotpovy 37, 19. (2) without article, év d. 7, 21; 18, 143; 60, 18; els d. 85, 33; 60, 16. See wéds.

"Arh 42, 223 oTparnyos els Thv’A. 61,7

dxupos } Bou} 45, 215 duopers col. 36, 7

dxwy 27, 10; axdvrwy 23, 12; dKovras 40, 6

adyea 5, 7 (Solon)

"Anetias dpxwy (4035/4) 34. 14

adnOjs 18, 28

GNloKopat’ ddhavat 19, 343 arg 61, 13 f

aAKH 12, 53 (Solon)

"Adkuewy 13, 17

"Arxuewvldae 7d yévos Epuyey 1, 33 (Ta puydiwy) mpoeoryxeray 19, 9; Kyet- abévys rob yévous raév’A. 20, 3; 28, 8; Tay evayav 20, 7; alrubraroe THs éxBo- Mis Tov Tupdvywy 20, 19; mporepoy Twr "A. Kjdwy émédero rots rupdvvots 20, 20

dda occurs about 30 times, always with negative preceding. dAA& 7 53, 173 also 26, 143 £4, 23 (Blass) 5 yujre—aAa 16, 83 cf. way

addkjrwy 21, 16; aAAAAOUS 5, 43 TWpds adAHAous 23, 18

Gos’ tov GAAov Abyor 15, 23; els TOY &ddov (=péddovra) xpdvov 31, 18 (de- cree); of re dANoe 12, 13 Td Te GAXa 8, 21; T& wev dra, KaOdmrep—elrev 29, 16 (formula of amendment); ray dAd\wy TG Bovroudvy 29, 14 (decree); ev perv rots &AAots 6, 133 Tots Te AAAos aot kai 6 Kal 2, 3

*dddoce Satravijoa: 29, 30 (decree)

addérptos 34, 6

Grws 34, 21

ddqura 51, 12

"Adwrrex@Oev 22, 243 45, 4

dpa 3,233; 11,7; 16, 113 mpomrOev H modus dua 7H Snuoxparlga—avéavouevy 23, 1

Gpaprdv’ 8,22; 16,53 41,19

apaprlay, tyvwoay Thy 34, 14

duelvoves 12, 60 (Solon)

dwewduevos 7, 24 (anon.)

*ducrrmot 49, 7

dulabous dpxew, ras dpxas 29, 39 (decree)

“Appuvos, h 61, 28

-Apmpaxiairns 17, 14

dudiBardv 12, 8 (Solon)

dudixrodoves els Afjdov 62, 14

audio Birnots 28, 343 Pl 9,93 57, 11

dudisinrw —ry 57, 10; —Twow 52, 4

i ati 60, 6; (in the lawcourts) col. 30, 3

dudbrepos* 11, 9, 123 12, 553 15, 4 &e. €& duporépwyv—darav 42, 2

dudoiv doroiv, é 26, 23

dv passim ; dv re—dy Te 48, 19; v. bs dy, bores dy

dvd, Surxtlous 26, 10

GREEK

dvaBalvw' dvaBdvres él robrov (rdv AlOov) 55, 30; dvaBijvari—els “Apevov mdryov 0, 17

dvaBaddouévew rhy droypadiy 40, 3

avayryvworKey 43, 20; dvayvwcduevoy 54, 223 dvarywadvar 54, 23. Probl. and (omitted in Judex Ar.) Poet. 1462 a 12

dvarykdgew 51, 18; qvayxdcOnoay—xara- oTijoat Tiv—moditelay 29, 4; 6 Simos twayKdoOn xeporoveiy tiv ddvyapxlav 34, 26

waryKatov c. inf. 44,53 48,163; 53, 28; col. 32, §3 cf. érdvayxes. dvaryKalys Uo xpelous 12, 37 (Solon)

iwdryey ¢. tf. 9, 93 47.243 48,53 5414+ év ras dvdyxaus (‘under torture’) 18, 24

‘avaryopever, 6 KApvé col. 36, 31; dvayo- pevwot, TOy Ojuwv 21, 18

warypadu (1) act. Ta Oéopia 3, 20; vdmous 41, 12; Tovds vduous els Tovs xupBes 7, 25 wodtrelay 30, 233 31, 13 32, 23 Tas picAdces—étv ypaymarelots hedev- kwpévors 47, 26; Ta xwpla 47, 21. c. acc. pers. 47, 18, and els Aeeukwuéva ypappareta 47, 16. (2) pass. TO dvoua dvarypdgerat 54, 37; & Tals orjdats dvorypagerat 54, 19; els orHAny yadkhy dvaypddovrat 53, 25; dvayeypaupéva 47, 31

ivayw° dviyayov 12, 36 (Solon); dvd-

_ youet(?) 49, 3 (Blass)

*avdryuryos (?) 49, 3

dddacra woujoewv, wdavT 1, 113 THY Xwpav dvddacrov rovotcw

dvadhuara 7, 20

dvaipO* (1) dveddvres Ta Grra 15, 203 (2) Tods—arroyryvouevous dvatpotow 50, 143 (3) Tas mpookAjoets dvethov 29, 243 Spous dvethov 12, 33 (Solon); G) Tous cuxopdvras dvypouwy 35, 20; avetey moNdovs 25, 6; dveddvres Tovs dvatrious 18, 313 dvé\wow 40, 153 modovs dyypyévat 19, 33 avypyKkecay 35, 26; pass. dvynpdOn 25, 233; dvatpeOévros 37, 143 (5) dvetvev % Iv0la 25, 6

dyaitious, dveNdvres Tovs 18, 31

dvaxadecapévn 8, 9

dvaxerrat, elxidy 7, 213; cf. dvarlOnuu

[dvaxy]ptrre. col. 36, 14

*dvaxpatea’ mpOros él rol Byuaros dvéxpaye (Cleon) 28, 17

“Avaxpéwy 18, 5

dvaxptvovres (= épwravres) 11, 35 dvaxplvas (forensic term) 48, 23; 56, 30

dvarapBavw* (rhv dpxyv) 16, 35

dvaNioxew éx Too vavxpapixod dpyuplou 8, 17 (decree) ; els 7d S€ov dvadloxynrat 30, 20 (decree). met. Wore dvaNoxerGar rovs émetkets 26, 11

dvadoylinra: tov éxarépov Blov, édy Tis 17,7

dvddoyov TH meyede TOD Timnparos 7, 14

dvidwpa 22, 343 50, 24

INDEX 259

dvaploryerOar 21,11; dvapettae 21, 4 (dva- peyvivar Rhet., dvaysx0a@or Pol.) dvapgisByrnrov Thy wodirelay, molodyres

35, 13 dvatlos, év otrw pexpors kal 6, 18 dvamdnp&* dverdnpwb6y 10, 6 dvanrre., thy alrlay 5, 19 (not thus used in Ar.) dvapxiay érolncay 13, 5 dvacwoacPa—rhy dpyjv 15, 9 dvarlOnus’ dvabjcew dvipiavra 7, 53 55, 32; dvéOnxe 7, 23 (anon.) dvapépw' ras éxrioes els rodw 8, 23 avddve. 12, 24 (Solon); qvdavey 12, 50 (Solon) : dvbparodiarhs 52, 3; Frag. 504°, p. 1560 6

35 dvdpamddwv (Siar) 52, 16 dvdperdrepos 14, 10, 12 dvdpidvra, dvadyoew 7, 53 55, 32 *dvepwrioas 55, 19 dyev picOopopas 30, 5 (decree); mpoxerpo- rovias 43, 413; dixagryplou yywoews

45.4

dvéxwv (2) col. 31, 27

dvjp* dvdpds ‘Apyelov 17, 133 TedeuTH- cavros Tod dvdpds 56, 413 xXopyyous— dvdpdow 56, 11, 12

"AvOeulwy, Arpldou 7, 23

*dvOlornu’ dvtéorn Tots yvupluots 6 Sfjos 5, 23 THS BovdAts avriardons 20, 12

dvOpwros 16, 223 27, 24

dvlecOai—riv mortrelav 26, 2; dvedels 12, 12 (Solon)

dvolyew, Tas Oupléas els rhv ddd 50, 133 Tov mlvaKa 49, 12

*dvouxoddunots, TELXOV 23, 17

*dvouxodoua’ dvwKoddunoe (7d HareAvKetov)

3» 29

dvratodobeay (?) 3, 13

dvrapdéas 12, 14 (Solon)

*dvreyypagdw* dvrevéypadov 36, 15

dvrl 7, 24 (anon.); T@v TerTdpwy 21, 43 TeTpakoolwy 21,75 TOY vauKpapiay 21, 21

*dyriypdderat 54, 15, 20

*dvriOnuaywyav 27, 12

dvrldicos 53, 9; col. 35, 333 col. 36, 28

dvrldoots 56, 14; 61, 9

*Avrldoros dpxwyv (451/0) 26, 21

*dyTrixadnpévew GddAHAoLS 5, 3

dvriiapBaveoOar Tis Hyeuovlas 24, 2

dwrthégat 14, 9

*dyricractwTns 14, 33 28, 8

*Avripav 32, 10

“AvuTos 27, 253 34. 23

dvirw* qvuoa 12, 12 (Solon); ovdev qvuoev 14, 16 (avvew Rhet. 1409 6 4)

d&wos 63, 14 &c.

déodv 14,15; Hélow 37, 18

dklwpa 23,85 pl. 18, 13 35s 24

dmayayav—eml riv Bovdyy 40, 11; Tovs dmaryouévous KNérras 52, 2

17—2

260 GREEK

draywyiv, &éeév—xkat 29, 26 (decree) ;

“ao used re in Ar. manrelpw (of debts) 47, 343 48, 2

dmadddin rods sii cle 5, 16

sie e adrivrncev ws amodoynodpevos 10, 33

dak dpEat 31, 18 (decree); mpoedpedvew 445 14

dmapxe? 12, 4 (Solon)

daras* dravres 3, 313 é€ ’AOnvalwy aardv- Tuy (opp. ad’ éxdorns THs pudijs) 57, 33 é& am. AO. 56, 8; éf am. 56, 8 (?)

Greys (absum)* dry 34, 8

daretue (abib0)" dmévat 34, 83 42, 35

drrelpwy Tod Todeuelv, cTpaTrnywr 26, 9

amrépyouat’ dwrehOdvras 52, 25; mad els maidas dmépxovrat 42, 6

dmexPdvecOar 11, 33 dmexOéoba 6, 15; IT, 143 dmrex@duevos 28, 39

améxw* obdevds direixovro 35, 22

dmioros, raw Fv 19, 3

Grdodv, dmorlverat 54, I1

ardws, dpxaixas kal lav 14, 233 Wy de pdt capas 9, 7

amd passim. (1) ‘beginning with’, dd Knrcopavros 28,25; drd—rod d 63,10; cf. dd’ of meut. 17, 2; masc.? 18, 73 dg ay 27, 22. (2) the source from which, drd rav ddpwy 24, 113 Tov yeyvonévuv 16, 12. (3) the derivation of a name, Tov rorwy KTA 13, 255 21, 22. (4) interchangeable with é&, é« Too KTHMATOS, OvK amd THY GTehexav 60, 14; ag’ <éxdorns Tis> gudfs opp. é& amrdvruv 61, 23 awd <Tis> pudjs éxdorns 43, 6. (5) proleptic, wh xared- Gety rods ard Pudfs 38, 15.—drd Tod kudov 24, 20; 6 drd Tol Tumdvou 45, 73 drocrioas dd Tw dirhwv 18, 27

droBaneiv Ivdop 27, 26

dmoryryvouevous, éx Tats dois 50, 14 (not in Ar. in this sense)

droyyveokw' *dmréyvwoay toveiy* 41, 30

*dmoypagy* (1) dmoypapiy elvar 39, 13 (decree); dvaBaddoueven riv &. 40, 33 Tas wvodolrous huépas Tis d. 40, 6; (2) ras aroypapas Trav Snnevoydrwy 43,

20

amoypi~w' mid. mplv dv amoypdwyra madw 39,18; pass. Ta droypadévra Kal mpabévra 47, 22; Ta dmroypaddueva xupla 52, 6

darodertdpevor 42, 30

dmodéxrat' esp. 48, 1—12; also 47, 323 50, 33 52, 18

*drodnula’ 11, 43 13,1

drodnuav 53, 323; Tots dmrodnuotow 30, 16 (decree); ZdAwvos drodnujoavros 13,2

dronlduue drrodtddact 43, 333 48, 4; 60, 7; 62, 53 col. 32, 20; dmrobdiddvar 40, 21; dmodidovs 7, 14; 20, 43 col. 36, 13 amodidévres col. 37, 3; awoddoew 11,

INDEX

12; dmréddwxev 25, 10; dmédocay 40, 20;

amob@ 52, 133 drodaot 56, 46; dro- Sodvar 39, 263 47, 243 58, 8; dmedé- doro 4, 4

drodoxiudoat 45, 19; 55, 273 dmodokt- pdoeey 55, 11

arobvioKkey 45, 3, 53 améOave 17, 1, 183 drobaveiv 18, 33; dmodavévros 40, 16

dmoxerta xwpls 47, 34

dmroxow}, XpeGv 6, 11; 10, 23 12, 26; 13, 13; fl. 6,33 11,9 (dmroxoral—dvoudruy Poet. 1458 & 1)

daroxplvoua dmexplvaro 16, 22

dmoxrelvw’ adréxrewov 35, 23; dmréxrewer 39, 19; dwéxreway 18, 20; 38, 123 dwoxreivy 57, 15, 17; Gmoxrewat 37, 73 40,123 45, 23 57, 18, 22

drrokauBave col. 33, 173 37,6

drokavte, Tis émwpas 27, 18

drodevréuevos, adtrodelrecOat, conj. for émt-, g.U.

dmodNivar, Ta vrdpxovTa 56, 36; mid. dméd\dvobae 26, 11

"Aré\AWY Tarpwos 55, 21; frag. 1

dtrodoyetrat 57, 23, 29; drodoynodmevos 16, 33 (only in Ahet. ad Alex.)

dtrodoyia 55, 21

*daromerpovot (7d @datov) 60, 19

* drropipnodpevos, Thy Oedv 14, 27

drovéuw Tas—dapyas dmrdveev apxew 7, II (ras dpxyas—rovros drovéuew Pol. 1309 @ 21)

arropla 13, 22

Garopos 16, 6

drocecauevun 7d Bapos 6, 5 -

*dmrocractou 58,

amécracts ieee trav "lover 23, 18

dmooréh\wy Thy Topmiy 18, 163 ep’ éxdory TOv dpxGv—aréoredrAe 8,11; dmréoret- ray, "Ayxlworov 19, 26; KadrlBiov 37, 18; pass. drooré\NovTat apxai els Déuov 62, 16

droorepy, Saveitduevos 52, 14; dmecre- pyon Tis émmedelas 26, 2

droriunua 56, 45

drorlve 60, 13; dmérwor 4, 18; mabey 4 dmoreicat 61, 13; 63, 153 daroriverac 54, 8, 9, 10

dmorvyxdvorres 19, 9

dropalyw’ ovclay 4, 8; vouov 4, 223 TO Sj 46, 9; mid. drropawdpuevos 12, 10; 28, 35; dmrogpalvovra tas Stalras 55, 29. Cf. obx drogatyovros Thy otolav Fol, 1303 6 35

*dmopépw byor drreveykelv 54, 4

dropedyw* of acquittal, drépuyer 27, 273 45, 6; dropiryy 59, 95 61, 143 dropl- ywou 52,5. Opp. audverOar de Part. An. 663 @ 13

*amoxerporovi’ 49, 6, 73 61, 12

droxwpnoavres, KaKOs 37, 3

droyndlowvra: uh elvar édevOepov 42, 8; dreynpicnévous brd THv Snuordy 59, 12

GREEK INDEX

ampoBovdevTos 45, 22 *darpooractou 58, 9 drwdev ris Tupavvldos 22, 28 *Apyetos 17, 133 Dl. £7, 153 19, 25. Ap- ryelas (yuvaueés) 17, 11; Tv “Apyelay 17,17 "Apywovoats, ev 34, 3 “Apyos 17, 13 dpyés, otros 51, If apyiptov 8, 18; 22, 31; 62,17; éay dpyv- ptou rind 63, 153 dpytpia 60, 21 ?Apelov md-you, Boudh q @E 4, 20; % pApetou mayou Bovdyh 41, 16; 60, 11; "Apel may, Bovry q év 8,93 23, 33 é& ’Apelou maryou 35, 11; 47, 133 59, 18; & ’Apely méyy 57, 15, 243 els *Apevov maryov 16, 33; 60, 17 *Apeomaryirat 3, 38; 8, 193 25: 3) 7, 125 213 27,43 35, 10; 7. Tov "ApeomayiTov Bovdt} 3, 343 4, 225 26, 1 *'Apeorayirw Boudry, Thy 41, 8 dpéoxy, éav 22, 343 53, 8 aperh 36, 10 dpiOpes 41, 6; col. 36, 26, 32 *Aplaratxuos dpxwv (621/0) 4, 2 *Aptoreléns 22, 393 23, 135 193 24, 103 28, 113 41,17 dpirrivinv 1,1; Kal wrourlvdyy 3, 2, 37 "Apioriwy 14, 4 *Apioroyelrwy 18, 13, 22; 58, 3 "Aptorbdixos 25, 24 ’Apisroxpdrns 33, 10 “Apiorbpaxos 37, 3 : aporov, wy é& amdvrwv alpOvras 7d 29, 153 Bovdetowvrat 70 29, 19; a av doxy abrots dpiora dew 30, 205 ws dy ddvwy- Tat dpora 30, 21 (all in decrees) apparos, ép’ 14, 29 (de Mundo 400 6 6, de Xenoph. 980 a 12) “Apyddios 18, 8, 12, 13, 213 58, 3 dpudoas 12, 46 ‘(Sol on) *appooris 37) 19 dprayaiow 12, 17 (Solon) ‘Apraxrldns dpywv (51/0) 19; 37 “Apreuts dyporépa 58, I dprios 12, 14, 18 (Solon) dpros, dprom@\ai, 51, 12, 13 dpyaikds kal Nav drdGs 14, 23 apxatos xapaxryp 10, 6; Tis dpxalas mo- Merelas 3, 1; TO dpxalov 8, g; Tay dp- | xXalwv 7, 21 Apxaupectas 44, 16 VApxéorparos 35, 10 ‘apy (1) ‘beginning’, 5, 6; 41, 133 é€ dpxiis 3, 6 (2); 16, 1; 28, 53 41, 73 55) 33 apxh 5, 20; dpxhv (‘motive’) kai mpbpacw 13, 133 apxiy—xaxav 18, 8; Kar’ apxds 35,1 ) ‘rule’, ee ‘ official’; the last two combined i in 3, 4, mparau Tov dp- xav joy Bagtheds KTN: ToUTwY Oé TPwTN Mey ) Too Baowhéws. Sing. 3, 183 7, 15, 30; 8, 143 13s 45 7, 123 14s 17,

261

18; 15, 9; 16, 25, 283 16, 35 (?)3. 17, 1, 4, 9, 18; 18, 43 245 6, 8; 36, 113 41, 203 55, 345 THs dpxis bvexa 55, 323 dpxnv dpxwy rd 53, 31. Pl. dp- xal evdnuor, brepdpror, 24, 163 al mpds Tov mNenov dpxal 43) 53 44. 173 61, 1; al kara modeuov a. 62, 18; &. KAN- pwral 8, 1, 53 30, 13 (decree); 43, 25 55, 13 62, I; KAnpodpevar, éx THs SAns gudijs 62, 2; & Onoely 62, 2; dpxal els Zapov xrd 62, 16; Tov apyGy 3, 38; 8, 10; Tats dpxats 48, 8, 143 59) 3) IT; Tas dpxas kadloracay 3,2; émolnce Nn. pwrds 8, 1; aipounévwy ras d. 3, 20; due Hpet Tas d. (4s 215 wept TAS de 3, 333 Q: 23 dpxas—dprew 7, 113 54, 43 dml- aBous 29, 30 (decree) *doxnyérat, éxaTov 21, 25 apxOéwpos, els Aijov "56, 20 (ov 76 adbro Sardynua Tpinpdpxy Kal dpxilewpy Eth. 1122 @ 24) *Apxivos 34, 233 40, 4 Apxivos "Aumpaxusrns 17) 14 Apxuréxroves—emt Tas vats 46, 4 apy (1) ‘begin’ » Wyovpmevor TolTo mparov dpxew detv ris duovolas 40, 23; mid. Npéaro 27, 243 40, 11; dptduevor 62, 13. (2) ‘rule’, or ‘hold office ”, dpxet AD 45 61, 14) dpxovet 43, 43 50, 53 apxwor 4: 21; dpxew “A 16; 24,93 29, 31; 39) 173 62, 18; Tipxev 55) 113 Npxov 3, 23 dpiew 55, 313 fptey 13, 73 19, 393 aan Thy d&pxhv—Tav apxouevey yrTw 36, 11 dpxwv esp. 56, 5—46; also 3, 5, 9, 13, 16, 273 13, 6, 113 14, 8; 17, 23 17, 83 55, 5; Solon 5, 4; Lygdamis 15, 15. éri—épxovros about 20 times; Nexo- pAdous dpxXovros 22, 29; apxovros ‘Tyy- xidov 22,40. For list of _archons, see English Index, (=els rév epxbyra) col. 31, 17; 24, 353 T@ Apxovre TY épeornxére col. 31, 28 dpxovres, of évvéa 7, 4,125 8, 3, 85 22, 213 2Q, 313 30, 63 45, 183 47, 155 55: 23 59, 19; 62, 2, 10; 63, 1; cf. 3, 11, 24. alpects Tov dpxdvTwy 3, 37; 26, 13; ypodvro rols—dpxovras 4, 53 ap- xovras érdobar Séxa 13, 8; ex fevyt- T&v 26, 153; Tov dpxdvrew kal rov érw WOULWY 53, 20. —dipxovres els Ta Ppovpia 30, 7 (decree); Tod I[eparéws—déxa 35 é doadels Q, 11 doeBelas, ypapy 57, 10 doeBjoaev 18, 30 dcedyelas—mavoacbat 36, z dodevets 18, 31 "Agedyrly, mourn 50, 21 daxGy 23, 14 (2#.¢.); doxioat 23, 10 domls 42, 31; 60, 22

dards’ && dupoly dorotv—yeyovds 26, 23;

é& duorépw»—dar Gv 425 3

262 GREEK

doru’ ol év Te Gore. 14, 303 Ta ev TH de 19, 5; els To dar 6, 1153 3917 4 (decree); 51, | 18; rév éx Tod darews 19, 133 mepl 70 doTv 21, 13; &v 7G dora 16, 8 (opp. Kara THY xwpav); 24, 3 (opp. ek ToD dyp&v); 27, 93 39, 18; ol éx Tod dorews (opp. of é« Treipacéws) 38, 33 39 73 40, 22; TOY ev doreL Mewdyr oy 38, 303 39, I (decree); Tay &v 7H d. 39, 17 (de- cree); Tous év Te a. 39, 24 ( ecree). — éy dare. 50, 5; els doTu 51, 2

doruvépot 50, 4

*draxrotvra 61, 15

dre—éxwv 27, 1

arerjs 56, 16; amdvrwv 16, 24; mdvTow 42, 343 dredels 53, 32.—dredés xwplov 16, 18

dros 8, 30; 16, 443 22, 423 53, 303

3, 12

aripotc bau (rev Searrnrhy) 53, 34

"Arrixqy, els THY 19, 313 y@ooav— Ar- rixqy 12, 38 (Solon); "Arrixdy éumébprov 51, 17

aruxe" yrbxnoov—vavpaxlay 34, 15

avOnuepdy (e con7.) 45, 2

as 12, 51 (Solon).

avaAnris 62, 11

*atdyrplies 50, 6

aidloxov éxovoat, Wipot col. 35, 275 ém- AapBdve. tov adNokov (rs KAeyvdpas) col. 34, 36

aviavoudyn, Kara puKxpdy 23, 2; -ov Too trHGous 25, 33 (dpxy) Tots émibéros avénGecion 3, 18

avinots 10, 4

avbroxpdropas, dpxewv 31, 13 (decree); rap déxa T&v a. (411) 32, 13; a@.—rTovs Tpid- kovra—dmoxrelvat 37, 6; déxa—avro- xpdropas 38, 5; a. éaurdv 39, 4 (decree)

airéparoy, 7d 8, 28

avrés 6, 203 12, 23 14, 133 15, 255 16, 14, 333 avrol z, 4, 73 avrol oe avTav 19, 9.—avriy poony Xwpety Thy Whpov col. 36, 8.—rof atrod 4, 12

dhereheth kplvew 3, 323 53, 5

avdréxetp 39, 19 (decree). Frag. 1 553 4 32

adap dpeday 12, § (Solon); ras mpoc- ovoas Sucxodlas—ddetrov 35, 16; pass. ol ddypnudvo. ta xpéa 13, 22; Tods ddaipeévras (?) 25,16; mad. adelrero, ‘deprived of’ 34, 1; 45, 73 ‘rescued’ 45> 4

dpavloat, Tovs vouous 22, 3

*apéoros (qudpa) 43, 13

ddeow, etpbuevos 30, 33 (decree)

*Agidvaios 34, %7

aplnu (1) Karamradrhy dguévar 42) 245 (éxxrAnolay ddetvat 44, 13; (2) ‘release’, adeicay brocmévdous 20, 15; TolTroy dgidow 49, 16, 19; apévTas ToOTor 40, 143 adyjoovras 52, 53 (3) ‘cede’, rh dpxnv Tis Oadarrns ddicover 32, 173 dda Tas woes 34, 12

Not in /ndex.

INDEX

dgixérOar 38, 23; adcxoudvov 38, 24; -wr 38, 26

dpio rn drocricas ard Tov StAwy Tols moumevovras 18, 26; otrws amréornoay 32, 173 droordvros-—Tod Syuou mpds avrovs 38, 16; EvPolas droardons 33,4

ddgvedy, édmld’ 12, 17 (Solon)

agoppyy, Savel{nrat 52, 15

Ndgpaxra, xwpla 27, 17

"Axepdovoros 38, 22

dpixwv, Slat 57, 31

Badlter els 7d Sixaocrypiov col. 32, 115 Badlgovor mpds Tov AGov 55, 283 els dxpémoAw 55, 33

Baxrnpla 63, 6, 8; col. 32, 3, 10, 16; col. 37, 3

Bddavor, on 63, 8,93 col. 31, 323 32, 5, 13 (not found elsewhere in this sense)

BéAXovet, Tods KUBous col. 32, 333 Bary col. 36, 10

BdpBapor 22, 38

Bdpos 6, 5

Baorrela 3, 12

*Bacthetos oTod, 7, 4

Baowrevs, king of Persia, 29, 4, 8. 6 Baotdevs, archon, esp. 57, I—31; also 3, 4 52 17) 243 19s 71 393 col. 33, 28; Tis TOU Baothéws yuvarkds 3, 26. Tar Baotéwv, early Attic kings, 3, 7; 6 B. of Pausanias king of Sparta 38, 25. “Hpaxdclins, 6 B. érixadovdpevos 41, 34

BaowdcKijs (wodtretas) 41, 11

BeBalws 15,14; 38, 12

BeArlw, opp. xelpw 28, 1. 7d BédAriorov 9, 133 35, 193 Tod BeArlorov xdpu 35, 213 Bédrioroe (2) yeyovévar 28, 28; peTadotya: Tay mpayudray Trois Bedri- oro 36, 3; Bedricrous 38, 19; 42, 163 Ta BédrisTa, vowoberqoas 11, 15; Bédre. ora—ry mode 29, 13 (decree)

* Bia 28, 17

Ble 13, 73 15,9

Biasdueros 12, a (Solon)

Blasov Ti apxiv 36, 11

Blos, 6 ért Kpévov 16, 273 did Blov 3, 3, 393 7° oe Opacds 18, 73 Tov éxarépou Blov 17, 8

Bidoas (?)=Biovs 17, 3

Bdracdnuciy 6, 93 ef. Ar, Dial, frag. 1481

@ 35 (xard Tov TeredeuTnKdTwr) Brac-*

gnuetv obx Sovov

Prérovres, mpds 7d mapavrixa 28, 28

BojGeay 19, 21; 38, 8; Tais els Ta Lda BonGelats 16, 38

Bonde 14, 133 19, 283 37, 173 38, 2

*Bouxodetov 3, 25

BovAredoews 57,17; ypady 59, 10

Bovdeuripiov 32, 143 48, 3, 103 53, 26 (only in corresponding frag. and in Rhet. ad Alex.)

har ae

GREEK

Bouheuris 4, 173 35, 43 45, 173 48, 133 49, 173 62, 4

BovAedw* inf. 4, 133 45, 183 (eEerrt) Bov- Aetoat dis 62, 19. (In decrees) 30, 4, 16, 19; 31, 2; and éx rev det’ Bovdevdvrwy 30,123 also mid. BovdevecOat (e cons.) 30, 19; pera mAebvwv Bovdevoacbat 30, 22; Bovhedowvrat 7d dpicrov 29, 19

Bou, 4) Tav "Apeomaryirav, 3, 343 4, 223 26, 1; % é& "Apelou mdyou 4, 20; 60, 113 } & Apelw mdyy B. 8, 93 23,33 thy ’Apeorayirw Bovdjy 41, 18; 4 BovdAy} 25, 143 57, 163 Tis BovAjs 25, 8; Thy BovdAyy 25, 133 Bovdtjs Spa 4, 17 5 cf. 30, 243 B. (rerpaxdotor) 8, 18; 20, 10 f; B (ol revraxdctor) esp. 43, 6 ff; and 4s— 49: 21, 73 22, 73 24, 143 ouvabpoo- Oelons Tis B. 25, 20; ai Tis B. Kploes els Tov Ofiuov édndUOacw 41, 273 4 B. dSoxiyudger rods éyypadévras 42, 123 kupla—fnudoat, Sjoat, daroKretvar 45,

~ 13 (uoBogope?) révre 6Borovs 62, 8.— Bovdas rérrapas 30, 14 (decree 411)

BovdAnors 9, 14

Bouhéuevos c. inf. 11, 33 12, 16; 18, 18; 21, 5 f; 22, 173 25, 123 of BovAduevoe Bracdnuciy 6, 9; TE Bovdopery 9, 43 27,173 70 B. Aaxiaddy 27, 185 Ter drwy 7H B. 29, 143 Tods B. APnvalwy 39, 2 (decree): BovAecPar 15, 43 éBov- Aero 11, 133 éBovAovTo 16, 36

“*BoaBebew 9, 9 (BpaBevrfs Rhet. 1376 6 20)

Bpavpwvla, wevrernpls, 54, 30. Bpaxéos, xpévov 35, 25 Bwpdr, kablfer—éml rov 25, 19

yatav 5, 8 (Solon)

yaha 12, 64 (Solon)

yaperis yuvarkds 4,93 €x THs yaueris 17, 10 (Frag. 1727)

yamos 3, 27

youa* eynue 17, 125 yar 17, 17

yap passim. After onuetov de 7, 21; 8, 4. Kal yap 22, 23 41, 27; Kal ydap— kal 19, 2; 27,4. In third place, ey yap—éd 3, 9; 11, 10; 14, 10; 16, 373 24, 123 28, 53 40, 143 41, 63 47, 25 Te yap—xal 16, 4, 31; 19, 10; Kara TavTny yap 2, 25; ém’ éxelvou yap 10, 43 éml wépas yap 38, 24. In fourth place ére kal viv yap 3,253 xad’d re yap 59, 3

yeywr' va yeywv7 waddov 15, 19 *yevviiras frag. 3 ;

_-yévos 1, 33 16, 443 20, 3; 28, 83; Kard 7d y. 42, 30; TO yéver uy KaPapol 13, 225 TG yéver—mpoéxovres 35, 233 TH evn 21; 6, 23; Tots yéveoe 57, II

Tepatorbs 22, 42 yépas 12, 4 (Solon); dwép [Tay -ye]pGv 575 12

*yewpdpor frag. 2, 14

INDEX 263

yewpyG* eyedpyour 13, 26; yewpyoovra 16, 17; -ras 16, 7

vii 2, 6; 12, 15 &c. kara yiv 19, 30. TH wédawa 12, 32 (Solon)

yipws <évexa> 35, 16 (law of Solon)

ylyvouar (often spelt yw. in papyrus) 2, 8 2. ¢.3 16, 113 7h ylyverat; 16, 20; roatrns é&6dou yeyvoudvns 16, 173 Tots bd TaY TeTpakoclwy yeyvoudvors 33, 113 cf. 35, 21. éyévero 15, 1; yevéoOar 11, 10; yeyerfoba 18, 8; yeyernudvwr eb 32, 10. ~yéyove 3, 1853 42, 73 54, 193 yeybvarw 53, 53 yeyovévac 13, 14 f; 28, 28, 313 42, 53 56, 18 f; yeyovus 26, 23; -6s 15, 243 25, 193 -dres 42, 3; -6ras 29, 38; 30, 5; -dow 63, IT

yeyveokw (often spelt yw- in papyrus) 5, 4 (Solon). yeyvwexover (‘decide’) 53, 73 eyvwoav c. inf. 26, 15, 223 37, 3- C. alc. 34, 145 8 Te dv yaow ol du- kaoTal 48, 27. 7d yvwobev 54, 7; TOS _ eyvacpévous 36, 14

yrdooav— Arrixny 12, 38 (Solon)

-vdbos (Urmov) 48, 4

yrnalous, matdas 4, 9

yvopn—siapépev 32, 11. wWavros 14, 53 gplfovow 48, 12

yvepiuoe (‘friends’) 6, 73 opp to Sfjuos, 2,13 §, 25 11, 8, 113 16, 365 28, 7, 10; 34, 19

youoews, Suxaornplov 45, 5; yaow da- TnToO §3, 12 (not used thus in Ar.)

yovéwy Kaxwoews 56, 30; yovéas el ed rove?

wapnv, "ypd- 29, 73 yowpas émepy-

55) 17

Topytdos ’Apyetos 17, 13

ypduua 63, 19, 21, 22, 243 col. 31, 6, 13, 27; col. 32, 4, 12

ypapparetov 47, 16, 19, 20, 27, 30; 48, 2, 45 53: 13, 22

*ypapuareds 6 Kard mpuravelay 54,13. 6 éml rovs véuous 54, 19. (Tob dyuov) 54,

21. Oecpoberav 55, 4, 73 59, ae 63, 2. (orparnyav in 411) 31, 12 (de- cree)

ypagpal: dypadlov 59, 10; ddixlov 54, 10; doeBelas 57, 10: BovAevoews 59, 103 dwpokevlas 59, 8; Swpwy 54, 93 59: 95 émiTariKy 59,6; Kaxwoews 56, 30—34; KAorfs (Snuoolwy xpnudrwr) 54, 68; Moixelas 59, 11; Eevias 59, 8; mapa- vouwy 29, 233 45, 243 59, 63 Kal vduov wh émerAdevov Oeivat 59, 6; mpoedpexy 59,6; Tupkaids 57,163 Tpavyaros (dtxar) 57, 143 gukopaytlas 50, 93 papudKcwr (dten) 57,15; Povou (Sika) 57, 12, 145 evdeyypagijs 59, 103; pevdordyrelas 59, 10.—ypagal Nayxdvovrat mpos abrov 57, 93 56, 29

ypagw ypdpew 29, 15 (decree); éypaper 29, 17 (decree); 34, 273 @ypayay 20, 213 ypdwas els mivdxtoy 48, 20; -avros younv 14, 53 29, 73 -avTes 48, 9;

264

yéypamrat 8, 17; év rats Baddvos 63,.

93 yevpd@Oa 9, 73 Kara Ta -yeypap- péva 11, 7. Tapavouwy 40, 8.

yuunxdy dyava, Tov 60, 5, 22

yuvatca peyddnv kal Kadi 14, 253 &o- Xev -yuwaika 17, 143 ‘yuvarkds, yau- ETS 4, 93 mWapaiBarotons THs y. 14, 29; ‘yuvackl miBduevos 35, 16; al ~yu- vaikes 2, 43 ‘yuvadv émipedetrar 56, 41

Aapactas dpxwv (c. 582) 13, 6, 10

Aapuovidns OljGev 27, 19

Savelfew 6, 2; 9, 35 Saveloa 22, 33; da- vefouevor 38, 8; edaveloavTo 39, 25; Savelonrat 52,14; daverodmevos 52, 133 -0t 6, 9; 22, 35

Savercpol 2,8; 4, 23

Samravy’ 8, 153 22, 35

Sarava* damavijcat 29, 30 (decree)

* darnrav alpeow, els, 56, 3

6é passim. 61a rodro 6¢ 21, 8 f; mera dé raira 2, 1 &c.3 mpds dé rovros 26, 6 &c.; kal—dé 12, 153 41, 20 (?)

*Gedouxévar 5, 20 (dedtdres Ar.)

Oe 12, 10; 16, 22; eee 7, 10; (&ry) Evds déovra etkoot 17, 43 évds ety (Set MS) 19, 393 27, 7; els 7d déov 30, 20 (de-

_ cree)

Oelxyuper Td ypdupa delxvvor col. 31, 273 beife—ouvicrapévous 25, 15; delkovow el Bovdovrar 40, 123 od Secxviwy col. 36, 18

Sew6bs, TH TodeutKd, TA TONTIKE, 23, 15

Servoict, év Te mpuravely 62, 12

déxa 8, 3 £; dpxovras 13, 8; ér&v 11, 53 els 5. pudds 21, 43 5. (udpn) 21, 13.

of déxa (1) under the Four Hundred, in 411, 6. abroxpdropes 31, 10—123 32, 13; (2) after the Thirty, in 404, adro- Kparopes éxl Thy Tol mokduou KardAvow 38, 53 7 Tov déxa rupavvis 41, 22 (39, 21); superseded by (3) another Board of Ten, rods BeAricrovs elva Soxobvras, ép’ way owéByn xal ras diaddoes yev- ér0ar kat aredOeiv rov Sjuov 38, 19 f. Other bodies of Ten (in 411), mpé- Bovdor 29, 11; (karadoyeis) 29, 37; Tapia. Tav lepdv xpnudrwy and ém- wernral 30, 8—t1o (decree): (in 404) Tod Ileparédws dpxovres 5. 35, 6; 6. diadraxrav 38, 26. For official bodies of Ten under the normal constitution see dryopavouot, dOdoPéra, amodéxrat, doruyduot, Acovuclwy émimednral, éuro- piov émumeAnral, eUOuvot, leporro.ol (25), lep@v émicxevacral, imméwy xaradoyels, oyioral (dis), NoywoTGy cvvyyopor, wer- povduot, mwdynral, orparynyol, cwopov- toral, Taulac THs ’AOnvas, ratlapyor, TpinpoTrorol, pvAapxot.

* dexaerlay, Hpxov 3, 4

ypayduevos rd Widitua—.

GREEK INDEX

* Sexdtew 27, 25; Sexdoas TO Sixaorypioy 27, 2

* Secumhoty, 7d yuwobev dworlverat 54, 8 f; 7d.6. 54, 12

Sexdrn 16, 13, 22

déxaros 6 ypappareds 59, 19; THS Sexdrns purjs 63, 2

Aexédeva, 34, 8

Acrgwly, éri 57, 21

Aeddol: 6 év A, veds 19, 20

Sekid? Sodvan Thy 6. rlarews xdpw 18, 35; Thy 6. dédwxe 18, 36

Odour édy un Séwvrat mrevdvwv 30, 24 (decree); kav re Séwyras émurxevdgover Ta pdduora Sedpeva Tav lepay 50, 4

Seouwrnplov pidraxes 35, 6: év Ty 5. 52, 2

decpwrav pidaxes 24, 20

Oeororikwrépws 24, 7

Sevrépa 3,6; Sevrépy 14, 7. 7d devrepov 15,2. ovdevds dvTa Sevrepov 38, 11

béxouat Séxovrac Ta xphara 48, 8; de- Xomevos—riv rourim 18,153 édéxovro 14, 30

béw* Oavaroiv xal Sev Kal xpipact §y-

, Mody 45, 83 () Bovdy) xupla—dfjoa 45, 2 (mpbrepov); 48, 7; (orparyyol) Kipror Ojoat 61, 153 dvdyKn 7d éd\depber RapPeNe H Se5érOar 48, 6; cf. 63, I

oy dia Tabryy 8h Thy alrlay 23, 8; mpos 6h rabryy Thy xopyylay 27,18. *Kdd- Nora 6H* Kal woduriKdTaTa dadyTwy 40,17. Kal 69 Kal 2, 3; 16, 5, 40

Sytov 12, 21 (Solon)

SFdov 13, 103 53, 20

Afirov, dugixrvoves els 62, 14; Tevrernpis els 54, 293 xopnyol and dpxibéwpos 56, 20

Onuaywylav, dvedéyovtro—riy 28, 26

Onuaywrybs 22, 14

Snuaywya mpds 7d Snuayuryeiv EdOdvros TlepexAdous 27, 1; deerérouv of érrceckels Snuaywyodvres 28, 53 Tovs mpodipws

. Onuaywyobyras 26, 3

Anudperos 38, 11

* Snjuapxor 21,193 Shmapxos, els Merpacda 54) 34

Snyevonevew, Tas droypapas TOY 43, 20

OnurryopGv 15, 20; ednunydpynoe 28, 18

Shutos 45, 3

Synucoupyol 13, 9

Snuoxparla 23, 2; 29, 2, 5, 185 38, 30; 40, 133 41, 13, 21

Sjuos (1) pagus, 7d Gvoua Tod Shuov 63,

19; ék Tod 6. rOv Ilasavdwy 14, 26; ér@Aouv of Shuoe 62, 4; Shuwy 21, 16, 21; Tay 6. dvayopedwow 21, 18; Kadod- ow Tay 6, 21, 19; wodev Tov 6. 55, 13, 15; Ojmous dyri Tv vaukpapidy 21, 20; Kara Ojmous 21, 125 48, 24; of Kara O. , Sixacral 16, 3; 26, 21; 53, 3; dey- podvro els rods 6. 62, 3 (2) Populus, 12, 4, 11, 29) 49 57

GREEK INDEX

(Solon). 5, 2; 6, 3; 9, 123 II, 103 15, 14, 16; 18, 293 20, 4, 13, 16, 173 21, 1; 25, 1, 105 29, 10; 34,1, 7, 19, 26; 35, 19; 36, 6; 38, 17, 20, 28; 415 2) 4) 5) 25—73 42, 2, 315 43) 12, 28. (=ékkAyola) 44, 8; = 22; 46, 39 9 213 56, 233 57, 3. Stmou mpo- OTATNS 2,93 23,135 25, 4. Oappodvyros Tob 6. 22,12; TH elwOulg Tod 6. mpad- THTL 22, 193; Tod 6. Kal rwv evrdpwr 26, 11; Ilepexdfjs mpoesrjxec Tod 8. 28, 1; Tod 6. mpocorhxes ZdvOurmos 28, 10. émavaoras TH Siuw 14,6; TO 6. Sta- veluacbat 22, 31; év.7@ 6. 25, 22. ouvéreice Tov Shuov 14, 3; fl. of Shuor Kparioavres 40, 24

Snudctos, 6 47, 31; 48, 4. Udvos and 6dy- béovos 6, 43 43, 273 48, 253 59, 16. Snuoola ogparyis 44, 5; 7d Snudciov 63, 12; Oyudoror épydrat 534, 23 vanpérac 50, 143 7a ddtavTa Snudowa elvar 52, 7. Onpoola 49, 28; col. 32, 14, 19

Onuorns’ 21, 16; 22, 223 27, 143 42, 35 5:9) 11, 133 59, 125 62, 5

Snporixds’ TH FOE 16, 30; Snuorixiyv— modirelay 29, 193 Syuorixd 10, 1; n- MoTLKWTEPA 22, I; 27, 33 41, 153 On- HOTLKWTATOS 13, 203; 14, 13 Tpla—dnpo- TUKWTATA 9, 2. ol Snuorixol 6, 8, 133 16, 36; 18, 303 34, 18

Od’ c. gen. (1) duration of time, da Blov 3, 3, 39. (2) interval of time, 6a rev adray xpdvwr 13, 6; adverbial *Oua rdxous* 34, 1 (dia Taxéwy in Rhet. 1386 6 1 &c). (3) agent, &’ *Apiorodixov 25, 24; Tov pldwv 6, 8; 6 abrav 33, 12; éavray 35, 73 abrod 41, 5. (4) means, da rovrwy 25, 1; dv Gy 25,9. (§) distributed possession, 177 Ov ddiryuw jv 2, 63 4, 29; dav Ov Oryur ToijowrvTa Tiy TodrTEiaY 29, 9.

c. ace. (1) personae, bv bv 22, 16;

6a Tlavoaviay 23, 20; rods Snuayw- yoovras 26, 3; Tous dnuaryuryols 41, 9; Tous wapopyicayras 34, 7: (2) ret, dud rotro 21, 8; Taira 38, 313. rodvd’ airiay 19, 8; radryy ri alriav 23, 8; tavTas Tas alrias 21, 13 Ta déiwpara 18, 1; Thv dmoplay 13, 22; Tas Twv Xpeay aroxomds 11, 8; THv THs Badrdr- THS apXIY 41, 193 Tas maTpixas ddéas 26, 93 Thy elvoay 38, 28; Tas HrLKias 18, 2; Thy wappyolay 16, 23; 7d AROS Tov ToKtTuy 26, 21; Thy paduulay 8, 28; Thy ceodx Peay 12, 273 THY oU"- Haxlav 29, 4; Thy Héptov orpareiay 22, 403 Thy gidovixiay 13, 163 Tov PbBov 13, 23. “c. inf. dd rd dvypynkdvar 19, 23 dmoBadelty IlvAov 27, 26; Bon- Ojo 19, 28; yevéoOar 3, 7; doxeiy 20, 73 11, 9; Gavudoa 16, 19; meyadny yeyovévar weraBodrry 13, 15; wy BovAer-

Oa 15, 33 Mh yeypapOar 9, 73 Mi.

265

divacba 9, 123 wh xphicOa 22, 33 vouifev 29, 8; ojoacba 41, 43 aracidfew 13, 8; cupBfivar 28, 333 Timwpely 19, 2

diaBddrew 6, 5; diaBddrdover 28, 36; diaBeBrAnuevous 23, 20

*dtaBovdretoar, (karedvOn) Boudry mply, 3% 4

Staylyvouar* Suvyeyevnrar (4 moderela)

- REX pL THs viv c. Part. 41, 23

‘Gid-yw* deitpyov ev Hovxla 13, 33 ovrws Oidryover 42, 29

diadéxouar’ Stadetapevwr (?) rev vidwy 16, 28 (cf. Pol, 1293 a 29 Tv TedeuTUvTWW SiadéxecOar Tovs vieis); duedéxovro ow- ex@s tiv Snuaywylay 28, 26

Siadl6wm’ roploaca Spaxuas éxdorw dxTo

_ SédwKe 23, 7; (StwBerla) diedldoro (?) 28, 21

Siadixdfer roils yévert—ras dugioByrioes 57, 10 (only in corresp. frag. and Oec. 1347 6 28)

*Siadixacia: émitpomis 56, 38; pl. Khjpwr kal émixAjpwr 56, 39; (Tpenpapxdv)

1,9 ~ *drarperol, dugopeis col. 36, 5

Otarp° ‘divide’, ra Tiwnuara Suetrev els rérrapa TEX 7, 9; Seypyro 7, g; duy- podvro els Tovs Sywous 62, 33 diedmevoe Tas pudds, mévre éxdrepos 61, 203 ‘distinguish’ rots uérpos diyphoOat 7,26

Otairas drogaivovrar 55, 29; diaveuover 53> 28; éxdiurady 53, 29

Siarrnral’ 53,6; 55, 293 58,8; é&nxoordy &ros 53,193; SiarrnTod ywwous 53, 123 mapa Tod 6. 53, 18

*Staird" Giarqoer 53, 28; emwvuuos 6— Sediaurnkws 53, 24

[SidxJeva col. 36, 27

*Suaxdypotar 50, 8; Siaxdypdoar 30, 18

(decree)

OtdKove 20, 22 (scolium)

Giaxdoroe 24, 145 eva Kal dcaxoclous (Gcxaords) 53, 153 Siaxdcra (uerpa) 7,

27

Otaxocpobyra tiv moumivy 18, 20

*Staxplwy (ordots) 13, 20

Oraréyouat? duehéyero wera orrovdyjs avrois 25, 173 Suadéferar mpos rov Sfjuov 43, 28

Siarelaw* Scadurdvres ern dbo 22, 11

*Siaddaxryv Dddrwva, eldovTo 5, 43 Tov (é« Aaxedaluovos) déxa diaddaxray 38, 26

Siadvcers (ér’ Evxdeidov) 38, 20, 25; 39, I; 40,1

diaddiwy rods Stadepouévovs 16, 14; dia- Ndcat 53, 73 SveAvOnoav—mpds rods *Edevoin 40, 25

Siayaprdvwy Tis mpds adrov Pirlas 18, g

Stapéver TO Séxa KAypoby 8, 4; ev rH dpxT Orduervey 17, 4; Stéwewev 4 modTela

25, 2; 33,1

266 GREEK

daupioByret, veep duporépwy pdxerac kal 5, 20

Stay dio Byrioecs elyov, Tov Todwvos Pec wav boot 35, 11

Sravéuw* dtavéuovow—ras dtairas 53, 273 Siaverudvrwy 31, 20 (decree); diévecue Thy xdpav tpidcovra pépy 21, 123 dta- veiuac opas Te abrovds Kal rods dAdovs déxa wéon 30, 17 (decree); dtaveluavra (ras dtxas) déka wépy 58, 6. diaveluac- Oat riy viv 12,153 7d dpyipioy 22, 31

Siaméurw’ Stem éumovro mpos Tous év Tetpace? 38, 23

Stameadvros (?), xpdvou 35, 25

Oiampakduevos, Tara 20, 9

dial pO uodcrw] col. 36, 29 ©

Ovapragew, Tas ovclas 35, 25

**Stappw&" érlOnua dteppwyuevor col. 36, 8

Stacelcavros rod vanpérov col. 31, 8

Siacnpalyw’ Seonunvay 15, 22

Siacrelpw* dtecmapudvor Kara Thy Xwpav 16, 8; dvecrdpyoay ol Abyou pos 7d THOS 36, 4

*Starpdddopwar’ év—ols Erparrov diecpdn- Aovro 19, II

Sracgtew éretpavro Tov Sfuov 34, 18

Otardrrovar (rovs orparyyovs) 61, 3; dé- take Thy Tokirelav 7, 7; Thy woktrelay Siérazay 29, 28; dtardtas 11, 1; dta- ragéaca 8, IT

diaredoiow, xpduevo. 8, 6; dterédovy vooouvres 13, 123 dreréhour—Syuaryw- yotvres 28, 43 oracidfovres dieréhecay 20, 19

Siarnpeiv rods vduous 3, 34; Steryper Tas apxds 4, 303 Ta wéyioTa Tov mwohiTiKwY 8, 22

SiarlOnow, dyGva 57, 73 58, 2

SiarplBw: c. part. diérpiBe Snunyopsv 15, 20. 0d diérpiBev 25, 16; dScarplBwor év rg dore 16, 8; dtarplBovow ev Tois gvdaxrnplots 42, 33

Siapddnv 12, 57 (Solon)

Siadépwv, dixatooivy trav cad’ éavrdy 23, 15; ouvéce kal yroun diadépew 32, 11. Otadepduevor mpds addAjAous 23, 173 Tovs Siadepouévous 16, 15

SiapOeipar (‘corrupt’) Tov dfjuov 28, 16. (2) ‘kill’, Onpayévnvy StapGetpar 37, 43 drépOerpev atrév 18, 38

Oiaopos c. dat. 11, 8

dtagvddrrw* Thy Snuokpariay 29, 2

diaxerpliwor—xpyuara 30, 14 (decree); cf. 43, 13, and Pol. 1322 6 28

*duaxerporovodcw 49, 17

*Siayyolterda 55, 25; col. 36, 10; dea- ynoglfovra: 42, 4; Siaynploacda col. 36, 13

*dayndiopds 13, 24

diddoxaroe (EpHBwv) 42, 22

Oiddoxovow 42, 24

*8ldpaxmov 10, 7; Oec. 13534 17

INDEX

*

SlSwpe* GSdvac rots woddols Ta abrav 27, 21; dddvac Snuoola tpophy 49, 283 Sidwor—els Tpopiy 42, 243; Sldwow éme- xerporovlay—phpov 55, 22 f; dlenv (42, 34), émexecporortay (43, 24), evOdvas (56, 4) didbdacw; ovdeulay éavTg@ mheovetlay dios 16, 325 Sobvac ray Sekidy and Thy Oekiav Sé5wxev 18, 35 f; dodvar Ta éav- ToU 35, 143 dodvar rats dpxais (ra d- kaorThpia) 59, 25; (Papyaxov) dovs 57, 16; Sols xarnyoplay Kal drodoyiay 55, 21

*Sueyyudiobat 4, 10

SehGeiv (?) 4, 16; xpdvou SreOdvros 4, 23 5teAN bvTwv—eraw 42, 36

ducdtw’ of the officials presiding at a trial, (ol elcaywyeis) ravras dixdfovow 57, 17) 21, 23—26, 303 59, 23 émur- vous elod-yovres 52,17; cf. 57, 27 and 30. Abs. 63, 11, 13. Kara Syyous édlxagov 53, 33 Tots THY puAnw—Od«Kd- fovew 53, 14; 58, 7; dedikacuéva col. 37) 5

Slkatos pos THY ToATelay 25, 53 ov—AdI- Katov 9, 133 It, 64; Sixalos (uérpous kal oraOpois) 31, 7. Adv. dixalws- AaBetv rHv éLovolay 41, 4; eyypaperOac 42, 10; wWytos 2orat 51, 11; apgew 55 31

Oixatog by y—dtapépey 23, 15

Stxaorjpia (under Solon) 7, 153 9; 5) 103 (Ephialtes) 25, 10; (Pericles) pcodo- gpopa 27, 11; (Anytus) dexdcas 7d d- KaoTHpioy 27, 27. eladyew els StxaoT?- ptov (29, 26), els 7d 6. 45, 10; 48, 26; 52, 4, 6, 19. epinow (€7 53, 9) els 7d 0. 42, 8; épéoiumos ets 7d 6. 45, 143 eects els TO 5. 45, 16, 193 55, 11. Sicacryply 55, 7, 10; & THO. 47, 223 48, 18; 55, 22; 56, 3; 61, 12. 70 6. 63,17; Ta 6. 63, 235 mpoypdwac 59, I. 6. tdia kat dnudora 59, 15. Ta 0. Tpels SBodods (utaPoopet) 62, 75 Ta 6. KAD- potow ol évvda apxovres 63,13 eloodoe els Ta 5. (2) 63, 3

dtxaorys, exaoros, 63, 18; dikacral— éEaxioxlALot 24, 123 Kara Syuous 16, 133 48, 243 6 72 dv yruow ol dtxaoral 48, 27; av katayrwow oi Sixacral 54, 93 63, 143 em roils dixacrais 55, 203 Tov haxdvrer Sixacrwv 63, 6; ducacras KAnpoior 59, 18

Slxn* Solon in c. 12, ev diky xpdvou 1. 30; we Te kal dixny 1. 43; evOeiay Slkyv

- 46.

Slknv diddacw—)auBdvovow 42, 343 dlkas Aayxdvovow 53, 2; Sika Nayxdv- ovrat mpos avrov 58, 4; dikas xpivew 3,

2

Sika alxelas 52,15; dvdpardduy 52, 16; dmrocraclov, amrpooraciou, 58, 93 els darnr&v alpeow 56, 36; els émirpo- wis Siadicaclay 56, 38; els émirpomijs kardoracw 56, 373 dovAwy édv tis Tov

GREEK INDEX

BdevGepov xaxds ACyy, 59, 143 Eupnvor 52, I1—20; éumopixal 59, 14; epavexal §2, 15; tae 58, 5; 59,133 KAnpwr Kat érikdjpwr 43, 21; 56, 393 58, 93 Kot- vevical 52,15; meraAdical 59, 14 ; mapa- volas 56, 353 mpaxéds 52,123 amd Tay cupBdrwy 59, 173 Tpamefirixal 52, 16; tpinpapxlas 52, 16; vmrofuylwy 52, 16; (Wevdouaprupidv) col. 36, 11—13; Ta pevdouapripia ra é&’ Apelou md-you 59,17. For dlxa: ddixlou, kaxwoews, krom}s (57- poolwy xpnudrwr), mupkalas, rpaduaros, pévov, see ypapal

Slunvov jptev 33, 2

dd Kal 3, 17, 21, 38; 5, 19; 8, 163 16, 13, 260, 343 17, 43 20, 213 23, 15, 203 27, 203; 61d Kal viv 7, 29

Stouxetv, undév Tov marplwy rdv dpxovra, 3, 16; mdvra, 16, 313 44, 1235 Thy modrelav, 27, 11. dtocxef—dywva 56, 273; Tas marplovs Ovolas 57,'9. Sto Kodot, mevternpldas 54, 28; moumhy 60, 4. dupxet Ta WAetoTa Kal Ta weyioTa 3, 353 TA Kowa 14, 173 TH KaTa Thy Tovw 16, 23; Thy ody 23, 3. Ta GAD mavra Supxovy 26, 12. Susxnoay, Tee- Xov dvouxodbunow 23, 17. mdvTa diol- ketrat Wdlopace kal dixaornplos 41, 25; Ta Ud THs Bovdfs Stocxovpeva 50, 1; mepl Trav Sipknuévow 25, 7

Stolknots dd Tv Kowa 24, 213 eyKvKALOS 43,1

Avovicia 56, 11, 12, 28; A. ray peyddwy 56,22; Twv émi Anvalw 57, 4; in Sa- lamis and Peiraeus 54, 35

Atévucos 3, 26

Surhotv—xaraBddrew 49, 5

Ourdobrat 54, 12

Sis Tov adrov ph dpxew 4, 153 ovK éorw (émeordrnv) dis rov atrév vyevéoOar 44, 33 ékeore Bovdedoat dis 62, 19

*Siopvpioe 24, 12

*Siax thot 24, 18; dard ToD Kudpov 24, 203 dioxAlous 26, 10

Algiros 7, 21, 23

*8lyous col. 34, 33 f

SiwBerla 28, 20 (dtwBorla Pol. 1267 b 2)

*§u@Bodov 41, 34

Subxewv, ‘prosecute,’ 56, 31; Tod dudxov- tos, ‘the plaintiff,’ 53, 11; col. 36, 32. Srbxew Thy wéony Twodirelay 13, 18; Thy wdrplov trodtrelayv 35, 9

Sbypa* obderi Sbypare NaBodoa Thy iye- povlay 23, 4

Soxiudver (47 Bovdh) Tovs éyypadéyras 42, 12; — Boudeurds 45, 173— 90" dpxovras 45, 173 —lmrovs, mpodpbuous, aulrmous, 49) 1,5, 73— ddvvdrous 49, 25, 27. do- kipdgwow (rods dpxovras) 55, 133 Soxe- pdgovras (of dpxovres) 55, 6; (ob mdpe- Spor) 55, 3. Soxtuacbévres (ol dpxovres) 55, 27; (of dOro0éra) 60, 3; Soximac- Owow of EpyBor 42, 14

267

Soxtwaclas rats dpyats drdoats, elodyouow (ot Oeopobérat) 59, II

Soxd passim. c. inf. 6,12; 9, 25 10, 13 20, 73 22, 173 25, 5; 28, 35 &c. ra Odtavra mepl ris roNrelas 35, 3

Sorodovnbels 25, 24. Soropovnévros Aro- Majdous, de Admir. 836 a 16; Sodogpovia Eth. 1131 a7

Séfav, mapa 11, 10; TH pUcet Kal TH ddEy 5, 125 da ras warpixas ddtas 26, g

Odpu 42, 31

Sopudépa (of Hippias) 18, 22

SovAeverw 2, 11; dovAevoy ol wévyres Tots Tovalos 2, 33 TwY ToAAwY Sovdevédy- Twv Tots dAlyos 5, 2; cf. 12, 26. TA — dovdevovea 12, 34 (Solon)

SovAwy Sixat 59, 43 Pavepws Soddot 40, TO

Apaxovrlins 34, 27

Apdxwy 3, £3 4, 33 7) 23 41, IT

*Opaxur’ 3,193 10, 6; 23, 73 42) 253 50 73 62, 7, 12, 14. émt dpaxuy 52, 13. méxp. déka Spaxudv 52, 193 53, 5+ Omitted évrds xiAlwy—vmép xiAlas 53, 15 f. (cuvadAdyuara) Spaxptata Kal ev- Tradpaxpa Pol. 13006 33

*Spvpakros 50, LI

Spa robr pwr cal érl rev dddwy 35, 173 BovAdbpevol rt Spdcat apd ris cvAAHpews 18, 18; 7@ Spdoavre ayxdver 57, 30

Sdvayw, elxov 12, 6 (Solon); meylorny elxev 6. 13, 115 Thy vavTiKhy 6. 27, 53 mepteltdovro Thy 6. 25,22; émdevbuevos TH Ouvduer 19, 5; Tay & Tals dwducow 22, 13 (cf. trav év rats éEovolas Eth. 1095 6 21)

SivacOa 9, 12; wn 6. TG odpare lrrevew 7 7TH ovale 49, 16; particip. 7, 193 49, 3; eddvavTo 18, 253 19, 9; duvwyTae diadioa 53, 7-

wie A as karadtoy thy (of the Thirty) 36,

bwards, Kad’ dcov Hv 14, 143 wy Suvarods elvan rols obyaow lrmevew 49, 145 TOs Swarwrdros Kal Tots cwuacw Kal rots XpHuaow AnTroupyeiv 29, 34 (decree)

B00 4, 193 13) 7193 20, 143 22, 113 Ta OUo wépn 51, 17. gen. Trav Sve érav 42, 373 Sveiv dpaxpaiv 50, 7; duoly xdpw 16,7. dat. brow pvdaiv 52, 12; 56, 133 mpods Toiv dvoi 6Bodow 28, 32. Cf. Kihner, ed. Blass, i p. 633

dvokoNias, Tas Tapovcas 35, 15

Sucxepatvorres, TH moderela 13, 15 (ol &v 7TH Tortrela Svoxepdvavtes Pol. 1306 b 4)3 éml rois &dots EdvoexXepawoy 2, 12.

Oddexa 8, 133 21,9

Swiexdrw, érer 22, TO

Swpedy odk eorw avrots \aBeiv 46,6; Sw- pewy 3, 13

*Swpotevias ypapy 59, 8

Sdpa Sods 59, 9; AaBbyTa 54, 8; wh AF- perOar 55, 3- Swpwy ypagdi 59, 9; dw- puv TYLWTW 54, 9

268

édy 7, 63 16, 42 (law); 17,73 22, &e Cf. dy ( ; i ci

éavrot, abrod, passim. vooodyres Ta mpods éavrovs (=dAdjAous) 13, 12

éBdounxovra 10, 6

€Bdopos 15, 2

eyylyverat 54, 32

eyypagy Tav Tortrav 42, 38

éyypagovrac—els rovs Snudras 42, 3, 43 eyypapew 42, 113 éyypdwavras 42, 13; dixalws éyypdperbar 42,10; Tovs éyypa- pévras 42, 123 of 6 EpnBor ol éyypags- pevor — els Dedevkwudva ypaupareta éveypdpovro, — éveypadnoav 53, 22 f.

(imméas) éyypdgovew els Tov mivaxa 49, 18; (iméwv) éyyeypaupéve 49, 13. Tuv éyyeypayuévey (els Tov Tay TpLC- xiAlwy karddoyov) 36, 15.

éwlrpotov éyypawar 56, 39. Kav Tis €ANlry karaBoryy, evrald’ éyyéypamrrat 48,53 (cf. mpdéers ray mporiWeuevwv Kare ras éyypagds Pol, 13224).

éyyunrat 4, 12

éyxady, b Te dv 48, 22; ovdels oddéev éve- kdderev avrots 38, 30

*eyxareynpace TH GpXT 17, 1

éykparéorepov egoxov, Thy moAw 35, 22 (cf. éyxparas goxov rhv dpxiv Pol. 1284 @ 40).

éyxdurtor (dpxal) 26, 18; Tas dpxas Tas wept THy eyKiKNov Sroiknow 43, 1

eyxet 22, 22 (scolium)

*eyxerplica 18, 27

Spa Bovdfs 7} éxxdnalas 4,173 Tas edpas — Tis Boudfjs 30, 24

depdov 12, 23 (Solon)

606\@ passim’; in pap. saepe Ow. wh *Pédover 49, 33 mh BEAN 56, 37. ob €0€dovres APnvalwy 29, 24 (decree)

el wh TL wapewpGro 26,18; el uy — dzro- Ocdotev 2, 7; ef — éxAelwor 4, 17; el dé wy, after éav wey, 22, 35 &c; after kay pév, 52, 5 el—i (=mdbrepov — 7) 43,

23

eixés 6, 133 9, 12 Kc.

elkoot 17, 43 24, 193 29, IT; 30, IO

elxwy 7, 21

elul passim. etn 14, 9. émt trav lilwv elvac 15, 253 mpds Tots idious dvres 16, 9. Td viv elvar 31, g (decree)

elrely 2, 125 14,93 ws elmeiv 2, 123 ws émos elretv 49, 31; 57, 8. dv — et- jo. 7, 303 ela 10, §; Ilepixdéous el- movros 26, 22; elmdvros Tov mpd Tod ynplowaros Noyor MydoBlov 29, 6. elra 12, 22 (Solon). Cf. elpyrae

elpyerOar Twv vouluwy 57, 133 elpyeras Tov lepav 57, 28

elpjuny dryew 34, 9; Tapeckedacer elp. 16, 26; éml répas qyarye Thy elphynv 38, 25. Tis elp. yevouévns avbrois 34, 17

elpntat, Kabdmep 4, 243 Worep 16, 33 dv- wep elpnrat Tpdmov 11, 2. THs HAKlas

GREEK INDEX

ris elpnuevys 30, 18 (decree); elpnuévor dow ol Néyor col. 35, 30. Cf. elweiv els: (t) of place, els Alyumrov 11, 5; els Tle:paséa, els doru, 51, « £3 % els 7d Sixaorypiov Epeais Q, 5 (2) of time, els eviavréy 30, 19 (de- cree); Tpia érn 47, 12; éxardv ern 7, 73 Tov wéd\dovra xpbvorv 31, 1; and (in decrees) Tdv Novmrdy Xp. 30,15 5 Tov GAdov xp- 31, 18. éx Ilavadyvaiwy els Tava- Onvata 43, 4. (3) of measure, or limit, els émra- kogtous dvdpas 24, 16 (4) of relation to, 7d0v — els roirov 20, 21. Ta els Tov mbrAELOY 23, 10 els passim. =6 pev els — 6 8’ erepos 37, Of; évos deiv 19, 393 27, 273 evds déovTa 17, 43 ea 4,14; la 13,173 mlav 4, 19 *eloayyerla’ Zddrwvos Oevros vouov ela- ayyenias 8, 26; pl. 29, 233 43, 193

59 4

ape hen mpos Thy Tav ’Apeoraryiray Bovarny 4, 22; els rods SiarnTds 53, 325 (of Oecpobérat) Tas eloaryyeNtas eloay- yéddovow els Tov Ohmov 59, 4; eeore kal rots liudrais eloayyéAdew Fv av Bov- Awrrat Tov apxav uy XpAqPac Tots vouors 45, 14 (not found in Ar. in technical sense)

eladyw' els ducacrnpiov 29, 26 (decree). eis TO SuxaoTHptoy 45, 10 (law); 48, 26; 52, 4, 63 53, 153 54, 63 56, 30, 423 63, 14. dikas 52, 12, 173 58, 83 59,

13, 17- dtadtcacias 61, 6. dSoxtwaclas 59, I1. évdelfers 52, 8, 9. mpoBodas KTX 59, 5- Tots Stkacrats rots Thy

puriy—elodyourw 48, 25.

*eloaryuryets 52, II

*eloehative” 颒 dpuaros elovjauve 14, 29

elaépxopuar els Thy apxiv eloépyovTat 55, 35; eloedOe els rhv apxnv 56,6. eloed- Odvres eis TO BovleuTHprov 32, 13. eloed- ety els 7d Stxacrhprov col. 32, 6; eoin (els Stxagryptov) col. 31, 33; col. 32, 7. elceN Oe els 7d lepdv 57, 29. Ads. evOdS elvehOdv 56, 5; elonecay and elodvar 32, 5 f. rov elovdvra émavrdy 31, 13 (decree)

elonyjoaro, womep Apioreldns 24, 10

*elonyntiys 27, 20

elgodos, els Ta Stxacrypta (?) 63, 3, 73 dixacrnplov col. 32, 10

*elomparrew 8, 17; 48, 6; 60, 8; émirpé- mous—elomparret 56, 46

elagéper—ras pucOdoes 47, 26. elo- pépovor ypdwavres év cavlédi 48, 93 Tov karddoyor els ri Boudyy 49, 11. vdsous elojveyxay els rhv Boudjy 37, 5. elopeé- perar—els riv Boudhy Ta ypaupareta 47,

30

elagopd 8, 15

elra: elr’ 8, 43 22,34. mp@rov uev—elr’ 42, 20; mpdrov wev—rerra—eld’ 62, 6—g.

GREEK INDEX

elwOev 28, 24; elwOacw 40, 4; TH elw- Ovig—mpagérnrt 22, 19 éx* (1) place, €& “Apyous 17, 12; ‘out of’ éx TovTwv 8, 43 éx THs muds éxdorns 8, 12 &c; mpOros jp ef airdv 26, 163 é« karadéyou 26, 8. (2) origin, é THs yaperiis 17, 10. *ée (= bd) rv dAdwr* Gporoyetra: 5,13. (3) inference, é« Trav viv yeyvoneve, éx ris dys wodrelas, Oewpely 9, 13. (4) time, && apis (= dpxy) 16, 1; 28, 53 41, 73 55) 33 ef drapxijs, denuo, 4, 16 (Pol. 1293 @ 2, initio); é& o8 60, 12; é« Tavadqvatuv els II. 43, 4 ékaocros' ékacrov 11, 6. Purdy 8, 2. ; The art. generally added, but some- times omitted :—éxdory 7H Nuépe 43, 15; Ths huépas éxdorns 62, 15. Tis mpuravelas éxaoTns 43, 143; KaTa Thy mp. éxdorny 61, 11: Kara mp. éexdorny 47, 18. ék Tis pudts éxdorns 8, 12; 29, 373 44, 83 53, 13 Tis @. éxdorys 48, 17; col. 32, 20; ard <Tijs> éxaorns 43,6; ad’ éxdorns ris o. 61, 23 &a rhs pudis éxdoryns 42, 18; 48, 153 56, 25; 60, 3; 61, 173 é& éxdorns THS P. 22,9: €& Exdorns <Tijs> d. 55, 53 éxarov €& éxdornys p. 8, 19. exdory TH PUAR 58, 73 7H p. éxdory 63, 3, 45 5. Kad’ éxdorny Thy d. col. 31, 2 Art. without ékaoros: d¥0 éBodovs éxdory Tis Nudpas 49, 28 (law); Tpets 6Borods exacrov ris hudpas 29, 323 Spaxuny ris judpas 62, 12. dmak ev Te eviavT@ 44, 14. els ek Ths pudfs 475 3) 83 &va Tis pudijs 61, 23. Pl. 7, 145 13, 253 21, 24 &c. éxdrepos passim. éxarépov Blov 17, 8; 颒 ols Exdrepor Tuyxdvovew exovTes 32, 15; 颒 ols éxovow éxdrepot 34, 8 éxarépwht 54, 35 “ExarouBaray 62, 13 éxarov dpxnyerav 21, 25; é& éxdorys guaijs 8, 19 (cf. 21, 8); dvdpas, Tovs dvaypdwovras Thy todtrelay 30, 3, 173 31, 213 32,4. &rn 7, 7. mYGY 4, 93 tddavra 22, 303; (Spaxpats) 10, 6 éxBdddw* é&éBadov (Ileciorparov) 14, 193 ToAAovs—exBeBAnkévat 19, 3; €éK THY Taguy ekeBdjOnoay 1, 2 éxBody* Tay Tupdyvuv 20, 18 *éxdiarray, duairas 53, 29 éxdixws 12, 36 (Solon) éxel 55, 343 pap. 19, 6 éxeibev 15, éxelvos 15, 203 16, 40 &c. éxeioe 19, 6 *éxOdpara (?) 54, 24 *éxxnpdéae 61, 15 éxxdnoia, under Dracon, 4, 18; under Solon, 7,15. éxkAnolat, esp. 43, 16 f. é. xvpla 43, 173 62, 7. édA@av els Ti

éxdoTn—TOv

269

é. 35, 11. & & Ta Oedrpy 42, 30. (dpxatpecias) ev rH é. 44, 17. ptodo- gpopov éxxd\ynolav—dréyywoay oteiy,

and od avANeyoudva els Thy é. 41, 305 pic Bopopodc.—raits éxxdAyolais 62, 6

éxkAnodgew 15, 17

éxxopiodmevot, Ta EavTav 19, 36

éxdelrroe riv cbvodoy, ef dé Tis THv BovAev- Tay 4, 18

*éxuaprupav (?) 7, 25

éxréurrw Kveouévny étéreupav 19, 29 5. érav fArcklay éxméurwot 53, 36; Tovs GAdous wpds Ta tapévra mpdypara éx- méurrovaelv 61, 10

éxmlrrw (ris dpxijs)’ ékémece 15, 23 19, 6; 67’ éxméco. 16, 353 éxwecdvra 17, 17. ws é&érecov (éx THs wédews) ol arept tov "Ioaybpay 28, 9

*éxmodtopkS' éeLemoopxyndnoay vad Trav Tupdvywy 19, 13

xpovv exovras, dxeTovs perewpous els THy 650v 50, 12 :

*éxrquopot, weAdrat kal 2, 5

éxrive’ éiv—exrelon Tis 54, 11: ews ay éxreion 63, 16 ([Ar.] Rhet. ad Alex. 1444 6 2)

éxrioes 8, 23

éxrés 22, 41 (évrés pap.)

exrw éret 14, 19; 26, 14

éxpavelv 12, 19 (Solon)

éxpépew, Sbfeer avrois 36, 14; dvéypa- yay kai éfqveyxay 30, 4

éxwv 27, Lo

éXaiav poplav 60, Ir

Ararov 60, 7 bts, 14, 23

édarrov 4, 8; od éharrw motpay 19, 24

éXavve 7d dyos 20, 7. HAdoaTe 5, 16 (Solon)

*édeyelav, woijoavrse THY 5, 6; cf. 5, 20

éAevOepos 42, 7; adv res Tov EXeUOepoy KaKdis Aéyn 59, 14. ovolav—édevbépar 4, 6, 9

édevGepoiv Tas "AOjvas 19, 22; Tov Ofuoy Mrcvdepwoe 6, 2; EdAevdepwOyTwy did, Tiy ced Peay 12, 27

’Bdeuois 39, 3. "Bdevoin 39, 10,173 40, 26. ’Edevowdder, "Edevolvade, 39, Of. ’"Brevoiva, wevrernpls, 54, 31. ’HXevot- view 39, 13

Axe—mwdxioy col. 31, 9; BdAavoy col. 31, 26

é\Xelarw’ Kav Tis EAN ry KaTaBorAy—dvay- Kn 7d €d\dechOev xaraBddrew 48, 5 f

“EdAgves 23, IT

*\Anvoraplat 30, 9(?) and 13 (decree)

évrls’—dgvéay 12, 17 (Solon)

éupdrres (riv Wipov) col. 36, 20; els évé- Badde Thy Wijpov 55, 24. (b) éuBddrdre 7d mwdkiov col. 31, 29; euBddwow— Ta muvdka els TO KiBwriov col. 31, 43 éuBaddeTar—7Ta muda 63, 5. (c) Bd- Aavoe els THy Vdplay éuBdddovrat 63, 8. (2) éuBary rods kbBous col. 31,17; éu- Badnovras Aevxol (KUBor) 2b. 21. (e) eu-

270 GREEK

Badévres rds wapruplas-—els éxlvous 53, 10; papruplais—els robs éxivous éu- BeBrAnuévats 53, 18. Mid. etOvvav—ép- Badrécba 48, 20. Lxtr. els rijy d-yopay— éuBareiv aire 57, 28

*éuBiBdtwr éveBiBacev 23, 7

éupévew, Tois Spxos 40, 13; Kav—eupé- vwot (Tois yywoGeiot) 53, 8

*tupunvor dikat 52, 11—20

éuryyvuo. Te muvdxia col. 31, (1; éumrny- vowy

*é€umjarns col. 31, 11, 24

éuropiav, Kar’ II, 4

éumopiKds, dikas 59, 14

éuroptov émimednrds—Taev éuroplwy ém- pedetobar 51, 15, 16

Eurropot 51, 17

éupavay xardoracw, els 56, 38

Eugpuv 18, 3

év passim. (t) of place, év TH arog 7, 33 év érdos (‘under arms’), 31, 11 (de- cree); of trial before a court, év rots (év Tle:patet) 29, 23 (decree); with vb. of motion, Tovs wvdpous év Tw TeAdyet Kad- cigay 23,24. (2) of circumstances &c., év rovros wy 19, 6; adverbial use, év kéopy 28,18. (3) of time, év @ 15, 20; ev (‘within’) mévre éreow 47, 23.—évi pect 4, 15 (Solon) ©

*évayayv, elvat Tov 20

*évaylopara 58, 4

évayrloy Tt, ¢. dat. 37, 10; evarribrara 36, 10

évavrloy rhs Bovdfs 47, 6, 10,14; 48, 33 and (in decree) 30, 28

évayTiwbévres 36, 4; dudorépas AvavTisOn 11, 13

évdelxvurat 63, 133 evedelxOn 63, 17 (not in Ar. in technical sense)

*dctw—kal drayuryny 29, 26 (decree); pl. 52, 8, 9

&dexa, of 7, 133 29, 273 ESP. 52, I—IO. Tov deopwrnpiov pidaxas evdexa 35, 6

*évdexdrw—eret 15, 8; évdexdry 41, 5

évdéyerat 17, 7

evdquot, dpxal 24, 16

évdo0ev 5, 7 (Solon)

évdogébraros 54, 16

évdtw' Owpaka évdeduKtss 55, 32

Wvexa, Tis apxis 55, 323 yhpws <evexa> 35) 16

évy(?) col. 31, 33

éviadoros (4px) 3, 22 (dpxat évratorar Pol. 1299 @ 7) ‘

éviaurés’ Tpis Tod ev. 47, 19; ev—enauTp 53, 313 Tov ev. 13, 103 Tov mpirov ev. 42, 29; els ev. 47,163 én’ énaurév 8, 10; kar’ éviaurév 3, 20; 30, 4

ot 3, 10; 7, 18; 8, 273 13, 153 18, 32. na 27, 4

évlore 43, 30

éviornue évéorn gpitla 17, 15; mbdeuos 27,9. Thy éverrGoav pidovixlay 5, 11;

INDEX

éxOpas eveoréaons 5, 22; TOD xeyswvos &veoT@ros 37, 1. éveoTigavro Thvy—To- Aerelay 41, 2

évvéa dpxovres, ol, see &pxovres

vous, rovs immdpxous Tovs 4, 11 (cf. Pol. 1322 @ 11)

évoxAw* Gvwxdovv II, z

evoxos ypapy mapavduwv 45, 24

évonualvouat’ évernualvero mixpas 18, 10

évratéa 3, 26; 48, 53 54, 30 &c.

évrevbev 55, 33

vrds xiAlwy 53, 153 TpLay pay 49, 20; Tp huepwv 48, 18; déxa cradiwy 50, 9

évruyxavovra, piravOpwmrws, c. dat. 18, 17

"Evuddos 58, 2

éf, see éx

éfaryw orparidy 37, 3

éZoupy (or 飀Ay) Tovs KvBous col. 31, 23. é&ethev 12, 64 (Solon)

étalpw éfapduevos (an exceptional use) ra Orha mpd Tay Oupay 14, 13

*éareipovar, Tovs ekouvupevous Tuv—éy- Yeveappevev 49, 135 é&Hherpov, opp. dvrevéypadov 36, 15. Met. ras mepl Trav rpotépuy airlas é&preway 40, 19

ékararnbévtos Tod Shwov 34, 6; ekawary- Oévres bd KXeopuvros 34,10; xiv éfa- warnoy 7d THOS 28, 24

*étamopw’ ékamopnodvrwy ols mpdyuace

23, 5 *éEdxous col. 34, 34 éfeddoat abs. 22, 173 €&nrdOn—rijs apyfs

13,7

éfehéyxerat col. 32, 7; wa py—eteddy- Xwot Tos veooNlras 21, 173 Kav—kAér- tovra éfehéyiwow 54, 7

ékepyavouévns THs xwpas 16,12; eeupyac- péva 46, 5

eépxouarr e&jer wodAdnis els Thy yxabpay 16, 14. (Of troops) ray ééévTwy 26, 10; dy élwow 61, 4; cf. todos

Heore 44, 153 45. 14, 225 $3. 173 62, 18; 63, 11, 13. é&f 4, 213 27, 15. eff 27, 173 col. 31, 33(?). éédv 6, 14; Ir, 13. é€eivat 9, 45 29, 14, 293 39, 6, 16, 21 (decree)

ckerdfew Ta yévn 21, 6; eSerdgec—ra ol- kodopjuata 46, 8

étéracts év SrAos 31, 11 (decree)

éfeupwy, yuvatka peyddnv kal kad 14, 25

* éEnryeto Oat, rods vdpous 11, 6

éfjxovra 10, 8

&0d0s 16, 6

etouxetv Exew ’Edevoiva 39, 3 (decree); df. rovs édovras 39, 25 (2b.); Tots Bovdo- pévas €& 39, 14 (20.); émvootyTwy é.

40, 3

* é£oixnats 39, 15 (decree); 40, 26

* eEouvume rods eLouvupévous—ph duvarovds elvai—lamevew 49, 133 dEoubonrar 49, 153 wh ébouvimevov 49,16. éfduvuvrar Tas papruplas 55, 30. (édduvucOa Thy dpxiv Pol. 1297 a 20)

GREEK INDEX

* orhiola 15, 16 (ébadows Probl. 922 6

14 éEopvéeev, édalay poplavy 60, 11 (éopuc- obuevor root, [Ar.] de Admir. 833 6 4) éovola 6,193 41, 4, 24 ew—rijs modirelas 37, 12 ewOev, Tov 36, 16 éoprav émiwedetrat 56, 29 érayyetAdpevos ws dddous unvicwy 18, 34 érawoupévay, Tv 16, 303 did Thy edvoray —éryvébncav 38, 28 * érrdy 42, 143 56, 4 érdvayxes émipndlgew 29, 21 (decree); évyypdgew 42, IT éravagépovres Tots mevraxitxtAlous, ovdéev ‘331 12 * éravaxuphoartes 38, 3 éravlornue’ éravacras rm Shuw 14, 6. éay tives rupavveiy éravicravrat 16, 43. (Used in literal sense in Ar.) éravopfoivres—rhy toditelay 35, 12 (éray- opbGcat wodtrelay Pol. 1289 a 3) émel 3, 283 14, 123 15) 233 19, 41 303 24, 17 &e. ‘ * éreddv 7, 29 &c. éredy IT, 13 62, 3 éresrw, 7d av7d ypdupa, col. 31, 13 ** dreokanrelv, and ** émeloxAnros, 22 f (decree) érera 6,7. Often after mpdrov per (7. v.), but never followed by 6é Cf. eira. érehavvet (?) 5, 9 érepwrGow, ewepwre 55, 13, 20 ént passim. (1) ¢. gen. (a) of place &c., éri rod Bhuaros 28,17; 颒 &puaros 14, 29; é@’ 08 55, 28. érl Trav lolwy elvan 15, 25. (4) ‘in the case of’, él rév dAdwY 35, 17. (c) ‘over’, [emt rar] vauxpap.ov 8, 14. (@) of time, éml rijs éxrys mpuravelas 43, 223 ch. 44,153 47) 21, 25, 28. éml rhs torepov Bovd7s 46, 6; érl Médovros—’Axdorou 3, 9f; Apda- KovTos 41, If; DoAwvos 3, 30; 41, 125 Tlesrorpdrov 41, 133 Toy TeTpakociwy 29, 5. ém’ ’Avridérou (sc. dpxovros) 26, 21; éf’ ov Apyovros 17,8. él (rob deivos) dpxovros (20 times) 4, 2; 14, 8, 203 17, 23 19, 373 21, 33 22, 63 22, IT, 21; 23, 223 25, 83 26, 195 27, 83 33; 23 34, 143 35s 13 40 U5 41, 33 54, 33; éml omitted only twice :—Nexopuy- Sous (?) dpxovros 22, 29, and dpyovros "Yyrxidov 22, 40. 颒 Gy (‘under the authority of’) 38, 19.

39)

(2) «. dat. (a) of place, ‘upon’, 颒

4 7, 215 ‘at’, or ‘near’, éwl Maddqvlde 15, 133 17, 16; éwt Anvaly 57, 53 émt Tladvadi 57, 18. (4) condition, 颒 ols 23, 243 32) 153 34) 83 éml rovros 1, 3 (2); 23, 365 emt rH owrnpla 19, 353 eg’ @ Te 14, 225 34, 17. (c) ground or reason, éml Trois dANois edvoxepatvov

271

2, 123 xaderds pepdvrwy éml rovras 38, 8; xadewds éveyxdvres éml TH cup- Pope 33, 83 ayavaxray éml trois yeyvo- Mévors 36, 2; pf’ ols exatpev 4 rbdus 35, 20; 颒 @ 63,17. (d) object, émt kara- AUcet Tod Shwov 8, 25;—rTis wodrelas 25,153 é@’ ols 38, 6; ‘for’, éd’ éexdory Tov dpxav. (e) ‘in the power of’, él rots Ouxacrais 55, 26. (7) ‘on the security of’, éml rots cwuacr 2, 8; 4, 333 6, 23 9 3 (3) ¢ acc. ‘upon’, él rdv Bwydy 28,

9. ‘over’, éml mdvras 42, 19; Td Oewpixdv 43, 23 47, 103 Ta éxOUpara 54, 243 Tous dmAlras, Thy ywpav, KT 61, 4—8; Tas vats 46, 4. ‘for’, én TS vowopuvakely 8, 20; Thy dwéboracw 23, 18; Ti Tov wodguou Karddvow 38, 5. ‘to’, érl mépas 38, 24; Thy vauTt- khv Sbvapw 27, 5; exaorov 7d dixac- THptov 63, 23. ‘throughout’, ém’ év- aurév 8, 10; érn rérrapa 13, 3;—Tpla 22, 25

értBadrew 56, 42; émiBodrnv 61, 153 Se. Snulav 56, 42 ; Tpoxdv 49, 4

* émiBodh 61, 15

érvypadet, Tots Oecuobéras 48, 25. eme- ypadovro (rots ép7Bos) 53, 23. éme-

yéypamrat 7, 21; col. 31, 33 mevdxtoy emvyeypaypévov Td dvoua 63, 18; ém- yeypaupévov ro ypduua col. 31, 6; 7d oroxelov col. 31, 31. ‘allege’, mpé- gacw 8, 24. ‘paint on’, rots dikacry- plows xpwuara érvyéypamrat col. 32, 9

émdelEwow, Tia dwpa aBdvra 54, 8

értdnus 39, 14, 16 (decree)

* éridiavéuw’ émdeveundnoar 10, 8

érvdldwuu" érédocav mpds c. acc., 37, 16

* éridixkagiat, KAjpwy Kal émexAnpwwv 56,

aa. of 28, 5; Tots éw. 36, 9; mapa “rots ér. 28, 43 Tay én. (opp. Tar TU- xovTov) avOpwrwv 27,24. Tods ér. Kal Tod Shou kal Tov evrépwv 26, 11. émtetkeorépous 26, 4

*Erlfndos 29, 7

**érignudoets 45, 9 (law)

érlOerov 3,17 £; 25, 9 (not found else- where in same sense)

*ériOnua col. 36, 8

ériOuudot 16, 10; éweOUpmovv 34, 21

émixadodpevos, 6 Bactheds 41, 34. emtka- Aeodmevos c. acc. 20, 6

émixaréotn 3, 6 (rHv Tov éedbpuw dpxiv émxaracrnoas Pol. 1313 @ 27)

émtxnpuxevoduevos, Tpds C. acc., 14, 21. émexnpvrrew dpyvpiov (émeriysov) [Ar.] Oec. ii 1351 8 31

émlxdnpos 9, 83 42, 353 43) 213 56) 33:

9 405 4

ences (ras dtalras) 53, 28; Ta Ot- KaoTHpia 59, 153 émexAnpwoy Ta ypdp- para 63, 223 Tovro.s érexdzjpour 8, 3

Tous

272 GREEK

émixpar&* émexpdrow r@ modéuw 38, 17 (émuxparotew of Sfuot rev evrépwv Pol. 1321 @ 19)

*émucupwOevrwy rotrwv bad rod wAjOous 32, 25 ém. Tov vouww 37, 12

*érucbpwow—xetporovlas 41, 32

érthapBdver Tov adAloKov col. 34, 36

értdelrecOat, ovdevds Tv modiTwY 34, 22. értherrépevos Ty Suvdue 20, 53 7H ovale 27, 18 (act. in Ar.)

émiAjGou 20, 22 (scolium)

*érldouros 33,3

*Emldukos 3, 29; "EmAvKevov 3, 28, 30

émipéheta 21, 20; 26, 2; 38, 29

émiuednral (under the 400) 30, 10 (decree) ; Atovvalwy 56, 233 éumoptov 51, 15; Mu- ornpiwy 57, 2, 7; Kpnvav émipednris

43.3

émipedotuae (1) c. gen. 15, 253 16,103 39, 53 42, 17, 285 44,113 46, 13 51, 3 103 52,13 56, 21, 26, 29, 393 575 1 23 61, 7, 25. (2) followed by dzws c. fut. 50, 10; 51, 10—12. (3) Ads. 39, 5 (decree)

émipehas 27, 23

*Emipevlins 6 Kpfs 1, 3- Bovgvyns frag. 10

émivoovvrwy éfoixeiv 40, 2 (the Ladex Ar. quotes zrepl kdouov only)

émioxevdfew, Tas dd00s §4, 23 TA wdduora Sebueva TH iepdv 50, 3

*émirxevaoral, lepav 50, 2

*émirxnrrwvra—rais wapruplas col. 36, 11; émuxyjPacGa 1b. 13 (rparos érolnce tip érloxnyw Pol. 1274 67)

*énloxomos Tis monrelas 8, 20

émurxoT@v 16, 14

*ériorarel 44, 23 émiorarovons 41, 163 émeordre. 18, 33; éwtorarijoa 44, 13 (only found in Ahet, ad Alex. 1422 617, and that in another sense)

émrisrdrys THY WpYTavEw 44, 1; TY Tpo-

Bpuv 44, 9 ao *émiorariKy, pao) 59,7 (in this sense, here only) *émiorAdw' —éré[areddov] conj. 38, 7

(only in Rhet. ad Alex. 1420 a 6 éré- arethds pot)

émaronas pépovres, of Tas 43, 32

*émurTUNoV 47, 33

*éruraguos, dryuav 58, 2

émitedw’ émwetéXecev (wodirelav) 41, 173 rov dddov NOyor 15, 23

-émirHdeos 8, 103 42,173 49, 6, 173 59s

Th —€l, 42, 27

émlrndes 9, 11; 18, 30

érirlOnue’ ériOjoew (=mpocPjoew) mpds tov dvotv 6Bodoty dAdov 28, 22. émeé- Onke—rd ypduya 63,23. Mid. émir- Oéuevov rupavvldt 14, 11; éméBero rots Tupdvvos 20, 20; TH BovAy 25, 6

*émirluous kal xuplous Kal avroxpdropas éavrav 39, 3 (decree)

INDEX

émiriyua* Ta wey éreripOvres 11,2. c. dat. éririypa kal robroas 36, 8

éxitpérw* Thy wodirelay émérpepav (Zd-

‘ Awe) 5, 53 emerpévar—rois dwarwrd- Tots 39, 33 (decree); ob pdoxwy émrpé- pew 34, 12

*éwirpowys katdoraoww, els 56, 37; els er. biadixaciay 56, 38

émlrporot 56, 32 f, 35, 38, 45

éripavets 18, 243 28, 14

éeripépwv, dryGvas 25, 7

*émeyetporovely 37,65 43, 17

*émixerporovia 43, 233 85, 223 61, 10, 22

émexeip@* émexeiper 15, 10, 17; emexel- pce 19, 5

émiynpifew, Trovs mpuTdves 29, 22 (de- cree); Tov émupngiobvra 30, 27 decree ; émupynglfovew, yvwomas 48, 12; émipy- gloavros’Aptoroudxov 32, 3

@rotro, érnrat, 12, 11, 13 (Solon)

érovoudoas 21, 14 (érovoudoae Ar. ap. Strab. 445; Rose, Frag. 6013)

éropeédevos 12, 5 (Solon)

ros’ ws eos elwetv 49, 313 57, 8

émra Kal déxa 25, 2

*énraxbotot 20, 93 24, 16, 17

**érrdxous col. 34, 32

**érrernpls 54, 29

érovuula 13,253 45, 6

éravupot (pvdAGr) 21, 253 48, 173 53, 21, 26. (2) WrKewr 53, 21, 27; 6 erdyu- pos 6—dediarrnkds 53, 24; Xpovrac rots éravbpots kal mpds Tas orparelas 53, 35 (found in wepi xécpou, and in a quota- tion in Rhet.)

*épavxal dixat 52, 15

epyagerOar, undev epyov 49, 27; ev dryopa Bovrduevos épy. 52, 14; epyafduevor, mérpas 16, 19; elpydgovro Tovs d-ypobs

2,5

épyactas, mpods Tas 16, 6

épydoimos 47, 12 (épydouua xwpla Probl. 924 a1)

épydras, Snwoctous 54, 2

epyov, dyabod moNirov 28, 38; epyor épyd- ferPar 49, 273 &pya(=uéradda) 22, 30

*Eperpla 15,8. Tq epi "Eperpiay vavua- xle 33, 4

’"EpexOevs Heracl. Epit. 1. 3

Epynmov yevduevoy 43, 22

€pxetos, Zeds 55, 16 (see Jebb on Soph. Ant. 487); only in repl kdcpou 401 a 20

“‘Epuoxpéwy apxwv (501/0), 22, 6

Epomac* Eonrar 7, 29; épéoOa 16, 20 (épo- hévnv Rhet. 1391 @ 10)

&pxouat, passim. édOuw els "Eperpiay 15, 8; édOdvres mpds—i5, 22; mpds 7d dy- Baryuryety €XOdvros 27, 13 al Tis BovAtjs xploers els Tov Sfjwov EAnbOacw 41, 27

épduevov 17, 5; épacbels 18, 8

épwrixds 17, 4

éaOovs 12, 25 (Solon)

écopav 5, 8 (Solon)

GREEK INDEX

éoxdras hudpas, els Tas 40, 3

éraipela 20, 45 34, 19, 21

*EreoBouvrddas frag. 3, 1. 30

érepos, passim. pmb ped’ érépwv 8, 30. Tov érépwy (opp. Tod Syov) 28, 13,

19

érépwOt 12, 15

ére 8, 33 21, 23 (?)3 47,4. ere xal vov 3, 253 7,6; 8,6; 22, 7. ére dé xalg, 7. ére 615, 113 24, 203 27, 163 §2, 155 55:43 59, 4. ere dé mpdrepov 20, 20. Onuorixwrépay ert 27, 3

eros, passim. éeree devrépw 14, 73 TH bore- py ere 22, 20; tplrw 22, 28; 23, 215 TETAPTY 19, 33 21, 2; 22, 393 méumTy 22,5; 26, 193 erm 14,19; éBdduy 15, 2; évdexdrw 15,9; Swoexdrw 22, 10, érn Ovo 22, 113 d€xa éray 10, 5; ern émra xal déka 19, 38; 25,13 TpidKovTa kal tpla, évds S¢ovra etxoor 17, 3f; ert érn tpla 22, 25; els éxardv érn 7, 73 Tools tarepoy érecw 3, 19

eD moved 55, 17

*evavdpla 60, 21

EvBolas droocrdons 33, 4

ebyevjs 28, 7

evdiapOopdrepot 41, 28 (duovootca ddvyap- xla obk eddidpbopos Pol. 1306 a 10)

evdoxtpicar, mapa Tots “E\Aynow 23, 113 mparov evdoxujoavros, bre 27,23 ovK eVdoxiunodvra mapa Tots émieckéow 28, 3; opddp eddoxcunkds 14, 2

e¥Sovres 12, 59 (Solon)

etOvvay—euBaréobar 48, 20; elod-youot 48, 26, cf. 84, 6. edOdvas SidGow and dodvar 39, 23 (decree); Siddacw 56, 45 Zwxe 48,19; Gdocay 38, 29; Sedwxdrwv 48,18. péxpe edOvvav 4,12; mwepl TeV edOuvav 31, 7 (decree)

ebOuvor 48, 15, 23

evOiva* Tods duaptdvovtas nbuvev 8, 22

ebOds 22, 203 38, 323 55, 23. evOds eloeh- Ody 56, 5. e0Odws 18, 21. ebfetav— dlxnv 12, 46 (Solon)

Evcreldns dpxwv (403/2) 39, ©

evxooplas émusehodvrat 44, II

edroywrepov c. inf. 7, 26

HopmAlons 6 ’Adwrexpber 45, 3

Eipodridar 39, 6; 87, 43 frag. 3, 1. 30

etvoia* els Tov Sfpov 38, 28

*ebmarpldat 13, 93 19, 17 (scolium)

etropla rpopys 23, 10; THY Kiuwvos ebm. 275 13

edmopotvres TG peTplwy 16, 9; evTopnoay Xpnpdrwv 19, 20

edmépwy, TOV Gps Tod Sipov) 26, 12; 28, 2

I

‘edpbuevos dec 30, 33 (decree)

*evonula 44, 19

*édéoipos (kplots) 45, 13

&peots 9,.63 45) 15,193 55) 11 (not found in Ar. in technical sense)

*épéran (2) 575 24

S. AT

273

pn Bor 42, 14, 17, 20, 25, 383 53) 22, 34 (épypBwv 7 ppovpdv rdéts Pol. 1322 b 28)

"EqidAtys 25, 4, 13,17, 18, 21, 233 26, 143 28, 115 35593 41,17

épinow els 7d dixkacThpiov' 42,8; ép7 els 76 6. 53, 9 (not found in Ar. in techni-. cal sense)

édlornu’ orpatyyav épiorapéven 26, 8; TQ apxovre TP eperrynxdre col. 31, 28

Epodos, Srrws uh T Tots cuKoddyrats 35, 17

EXOpa §, 22

éxOpov elvar kat plrov, wore Tov adrdv 23,

23

éxivos 53, 11, 18 (not found in Ar. in technical sense)

exw’ passim. eoxev yuvatka 17,143 ey- xetplira éxovras 18, 28; yAamvdas exovTes 42, 33- With double acc. rovrous pvAa- Kas elyov Tis dpxfjs 24, 8. Of troops, éxovra orparidy, irméas, aTddov 19, 27, 28, 30. elxov TO Oecpobereiov 3, 303 Ta mpdypara BeBalws elyov 38, 123 THY awodw éyxparécrepov eoxoyv 35, 223 TV éxdvtwv Thy ToNrelay 15, 12

Intrans. @yec—révde tov Tpdirov 42,

1; ToOrov elye Tov rpdrov 3, 333 9, 13 Todrov Tov tpbmov éoxev 12,1. With adv. dpiora 30, 20 (decree); Kadds 28, 253 Kax@s 19, 5; olxelws 36, 5; drorépws 3, 14

é& c. inf. elacev 21, 24; elwv 22, 18. éGvres Tas wodtrelas tap’ adrois Kat apxew av éruxov dpxovres 24, 8. elac’ 12, 9 (Solon)

éws €Odppycav 40, 73 éénddOy 13, 73 TY 29, 1; meptelhovTo 25, 22; mpoeiorHKet 28, £3 mpotrpefe 19, 22. ¢. opt. Ews pndév mapavounotey 28, 37. ews av— fi 29, 33, 35 (decree);—yévyrax 56, 443;—éxrelon 63, 16

*tevylovov 7, 27

gevyltns 4, 193 7, 10, 12; 26, 15, 18 (Pol. 1274 @ 20)

Deis epxeos 55, 16. Act re Dwrhp., mommy 56, 27

fnulay, émiBdrrew 56, 42

{nd Kordfovca kcal fnuodoa 3, 36; (npsodv cal Kordfev 8, 23. 7 Bovky— Snpsot rods SnudTas 42, 13. subj. (abs.) {npsot 29, 23 (decree). Oavdrw Fnuidoae 29, 28 (decree); 9. Snuuboovras 52, 43 6. éfnulowy 60, 12. xpyuacw (nudoae 45.13 xp. Squsody 45, 83 Snusbon 45,

. Snot TE olrw 49, 2

gyre Thy ddvyapxlay éfyrouv 13, 19; THY mérpiov modirelav 34, 23 (lodryta fyret 6 fos Pol. 1298 @ 11)

4 passim; (‘than’) 2, 17 &e. A—H 11, 11 &c. 7% (‘or else’) 22, 43 (law) as

qo wy ovyypdwew, dudcavres 29, 12 18

274

(decree); omitted by author in 2, 113 _ 7s 53 55, BE Hyenovla abs, 23, 43 24, 2, 53 Oaddrrys 23, 11 yeudw 20, 17; 22, 9, 20; 26, 4. Hye pbveoow 12, 11 (Solon) ‘Hyqolas 4 apxwv 14, 20 “Hyyolorparos 17, I1, 16 qyodpat, (1) ‘lead’, c. ger. 13, 193 61, 45 18, 20, 243 ads. 61, 14 (2) ‘think’, 29, 13 (decree); 35, 21} 40, 22; 42, 16 (Wyjoacba c. inf. quoted only from Méeteor. 339 4 22 959 3) 195 a 14; 15, 145 18, 14; 28, 26; 42, 37 &c. HBopac’ hodels dia Thy wappyotay 16, 23 *Herwwvela 37, 9 Geos 56, 21 7Oos* 7d Snuorixdy elvac TP FOer 16, 30. 40n SeomorGy 12, 41 (Solon) ier oof HElet 11, 5 qcata (?) 57, 20 (cf. Pol. 1301 6 23) gra: yeyovévar Thy Hrcklay tiv éx Too vopou 42, 53 THs jAtklas abr @Kabnkovans 53, 303 Ex THs HA. THs elpnudvys, Trav ék Tis auris Hh. 30, 15, 23 (decree); ‘those of the military age’, drav #Atxtav éxméutwow 53, 36. FL. rats pruxlas 17,7; Sta Tas Hrexlas 18, 2 huepa 19, 363 20, 13. THs hucpas 29, 333 49, 29; 62, 123 THs Nudpas éxdorns 62, 15. viKra xal tuépay 44, 2 B8oae quépar (‘daily’) 43, 13. Tiow qudpas Oe? Sixdfew 59, 2 etxorbhiov 60, 9 (Hist. An. 573 a 7) juious’ ai—nuloear b2s, col. 35, 28 f auixous col. 37, 4 (Hist. An. 630 @ 34) ‘Hpdxdera, mevrernpis 54, 30 ‘Hpaxdrelons 6 6 Kdafopénos 41, 33 * pla. ( pL.) 55> 17 “Hpddoros 14, 25 houxdoavres 4, 15 (Solon) jouxlay, érhpe. THv 16, 26; Sifyov & Te 13, 3 (Hovxlay ayew Pol. 1297 6

ee 5, 15 (Solon)

qrTmpevos rats ératpelats 20, 3; Tots ldlous Qrrato 27, 213; Hrrnéros av’tod 19, 273 ArTnbévres—vaupaxla 33, 3

Frit, Thy apxyy Trav dpxouevuv 36, 11

Oddarray, Kara 19, 273 THY THs Oaddrrns yepovlay 23, I1,—adpxyy 41, 203 THY apxhy Tis 8. 32, 16

Oavaros 19, 4; 26, 143 28, 233 2, 28; 52, 4; 60, 12. duporé pia Bavaror karéyowoay 28, 13

Oavarody kal de Kal xphuace fnmody 45, 7; kuplous elvat Oavaroivras 37, 4. Bavarwoovras 52, 5 (Gavardoat, opp. guyadeboa, Oec. ii 1347 6 33; Oavarw- Oia de Adm. 836 a 6)

GREEK INDEX

Oapyfrra 56, 12 f, 27 £f. (O. meT& ra Avoviora Met. 1023 6 11)

Oapynuev 32,4 f

Gappobvros 704 Tod Shuov 22, 12; Oappov- ons 757 Tis Wodews -24, 15 Bapphearras tovs modAovs 27,6; ews COdppyoay 40, 7

Oaupafew 15, 243 Gaupdgorres 14, 303 Oaupdcat 16, 19; Oavmacdvray mayTwy 25, 19

Oeatpy, éxxdyola év TE 42, 30

OeuioroKAfs 22, 31; 23, 145 25, II, 13, 213 28, 11

Gedxriroy, marpls’ els 12, 35 (Solon)

Ocbropsros dpxwv (411/0) 33, 2 :

Gebs, ) 30, 8 (decree), Oeois 7, 23 (anon.); 30, 8 (decree)

Oeppyatos KdAros 15, 6

Gow, vonww 14, 7 (Pol. 1289 @ 22, 1298 a 18

*éouia, dvarypayaytes Td, 3, 20; Oéopia— kal mdrpia 16, 42 (law)

Oecpobérat 3, 19, 30; 45, 10; 48, 25 f; 55) 43 eSp. 59, I—20; col. 32, 32. eladyouot tv évbeikedy Twas 52, 9. ypaupareds Tov 0, 63, 2. 6 Oecpodérns 63, 22; col. 31, 9

OegpuoGeretov 3, 30, 31

Oeopots 2Oynxev (Apaxwv) 4, 3; Apaxovros Geopots 7, 12; Tov Dbdwvos Decay 35, 11; Oecpovs—éypaya 12, 45 f (Solon); only in wepi kécpov 401 @ 10, Tois Tod Oeod Pecpors

Oerradol 19, 30

Oerrarés 17, 12; 18, 6; 19, 28

Gewpeiy rhv éxelvov BovdAnow 9, 14

Gewplay, kaTa& 11, 5. Oewpla sent to Delos 56, 20 note

*Oewpixdv, Tov éml 7d 43, 33 47, 10

OnBaio 15, 11

Onpapévys 28, 19, 30, 30-393 32s 103 33s 103 34, 253 36, 1

Ojs* Offa, 7, 11

Onoeiov 15, 16, 22

Onoevs 41, 10

Onrixdv, 7d 7, 153 Onrixot—rédous 7, 24 (anon.); OyriKxdy (TeA€t) 7, 28, 30

Oddos 43, 11; 44, 6 (not found in Ar. in this sense)

Bouxvdlins kndecrhs Kiuwvos 28, 13, 30 OpacvBovdos* katahaBbyros O. Suvdyv 37, 13 70 Whdioua 7d OpacuBovrou 40, 8 GpaciverOar 28, 27 (opp. vropuevew in

Lth. 1115 5 33)

Opacds 18, 7

Oparra 14, 27

Opudrciv’ €6[pu]Ar[ez]7o 16, 27

Ovyarnp 14, 223 15, 43 17, 13

Oupaiy, mpd TaY 14, 13

OBupls 50, 13

Over 58, 1; Ovovot 54, 25

Ovolas—A@voucr 54, 27; Over 58, 15 Storxed

57,9 Owpaxa évdeduKws 34, 11

GREEK INDEX

*"Taovlas 5, 8 (Solon)

lélg kat Kowy 40, 17. tos Kal Syudctos 6, 45 43, 273 48, 19, 24 f3 59, 15. vopuov—torov 8, 29. ida 9g, 10; Tats els Ta iia BonBelas 16, 37. éml rdv lilwy elvat 15, 25. mpos Tots ldlos dvres 16, 9; Tots llows qrraro 27, 21

ldusrqv (opp. dpxovra) 48, 125 ldudrars (opp. Bovdg) 45, 14

lepetor 57, 11

lepewotvn 21, 243 42, 363 57, 10

lepouyjuwv 30, 36 (decree)

lepév, at Eleusis, 39, 5. 7a lepd 55, 163 mepprOov 42, 20. Tay lepav 44, 43 57, 28; Tov lepav érirxevacral 50, 2

*lepomotol 30, 10 (decree); 54, 24

lepdv adj. 30, 29 (decree); 43, 29. Tar lepSv xpnudrwv 30, 8 (decree)

txernplay Oels 43, 275 Tats ixernplats 43, 26 (Thy ixernplay aloxuvOévres ap. Rhet.

- 1411 6 7)

“"IuBpov, dpxat els 62, 16

wa, usually c. subj. even after past tense (cf. Eucken, i 52), alp&vra. 29, 15 (decree); yeywry 15, 193 yévnrae 55, 273; delEy 25, 17; SearpiBwow 16, 8; PI—D 42, 353 mi—Kaxovpyy col. 31,

145 mh mpoebarerply 47, 34 c. opt. doeBnoaev—Kal yevowTo aoGe- vets 18, 30

"lopav 17, 11

immada (redev) 7, 18; 7, 24 (anon.); 7, 28 (Pol. 1274 @ 21)

*trmapxos els Afjpvov 61, 25. immapxov éva 31, 14 (decree in 411): Umrmapxot 4, 8, II, 133 30, 73 44) 163 49, 105 61, 19 (immapxia: Kal ragiapxla Pol. 1322 6 3)

“Immapxos, son of Peisistratus, 17, 103 18, 2, 4, 16, 193 19, 4

“Immapxos Xdpwov Koddureds 22, 15, 20

lamets 4, 19; 7, 10, 12. lamets 24, 145 26, 173 38, 143 49, 8; 61, 20, 26. immeis (é€v’ Hperplg) 15,12. Thessalians 19, 29, 31

Seren 49, 14, 16 f

“Inmlas 17,10; 18, 2 f, 15,17, 26, 355 373

ee 19? 3? trmodpopla 60, 5, 22 “Irmoxparys 22, 24 trmos, wapéornker 7,. 25. Kaddv Yarmrov éyuv 49, 22. Soximdger Tovs Yrmous % Bovdy 49, 1 *trrorpopely 7, 18 (trmorpoplas Pol. 1321 @ 11) *Ioaybpas 6 Tevodvdpov 20, 2, 5, 10, 133 28, 9. dpxwy (508/7) 21, 3 isopoplay exew 12, 25 (Solon) lobppora Ta mpayyaTa 29, 1 tos 63, 8, 21. toat (al pipor) col. 36,

35 *looredéot, Sixar Tots 58, 5 lornus’ éornoay (rods vouous) 7, 3+ earn

275

12, 8 (Solon). Yorara: 4 oriAn 53, 253 (unves) lorapévou 62, 14 laxupas rijs ordcews otons 5, 3; loxupbrepa

29, 3 loxucévat 9, 53 loxucer 23, 3 tows (=madtora) Térrapas pwfvas 33, 1 (seems not to occur in Ar. in this sense) tyvos THs mpdtews, NaBetv 18, 26 *Iwy 3, 83 41,7 *Idvwv drbcracis 23, 18; Spkor 23, 23

kabalpw* ’"Earipwerlins—exdOype tiv modu 1,4 F xabatp&" Tols—vouous xabeidhov ef ’Apelov mayou 35,10; Kabedwy (Ta ypaymareia) 47) 32 kaOdmaé, drlwous elvat 22, 43 (law); xv- ptov trovnoavres KaOdwat 35, 15 (Pol, 1259 5 36; 1332 6 23) xabdep éwl’Axdorov quoted in 3, 113 Kk. elpyrat 4, 243 x. mporepov 7, 9; 8, 11; -K. TovS TevTaKkociomedluvous 7, 26. Td pev adda Kxaddmrep KTA (formula of a- mendment) 29, 16 Kadapa kal dxiBdndra 51, 33 TH yéver MH kabapol 13, 23 Kabhjxwv (vduos) 16, 41. THs Hrcklas Kaby- Kovons 53, 30; Srav xaGjxy conj. in 43, 15 (8ray of xpdvor KabjKwow otro List. An. 391 @ 8; cf. 2b. 568 @ 17, 573 & 30; 585 @ 18) KabjoOa 48,17. Kabjuevov papyri lectio wal Tov Buoy 25, 183 Kablfew (riy BouXiy) 435 15 Kablnus Tous pbdpous év TH meddryer xader- cay 23, 24 Kadlornue xopyyovs Kabloryot 56, 7, Ah x. kablorn 56, 9; Aoxayovs kabiorn 61, 18; Kaiorn THv Snuoxparlay 29, 18 (decree), xuplovs xatiordvat 20, TI. kabioraot Tovs evdexa 52, 13. Xopnyous KaOtoraot 54, 36; Kabioracav, dpxas 3, 2. morirelay xaréoTyce 7, 13 dp- xovra Karéornce AvvySauw 15, 53; Bov- My—karéornoev 23, 73 KaTéornTe— Snudpxovs 21, 19; od KaréoTnoay ap- xovra 13, 43 Karésrncay—elroplay Tpo- pis 24, 93 KaTaorThoa Thy—orelay 29, 53 Tovs TpidKovTa 34, 16; Tous udoPacirels 41, 9; KaracTHoarres (dp- xXas) 35, 4. Karéorn 16, 13 17, 23 225 15; xaréornoav 26, 203; 35,1; KaTaory 31, 11 (decree). Kaioravro 3, 383; 55; tonréuou KabeoTGros 33, 14. KdOodos 15, 133 19,10; 38, 243 41s 5, 23 xabddov g, 52 xa’ 6 Tt av 43,73 59. 3 kal passim. Kal-yap 5, 9. 16, 5; 40 Kawas Tpiynpels 22, 3 kalmep c. gen. abs. 19, 23. ¢ part. 23, 173 25, 3 (Pol. 1269 6 1)

18—2

kal dn kal 2, 33

276 GREEK

Kaipés* Kara Tovrous Tods K. 23, 9, 133 33) 133. Kara Tovs x. Tovrous 26, 4; Kar’ éxelvous rods n. 16, 40. év Tovro.s Tots n. 22, 393 & Tots torepov—x. 41, I

kaxd 16, 20; xaxav 16, 21; 18, 8

INDEX

5

23 28, 3. . (4) of periods of time, éxei-

vous Tovs KaipoUs 16, 403 ToUTOUS TOUS K. . 23, 9, 133 Tovs K. Tovrous 26, 4: TOY Kad? éavrév 23, 15; WoAEuov 29, 13 62,

18

* xaxompd-ypwv 35, 19

Kaxoupyf, tva wh col. 31, 15

Kaxoppadys 12, 48 (Solon)

KaK@s 19, 45 375 33 49) 23 59) 14

Kdkwows yovéwy 56, 30; dppavdv 56, 323 émixdhpou 56, 333 olxov dppamkod 56,

4 (twpdrwv—Kaxdoes Rhet. 1386 a 8)

KadNlas dpywy (412/1) 32, 3, 8

KahNlas 6 ’Ayyeddev dpxwy (406/5) 34, 3

KaavlBios appoorys 37, 18; 38, 13

* xaddeepO" xdv Te KaANephoar béy, Kah- ii 1351 @ 9)

Atepodor pera THY pdvTEw 54, 25 KaTayvyvioKkw Ko Thy—KarayryywoKouct . Kadndcxparns Toavcevs 28, 21 54, 7. TolTwy—Odvarov Karéyrwoar kadds kdyabés 28, 31. 7d Kaddv 6, 16. 28, 23 (cf. Rhet. 1380613). dy Twos

Kandv mov 49,1. ‘yuvaika weydhyy Kal . ddixely Karayv@ 45, 9; aduxely Kara-

KaAWV 14, 25 yraow 54, 10. (abrav) Karay@ 45, KANG: Karel els Td KANPwrprov col. 31, 183 16; (Twos) KarayvGow 53, 34; el Tov

rovs elAndéras 26. 25. Kadodor 6, 43 katayoln 60, 12. Ads, xatayv@e 48,

21, 18; 49, 15. KdAer Tovs pdprupas 233 KaTayvGow 84,93 Karayvevtos (rod

55, 19. Kadelrat 13, 16; éxadelro 3, Sjpov) 46, 10. Pass. xatayvwobervros

28. 7d Kadodmevov 19, 32; TOY K. 54, Tov dyous 1, 2

133 Kahovmevor 55, 2; kadoumevous 14, Kardyumu' éhatav—xardéeev 60, 11

63 54, 25. éxdjOn 3, 30; KAnOév 16, *xararyvioets, elod-yew 45, 9 (decree); cf.

8 59, 1 ne KaTiyayev—xarayovons 14, 23 f

(Pol. 1311 6 19) karadelEavros, mpwrov 27, 25 (karédetev |

évapy@s Ar. 1583 @ 15 in epigram on

karaBalvoyres els dar 16, 15; karaBdvras x rev dypav 24, 3. Abs, xaTaBdvres (from the acropolis) 18, 19. KaTafé-» Byxev (ex eguo) 49, 6

karaBdd\w* é) lit. xaraBadel xdmpov 50, 1o, (2) of payment (esp. by instal- ment) 47, 19, 25, 28, 333 48) 2, 6 (7t- why Oec. ii 1346 6 29, 1349 4 8)

karaBody (of payment) 47, 20, 30, 325 48, § (ai xaraBoral rv mpoobdwy Oec.

I

Kars 16, 38; 23,9; 28, 253 33,133 34 133 40, 73 43, 18; 61, 12. KdANoTa n* 40, 17

* xavngpopely 18, 11

= xavovls col. 31, 13, 16 Plato)

xapirés 60, 10 i karadéxyoua’ xaredékavro—Tods worpa-

* xaproupévous, Ta avta&v 39, 4 (decree kispevous 22, 39 (de Respir. 476 a 29

Kaprepdy Arop 5, 15 (Solon karadéxecOat THv Tpopyy)

kard: ¢. gen. (1) Ka®? lepiiv dudcavres 1, KaTakAyw' KaTakAhoavres els Td — olky- 1; duédcayres Kad’ lepdv Tedelwv 29, 39. Mara 15,213 KaTaxApoas— els TO—Tel- (2) kara rOv émerpbrwy 56, 33. (3) KU- Xos 19, 31; KaraxAyobels—ey Te dore pto—elow—xard r&v dmdurav 61, 21 27,

c. acc. (1) of place, (a) xara Oddar- Karaxovew abs. 15, 18. (€av xaraxotow- Tay, Viv, 19, 26, 30; THY xdpay 16, 8; ow abdotvros Eth. 1175 6 43 Karaxov- Thy etcodov 63,7. (4) ‘opposite’, Tov ecOar Thy gwviv Hist. An. 614 6 23) émavupov 48, 17. (c) pudds 22, 213 *KaTaxupw" Karextpwoev—rods vouous 7, Siypous 16, 14; éxdorny (TpirTuv) 8, 153 73 Ta TEAN—KaTakupodow 47, 10, 15 airy, ‘by itself’, or ‘on its own re- katadaBdvros Pudjv 37, 1; -AaBdvTwv sponsibility’, 8, 10, (d) xara mévre Movrixlav 38,15; xpelas -AaBovons 3, 8 mudxea els col. 31, 21. (2) of object, Karadéyw* mepiopdv 48, 10; Tods lrméas 49,

éuroplay kai Oewplay 11, 4. (3) ‘ac- cording to’, rods véuouvs 16, 313 Ta marpia 21, 243 wdoas (rds modcrelas) 28, 373 TH yeypaupeva 31, 153 cedjvny 43, 10; Kad? doov Hy Suvards 14, 143 Kal? 8 re dy—43, 73 59, 33—S0KH 44, 17; ‘in respect to’, ray Kara Thy mo- Arrelay 2, 113 nearly equivalent to da in kard 76 yévos lepewotvn 42, 36; Kara aird ralra evoxds éoriww—ypagdy mapa- vopwv 45, 233 (of rent) radryy Thy ulo- Owow. (4) (a) of parts of time, éviavrdy 30, 4 (decree); éxdorny Thy tuepay 27, 16; 30, 27 (decree);- cf. xard wixpdv 23,

)

kardAvows* Tob modduou 38, 6.

8, 10; Tovs TevraxirxtNlous 29, 37 (de- cree); TptoxtAlous 36, 73; Tpinpdpxous 61, 82. ods Kareieyuévous Kadovor 49, 15 (wAnpwudrwv karereynévw els éxarov vais Oec. ii 1353 @ 19, the only authority for this sense in Jndex Ar.)

"xaradoyets (lnméwv) 49, 93 (in 411) 29,

38 note

Karddoyos* THs otparelas -yevoudvyns éx

karaddéyou 26, 8; Tod K, meréxovras 37, 73 Tov K.—UmepeBdddovTo 36, 123 elo- gépovor Tov x, els Thy Boudyy 49, 10

Tay Tu- pdvywy 13, 243 41, 143 (Tay TeTpa-

GREEK.

xoglwv) 33, 10; 34, 2. él xaradioer Tod Shou curicrauévous 8, 253 cvvicra- Mévous éml TH kK. THs WoNrelas 25, 15 (xardduors ris ddvyapxlas Pol. 1305 a 33 karadices rupavvliwy 1312 6 21)

karahiw tiv tupawlda 19, 8 (karadv- Belons rijs Tupavvldos.20, 1; 28, 7). Thy Boudry 20, 10; 25, 133 41, 18 (kaTehvOn, sc. Bovdy}, 32, 4). mdoas Tas moNrelas 28, 36; Thy duvacrelay 36, 6; 7d KDpos 35, £2; Tods Terpa- koolous 33, 73; Tovds TpidKovyra 38, 5; tovs déxa, 38, 18. xaréduce 28, 21.

Pass. 4 xplows xaradédvrat 60, 14; Mid, xaredtvovro rév médeuov 32, 15. t. gen. Wh KaTahvOdaw ris apxfs 38,

10

Katamddrny adiévat 42, 24.

kararavew Thy évertGoav pidovixlay 5, Io

Kxaramdéovros, Too alrov Too 51, 16

karamdaryels 28, 18; 34, 26. Karamdféa 38, 10

* xarappumalvew 6, 18

* xaraceonuacuéva, Th dvbuara 49, 12. (éxfvous) KATACHMNVdwevot 53, 12

KaTAoWwIrwoW 14, 12

* karaoknpavres, TeixXos 37, 9

Karackeva fw’ Kareckevate duxacrds 16, 13. Thy apxiv — karackevdtovres 36, 12. Kateoxevace (7d modeuapxeiov) 3, 293 Toro 18, 29; pucOopopay Tots bixacrais 27,22. KaTaokevdoac. Thy—druyapxlay 37> 10

kaTackev}, Tours 56, 26

KaTdoraots’ (I) TAS wodirelas 42, 13 TWY TeTpaxoolwy 41, 20; cf. 11, 10; 14, 203 16, 413 22, 63; 41, 6. (2) émerpomfs 56, 37- (3) éudaray 56, 38

* xararpavparioas éaurdv 14, 2

*xaraparifw impf. 7, 5 (kardpacts, Kara- garikés, Ar. sacpius, e.g. Categ. 1267 q xarapacis Abyos eorl karapareKds)

Katapebyw Karépuyov 20, 13

karaxaplfec@ar Thy Kplow 49, 21 (odd tay kowav Pol. 1271 8 3)

*xaraxetporovia 59, 5

KaTenhOeiv rovs dd Pudfjs 38, 153 Tov Ojpov 38, 20. Tav duyddwy oi Kared- Obvres 34, 20; TOv éx Iletparéws Kared- Odvrwy 38, 31. Ta&v KaTednruvObrw 40, I

karéxw" (1) ‘restrain’, od xaretye Thy épyqv 18, 9; €avrév 18, 37. Karéoxe dquov 12, 49 and 63 (Solon). (2) ‘re- tain’, Bovdduevos Karacxeiv abrovs 40, 5. (3) ‘hold’; ‘gain, or keep, posses- sion of’; ri dxpbmodw Karéoxe 14, 6; katelxov Thy apxiv 17, 93 KaTéxovTa Thy dpyhv 17, 18; Karacxjoew Thy Tryepoviay 24, 5; Kataoxévros Tod Syjpou Ta Tpdyuara 20, 16; Karelxov Tip wokw 6¢ éavTay 35, 73 Karetxey THY

INDEX 277

tupavvlda 15,13; Karaoxdvres Thy Tup. 19, 373 abs. kareixev 15, 3 ° karyyopla 55, 21

-*xariyopos 42,93 55, 21, 26

Karyyopw’ c. gen. 18, 23, 293 25, 203 37, 173 §5, 21,23. Karyydpyoe tas evOuvas Klpwros 27, 2

*xarouodomew, Tas 500s 50, II

Karorkd" 22, 42; 39,17f (decree); 40, 26

keirat 5, 7 (Solon): évoua-Keluevov 7, 20

Kedever 8, 7; 49, 263 5f, 143 53, 31+ KedeVouTw 43, 293 53, 34. Kededy 44,7. ékédevey 16, 20. éxédevoey 15, 18. Kedevwy 22, 32; KeNevovTES 37, 53 KeAevovt@y 40, 21

kevéy col. 33, 10

kévtpov 12, 47 (Solon)

Képde kal ydpioev 41, 29

kndeorys 28, 13

-Kydwv 20, 20, 22

‘Kipué (rev évvéa dpxdvrwv) 62, 113 (in

the law-courts) col. 36, 11, 31. i. Kipuiw—mpecBelats 20, 29 (decree) ; 431 30

Kypuces 39, 53 57) 4

knpvédvrwy, Tav oTparyyav 23, 6. 6 dpxwv—Knpitrer 50, 52

Kygicopdv apxwy (329/8) 54, 33

KuBwriov 63, 4f; col. 31, I, 5, 10, 12, 14, 30; col. 32, 20

*xBapiorpla 50, 6

Kiuov 26, §; 27, 1; his evropla 27, 13; Tupapuichy éxuv ovclay 28, 12

klySuvov, wera Tov 38, 3

Kwéas 19, 28

kwe, Tatra 1, 3; Thy alperw ovK éxlvovy 26, 14; K[uvtoalyres Thy Sypo- Kparlay 29, 4

Knafopuévios 41, 33

Knrealveros 28, 15

‘KNels Tas TG lepoy, Tas 44, 3

Knrecoddvns 20, 3, 4, 8, 15, 173 21, 25 22, 4,16; 28, 73 29,17, 203 41, I5

Knverropév 29, 153 34, 24

Knreouérns 19, 6, 293; 20, 6, 13, 14

Kncopév 28, 19, 26; 34, 10

Kdérrns 51, 2

KAetrovT’ 54, 6

Kréwy 28, 15

KAfjua (?) 60, 14 2. ¢.

KApou Kal émixdiyjpov 42, 353 KAjpwr Kal emexdnpwv 9, 83; 43, 213 56, 393 58, 9

KAnpa act. é& bwapxijs KAnpoby 4, 173 (in appointment of archons) déka Kn. éxdorny (rv gudtv), el’ éx rotrwy kvapevey 8, 4; KX. ToUs Taplas éx Toy mevrakoclomediuvwy 8, 7; KA. Thy Boudty rods évvéa dpxovras 30, 25 (decree); KA. robs Aaxdvras were Tors €édovras mpocedbew évavtiov Tis Bovdys 30, 27 (decree)

KAnpot (6 émtordrns TGv mpuTdvewy

mpoédpouvs évvéa 44, 8. KA. (4 Bovdd

278 GREER

ieporrotov's 54, 243 lepomowovs rods Kar’ éviaurév 54, 27; Atovuolwy émiuedyrds 56, 25 KAnpotot—dOdobéras 60, 2; ‘ypap- Maréa Toy Kara mpuTavelay 54, 133 (yp. Tov) éml rods vduous 54, 193; dixacrds (wdyres ol évvéa dpxovres déxaros 5° 6 ypaupareds tov Oecpoberav) 59, 18; Ta Otxaornpia (ol évvéa dpxovres KTA) 63, 1; els Zadapiva dpxyovra Kal els Tleparéa Sijpapyov 54, 34; eloaywydas 52, It; ebOdvous 48, 143 Oecuodéras 55,43 Aoyiords 48, 133 ddomo.ovs KTH. 54, 1; (rovs) rerrapdxoyra 53, 1 (rpirris) Exdypwoev rpets els Thy pudyv éxdorny 21, 14 Mid. kdnpotcO at (ras dpxas) Tous brép TpidxovTa érn yeyovbras 4, 143 7, 293 (of dicasts) kAnpoupévwy—paddrov Tov Tux byrov i rev ércexGv dvOpdbrwv 27, 23; Tovds KAnpwoopuevous TOv évvda dpxdv- twv 26, 15 Pass. krnpotcOai—rov érupnpioivra 30, 27 (decree). Bovday KAnpoidrar 43, 6. (rev rwdyTav) KAnpoiras els ex THs puAhs 47, 23 (Trav ramav ris ’AOnvas Kv. els éx Tis PuARS 47, 73 (€umrnxrys col. 31, 14. «KAnpodvra: dyopayéuot 51, 1; lepwy érisxevacral 50, 1; weTpovduor 51, 5+ (dpxal) wer’ évvéa dpxdvrwv éx Tis pudis Sdns KAnpoduevac 62, 23 (dpxat) év Onoely xAnpovuevar 62, 23 (dwrodéxrat) KexAnpwuevo. xara gpudds 48, 1 *cdypwrnpiov 63, 43 col. 31, 15, 18 KAnpwrds (ypaupareds Kkard mpvravelav) 54, 193 (Taplas) 49, 30. KAnpwrol (ol évdexa) 52, 13 (otropddakes) 51, 8. dpxal kAnpwral 8, 1,53 30, 13 (decree); 43.23 55) 13 62,1 , Kori (Snuociwy xpyudrwv) Kataryryyd- oKovet 54, 7 Kodpléae 3, 13 KOWT 5, 4, 10; 23, 173 40, 18, 215 57, 6 kowdv, wérprov Kal 6, 14 (of Solon). Kowdy, ¢. gen. 39, 5 (decree), els rd kowédy 42, 28. Ta Kowa g, 10; 14, 173 15, 253 16, 103 24, 5; dd Tuy Koway 25, 213 56, 373 Tas Kowas Anroupylas 27, 14 Kowwwvelv c. gen. 6,9; 13, 243 TwY Koww- vowvrwy THs mpdzews 18, 16; Kowwvelv Tis—monritelas 37,8; dudorépwy Kexor- vavnkws 37, II kowwvixal dlkat 52, 15 (not found in Ar, in technical sense) Kordfovca Kal Snucodoa 3, 36; Kyucodv Kal xordgew 8, 23 Koddurés 14, 26; 22, 16 xédmos, Oepuatos 15, 6 xoulfew (atrov) 51, 183; Kouloayros (of troops) 17, 16. Aid. kouloacbar Td Xphyara rapa Tov davecapeuv 22, 35 Kévwv dpxwv (402/1) 25, 8

INDEX

kémpos, 50, 103 *KompoNéyot 50, 9

xpos 12, 13 (Solon)

* kopuynpopot 14, 5

* koopunris 42, 19 i:

xbopos* THY Gedy dtomipnoduevos TH Kio 13, 28; Tov G&\dov xéopuor (of the Par- thenon) 47,6. év kécpy AeydvTwv 28, 18

kpareiv, éxew kal 56, 7; 6 Ofjuds éorw 6 Kparay 41,26; ol Ojo KparnoayTes 40,24

Kparepoy odxos 12, 8 (Solon)

Kpdros 12, 42 (Solon)

KpnvGyv éruedynThs 43, 3

KpiOal 51, 12

xplvew, Sikas 3, 32; avroredels kplvew 53, 6; xplve ras dpxas 7) Bovdh 45, £23 Kpl- vovow (orparryév) 61,12; Kplvaca 8, 9; &xpwev 8, 25; 60, 11; mwapadelypuara— 4 Bovdy 49, 20; KplvecOar Mndtcpod 25, 125; Kpwopevos 27, 26

plows, ob kupla 45, 133 KatadéduTat 60, 14. Kploews—xipios 9, 11; Kploews— yevowerys 45, 53 audicByrnots Kploews 28, 34. mpos Thy xplow 3, 21; KaTa- xapiverOar riv Kplow 49, 22. al rijs Bovdjjs xpioets 41, 27

Kpévos: 6 ért Kpévov Bios 16, 27

KThjua 60, 14

krlgwo dd t&v xrisdvtwv 21, 22 (Pol. 1275 6 33, 1310 8 38

kr@po ovciay Kexrnuévous 4, 6; cuptel- Oew Tov KexTnuevov 39, 10 (decree); 6 76 xwplov KexTnpévos 60, 8, 13

*xvapevew, éx ToUTwv 8, 43 éxuduevoay Tovs—apxovTas 22, 21

Kbapos* Tos did Kudmov durxiAlous avdpas 24, 203 THy el\nxviay TE Kvauwy Boudyy 32, 6

xbBor col. 31, 17 £; col. 32, 31

(KvAwr) 1, 1—3 notes

kbpBes 7, 3 (only in de Mundo 400 6 30, Ta ev KUpBeow dvaryeypaupéva)

Kuptos’ 6 véuos 47, 43 ov Kupla % Kplows 45, 13; kupla éxxAnola 43, 17; 62, 73 au- gopeds KUptos, Axupos, col. 63, 213 Ku- play (Wipov) col. 36, 203 6 Te ay of Oicacral Wydlowvrat, Tobro Kupiov elvat 45,113 6 Te dv yvoow ol dixacrat, rolro Kbpidv éore 48, 27; dvres KUpioe 52, 19

C. gen. GMWdVTWY 41, 253 TOV abTay 61, 21; Tav ypaypdrwv 84, 143 Ths Soxtwaclas 55, 12; éavrwy 39, 33 THs Kploews 9, 12; ovdevds 54, 223 THs mé- ews 20, 113 34, 16; 35, 23 THs mo- Nrelas 9, 7; Tov wpayudrwv 6, 1; 18, 13 41, 23 55,15 Ths yypov 9, 6

c. inf. 3, 313 8, 233 29, 36 (decree); 44,133 451193 56, 423 58, 13 61, 14

c. part. 37, 13 Kuplous elvac Oava- Toovras

kuplws, gnuwsodoa 3, 36

*«ipos, 6 Hv év rots ducacrais* caréd\voay 70 35,12

xupotat 7a ciuBoda Ta pds Tas wédes 59,

GREEK INDEX

16; kupwhévrwy d& TovTwy 30, 1 (only ev rH Tevedlwy rodcrelg, p. 1569 @ 27, frag. 593°, éxdpwoe Kal epi rod lélov masdos TypnOhvat Tov vopov)

Kuwpedldat 17, 14

xuew 56, 42

kvoly woddatow 12, 54 (Solon)

* kwhaxpérat 7, 13

kwriw* éxwbdvoev 18, 113 22, 32. c. taf. yevéoOat 34, 10; davelfew 6, 23 KaTou- Kodopety 50, 11; Kowwvely 37, 8; map- tévat 19, 31; as in Ar. (Judex p. 419 b 32) never followed by 47

Kupéas &pxwy (560/59) 14, 8

kwupdois, Xopnyovs 56, 9, 11 (Kwppdois xopnyav Eth. 1123 @ 233 xopoy Kwpy- dav dw more 6 dpywr ewxev Poet. 1449 61)

xwrl\dovra 12, 19 (Solon)

Aayxdve* Slkas Aayydvovar (mpds) 53, 23 TP Spdoavre Aayxavet 57, 30. ov EAaxov col. 37, 8. To eldnxdros col. 32, 143 tovs elAnxéras col. 31, 243 Tots elAnxd- ow col. 32, 24. ds av Aaxy dtalras 53, 29; els olov dv Aaxy (Sixacfijpiov) col. 31, 32; Kad’ 8 ri dv Aaxwour 43,4. 6 Kaxdy 47, 43 els 6 Naxwv 44, 13 TO -ypdupa Td Aaxdv 63, 24; 7d SekacTHprov 7d Aaxdbv 49, 213 7d Aaxdv pépos 30, 16 (decree); 58, 7; TP Aaxdvre 50,9. ol AaxdvTes 57,24; of X. él ras Wydovs col. 35, 30; T&v AaxdvTwy Sikacr&v 63, 6; Tovs Aaxdvras 4, 143 (ade) 30, 26, 28

Pass. ypapat cal dlkac Aayxdvovrat mpos adrév 56, 29; ypapal X. mpds adrov 57, 93 Slat dX. wpds adrév 58, 43 rv. Olkae 57, 12

Aakedaipdrioe 19, 7, 213 23, 193 29, 33 32, 143 345 8; 37, 183 38, 253 40, 20

Aaxedalpwy 37, 173 38, 7) 27

Aakiddat 27, 15

Adkwves 19, 7, 21, 253 23, 20

AapPaver droryuhuara 56, 45; Slenv Aap- Bavovow 42, 34; A. Swpeay 46, 7; els cirnow Xd. 62, Io. AapPavwv 25, 26; AapBavovres apyvpioy 43, 11; A. Tptd- KovTa pvas 50, 3. Thy Ovyarépa avrod Mhperat 14, 23. edAaBev (Thy Setcav) 18, 353 mpoorarny éhaBev 6 Sfuos 28, 34 AaBely (addnrplda) 30, 8; A. THY dexa- tnv 16, 223 r. THY efovolay 41,43 THY tryevovlay d. 23, 11. A. Uxvos 18, 25. AaBu 22, 36; r. Thy dpxjy 14, 163 15, 13; Swpedv A. 46, 6; A. THY emeueheray 38, 29; A. Tods Kopuynpdpous 14, 5; Mot- xov X. 57, 193 AaBdvres domwlda 42, 315 Spa AaBovra 54, 8. Sapa AjweoPas and AdBwor 55, 32. AnPOevTwy (=adbv- Tov) 19, 34

Aaprddwy ayaves 57, 7 a

Aapmpas, Ehyrovpyet 27, 14 (Xoprryetv hau- apus Eth. 1122 6 22)

279

AavOdvw' AdOy—Epypov -yevouevov 43, 22

déyw* Aéyer 12, 15; Aéyouor 6, 8. Aéywr 14,125 6 wpbrepov A€ywv,6 Uarepov Aéywv, col. 36, 15 f3 év kéouw AeydvTww 28, 18. Adyerat c. acc. et inf. 14, 8. 6 Aevyope- vos Aéyos 18, 26. édhéxOn 21, 5. v. el- mew and etpyrat

Aecuidvy (‘Imouevous) Heracl. epit. 1. 12

Aelrw* (Slknv) Ercrrev 16, 34 (retinet Blass, coll. Dem. 49 § 19, 59 § 60)

Aewdpiov 19, 12, 15

Aelws 12, 19 (Solon)

AdoBio 24, 7

Aevxol, KvBot col. 31, 19

AevKG* mivdkcov AedevKwpevov 48, 20; e- Aevkwpéva ypaypareta 47, 16, 273 &3, 22 (only in Phys. Ausc. 185 629 6 dv- Opwrros.od Nevxds eativ dAAG AeNevKwTat)

Aewkébpeov 18, 20

Afjuvoy, dpxat els 62, 16; trmapxos els 61, 25; Tov lrméwy Trav év Anury 61, 26

Anvaly, éml 57, 5

Aneis* Ankers KANpwv 43, 213 vEetuar—rovs Gddous mpds THY Anew Exdorny 30, 17 (decree) ; tva veunOwow els ras Térrapas Angers 31, 19 (only in de Mundo 401 b 20 4 Kara piow HES)

*\npodow 17, 5 (Afpos Pol. 1257 6 10; Anpwdns Rhet. 1414 616; Hist. An. 579 4 3)

Anroupyla 27, 143 86, 16

AproupyS* 27, 143 29, 35 (decree); 56, 15f

Alay 12, 12 (Solon); dpyaikds kal Nav GrAwS 14, 22 (Alav dpxalws Pol. 1330 & 33; Mav amdodv Meteor. 339 6 343 amas 365 a 26)

AOos* duyivres mpods Te AlOw 7, 5; Badl- four mpds Tov NOov 55, 28

AoyifSuevor, ol Tots Urevddvors 54, 53 TOUS Aoyrouévous Tats dpyats 48, 14

Xoytoral déxa (ris Bovdfjs) 48, 13. Aoyt- oral déxa Kal cuviyopo: 54, 3

Adyos* (1) ‘speech’, rdv dddov Abyow érre- rédecev 15, 23; Tov Tpd Tod Yndloparos Aéyov 29, 6; in the law-courts, (elpnué- vot) of Aéyou col. 33, 31. (2) ‘current account’, 6 Tov Snuorikwy Aébyos 6, 13 (=os of Snuorixol Aéyousr 6, 8); 6 Ae- youevos Aéyos 18, 26; ‘rumour’, ‘re- port’, duacrelpas Adyov 14, 24; dieord- pnoav ol Adyor mpos Td TAOS 36, 4. (3) ‘in name alone’, Moyw povoy 32, 12. (4) ‘accounts’, Aéyor dmreveyxely 54, 4

Aowdopjoas 18, 12; édocdopyoaro 28, 17

Rowrrds* 7d Aourdv 22, 413 31, 18 (decree); els Tov Aourdyv xpbvov 30, 15 (decree); Ta Nowra (én) 17, 4

Aokdy—spawor 12, 21 (Solon) .

Noxayoi 61, 18 (de Mundo 399 66; Oec. ii 1350 511; Aoxarylar Pol. 1322 5 4)

Adbydapus 6 Ndgtos 15, 11, 15

Avkopujins ZKdptos Heracl. epit. 1. 7

280 GREEK

*huxdrodes frag. 5

AvKos 12, 54 (Solon)

Avkoipyos 13, 20; 14, I

ead Thy B\nv Puan mpagw 18, 21

*upotrotés, KNeopuy 6 28, 20

Avcavdpos, King of Sparta 34, 16, 25

Avockpdrns dpxwy (453/2) 26, 19

Avoluaxos, father of Aristides, 22,39; 23, 13

Avoiwaxos 6 ard rod Turdvou 45, 2-7

*uxvelov col. 36, 17

Awrodurys 52, 3

padaxds 3, 7; 18, £2 _ BaOV 14,173 15,.19; 16, 3; 29, 8 &c. del pGddov 27, 23.—pdduoTa g, 43 13, 18; 16, 40; 18, 4; 22,163 25, 2. moA- av wey cal drwy, w. dé OnBalwy 15, 113 alrlwy pw. yevouévuw Ilecdvdpov Krv 32, 93 maXora with numbers 32, 9; Tay Tpoyeyernuevuov 33, 5.—uddAa does not occur. pavioy <évexa> 35, 15 (law) *yuavreuta lepd 54, 25 pdvrewy, weTa TOV 54, 26 Mapafwn, év 22, 10 Hapruplat 53, 10, 175 55, 30 Haprupel 5,143 6, 19 wdprupes 55, 30. Kddew TOUS udprupas 55, 19; émeddy wapdoxnTat Tovs fh. 55, 20 Mapwvela 22, 30 *paotryopbpous—vrnpéras 35, 6 paxatpay, oracduevos Thy 18, 38 paxny, thy émt Tladdyvlic 17, 16; Thy év Mapadav. 22, 10, (Trav dard Budjs) viknodvTwY paxy TOUS meTa TaY Tpid- xovTa 38, 2 waxerat, mpds éxarépous tirep éxarépwv §, 9 Meyaxafs (the slayer of Cylon) Heracl. epit. 1. 15 Meyaxdfjs ‘Immoxpdrous ’AXwrexA0ev 22,24 Meyapéas* év r@ mpds M. rodduw 14, 23 (+ ept Zarapivos) 17, 6 péyas’ yuvatka peyadny Kal KadnY 14, 25. peliwy (‘too powerful’) 22, 27; welfw 10, 4; oTddov pelfw 19, 30 péyiorai Kal mpdra rar dpxav 3, 43 Ta ThetoTa Kal Ta wéytora 3, 35; 8, 225 mparov Kal péyiarov 9, 3; meylorny elxev Stvapuw 13, 113 méyiorov mayTw qv 16, 29 péyeOos Too Tyuwjparos 7, 14 Mééwv (Bacrrevs) 3, 9 * ueOdpucbpuevos, éxeioe 19, 6 peOloraro 22, 27 peOvuv 34, IT pédaves, KvBot col. 31, 19 Hédrw c. inf. praes. 6,6; 7,293 18, 115 24, 12,143 45,33 Col. 36, 10 c. inf. fut. 63, 10 and col. 31, 36 LAA wAnpwOhoec Oa (not noted either by H-L, or in Class. Rev. v 185 4).

INDEX

els 7d péddov 6, 2; els Tov wédAoPTA xpivov 31, I

véuynrat 6, 20; 12, 2 : :

Heuypoupla® p72. 12, 55: (only in de Virt. 1251 6 25; peuypluorpos in Hist. An.

* 608 4 10)

pev—dé passim, 1, 2£; 3, 2f &e. we without 5¢ 19, 9; 48, 23. sé in irre- gular position 48, 24; mév—dé—éé 21, 13. bev ov assim, 2,103 3, 14s 333 4,1; 8, 83 9, 1, 10; 10, r &c.

we <ro> 28, 35

peva’ wevew 44,53 49, 25 pmewev 16, 353 pewdvrav 38, 31; 39, 3- menevnxe did Alou 3, 38

wepltew xara Tas—rpirris 21, 10; (Ta Xpjpara) peplfover Tais dpxats 48, 8

pepiopts 48, 9, 11 (Met. 1027 6 20 Bz ws. dvripdcews)

Hépos, KaTd 55, 5; TO Aaxdy pépos 30, 16 (decree); év méper 43, 73 86,133 & TO péper col. 37, 7- Ta dvo wépn 51, 17+ ddvepe Thy Xapav—rpidxovTa pépy 21, 125 Suavetuar rérrapa mw. 58, 6; vevéunr- tar—béxa p. 63, 20

peodyetos, ) 21, 14

péoos? LéAwy—r7 ovale kal rots mpdypace rav—péowy 5,123 THY wéony TodLTelay 13, 18; pipo—adAloxov Exovoa ev re péow col. 35, 28

pera c. gen. Tov ’APnvalwy 19, 333 avdrod 20, 11; éAlywv 20, 18; démorépwy 11, 13; TovTwy 14, 6. pel’ Srdwy 18, 28. MeTa omovdFs 25, 17

¢. acc. Tovs dpxalouvs 28, 293 Tov— Odvarov 19, 43 Thy Tay véuav Oéow 14, 73 THY KdBodov 15, 23 THY TOY TUpdyYwH Karddvow 13, 243 21, 33 Thy mpwrnv KatdoTracw 14, 19; Tauryy Thy Kard- aragw 22, 6; ra Mydixd 23, 2; 25, 23 Thy vavpaxlay 23, 22; TH viK«ny 22, ITs ov todd 6, 10; 00 monty xpdvov 25, 243 34,135 TAaOTA 2,1; 10, 35 14, 203 15,13 19, 13 24, 1 &c3 Thy rod warpds TedevTIVY 19, 38; THY TUpawlda 22, 23

peraBody 13,183 16,23 41, 5

meradidbact 36, 9; meredldou 40, 9; meré- Swe 40,9; meTadodvar 36, 39. Constr. Tuvds TWL

peTaxply, év 12, 65 (Solon)

Merakively (rods vouous) 31, 9 (decree)

péradda, 22, 293 47, 8, II

* weraddixal Sikat 59, 14

lend 3, 83 18, 6; 20, 16; 38,

perarlOnu Tas ordoes dudorépas pera- GécOa 11, 9

Metéxw’ apxfis 7, 29; Tod Karaddyou 37, 7; obdevds 2,12; THs médews 8, 30; 26, 225 Tis wodcrelas 21, 53 42, 23 mdvTwy Tov Torwy 21,15. meTexdvTwy ToAAGY

- 18, 14

Merewpous, dxXETOUS 50, 12

GREEK INDEX

MérotKos 43, 253 57,183 58, 11. dlkar— HeTolkots 58, 5, 10

pérpios* wérpiov yevérOar Kal. kowdy 6, 143 Hérpioe Tots woNlrats 35, 8; edmopodvres Tav perpluv 16, 9; exew Ta Bérpia 27, 16. év._perploot 5, 17 (Solon)

Herplus 16, 3 : i

Hérpov 7, 17, 26; mevraxdoia pérpa 10, 43 Héerpwr kal crabuar 10, 3

* peTpovduot 51, 5

wexpe déka Spaxudy 52, 18; 53, 53 eb- Owiy 4, 12; Zddwvos 2, 93 dpxiis ré- Aovs 56, 73 Tw .52,.37; THs viv (sc. mohtrelas KataoTdcews?) 41, 23 (roo vov usurpat Ar.); rod « 63, 20; col. 31, 4; TOUTOU 23, 15 TPLOY 43, 25

HH, unde, pndels, wre passim. unde pel? érépwy 8, 29 (law of Solon). es a 7: ot II, 35 16, 103 39, ecree); col. 35, 34. TE —drnra 16, 8 et

Mydixd, wera 7a 23, 25 25, 25 41, 16

* undcopod, KplvecOar 25, 12

My défros 29, 6

pay od phy ard 6, 123 7, 20; +xal 2, Ir. od pay eixds GAA g, 12. FF why 29, 12 (decree)

Hay, O° pnves 32, 43 wiva 62, 133 wivas

13.7

unview 18, 8; éujvve 18, 33; pyviowr 18, 34

Barnp and pnrpds waThp 555 14

Mikpdv 3, 143 II, 123 15, 173 25, 33 41, 10. & otrw puxpots 6, 17

Marriddys 26, 53 28, 10

pac8ds (dtxacrixés) col. 33, 183 col. 37, 73 cf. rpets 6Bodovs 62, 7. a. (exkdy- otagrixds) 41, 29—35; 62,6 f

fucbogopa: Kareckevace pucOodopay Tots Sixacrats (Pericles) 27, 22; dveu pcdo- opis 30, 5 (decree). sucPogpopay tro- piger Pol. 1304 6 27

picGopbpa Ta Stxacripia, érolnoe 27, 11; pndeuday dpxny elvar mcPopbpoy 33, 95 micBopbpov 33, 9; picBoddbpov éxkdy- clav—dréyrucay moeiy 41, 29. Cf. Fol. 1303 6 1; Rhet. 1399 4 2.

pucbopope, ev rais orparelats 27, 103 pioPogopovcr Spaxyhy 62, 6; méravrac pisOopopay 49, 8. Cf. Pol. 1317 6 35

picOot Tovs otkous r&v dppavav 56, 42; pucOotor Th picOwdpara 47, 8; TE da- xovTe puaotor 50, 9. Fass. drws—py pio OwOjoovra 50,7. Mid. orparwsras picOwodmevos 15, 18; euicOuoavro Tov —vedw olxodopeiv 19, 20

* woOdpara 47, 8

Klc@wors 47, 27; mcOdoes THY Temevav 47, 26. Kara Tatrny Thy ploOwow 2, 53 Tas pucbwoeas drodidotey 2, 7

Bic" pucely 28, 24

uve 10, 5, 8, 93 evTds TpLdy uvdv 49, 26; TpidKovra pyas 50, 3; éxardv wvas 56, 26

281

Monorbelins dpywv (457/6) 26, 16

* pvnowxaxely 39, 20 (decree); 40, 11. éuvnoixdanoe 40, 16 (uvyotkaxos Rhet. 1381 64; 2th. 1125 a 5)

* motpa, (=xépos)* cuveBddero 8 ok éddrTw Motpay. 19, 24

Hoxelas ypady 59, 11

Morxov AaBdy 57, 19

Mévos ¢c. gen. 3, 21, 38 &c. ob pdvov— ada kal 40, 18 &c. wor’ abrhy pbynv Xwpely thy Wiigov col. 36, 9. Tpurxt- Alo pdvors 36, 9

* uovoxltwy 25, 18

* woptat 60, 8, 9; édalav poplay 60, 11

Movrixla 19, 53 38,1,16; 42, 21. (orpa- tyes) els Thy M. 61, 6

Movotkhs aywy 57, 5; 60, 5. povoikhy vixGow 60, 21

pvdpor 23, 24 (only in de Mundo 395 b 23 uddpovs dtamrvpous)

* pudwOpol 51, 11

Mépwyv 1, 1

*ptorat, Grav olxovp&ct 56, 22

BuoTHpLa 39, 83 57, 2

Ndévos 15, 11

Nagios 15, 15

* yauxpaplas 8, 13 f

*yavxpaptxod apyuplov, éx Tod 8, 18 (de- cree)

*vatxpapo 8, 14,173 21, 20

vaupaxia, 7 rept Dadapiva 23, 5; év Dada- Hive 23, 223 27, 7. 1 wept Kperplay 33, 4 &v’Apywovoas 34,4. ev Alyds rora- Mots 34,15. yrvxnoav—vavuayxlay 34, I

Tots Tip

5

vaupaxe’ évauydxnoay—mpds rods BapBda- pous 22, 37

vavrnyouLévou 22, 37; évaumrnynoaro 22, 36 (only in Oec. 1349 @ 25 vavmryeio Oar Tpinpes wéAAwWY. vavrrnyés and vavrnyla in Pol.; vavrnycy in Eth.)

vais: ém’ addorplas vews 34, 6; vijes ppov- plées 24, 18; dAdae vijes 24, 19; els Tas vais 23,7

vauTicny Sivamy, Thy 27, 5

véuw* vetpwat—rovs &ddous mpos Thy AHEw éxdoryy 30, 16 (decree); va veunOdow —els tas Trérrapas Ayjéers 31, 18 (de- cree);.éx Tijs puAfs éxdorns veveunuévar Tpirrves Tpets 8, 133 vevréunvrat Kara guards déka pépn ol Sdixacral 63, 20. Mid. édv ris wh "0€\y Kowa ra dvra véperOar 56, 37

Neoxdfjs 23, 14

* veoroXlras, Tovs 21, 17

véos dy 27, 33 TH veg Bourg 46, 5. vewre- pos 19, 6; v. dxrw Kal déxa éréiv 42, 13; vedrepov (?) 26, 5

*pewplwv, ppovpot 24, 15

vews 6 &v Aedgois 19, 20

*yedooxor 46, 2, 4

veworl 3, 18

282

vlenv, pera Thy 22, 11.

Nuxlas 28, 15, 2

Nuxddnuos (or Nixouhdys) dpxwv (c. 483/2) 22, 2

wxG" wukév 12,9 (Solon). évixnoev (rods immeis) 19, 31. ¢. Qct. cogn. muchas Thy éxt Tladdnvlde pdxnv 18, 123 Thy év Mapadan pdixeny vexno dvr 38, 25 Thy povorkhy wixGow—riv ebavdplay— Tov -yuurixdy dyGva Kal rip lrrodpoplay 60, 20f, c. dat. vixnodvrwy wdxn 38, 2; Tos TH vavpaxlg vixGvras 34, 5. 6 vixjoas (of one who gets a decree passed) 45, 24. (In the law-courts) édy O€ viKHon 42, 11; obros vikg col. 36, 35

voultev 6, 21; vouloavres 18, 18

vouluwy, etpyerOat TOv 57, 14

VOmLoUA 10, 4, 7

vopobecla 10, 2

vopobera: évonobérnaev 8, 8; vowobernoas II, 15 (both of Solon)

vopos 4, 233 16, 41. 6 per vduos early 60, 13. elcayyeNas 8, 26; mepl rol dorpa- kicpwod 22, 5. vouov €Onxe 8, 28; 22, 17; vduous €OnKe 6, 3; 7,1; vouos éréOn 21, 43 22,13, 26. vouov wih érerpderov Oetvat 59, 6. dvarypdwavres—vduous 7, 33 doapels—vdbuous 9, 113 wh yeypdpOat Tovs vduous dTAGs unde capGs g, 7; v6- ous (Starnpety) 3, 35; vouous eEnyeiobat 11, 63 vbpuooy Oéows 14, 73 &v Tots vouors 10, Ij KaTa TOUS vouous 4, 215 Tovs— vb pious Tous Trept Tuy’ Apeotraryiray 35, 103 bro T&v vow 51, 25 exproavro T]® p vdpup 22, 12. vdmor quoted, Tept Tay TopLdv 8,6; Zérwvos 8, 16; wept ray rupdwwy 16, 39 *yopopuarakety, ért 7d 8, 20 (vouodtAakes and vopopuAakta in Pol. )

véov, tpépecbe péyav 5, 17 (Solon)

vooyoas 17, 2. Met. ra wpdyyara voo- obvra 6, 193; dierédovv vocobvTes 13, 12

VOKTG, Kat ‘fudpay 4, 2

viv 3, 24 &c. 76 viv elvat 31, g (decree). kal viv 3, 39; 7, 29. ére xal viv 3, 25; 7,6; 8, 6; 22, 7. viv d€ (opp. mpére- pov per) 53, 243 54, 193 55) IT, 253 56, 25; OI, 2; (opp. apbrepov dé) 56, 9; (opp. sore) 491 203 (opp. 7d per é apxiis) 55, 43 vOv 8 after impf. 51, 9

Nikat 47, 5

dvOurmos 6 ’Aplppovos 22, 28; 28, 10

Revalveros dpxwy (401/0) 40, 27

Eevlas ypady 59, 8

E€vos 19, 23; 20, 63 57, 18

méptou aoa Be 40

Enpd cal bypd 7, 1

Edduvos (du@opeds) fol 36, 5, 7+ EvAwor(?) ‘«bBot col. 31, 19

Evviyyaryov 12, 28 (Solon)

6. 7a mev éxdy ra 8 dxwy 27, 1o.—Td Svo0 wépn 51, 17+

6Bodés’ 41, 333 62, 9.

GREEK INDEX

Article often found in periphrastic phrases, of srepl *Avaxpéovra 18, 5; of mepl Tov KYeouevny 20, 123 Tov ev TH modrela 38, 9; Ta wept ras dpxds 31 335 74 mpds éavrods 13,135 Ta els Tov moe Mov 235 103 Ta TOO Todeov 30, 30 eaten Th Karas Thy Torirelay 2, 103 29,

ne omitted (1) before the names of officials, as Oecuodérat 3, 30; Hg kal trmdpxous 4, 8; cf. 30, (2) in certain set phrases, as év sop §I, 10; 52, 143 év doret 50, 53 év d&xpomddet 18, 14; els dxpdmohw 55, 333 60, 18 (but eds rhv dxporohw 20, 13); dvev Stxacrnplov ywwoews 45, 43 éx Karahoyou 26, 8; év mépe 43, 73 Kara wépos 55, 53 els rok 8, 245 mexpe dpxfis Téhous 56, 73 eree Sevrépy 14, 73 15, 9 &c; xal adrdv Kai yévos 16, 443 rls marpos (and pyrpds) warhp 58, 14 f. Similarly with dpxy7 5, 6, 20. (The exx. mainly from H-L, s.v. Articulus.) See also 66, éxacros and rpérros. dbo 6Bodovs (rots dduvdros) 49, 28; Svoiv 6Bodroiv 28, 22; Tpeis 6Bodots 29, 32; 62, 73 TérTapas 42, 263; 62, 10; w&re 62, 7; evvda 62,

7

de, article sometimes omitted in papyrus after, 7, 8; 29, 29; 37, 5; not omitted in 42, 1 révde Tov Tpd7rov.—vduos—obe 16, 42

* 6dorovol 54, T

656s 50, II—I43 54, 2

édvvat 16, 21

é0ev (1) ‘whence’, (of place) 15, 7; (of origin &c) 6, 11 80e pact yevécbar; 8, 3 dO er Stapéver; 18, 12 Obey ouwvéBn; 19, 20 b0ev edrépyoay xpn- parov; 21, 5 dOev ehéxOn 7d pudoxpr- vetv. (2) ‘wherefore’, é0ev cal 3, 8; 17, 153 21, 18; d0ev &re kal vov 7, 6; b0ev borepov 19, 13

olda passin. oldev ddcxodvra 49, 113 My el59 57, 20; elddres 14, 12

Olpev 27, 19

olxelas, éx 77s 7, 173 TGv olkelwy 40, 24

olkelws elxov 36, 5

olxérnv daroxrelvy 57, 17

olkhuara 15, 21

olkias éav—olxtav AapBdvwow 39, 10; ol- clas 20, 9; T& Xwpla Kal Tas olxtas 52,

olkodomety 19, 20

olkoSounuara Snudbova 46, 8

olkou éppavixoh Kaxwoews 56, 343 olkous éppavav 56, 43 * olxoupGot ptorat, Stay 56, 22

olk&* c. acc. olketv riv woAW 22, 193 ¢ pracp. rods olkoivras vy éxdore rév Ofhuwv 21, 16; olkety &v r@ dora 24, 3 &e. genoay (2) 3, 23

GREEK INDEX

olvoxoely 20, 23 (scol.)

olouar’ ofovrar g, 10; ole Oar 10, 6; ero II, 10

olov, ‘for example’, 35, 145 57,19. *ovx olov* papyri lectio 40, 23

éxrd 23, 7. dxrwxaldexa Eryn 42, 3, 13

6dBos 12, 13, 18 (Solon)

Odvyapxla xaréorn 32, 7; ddcyapxlas éze- Obpovy 34, 20; & ddvyapxle 38, 293 Thy ddyapxlay éfjrovy 13, 193 xeELpo- Tovey Thy ON. 34, 26; Thy mporépapy dr. 37) 11; Ti éwl Tay TpidKovra 6d. 53,

4

édvyapxeKh, 7) wodcrela 2, 23 mpoodeuévov rots éddvyapxiKols 34, 25

Alyos’ dv? éAlywv jv 2,63 4,24. of dAl- you 41, 28; T&yv mwodAGv SovAcvévTwv tots éAlryous 5, 2

dvywpO" ToUTwY perv wvyapycay 36, 12

Sdos* Thy Ehyv—mpGéw 18, 21; ex THs pu- Ais GAns 62, 2

brws 13, 12

bucAlars—mpooryero, Tals 16, 37

Gmshodvras, mpos xd pw 35, 19

Buvupe duvdovor 3, 11; 7, 6; 22, 73 55, 313 55) 34. Suvivres 7, 53; TOUS Spkous ayoce Tols “Iwow 23, 23; Gpooay xpi- cecOat 7, 43 mept Tod Bpxov Svrwa xpy éudoar ypdat 31, 6. dudcavres 42, 4, 153 55> 29) 335 7 My 29, 12 (decree); kad’ iepdv 1, 1; Kad? lepiv redelwy 29, 393 dudowow 39, 15

bpolws Kal mpédrepovy 26, 12; duolws—xal ét r&v GNwv 35, 17

dpororyla 19, 35

dporoy&" duoroyotow 28, 31; duodoyy 57, 193 dporoyHar 52, 33 ouodoyerrar 28,

I

elroy, dpxew TIS 40, 23

* 6uoppovicavres 14, 18

oubxpwv TQ dixacrnply, Baxrnplay col. 32, 43 Stxacripioy éudxpwv 79 Baxrnple col. 2, 11

svedituy 12, 553 dvedlcas 18, 36; dvet- Sloat 12, 57 (Solon)

Gvoua 7, 193 14, 273 171 133 48, 203 54, 36; 63, 19

dda, dveddvres 15, 21; ebapduevos 14, 133 Mh) Ofjrae 8, 29; mapeldeTo 15, 153 mapelNovTo 37, 143 Mapekecbar 37, 43 maperduevos 15, 13; mapexduevor 4, 473 ard tev StAwY 18, 27; Tots éx Tov Sriwy 33, 83 éx Tov drAwy Tis To- Nrelas otions 33, 14; MeO” STAw 18,

28; wepl trav brhwy 15, 24. éf¢racw év &rAots 31, 11 (decree) 6mdirac 24, 18; 61, 21, 24. (oTparyyes)

éml rods omMras 61, 4 * drdopaxety 42, 22 Grébrepos dv 46, 33 dwordpws wor’ exec 3, 14 8rrov 43; 15 émmpa 27, 17 Srws (1) ‘with subj. pres. (a) after past

283

tense, dpywow 4, 21; €£9 27,173 7 Os II; meréxy 21, 153 MpoowrTAral 41, 313 Pudrdtrwow 3, 21; pjr’ émiOupdor pire oxoddfwow 16, 10; wi 35, 165 wh TapapehGot 16, 153 why cuuBaivy 21, 9. (4) after pres. inf. dependent on pf. ind. mpooréraxrar—émipendeiabat, Sirws TONATAL 51, 2—4.

(2) with szdy. 2nd aor. perdoxwor 21, 53 pndéva \a0y 43, 22.

(3) dws <dv >—Bovdrevawvrat 29, 18 (decree); dv cupBovredwor 29, 24 (de- cree); dv o&a F 30, 20 (decree)

(4) with fut. ind. (after émimedodv- tat), 8rws—éorai—, STws—mwrHo ovat 51, 10 f; wdels xaraBadel 50, 9; xpr- covrat (xpijowvrat MS); (after oxorod- ow), drws wj—picOwOjoovrat 50, 7

épy# bird ris dpyis 18, 37; ov Kareixe Thy épyiy 18, 9

6p0Gs, rovety 41, 28

Opifw wpisay Tois doTpaxtfouévors—Karot- Kelty 22, 413 ws ev robTw TE TAHGEL THs dperfjs wpiopévys 36, 10

* 8pxca tovjoerv (?) 3, 12

Spxov érolncav 22, 7; Spkovs Wmocev 23, 233; Tots Spots éuuévew 40, 13

Spy 19, 24; oppais (?) 28, 16

8pos 12, 23, 66 (Solon)

dppavol 24, 20; dppaverv, émmederrar 56, 39; dphpavav kaxwoews 56, 323 olkous éppavay 56, 43

épparxds* ofkov épparcxod kaxwoews 56, 34

6p@ passim. sdpav 8, 26; dpav col. 35, 33; ldmv 16, 18; lddvres 18, 16

Os: é€ oF 60, 12. ef’ @ TE 14, 223 34, 17- Ti av Soxq avrois dpiora éfew 30, 19; 7 dy jyyavras ovpdépew 31, 7 (decrees)

dolwy 43, 30; +xpnudtwr 30, g (decree)

8a0s* Bcov dv 51, 143 Kab” Boor 14, 14; boo wh 22,18; Soar hudpac 43, 13

Scoorep’ Soourep 63, 7; Soamep dv 63, 10

Gorep' ék Tod avrod réNous obmrep 4, 133 70 abrd direp 31, 7,13, 31. Omep éyévero 38, 11; dep kal cuvérecev 40,15; Sep eldOace rovety dravres 40, 4; Sep éoriv dya0ob ronlrov épyov 28, 38

boris’ 8 re Xphoerat 22, 31. 8 Te dv ywa- ow 48,273 Soxn 48, 22; 63,153 éyxadg 48, 213 mpooriunoy 63, 73 XElporovyien 47, 113 Woplowvrar 45, 10; Mi Tpo- ypdwwow 45, 22. olrwes Karadétovor 29, 383 dvTw’ drodoximdocey Bovhh 55, 11

borpaklgw 22, 18, 24, 25) 275 38, 40, 413 _ 27, 20

dorpaxicpds 22, 13

éorpaxogopla 43, 23

Grav passim. 4, 17 &c

bre passim; c. opt. 16, 353 36, 14

bre passim ; 6, 18 &c

ob passim; 7 od 49, 28. obxl 18, 32 (Poet. 1448 & 18, 1459 @ 2t &c). ob

284

Biv Grd 6,12; 7, 26; +Kal 2, 115 ob May elxds GAdd g, 12 obdé and ovdels passim; obd’ dv els etror

71 30

ovdels* obdeutds 7, 283 od8’—els 7, 30

obkére xpOvrat 8, 16 &c

otvexa 12, 28, 53 (Solon)

obtw 14, 17

ovela 4, 83 5, 125 27, 13, 193 49, 16. F1. 35, 23 253 47, 13

otre—otre 38, 30f

obrepo 12, 51 (Solon)

obros passim. Todrov <Tbv> Tpbrropv 12, 1. TovTwy & elvat 30, 5 (decree)

ottrw, otrws, passim. év ot'rw pixpots 6, 17

*[dperre]rav (?) 47, 14

dgelrew Spaxwhy ris huépas éxdorns 30, 333 Opelhuww (mpotka) 52,13; d@elrovcr TP Snpooly 63, 12

* bpdnua 63, 16 (bpelAnua Eth. 1162 5 28, 1165 @ 3)

dxerovds weTEwpouvs—rovelv 50, 12

dpé 26, 6

Tdyyacov 15, 7

awdryos, "Apevos* v. “Apevos

Tlatameds 14, 26; 38, 22

mardiwdns 18, 4

TradorplBns 42, 22

mais 16, 19; maides 2, 8; 4, 93 19, 35- éay ph admrodGo tots matoly Tov cirov 56, 46. xopyyols—maily 56, 11 f; macy xopyyotvra 56, 18

* ranratordoura 6, 12 -

maw II, 113 12, §53 14, 21; 15, 93 16, 35; 20, 6. mddw é& brapyis 4, 16. maw 5€ 12, 10, 15, 26

TladAadlw, éwl 57, 18

TladAnvids, émi 15, 13

Tlava6jvara 18, 11, 15; 43, 43 49, 233 54, 28, 31; 60, 4,193 62, 13

Tlavétwy Heracl. epit. 1. 3

wave TES 47, 4

mapa’ c. dat. é&vres—map’ adrois 24, 8; mapa Tots “EAAnow 23, II

c. acc. édOdvte map’ atrév 24, 16:

mapa 7d Aewxdpeov 18, 20; Tods érw- vopous 53, 26; Sdtav 11, g; Td Bér- TiTOV 35, 19; map’ dy déiKetrac voor 41 23

tapéBodov’ p. 253 frag. dubium 7 (not found elsewhere in this sense)

TmapaBao Tov vouwr, édy twa 7, 6

Tapaderyua rojoew 40,15. L2., ‘plans’, 49, 20.

mapadldwor Sicacrnply 46, 10; (rd ypay- Mareta) rots dmrodéxrais 47, 32; Ta mev tdia Tots Stxagrais 48, 24; 7d mpdypaypa 44,10; (7d €dAatov) rots raulas 60, 16. mapadidbace (ra TéAN) TH Bovdy 47, 173 (rév Karddoyor) Tots immdpxots 49, 103 7 Tlunua rots duaryrats 53, 6; (rods éxlvous) rots—dixdfovew 53, 143 TH Kt-

GREEK INDEX

Béria col. 32, 233 Tots eAnxdow col. 32, 243 éxdory Tov Sixaorav dbo yipous col. 32, 31. mapaddcovras trois mwhy- Tals. 52, 7. mapédwxay Thy dxpbmohw 19, 36. Tmapadwow éepyacpéva 46, 55 mapadodvat Trois &vdexa 29, 27 (decree)

™ mapaiBarovans Tis yuvatKos 14, 29

* Trapaw 5, 10, 143 36, z

“qapatpoduas Tay ’Apeoraryiriy évia mapel-

Aero 27, 4. (Of Orda) mapehduevos 15, 13; mapelero 15, 15; mapehéoOa 37, 143 Tapelhovro 37, 14. Cf. mepearpod- Mae.

mapaxdOnrar TH Bovdk# 54, 18, 20 (only quoted from de Admir. 845 4 28 éyel- pew Tov vidy tapaKkadypevov)

mapakadav abs. 14, 16

Tmapdxerat TE dpxorre xiBdrea col. 31, 35

mapadapBdver cbuBorov col. 32,143 wapa- AapBdvover 7d dyadwa Ths ’AOnvas 47, 5; Baxrnpiay wdduy wapadauBdvorres col. 37, 3. édv mapardBwow (ra Snudora) 48, 26; (e0Ouvay) 48, 26. mapadraBav Tovs xopnyous 56,10; mapahaBbyres Thy apxjv 38, 6; Ta ypaypareta 48, 23 (ras Stkas) 53, 7, 143 (lrméwy Kxard- Royov) 49, 113 (Td Tpbypapyua) 44, 10

mapaAla, 21,13. mapadluv (ordots) 13, 17

mapadr\déew 11, 12

TIdpanos 61, 27

Tapapedwor Tar dypav 16, 15 (évépyea mapnuehnuevyn Eth. 1175 & 10)

mapavolas, dtkn 56, 35. Cf. de Part. An. 635 5 5

Tapavouoier 28, 37; wapavomovoas 28, 38; Tapavomowvrwy 3, 21

Tapavéuav ypady 45, 24; §9, 6; pl. 29, 23. ‘ypawduevos mapavéuwv 40, 8 (Fol. 1255 @ 9)

* rapavootvra 56, 35

Twapatdyolay c. dat. 29,20. Adv, mapa- TAHotov 10, §

Tmapardnolws toot 63, 21

mapackevdtw’ mapecxevater elpyyny 16, 25

mapdcraots rlGerat 59, 8 (found in Fol. in different senses)

* rapacrparnynOfvar dua Tov Piltwv 6, 8

mwaparnpovyres 18, 14

maparlOevrar, Baxrnplar kara Thy eloodov 63, 7

exe abbot Kfpuxa Kal addnrhv (of the archons) 62, 11

mapaurixa’ mpds 7d 1. BA€érovTes 28, 28

Tapaxpiua 18, 25

Tapaxwpyodvrwy trav Kodpdiav—3, 13; Tapexdpov airy Tot dtiwmparos 23, 8

TapeykNlvovoa Tis Backs, piKpov 41, Io

* rapedpeve 56, 3

*mdpedpor (to the dpxwv, Bacide’s and monéuapxos) 56, 1; (to the ev@uvar) 48,

15 mépeyu (elul) mapmy 11, 4, 63 THS wap-

GREEK INDEX

ovons monirelas 37, 8; év 7G mapdvre 6, 23 +kapy 31, 23 Tay wapdvrwy (masc.) 38, 133; mpos 7a wapdvTa mpdyyuara 61, 10

wéperwe (elu) els thy *Arrixhy maprévac 19, 31

mapépyws 28, 35

mapépxouat maphrOer els rovs—rémous 15, 73 TGy wapeAnvObrwv—uvyotkaxely 39, 20 (decree)

mapéxet 5 év wdpet éxarépa TSv pudav Tod- tov 56, 13. ded. rots bra mapexo- pévois 4, 53 TOv Sra twapexouevwy 4, 7. éyyunras wapacxomevous 4, 123 Ta- pdoxnra: rods pdprupas 55, 203 Tima- para mapexouévors (?) 39, 24

waplornu wapéoryKey immos 7, 25

Ildpyys 19, 12

mapotuvOévra 18, 13; mapdtuve 18, 36

tapopyloavras, did rods 34, 7 (Act. hither- to found in Gk. Test. alone)

mapope Ta dbgavTa—apewpwv 35, 33 €f wh Te Tapewparo 26, 18

TapoxAS’ Tapwyrer 16, 25

mappyatla 16, 23

* rapwvdptov 17, 12

was, dqas, passim, mdvTes 12, 23 wavT’ dvddacra Toujoewv 11, 113 wdvTa owwy 18, 33 S

méoxw’ brs TOY dvTicTacwrey Tatra Te- movOws 14, 4; mabely } daroreioa 61, 13; 63, 153 (laos) 6 Taira rafdy 49,

4

TWATHP 19, 393 55,133 Tarpos warhp 55, 14

marpixas dbéas, Tinwydvuy dia Tas 26, 9

TaTpikas Xpwuevous, TH Tove doy 28, 32

adrpios' mdétpiv modttelavy 34, 18, 223 Tév Tarplwy 3, 16; marplous vouous 29, 17 (decree); marplovs Ouvolas 57, 83 xara Ta mwdrpia 21, 24 and (in decrees) 31, 33 39: 6, 19 ih

marplia, obous 11, 143 BeBonOncévar rp marpldt 14, 14

*rarpbOev mpocaryopevovres 21, 17; TO évoya Td éavTod rarpobev 63, 19

marpwos, "Amé\\wy 55,163 p. 251 frag. 1 (only in Pol. 1303 6 34 9 Tw Tarpowy

voun,

marrdaAg (2) 16, 18

Tlavoavias, Spartan general in Persian war, 23, 20

Tlavoavlas, Aaxedapovlwy Baciret’s 38, 23, 25

natw: Mid. ématoavTo xpwmevot 7, 13 wéravrat picdopopav 49, 8. Tis doed- yelas wavoacOat 36, 1. éravoduny 12, 29, 63 (Solon)

mediaxay (orders) 13, 19 ;

mefas wdoxous p. 255 frag. alienum 15

melOw* obk Erebev 14, 12. eloas 18, 343 40, 12. mewbevres—raira 24,6. “yu

vaxl miObuevos 35, 16 (law of Solon)..

mevobped’ 8, 18 (Solon)

285

Tlepacevs. Ileipacéws* rod IL. dpxovras déka 35, 53 Tay é« IL, xareAOdvrww 38, 313 tovs Tob II. dptavras 39, 22; Tols éx IL. ovyxaredGotow 40, 9}; Tovs éx rod IT. 40, 225 Thy éx IL. xdodov 41,23. ITe- pated’ 38, 23; 30, 23 £3 50, 53 61, 7. Tlecpaéa’ 38, 163; 42, 213 51, 1, 6, 8, 10; els Il. djuapxos 54, 343 (oTparnyol) émt rov II. 61, 6 i

meta c. inf. 6, 83 20, 10; 34, 19

Tlelcavdpos 31, 9

Tlewsrorparidar 19, 24 f, 34

Tlewclorparos 13, 20; 14 passim; 15, 223 16 and 17 passim ; 23,143 28, 53 41, 13

médayos 23, 24

Tledapyixov retxos 19, 32

* rehdrat 2, §

Tlehorovvyclous, wédemos mpds 27, 8; Tar IL. 38, 13

mwéumrw (ere) 13, 3, 33 26, 19

méumrw ov yap érenrov—pel” Strwv 18, 28; Thy Trourhv—réumrovow 57, 6

wévys 47, 43 wévyres 2, 33 wévynow 13, 14

* revOnuepor, KaT& 30, 24 (decree)

*mevraxirxidiot, of 29, 35; 39 (decree); 30, 23 31, Io (decree); 32, 1, 123 33, 8, 12

mevrakdctot, of 21, 7; 22, 73 25,10. mm. 22, 223 24, 14 f, 185 55, 6. 7m. Bov- Aeurds 35, 33 43, 6. mevraxdowa 7, 17

mevraxootouediuvos 4, 18; 7, 10f, 273; 8, 73 26, 173 47, 3. -ov Tedely 7, 16

mévre 13, 8; 19, 36. mevrexaldexa 51,9.

mevrernploes 54, 28—32 (Sid wevraernplios Pol. 1308 6 1)

TEVTHKOVTA 19, 393 21, 83 24, 15

* wérdos (of Athena) 49, 20; 60, 6

mépas, érl 38, 24

wept’ ¢. gen. Tis droKkonris 12, 26; Tav- TS THS apxfs 13, 113 avrawv 8, 26; 12; 23 Tdv Bovropévwy 12, 153 THY SupKy- pévov 25, 73 KAnpwyv Kal émikAjpwv Q, 8; Tay vouwy II, 23 TOY GrAwY 15, 233 Tod éoTpakiopod 22, 5; mAelovos motn- cacbat 6, 16; Tod rAjPous 12, 10

c. ace. (local) 7d dorv 21, 133 Zada- piva 23, 43 Idyyatov 15, 7; Tov Oep- patov KéMrov 15, 6, Tas dpxds 9g, 1; TOV éorpaxtopov 22, 13; Tov xpbvoy TodTov 23, 10.—ol mept ’Avaxpéovra kal Z- povldny 18, 53 Tov KAcopévyy kat Ioa- yopav 20, 123; Tov "Icaydpay 28, 9; Tdv ‘Piywra 38, 28

mepiarp®" mepiarpefrae rov orépavoy 57, 26; dmavra mepiethero Ta émlBera 25, 8; mepielthovTo avTay Thy Sivamw 25, 22. Cf. rapapd

mepieyeveTo TH mode TaAavTE ExaTdv 22, 30

* repichavvouevos TH OTdoEL 14, 21

mepiépxouat’ Ta lepd meprAGov 42, 20; kara Ojwous mepudvres 53, 3

mepivwodmevos éinunyopynoe 28, 17 (zepte- (Gc0a Tv popBelay Pol. 1324 6 16)

286

Tlepixdfjs* (law concerning citizenship) 26, 223 mpds 7d Snuaywryelv EAObyros II, 27, 1; érolyoe picbopébpa ra Sixagrypia 27, 125 mpos tabryy Thy xopyylay émde- momevos 27, 18; ews Il. mpoeoryce Tod Shpou 28, 1; Tod Shuwov (rpoordrys) 28, 12

mepthaBelv? kabddou 7, 7d BEATiCTOY Q, 13

Tepirohovot Thy xwpay 42, 32 (not found in technical sense; occurs only in frag. 12%, 1476 a 6, Gdtov TepiTodobyra)

wérpas oxdmrovra 16, 19

rHyvupe’ dpous—rennyoras 12, 33 (Solon)

1npS' Td cua Ternpwpévous 49, 26

miap 12, 64 (Solon)

muelpas xBovds 12, 24 (Solon)

midavwrepos 6 Trav SnuorixGy Abyos 6, 12

mixpos 19, 3. mikpbrarov 2, 10. mKpds 18, 10 mudkiov AedeuKwuevoy 48, 20. (dixacrob)

mw. mUEwov 63, 18; muvdxciov col. 31, 7, 10, 30; pl. 63, 6; col. 31, 5, 113 col. 32, 19; col. 33, 9. év Tots duxacryplas . pépew Exacrov mudxiov (of Hippo- damus) Pol. 1268 a 2

mivak 49, 12 (rlvaé dy dvéOnxe—xopnyjoas Pol. 1341 @ 36)

*nimpdoxw Ta wpabevra péradra 47, IT; p. jwempayeva 47, 12 f; TéAn Tempa- péva 47, 16 (rpabévrav 7 prcOwbdvrwy Rhet, ad Alex. 1425 6 23)

miorevw’ émlarevey 21, I

tlorews yap 18, 34

TioTOTATOS 54, 17

TAavapevous 12, 39 (Solon)

traTTopevos 18, 32

treovdis 62, 18

mAeovekrelv 4, 15

mreovetla 7,173 16, 32 -

whHOos, TO z, 23 9, 53 12, 10; 16, 243 20, 5, 123 21, 2,123 22, 43 25, 43 28, 243 34, 95 36,43 41, 24, 32 7d 7A,

. Tov ToNTwY 26, 21. WAGs, ‘num- ber’, 36, 103 40, 4

WAH C. Len. Jy 23 245 73 2O, 31 TW éav 43, 133 54, 31- mA Bovrciomw 62,19. Any wuornplows 39, 7 (decree)

TArNpyS, Whos col. 35, 29; col. 36, 20,

33

TAnpwbjcerOa, Sixacrhpia 63, 11; col. 31, 37 (not found in Ar, in this tech- nical sense)

TAnolov c. gen. 3, 25. 15, 21

Trolw, &v 57, 23

Thovatos* 2, 4, 63 4, 14, 19} 22, 33. trovowwrdrous 56, 8

whourlviny 3, 2, 37

twhovTd zmpf. 6, 11

wébev ray Shuwy 55, 13, 15

Toujpara 8, 133 6, 20

molnots rw Nixkav 49, 22. 12,2

Ta TH. olkjpaTa

€v TH woujoe

GREEK INDEX

monrhs 18, 6

motov Tédos TEAEL 7, 20

mous eB move? 55,17. Torey Thy ceodx- Oeav 6, 6; movetv—pérpa 7, 17 f, 28. mdvra Tow 18, 33. roiro—eérolec 16, 4. dvddacra movjoew 11,11. emroinoe 27, 11; Boudhy érolyce 8, 18; éolyoe —orabud 10, 7; drehji—érolnow 16, 243; doadets rovfoat Tods vomous Q, II; Tojoa—xpeav diroxoryy 10, 2; Te

yeypaypéva tojoa 11, 7, Mid, roe- cirat ras Tpippers 46, 7 amrodnulay éroijoaro 11, 4; 13, 1. 46 éAtywr

TojowvrTat 29, 93 wept mdrelovos sotn- cacdar 6, 16 (cf. Eth. 1160 6 15). éforhiclay mowmodpevos 15, 173 buodo- yiay ronodpevot 19, 35. aAKIvy—rot- evpevos 12, 53 (Solon); motolaro 12, 61 (Solon)

* rokepapxelov 3, 28

* roreuapxla 3, 6

Toreuapxos 3, 5, 17, 273 22, 93 55s 53 esp. 58

TOAEMAPXW -Xjoas 3, 29

Toeuikd, TH 3, 73 23, 14

méodenos’ mpds Meyapéas 14, 2; +7epi

Zadrapiva 17, 6. mpds TWedorovynotovs évéorn 27, 8; suwveorioavro Tov wb\Ee“ov 24, 17; Ta els Tov WOAELOY 23, IO; Ta Kara roy médenov 29, I. ab Kard 7. dpxal 62, 18; al mpds roy 1. dpyal 43, 53 44, 73 OF, 1. év Todduw 57, 20; rereheuTnkbow év TY woddum 58, 3. 1. & 7h xwpa 61, §

Toren drelpwv Too Todeueiv 26, 9. To-

Aewe? obros OF, 5

TOALOPKW 19, 323 20, 14 mohis* THs médews, Tupavvely 6, 153 Thy

Tis mwodews owrnplay 6, 16; oracia- fotons Tis médews 8, 293 Tis mbdews ph meréxew 8, 30; Kuplous ris méAews 20, II; Oappovons Tis modews 24, I. Tov év TH Wodet 3, 353 TH WOAEL, Tept- evyéveTo 22, 30; TH ToAe TaTpiKWs Xpw- Bévous 28, 32. mbAw—aracrdfovaar 8, 27; olkety Thy wow 22, 193 mpds Thy mod dpe mpocedOdvra 26,6. Ta obu- Boda ra wpds Tas wove 59, 16

=dxpbrodis els wow 8, 243 ev TH monet 24, 15

jontTela 2, 2; II; 31 13 4, 153 5) Ty 53

7st, 73 8, 213 9, 2,145 11, 15 13, 14, 18, 253 15, 123 20, 53 21, 53 22, 25 25s 2) 1 153 27, 6, 11; 29, 28, 33. Pl, 24, 8; 28, 34, 36; (‘grants of citi- zenship’) 54, 18. 7a Kara Th o- Neretay 28, 2; Thy éml Trav Terpaxoclwy T. 29, 53 7 TwY TeTpakoclwY 7. 33, 1; 60 OALywr rojowvrar Thy mT. 29, 93 dvaypdyovras Thy 1. 30, 33 Tov ev TH modirelg 38, 9 ‘ TokireveoOa KaTd mdoas (Tas ToXcrelas), Suvduevos 28, 37; €f’ @ Te Todrevcov-

GREEK INDEX

ToL Thy wdrpioy moNrelay 34, 18; doxe? Tobro jodirevcacOa Kadds 40, 73 TOY AOqvnot Todtrevoapevev 28, 29 Pass. érodTedOnoay "A@nvaio. kadas 23, 83 KaAGs TodtrevOfvar 33, 13

wonlrys passim, arya0od moAlrov épyov 28, 38; T&v wodTGy éviouvs 8, 27

TouTiKés, TH pice 18, 3; dvdpas—roN- Tixovs 28, 32; Ta wéyioTa TwY ToNTL- kay 8, 223° 7d moderixd, dewds 23, 143 wept Tov TwoAtriKwv 31,83 Tay TohTLKWP (conj.) elonynrhs 27, 20. moArTLK@s 14, 173 16, 14; woduTiKwrara, 40, 17

modAdxes 8, 27; 16, 14, 26

ToAaAXH 12, 33, 39 (Solon)

ToAdaxod wéuvytrar 6, 20; m. yéypamrat 8, 17

modus ToAdv xpbvoy 2, 23 5, 33 16, 343 18, 233 36, 13; od woddv xpévor 15, 3. per’ ob Todt 6, 10. odd mpds wud- TyTa—érédocay 37,15; vewrepos Trond 18, 6; Onporuwrépa wort 22, 1. MWOAAG@ c. compar, 16, 28; 19, 1. of moddol 2, 10; 4, 23 27, 213 28, 27; 29, 8; 36, 5. Tay yvwplawy—ol moddol 16, 37. To\Awy — G\dwy 15, 10; peTexdvTwr ToAdwv 18, 14. moddovds 11, 8; Todas dppisByrjcets 9, 9. TH TOAAG 21, 19.

Twrelov 4 eviatoios 3, 22. wAéov F drat 31, 173 44, 14. mAelovos 50, 7; meplt melovos 6, 16. of mAcelous 3, 93 melous 21, 53 24, 125 50, 8. Ta WreioTa 3, 353 8, 213 49, 31

Toumevw 18, 27

*roumh 57, 5. Thy woumiy, dmrooréh\wy 18, 16; diaxoopotyra 18, 20; dvadd- para els 56, 243 Kowy méumovtw 57, 6; dvotxodar 60, 4, moumradv 56, 21

movnpbs 35, 20; 55> 26

movnpta 37, 15

mopevovrat, els Tlerpasda 42, 21

moplaaca Spaxpas éxdorw éxTw didwxe 23, 6; dBororv éwdpicey 41, 333 THY diwwBertay 28, 20

Tloctdedvos col. 35, 7

moré 16, 323 more—vov 5€ 49, 203 dmord- pws mor &xet 3, 14

wbrepov—f ob 49, 17

mov, éTépwOl 12, 15

wot radra Ta bepd éore 55, 16f

mpdyyara* ‘government’, mpod-yovres ra mpdypara 17,10; Karacxdvros Tol O7- pov Ta mpdypara 20,17; Ta mp. Tape- SwKay Tots wevTaktoxtAios 33, 8; MeTa- Sotvas Trav mp. Tos BeATiaros 36, 33 Ta mp. BeBaiws elyov 38, 125; KUpior Tay mp. 18, 1; KUptos 6 Sfjuos vyevdpevos, Tov mpayudrov 41,2. ‘Public affairs 7h Te mpdyuara vorotvTa maprupel 6, 19; ékarropnodvrwv Tots mpdyuace 23, 0 ‘Occupation’, wz¢ae studia ac negotia (Herwerden), 79 odolg xat rots mpay- pact Tov péowy 5, 12

287

mpaky, mpdrrev thy 18, 143 Thy SAnvY eduujvavTo Thy mp. 18, 21; Kowwvovy- Twv THs mpdzews 18, 17; txvos THs mp. 18, 26 mpgos 16, 5; vouoe mpgor 16, 39 mpgérys, To Sijuov 22, 19 mparrew thy mpatw 18, 13; Ta Kowd 24, 53 0 ay HyGvra cuudepew 31, 7; éd’ ols péOnoav ox Exparrov 38, 7; émpar- Tov 19, 11; émpate 25, 11 Mid. érparrero dd Trav yeyvopévwr dexdrny 16, 12; [rod awpdrrjecbas (ras éxrioes, or THY Eyulav) 8, 24 mpeoBelats 30, 29 (decree); 43, 30 (in an- i sense, xara mpecBelay Pol. 1259 13 tpéoBes 37, 16; 43, 32 (not in this sense in Index Ar.; mpecBevral alpotvrar Pol. 1299 @ 19)

* mpecBevoduevot, mpos Aaxedatuovlous 32,

14

mpecBvrepos 18, 2 mpecBurdrny 5, 8 (Solon)

mpecBuTns 14, 14

Tplv TuxElv 12, 29; StaBovredoa 32,4; &c. mp av dmoypaywyrat 39, 18 (decree); mapade 60, 17. mp [A] dduxécOar 38, 22 (de Part. Anim. 668 @ 35). Cf. Eucken, i 5—8. mply—éée?dov 12, 64 (Solon)

mpd, (1) of place, rob Bovdeurnplou 53, 253 Tov Oupdy 14, 13. (2) of time, rod SteNOety 4, 16; THs évarns mpuvravetas 28, 373 Tis vouodeclas 10, 2; THs ovA- Ajwews 18, 18; Tovrov 26, 17. Tov mpo (?) rod Wopioparos Aéyor 54, IT

Tpodyovres Ta MpdryuaTa 17, 9; Tovs TL Tpoayayévras Tow avrovs Toy wy Kadas éxdvrwv 28, 5; mwdoas (ras 7o- Aurelas) mpod-yew 28, 37

mpoayopevuv, (1) ‘proclaim’, 57, 133 (2) ‘state beforehand’, mpoeurety 6, 7; Thv Spay Thy mpoppyOeioay 30, 32 (decree)

tpoatpoduat' [mpoypetro] mavra Stokely Kara rovs vouous 16, 30; mponpetro Thy mo- Arrelay Stocxety adrds 27, IL

tmpoavaxplyew 3, 32

mpoBody 43, 243 59, 5 (not in Ar. in tech- nical sense)

* poBovreupa 44, 1Q

mpoBouvresew els Tov Shuov 45, 21 (Pol. 1298 4 30, 1299 4 33, 1322 4 16)

- mpoBovrot 29, LI

mpoyeyernpevav, uddora Tov 33, 6; Tals -ais cuupopais 40, 18

*mpbypaypa 44,10 5

mpoypipover (oi mpurdvers), boa de? xpy- parle Thy Bovdhy KTX 43, 16; Tas éxxdnolas ib. cf. 45, 23. (of Beopo- Gérat) Tob mpoypdwar Ta Otkacrypia Kv- pioe 59, 1. (Of the people) zpoypd- govew 53, 36. (Found only in the fragments, and in Oec. ii 1352 @ 1)

288 GREEK

*mpodavelfw* rots drépous mpoeddverve xpy- para 16, 6

**rpodiacmelpw' mpodtagmetpas Aé-yov 14,24

** mpodpomever 49, 6

mpbipouot 49, 5 (not in Jwdex in this sense

tmpobwoératpoy, Aewvdptoy 19, 15 (scol.)

* mpoedpevery 44, 14

** mpocdpirt, ypagh 59, 6

mpbedpor 44, 8 (found in technical sense in the fragments only)

tpoerety 6, 73 v. Mpoaryopevwy

** mpockarerp6G 47, 35

* mpoctavacrdyres Tv [Aovrdy] 18, 19

mpoéxovow addjrwy 3, 23; Tals ovolus KTX MpoeXovTas 35, 24

mpoprOev 4 méds, HEXpt TOUTOU 23, I (MéxXpL tivds mpoépxovrat Pol. 1280 @ 10)

mpoOupmoupevwy 38, 21

mpobvpws 26, 3

mpotkds (dlxn) 52, 12

mpolornu mpoeoTHKer 13, 17; 28, I, 10, 143 34, 243 MpoeioryKecay 19, 9; 38, 21. TpoecTynKws 21, 23 WpoecTUTWY 25, 23 mpocotdvar 26, 5 (Pol. 1285 u 36, 1319 4 7) :

mpoxerrat 54, 323 wept Trav mpokerudvey 29, 25 (decree)

mMpoKANoLs 53, LO, 17

mpoxpivw* mpoxplyee and mpodkpwev 8, 25 mpoxplvovras 30, 12 (decree). mpoxpt- veoOat 26,15. ék Tv mpoxpiOévTwy 21, 253 22, 22

apoxplruv, éx 8, 13 30, 11 (decree); 31, 4 (decree); 35, 4

apbvoia éx mpovolas dmoxrelyy 7 TPHTY 57; 18 (Pol. 1300 & 26)-

* mrpotevia 54, 18

mpokévors, Sikar 58, 5

*apérvdov Tis dxporré\ews, pds 7d 15, 19

mpoppnbeioay, Thy wpay Thy 30, 32 (de- cree); v. mpoaryopevwy :

mpbs’ c. dat. mpds Tovros 23, 133 24, 15, 173 26, 6; Totv Suoty dBoroiy 28, 22. T®e MOw 7, 5. Tots ldlas dvres 16, 9

c. acc. mpds adAWAous 23, 17; Gp-

gorépous 11, 143 16, 38; Tods "Apyelous 17, 18; Tovs ’Apeomaryiras 15, 143 Tis pos abrdv pidlas 18, 93 mpos THvy—Bor- Gevay 19, 20; mpds Thy Bovdty eloay- yéd\rew 4, 22; mpds Td Synuarywyeiy éd- Obvros 27, 13 mpds éxarépous paxerat 5, 9; mpds Tov "Hqiddrny eheyer 25, 133 Thy Kplow 3, 213 Tas meuyimouplas 12, 553 7d vomioua 10, 7; 7d mapavrixa 28, 28; 7a Tapdvra mpdyuara O1, 10; Tov Tlewslorparov 14, 223; al mpds Tov mé- Aeuov dpxal 43, 53 44,173 61, 13 mpds Thy wodkw mpocedOovra 26, 6; Ta ovu- Boda Ta mpds Tas Wéders 59, 16; Sikatos ampods Thy Todtrelay 25,6; mpds TO mpé- muNov 15, 193 Tas Tyds 51, Il, 133 mpds xapw dmudoidvras 35, 19

INDEX

mpocaryopevorres, marpbbev 21, 17; mpoo- nybpevoe 21, 21

mpocayaybyras Tovs oTparyyols, Ta TOD mrodéwou—akdnpwrl (decree). Mid. rais Oparlacs mpooryero 16, 38; mpoonyd-yero ad 20, 4 (Pol. 1296 6 37, 1303 5 36)

Sh oe ee mpocedopevor aglow abrois dpxovras 35, 53 (only quoted in /xdex from Pollux viii 92)

TpocavaBivat 15, 18

** roocavatnTioat 29, 16 (decree)

mpocaprncavres, Thy ywGow rod SiacryTod

53, 13 mpbceu (elul)* tas mpocotcas SucxoNlas

359 15

mpdbcerps (elut)* mpootdyres atr@ 11, 2; Ta Xphuara Ta wpoctdvTa 29, 29 (decree) ; did r&v mpoordvTwy 39, 8 (decree)

* rpocemiAapBdvovta Ty wAnOE Ti efov- olay 41, 24

tpocépxopat ¢c. dat. 43, 31. mpooehOeiv évavrloy rijs Bovdfjs 30, 28 (decree). mpos Tiv wodw dpe mpocedObyTa 26, 6. Cf. mpdcerpe (ety)

mposéxovres, Tois vouos 26, 13 (frag. 496’)

TpoojKov, ov 13, 25

mpoaGev (2) col. 31, 2 ‘

TpoctaThrat Td WARS, Sws 41, 31

* mpookaegomevos erodépKet 20, 14

tpookabnuevou 8’ abrov 19, 33

Tpockadoduat mpookdyOels Povovu Sikny 16, 32; 6 mpooxaderdmevos 16, 343 eav— TpockaAfrat 29, 25 (decree)

* mpookhjoes 29, 23 (decree)

™ MpooKkoouO* Mpocexekdaunvro 13, 21 (not found elsewhere in this sense)

TpockuvoivTes 14, 30

mpocddous, Tas 16, II

* rpocopylfouai mpocopytabevres 19, 29

* rpocopucduevos év mAolw é 5 23

* rpoomaparlOer Oa c. dat. 63, 22

Tpoctrotodpat* wpocerowdvTo dubdkev Thy marpiov TodiTelay 35, 8

mpooratns, tryeuwwv xat (of Hipparchus) 22,20. mpoordryns Too djuou 2, 9; 20, 18; 23, 12; 25,4; 28, 6; 36,6. mpo- ordrny @daBev 6 Snpos 28, 3

mpooTaTTw’ TpoorérakTat 51, 2,153 54, 2

Tpocribéace Toy olkelwy 40, 243 mMpoc- Getvar 58, 7; 6BodAds wpooriPera 62, 93 poo benévou Tots GrvyapxeKois 34, 25

*mpooripGow atr@ ol dixacral 63, 14; tpocrtnon 63, 17 (Bekk. Anec. 219, 16 in Testimoniis, c. 57 § 2)

* rporepala, TH 48, 8

mporepov 3, 28; 7, 10; 8, 20; 10, 53 12, 27; 17, 143; 20, 20; 62, 13 63, 16. ov—mporepov—mpw av 60, 17. mpbre- pov pév—perd 5&— 53, 3. mporepov— vov 5é, see viv. 6 mpdrepov Néywr, 6 Uorepov déywv, col. 36, 15 f. ois mpd-

GREEK INDEX

TEpoy vauKpdpots 21, 20; ev Trois mpore- pov xpévots 28, 4

mporepos* TQ mporépw erer 53, 243 Thy mporépay ddvyapxlay 37, 11; ol mpore- pot 22, 23

mporiéacww 44, 11; 48, 10

mporpérw’ mporpéyey 40, 14; mpotrpepe (els) 19, 225 (éml c. acc.) 27, 53 6 mpo- tpéwas (€mi c. acc.) 23, 19

Tpovmapxovoas TpiTTos, Tas 21, 10; TOV mpotirapxovrwy béxa mpoBovhuy 29, 11

* mpovmoBddNwvra (?) col. 36, §

mpogpacis ToO dmiévat 42, 353 THY mpo- gacw rod [rpdrrlecOar 8, 243 dpxnv kal mpdgacw 13, 13.

tmpopepw’ mpotdeper, 4 IlvOla 19, 21 (not in /ndex in this sense)

mpoxeporovlas, dvev 43, 31 (only in frag. 396")

mpuravela 43, 14, 225 Kara mpuTavelay 47, 18; (ypappareds) Kara mp. 54,133 Kara Thy wp. 48, 14; +éxdorny 61, 115 émt rijs evans Tp. 47, 21,25, 283 mpd ris évarns Tp. 54, 11

MpuTavetov 3, 25, 27; 24, 20; 62, 12 (only in de Mundo 400 6 19)

mMpurdves 4, 11; 29, 21, 323 41, 313 43s 325 44515 45, 23

mpuTavever 43, 735 7) mpuTavevovca pudy 44, 9; ol mpuravedovres 43, 10; 62, 8; of wera Thy ExTyy mpuTavevovres 44, 18. (The Zndex refers to the fragments only)

mp&ros 22, 27; of mp@roe 5, 123 mparac Tav dpxGv 3, 4. MpOrov pev—éreira (never érera 5€) 9, 33 21, 33 24, 85 25, 65 27, 133 29, 213 34) 45 30, 85 43, 115 81, 10; 56,73 57, 25 59) 1-— elra42, 20.—éxelOev 62 15, 6.—devTEpor, tplrov 30, 29 (decree).—perd dé Tadra 55,13; 7d mpGrov—pera Taira 3, 3. mparov—rére 28, 3; Tore mpOTov 15, Q; 22, 12, 233 41,7

Tlv@ia, 19, 213 21, 26

TlvO6dwpos apxwv (432/1) 27, 8

Tlv0ddwpos dpxwv (404/3) 41, 3; IL. "Em- fAdovu 29, 7, 10, 16

TluPoxdelns frag. 13 p. 255

TlvAos 27, 25

*riiwov, mivdKkioy 63, 18

mupkaias (‘ypapy) 57, 16

tupol 51, 13

mri ow 14, 173 wwrore apparently does not occur

mwdyral 7, 133 47, 73 52, 8. (Lndex refers to frag. 401” only)

mud? Tobrov 7} modus 42, 10; TH wéTAAAa mwhotot 47, 9; Tas ovolas 47, 153 TH xwpla 47, 23. of mwdodvres 51, 7- Tradioovsw—argira—adprous 51, 12 f. érdder Tov KapTrov 7 Tos 60, 10; émd- dovy of Sfmor (Tas dpxds) 62, 3. Lass. brws—mwdfrat 51, 3. Ta mpabévTa 47, 11, 22. Td mempapéva 47, 12 f.

S. A.

289

padlws 16, 36 gOuuta 8, 28 Paixndos 15, 6 péfew 12, 24, 44 (Solon) pgd" ovrw rijs dpx fs éppufwuevys 14, 18 ‘Plywr 38, 21, 28, 32

odxos 12, 8 (Solon)

Darayls 17,75 22, 383 23, §, 225 275 7 dpxwv els Darapiva 54, 343 62, 11

Dduwoe 24, 7

Zduor, dpxal els 62, 16

cavls 48, 9 (only in de Admir. 832 a 9)

capes, yeypapia g, 8

*ceodxOea 6, 4, 73 12, 27

edHvyV, KaTa 43, IO

onpalyovoay, ws—7, 25

onuciov 5° émipépovow 3, 10; 0. d€ dépovor 4, 19. Gre Terevtala—eyévero Tav dpx@v, o. kal ro—dioiKely 3, 15; 6. 8 6re 13, 233 o. 6 Gri—d—vdpos 8, 5; o. bé—yap 3, 25

Zicedlas 6 év 2. rTedeuTHoas 28, 155 THY év 2. yevouevyy ovppopdy 29, 2

Xipwrldys 18, §

*olrnow, els 62, 9 f, 17

*oerexdv (?) éumdpiov 51, 17 (pap.)

otros dpyés 51, 11; mept-clrov 43, 18; 700 olrov 51, 16; Snmot rw alrw 49, 23 éav ph dirodwot Tots matol Tov cirov 56,

4

oiroptdaxes 51, 8 (Judex quotes corre- sponding frag. only)

oxdmrovra, mérpas 10, I

oxety, ‘tackling’ &c. 46, 23

*oxnmrwrrat kvew 56, 41

oxnpes 56, 14 (od Sordov émiriujocews oxhyw Top. 131 5 11)

Zktpopoprwy 32, 7

oxddov 19, 14; 20, 21

oxorrovat drws wh c. fut. 80, 6

ZkvAdalov 22, 42

Zxbpov, dpxal els 62, 16

o[pixpéy] 12, 12 (pap.?); v. mexpds

Dodrwy 5, 5, 11; 6, 1, 63 8, 7, 16, 253 9, 2; 13, 2f; 14, 8, 15; 17, 6; 22, 1 f; 29, 203 41, 12, 153 (appointment of raplat) 47, 3. mpoordrys Tod dimou 28, 6. Zddwvos Oecwdv 35, 11

copifonévwv, TOANG 41, 31

Zoduwvlins 25, 5

copwrepos 14, 10, II

Drapriarat 19, 23

orovédtw c. inf. orovidcwot NaBeiv 50, 8. éorovdatov uy KaredOelv rors did Budjs 38, 153 ovs—éorovdacev édOetv 38, 27. Ads. ior wev Eomovdafov 34, 9

orovdys, meTa 25, 17

one oracdpevos Thy paxarpay 18, 38

oradlwy, évrds déxa 50, 10

orabuds 51, 13; oTaOud 10, 7; oTabuav 10, 3; ora@uots Io, 9

oracidiew, Sid To 13, 8. THv médkuw—

19

290

orasidfovsay 8, 273 oraciatovons Tis modews 8, 293 oTactdfovres 13, II; 20, 19. éoraclagjov 20, 1. oracudoat 2, 1

oraows" loxupas ris ordoews ovons 5, 33 TH alrlay ris ordcews 5, 19. Tepte- Aavvduevos rH oTdoE 14, 21. die Thy oTdow 13, 43 mera THY OTdTW 41, 12. Tas ordoes duporépas 11, 93 15, 53 ardoets Tpels 13, 16

orarip 10, 9 (Oe. ii 1349 @ 28, and frag- ments)

oréXexos 60, 9, 15

*orepovorwNs 14, 27

orépavos 57, 27

oTHAN XOAKH 53, 253 ev Tals oTHdals 54,

17

orod, 4 Bactdeos 7, 3 (Ludex refers to fragm. only)

arotxeiov 63, 9, 20; col. 31, 3, 8, 37

arédos 19, 30

oroxafsuevov Tob mAHOous 22, 4

orparela, ‘military expedition’ 22, 41 (cTpaTian); 26, 73 27, 10 (cTpa- TIAIC)3 53, 353 55, 18

oTpaTevomevas 24, 4; oTpareverOar 53, 37; Tas orparelas ei éorpdrevTat 55, 18 (boas dy otparedowvrat orparelas Pol. 1324 6 15)

otparnyla 27, 26

orparnyds 22,143 23, 165 26, 8; 38, 32. orparnyol 4, 8, 11,13; 22, 8; 23, 53 29, 273 30, 53 34) 43 44, 163 esp. 61, 2—16. émt rovs émAlras 61, 3; ém THY xdpav 61, 4; él rov Tepacda, els rHv Movvextav, 61, 6; els Tay’ AKrhy 61, 7; éml ras cuppoplas 61, 8

orparnyeiv 17,6

*orparid, (1) ‘army’ I9, 273 22, 9 (2) ‘expedition’ kara ray oTpariav (orparelay K-W) 7 eéyyaryov 37, 2

orparibrys 15, 83 37, 19

orparwrixGv, Tapas 43, 2; ¢. art. 47, 9 and 49, 23

otpépw’ éorpadny 12, 54 (Solon)

ovyyevav, Tov éxelvou 22, 15

ovyylyverOat 15) 4

ovyyvwpovixds 16, §

ovyypdwew, cvyypdwover, 29, 13 (decree) ; Tatra owéypayay 30, 1 (only in 2th, Eud. 1214 a2 and Rhet. ad Alex.)

*avyxabiory Thy Tupavvlda 16, 443 ovy- KaGeor@res 34, 21

ouykareNOodaw, rots éx Ilepacéws 40, 9 (Pol. 1300 @ 18)

ovyxwpav, mapavonotcas od 28, 39; Ta ouyKexwpnueva 47, 12

cuxopdyrns 35, 17 f; ouxodayrdv mpo- Bohat 43, 24

cvxogparrlas ypapyh 59, 9

ovh\aBdvres—daméxreway 38, 11; Tovds épyBous 42, 19; Borepov cvAANPOels 18,

23

GREEK INDEX

oudhéyerat, Xphuara 47, 29; TO Edasov 60, 73 ovdddkas 60, 15. ov ovdAdeyo- pew els Thy éxxdnolav 41, 303 ovA- Aeyévres—kara pudds 42, 14 .

oudAnWews, pd THs 18, 18 (not in Ar. in this sense)

oupBalyw" c. inf. cupBalvy 21, 9. ouvé- Bawey 11, 7; 16, II; 19, 13 24, 105 26, 2, 10; 37, 12. owéBn 2, 13 6, 63 16, 28; 18, 7, 123 22, 2; 23, 93 26, 33 275 53 34, 5, 165 37, 193 41, 1, 18. ouveBeBijxet 13,14. cuuPivar <elvar> 28, 33; sine inf. 16, 17. édv wh oupBalywow dddAqdos 39, 11 (decree)

oupBddrdw" cuveBddrdero—ovx éAdTTW jol- pay 19, 24

ctpBorov, maparayBdve col. 32, 143 dmodidévres col. 37, 2. (2) Ta auBora Ta mpds Tas méAes 59, 16; Tas Slkas Tas drd roy oupBdrwv 59, 17

cupBovrevew 30, 14 (decree); oupBov- Aevdvrwy 22, 31; suveBovdevey 24, 23 oupBovrebwor 29, 24 (decree); cupu- Bovdedcavros 27, 19. cuuBovdeverBar Mera THs Bovdjs 31, 3 (decree)

cbpBoudos 23, 16

cuppaprupoln 12, 30 (Solon)

ouppaxlay, Thy mpds Baothéa 29, 4; ard Tis tay Aaxedatpovluy cuppaxlas 23, 19; mpos Tais cupmaxlas 54, 18

ouppaxixdy, Td 39, g (decree). Isocr. & T@ guwpaxex@ (in another sense) het. 1418 a 32

ouppdxouar: ouvenaxécavTo riv—pdxnv 17,15 (Pol. 1300 a 18, Rhet. 1396 a 18)

obppaxot 24, 6, 11 (Pol. 1269 6 1, 1315 @ 2, omitted in Zxdex Ar.)

otppertis 3, 26 (not in Ar. in this sense)

*ouppopla’ (srparyyes) érl ras cuppoplas

1,8

ctpras’ cbpmavra 19, 39

ouprelfew Tov KexTnuevoy 39, 1o (decree); owénewe Tov Sjpov 14, 33 ocuvéreev ¢. inf. 20, 6. oupmesbéyvTwy tev Trod- Adv 29, 8

oupmintre ¢. inf. ob cuvérimrev av 21, Il; ouvérece 19, 33; 26, 4

guuToreujoew Bacthéa—éavrois 29, 93 Hera TOY TplaKovTa ouveTodeunoay 40,

2 *oupmpodvpoupévwr alto 15, 10 ouppéepe, 7 dv jryGvrat 31, 7 (decree) ouupopd 19, 143 29, 33 Tals mpoyeyery-

pévats auuhopais 40, 18 (cuudopais

mepireceiv Eth. 1100 @ 73 word omit- ted in Judex Ar.)

cupgwvoict mdvres 12, 2 (frequent in genuine works; but the closest parallel

is in the spurious de Admir. 838 6 34

guupwvotow, uno ore perhibent) adv ols 6 rarnp pkey Ta obpravra (ern)

19; 39

GREEK

ouvdryew tyy Boudiy—rov Sjuov 43, 123 44, 73 ouvdryew (?) col. 31, 34

ouvayavigouévou 38, 13; -wy 38, 20

ouvabpocbévros Too TANGous 20, 125 ouva- Opacbelons ris Bovdfs 25, 20; ouva- Gpocbevres els THY dryopdy 38, 4

ouvaittov yevouevou Oeuicroxdéous 25, II

ouvdupw 7, 17, 28

ouvavayKkacOiva weve 40, 6

*ouvapeokbuevot Tots -yeyvouevors 33, 10

ouvapuboas 12, 43 (Solon)

ouvapragev 25, 14

*ouvdiotxet Tais dAAais dpyats Ta mAcloTa 47, 15 49, 31

owebiabels—toOopopely 27, 10

*owetyayer per’ avrod 14, 28

*ouvetauaprdvea’ dco. yn ocuveenudpravoy 22, 18

ouveenrOor, els 8 19, 12

*ouvemipedeirat, Tov raulov 49, 23

ouvére Kal yvapy—dtapépew 32, 11

ouvexas 28, 26

ovviyyopot, Tots NoytaTats 54, 3

ouvijOov, dravres els Td Oecpoberetov 3, 31

owOjKas cuvriderbar 29, 36 (decree); kara, Tas o. Tdode 39, 2; Kedevovtwy TOV O. 40, 21

suvlornue' cuvéorn pidla, médenos conj. van Leeuwen, for évéorn, 17, 153 27, 9. pel’ drorépwy éBovdero ovaTdyTt 11, 13. JGid. éml xaradtce. rod drpov ouvicramévous 8, 25; éml Karadvoe Tis modrelas 25, I5. ouveorioayvro Tov awodewov 24, 17

*cuvvavpaxjoavras 34, 6

*cuvvéuw' cuvévee wavras els déxa pudrds 21, 4; els ras rérrapas cuveveunOnoay guards 41, 8

abvodos 4, 18

atvoda* Tovs cuverdéras eujvuev 18, 33

ouvorxely 39, 13 (decree); Tay cuvo.Kodv- Tov 56, 343 TUVOLKNOaYTWY 41, 7

ouvoixlfw 15, 5 (?)

auvoporoyover 6, 20

cuvops auvidav Td TAHO0S 40, 4

cwrdtrw ovK els SwWiexa Pudds ovvérazev 21,

ia ee rd ouupaxixdy 39, 8 (decree)

owrlOecOat, ovvOjKxas 29, 36 (decree)

ovvwvodua cuverplayro modi xdpav 6, 8 (cupmplacba. mévra tov olSnpov Pol. 1259 @ 24)

*guorovbdgw' cuverroviacay tiv Kabodov 38, 24 “

guootrotot Kara pudds 42, 28; év TH OdAY 43, II es we oe

odds atrots 21, 19; 30,15. ogwy atruy 30, 2

ognxicxos col. 32, 9 (only in corresp. frag.)

oPbip’ eddoxunkws 14, 1; oPbdpa mpeoBu-

"THs 14, 14

GOr\wy—pera rod

INDEX 291

odpayisa, Snuoclay 44, 8

oxedév 20, 18; 28, 31

oxXorafwow 16, 10

ogsew Exagrov éavrév 23, 6; rhv Snyo- kparlay o@ few 40, 13. c&oasTHy Tarploa (11, 14. én” &dXorpias vews cwOdvras 34, 6

owua Temnpwpéevous 49, 20. pvdakyy rot ouparos 14, 4. él Tois cwuaow 2, 8; 4, 233 6, 33 9) 3. odpaow—Ayroup- yet 29, 34 (decree). gx Suvarods— Tos TwWMATW 49, 14

owa 7, dws dy 30, 20 (decree); only in Oec. ii 1347 & 24

owrip, Lebs, 56, 27 (cwrnp amdvruy 6 Gebs de Mundo 397 6 20)

ournplay, Thy THs modews 6, 17; emt TH Tay Taldwy owrnpla 19, 35

Abs. wepl ris owrnplas 29, 14, 22

(decree)

*cuwppovicral 42, 18, 28, 27

Ta, pév adda Kadamep 29, 16

TdédavTov 10, 8; 22, 30

taplas (THs BovAys) 49, 30. T. orpariwrt- Koy 43, 23 ¢. art. iN 47, 93 49, 23. a. THs Tlapddov kal dddos Ts Tod “Au- bovos 61, 27-

Tolar 4, 6; 7, 13; 8, 6, 73 60, 16. of raulac rhs "AOnvas 47, 23 7. TOP lepav xpnudrwv ry bed Kal Trois GXos Geois déxa (411) 30, 8 (decree)

Tavarypatos 25, 24

taklapxot 30, 6; 61, 17 (Oec. ii 13500 I0, de Mundo 399 6 7; Takapxeiy and ragvapxiat in Pol.)

rdgis THs Tohurelas 3, 1; ToNerelas Tagw 41, 10; Ths Tdgews—év TH modurela 5, 13 ) rakes rovde rov Tpbaov elxev 4, 33 (% Bovdyn) rdéw elxe Tod Siarnpety Tous vduous 3, 343 Thy atryy Tatw arodwocew 11, 12. Fl. ra wepl ras Tages 42, 31

TapaTrw’ THs wodews TeTaparyuerns 13, 2

rapaxais, év rats 22, 18 (Pol. 1302 a 22)

Tapaxwdes Tas wodirelas 28, 33

Tarte eratev él 7d vouopuaraxely 8, 20; Ta mepl Tas dpxas Tolrov erate Tov tpbrov 9, 1; Tovs Pbpous otros Hv 46 Tatas 23, 21; qr’ dy—rdtwow Tipay 39, 12 (decree); dcov ay—régwow— rarrew (Tov orabuov) 51,14. (orders) ép h Terayudvos Fv 13, 20; émt rovTw reraynudvor 15, 21 (Pol. 1307 5 13); (4px) Teraryuévn mpds c. acc. 8, 153; of reraypévot col. 36, 23

tapos I, 2

Taxous, Sid 34, 2

Te—kal passim

Teloavdpos 19, 2

*rerxlfew 19, 5; TetxXloavres 19, II

retxos, TO Tlehapytkov 19, 32; 70 év "Herw- vela 37, 93 TOU relxous 50, 10; THY TaY Tecxwv amoKoddunow 23, 17

19—2

292

Téa, 2, 4

Terelwv, Kal" Lepaiv 29, 39 (decree)

Tedeivos dpywy (487/6) 22, 21

TedeuTatos 3, 93 53, 2

70 TedeuTaloy 18, IO

TEedeuTHY, weTa THY TOD Tarpds 19, 38

TedeuvTyoas 28, 15; TeAeuTHoavTOs 17, 8; 19, 27; 28, 2, 143 56, 413 éredeUrnoev 18, 22; rerehepryktow 58, 3

rédos' exer réhos H dixn 53, 93 dpxis tédous 56, 7. adv. 18, 33. Classis, census, Tértapa TEAN 7,9; €K TOD adrod Tédous 4, 125 TO dvoua Tod Tédous 7, 19; Onrixod avril rédous 7, 24 (anon.); Totoy TéNos Tehet 7, 30. TEAM 24, 113 475 Qs 15; 55, 18

Tedw Tols TO Onrikdy Tedobow 7, 15; Teel 7, 16, 27; Totoy TEAos TEhEt 7, 30; ei—ra. Tédy Tee? 55, 18 (quoted in this sense from the fragments only)

Tedavat §2, 18

Tepevav, wicbuoes 47, 26

Terdprw, Ter 19, 4; 21, 2; 22, 26

rerpddr éml déxa 32, 6 f; dard THs Terpados iorapévou 62, 14

TETPAKLS 43, 14

rerpaxoctous Kal éva, Bovdevew 4, 133 (Bovdhv) terpaxoctous 8, 19: eva Kat rerpaxootous (Stxaords) 53, 16. ob Te- TpaKdotot C. 295 37, 19; 41, 20

rerphpeis 46, 3 (frag. 558%)

*rerrapaxardexéris (?) 56, 44

rerrapdxovra (Sixacral kara Sywous) 53, 1 f; 53, 27 (quoted from frag. 4137). 7. &rn yeyovbres 29, 12, 373 56, 18

rérrapes 4, 12; PudoBacrdrels 7. 8, 125 dvrt twv Terrdpwy (pvdAGy) 21, 43 rérrapas gudds 41, 8. rérrapa rédy 7, g. Tots rérrapet Tots THY pudAjy—BeKd- govew 53, 13

Type Th ypappareta—rnper 6 Syudoros 47, 303 Tas KAEls (6 emiorarns) 44, 33 (76 @daov) of rapylar rypodow 60, 18. érhper Thy novxlay 16, 26. Typioas rods Adxwvas diaBeBAnuévous 23, 19

TlOnut vomous @0nxe 6, 33 7, 13 vduov 2Onxe 22, 16; + mpds avrovs idiov 8, 28; (vouous) Oeivat 22, 4; ev Tots vdmors Taira Soxet Oetvar Snuorixd (of Solon) 10, 13 Pecpuods €Oqxev (of Dracon) 4, 3; LDébdrwvos Oevrds vomov eloaryyerlas 8, 26. Pass. éré0n (vdpos) 21, 43 22, 13, 263 ois vouots of dv TeOGar rept Tv mToNeri- kav 31, 8; wapdoracis rlOera 59, 8. Mid. vbpov éero 45, 8; pnd’ érépous (vépous) OéoGae 31, 9; ds dy wh OFra Ta Orda unde wed’ érépwy 8, 29

tleret 12, 13 (Solon)

Tyiv, arododva. Thy 47, 24; awBdvew 39, 12 (decree); mpds Tas Tyas Tov KpiOav ra ddgira Kal mpds Tas TYuds TOY mupav Tos dprous (awAeiv) 51, 12. Tis 12, 5 (Solon)

GREEK INDEX

Tyshpara Suethev 7, 9; peyeler—riunuaros 7, 123 éx Tov 7. 8, 8. ey Tots TA TLLH- Hara mapexouevors (?) 39, 24 (decree). ‘Penalty’, rlunua émvypayduevos 48, 22; Umép otro 7d Tiunua 53,6

tlunots col. 37, 4

Tyuinras édécOat rpeis 39, 11 (decree). tiuntat nulas ol Stxacrat Rhet. ad Alex. 1427 6 6 (the only ref.)

Tipoabévys dpxwr (409/8) 23, 22

Tiywpeven bi Tas marpixas Sbéas 26, 9. Litem aestimare, Sdpwv Tywow 54, 93 ddixlou 54, 10; ore xph wabely 7 diro- retoat 61, 13. mddw Tindor, ay dey Tipfjoat, col. 37,1. éav apyuplou TiwnOy 63, 16

Timevacoa 17, 13

Tiywwpeiy TYG Abekp@G 19, 2 (cf. Pol. 1311 6 21, Rhet. 1401 @ 10); brép Trav ddtxounévav 9, 4 (Timwpeicbar dtrép twos Rhet. 1372 b 4)

tls, Twés, passim

tls; rls oot marhp KTA; 55, 13. TE ylyvera; 16, 20

TiTpwoKw" érpwrev 39, 20 (decree); Tpboy 57,153 Tpwoa 57, 22

Tobade 3, 2; 29, 10

Towobros* 15,1; 16, 153 40, I

*rémia 55, 28

Tokeve 42, 23

rokérat 24, 13

Témos' did Twv Torwy 13, 263 21, 223 wdyrwv Tay ToTwY 21, 15; Tots roots 21, 235 Tovs wep Ilayyatov rémous 15, 7

tbcov—édocov 12, 4 (Solon)

tooécde" not found(?) in’AQ. mod,

tosotros’ 16, z

Tore 4, 16; 14, 163 15,93 18, 283 21, 2, 8; 22, 12, 223 41, 7. Tére 8’ after Tov ev aAdov xpévov, 57, 293; redun- dant after el 6¢ 44, 52, 5

Tparywoots, xopyyovs 56, 7

*rpamefirixat (Stkar) 52, 16

Tpavparos, Sika 57, 14

Tpaxdv—vdov 12, 19 (Solon). tpaxurépay Ty apxqv 16, 29; THY TUpavvlda Ig, 1

Tpelts 4, 19; 8, 133 13, 9, 16; 21, 14. Tpets kal éfjxovra pws 10, 8. pla tair’ 9, 2; rpla ev lepav xpyyariiev, tpla dé xypvét kat mpeoBelais, rpla 8° dolww 43, 29. méxpe Tpidv 43, 253 év- Tos Tpiwy Huepay 48, 18

Tpépew (Urmov) 49,2; Tar Snuoray erpepe woAdous 27, 15. rpéperbe (vdov) 5, 17 (Solon); tpépeoOar 24, 12

Tpidxovra (dixacral Kara Shuous) 26, 203 53> 3- 7p. rn 4,15; ern tp. cal rpla 17, 3+ Tp. Mépn 21, 12. of TprdxovTa

347 175, 35373 40: 203 41, 225 53) 4 Tpiakovroptoy 56, 20; cf. p. xlvii, n. 4

melemneins 20, 10; Tptaxdowa (uérpa) 7, I +

* rpraxoor@ (Erect) 14, 7

GREEK

Tprnpapxlas (Star) 52, 16 Tpijpapxot 61, 7 Tpijpets 22, 36; 46, i—8 Tpinpotrotol 46, 8 Tpls 47, 19 tpirxlrroe 26, 10; 36, 75 9, 133 37, 8,

15

tplrov 9, 4; Tplry (ordows) 13, 203 TH tplrn (huépg) 20, 143 Tplrp (Ere) 26, 21

*rp.rordrwp frag, alienum 14 p. 255

tpirris’ Tpirrves Tpels 8, 133 (Tas) TpiTTDs 21, 10, 143 OWdexa rpurtves 21, II. Tpirrlv Tay mpuTavewv 44, 6 (reff. to Frag. only)

TpibBodov 41, 35 (reff. to Oec. ii 1347 @ 35 and Frag. only)

Tpowevpévous 12, 41 (Solon)

Tporov, Toy avTov 17,10; 25, 22; col. 31, 22; col. 37, 1. Todrov Tov TpdToy 3, 333 9, 13 12, 13 16, 23 26, 15 32, 73 42, 383 55, 27; 60, 1. révde Tov Tpd- mov 7,8; 15, 63 29, 293 37) §3 42) I+ Gvrep elpnrat Tporov 11, 1. bv Tpdmov 55, 33 TeOTw TOUGDE 34, 17

Tpody 25, 1; evroplay Tpopijs 23, 103 Tpo- giv *recOar tact 24, 3; dldwor—els Tpophy—sdpaxpyy 42, 243 dtddvat—rpo- oyy 5b0 6Bodods 49, 28 (law)

Tpoxoy emi Thy yvabor eriBaddet 49, 4

Tpurjpara col. 36, 25

TpuTw Widos rerpurnpuevy col. 35, 29 f; col. 36, 14, 19, 30 33

Tuyxave c. part. 2, 123 18, 153 24, 93 37, 9, 113 53, 31- maddov Tay TUXOP- Twv ) Tay émetxwy dvOpwrwy 27, 24

tumdvou, 6 ard Tod 45, 7 (not in Ar. in this sense; dmoruuravifecOar in Rhet. 1383 @ 5)

tupavvety 6, 153 11,43 16, 43

tupavvixhy exw obclay (Kluwv) 27, 13- Tupavixds, Opp. TodTiKws, 14, 173 16, 43 19, 8

tupavvls 14, 113 15) 143 16, I, 27, 41, 433 19) 21 373 20, 13 22, 3, 23, 283 28, 73 41, 14. % TOv Tpidxovra Kal tav déxa Tupavvls 41, 22

tépavvos 17, 33 T. KaTéoTn 22, 143 TOY Tod tupdvyvov gidwy 18, 30. of rrepl tov Tupdvywy vouor 16, 39; Tovs TOV 1. pidrous 22, 18, 253 Urd Tay T. 19, 13; éxBodjs Tay T. 20, 19; 7. Kard- Avow 41, 14. Pldoe Tols Tupdvvas 18, 253 éméOero Tols Tupdvvars 20, 20

UBpw 12, 13 (Solon)

bBprorys 18, 17

bypd, wérpa—énpa Kal 7, 17

bdpla 63, 6, 8; col. 31, 26

BSwp col. 33, 143 mpds ulxouw vdaros col. 37) 5

ulés vieis 17, 93 19, 343

“Yunrr@, ev 16, 17

vigwy 16, 28

INDEX 293

bralOpior, Sixdfovow 54, 26 braxovedyrwr, obx 32, 16; obx vmjKovcey

34.9

brapyys, €& 4, 17 (de Gen. Anim. 745 a 7 de Anima 412 a 4, Rhet. 1355 6 24

brapxe col. 31, 243 f—vrdpxovoa gidrla 19, 253 bripxev kal ampétepov 8, 20; brnpxov 21, 23

bretatpobpevor Tov PbBov 35, 24 (vreé- aiphoomey Tas émipepouevas duvoxepelas Rhet. ad Alex. 1432 6 13, the only ref.)

brégeu Vrekidvras 19, 34

bretépxouou vretpOev 15, 53 vreted- Oévros 20, 8

brép’ c. gen. IdpvnOos 19, 123 Tay ddav 51, 11. Tay ddicounévwr g, 4; éxaré- pwr 5, 9. Tay yepav 57, 12; oy def xXpnuarlvev 44, 11

c. acc. brép Séxa ern yeyovbres 4, 10;

—rTpidxovTa—4, 153; 30, 4 (decree); 31, 4 (decree) ;—rerrapdxovra—29, 12, 37 (decree); 42, 16; 56, 19; 63, II. 7a brep roiro TO Tlunua 53, 6; Te brep xAlas 53, 16

UrepBddrouat’ Tov Karddho-yov—modly xXpo- voy UmrepeBddrovTo 36, 13 (Rhet.ad Alex. 1420 @ 8, 1438 4 6, the only reff.)

drepngavia 5, 21 (Solon)

Urrepbptor, dpxal 24, 16

breprelvew, Spupaxrous Umep. Trav bdav 50, 12

* baredOuvos 54, 5

barnpérns 63, 233 col. 31, 8; col. 32, 2, 3, 19. exovres Snuoolous banpéras 50, 143 Baocrvyopbpous—vrnpéras 35, 7

bmioxvotuar’ vrocxopuevos ériOjcev 28, 22; vrocxduevds TL 43, 26; dreoxounv 12, 44 (Solon)

bro Tuy Sopypdpwy 18, 22; wd Tis dpyis 18, 373 Umd Tov TUpavyWY 19, 13

broBddAwwrae (?) col. 36, 5

broypapyh 4, 1

brodelxvume brébeeer, opp. éweréhecer, 41,

17 ‘

brofuylwy Sika 52, 16

bmodouTos 40, 5

Sromomodpuevov Tovs érépous 6, 15. Tov épdpevov (rod éralpov) Yreroujoaro Pol. 1303 5 24, the only ref.

* §$rocrovdos 20, 15

bropepouévn Kara muxpov () woderela) 25,

. 35 Ths modews Yropepopevys 36, I

bropla trav év rats Suvdpeot 22, 133 only quoted from frag. and spurious works

borepalg, TH 38, 43 48, 9

Borepos' TG voTépw ere 22, 20; Tov tore- pov os ad 42, 303 45,17; ab torepae purat) 43,9

ee adv. 3, 19; 6, 123; 16, 18, 28; 18, 22, 293 19, 133 24, 185 27, 215 28, 24; 38, 26. T@ Uorepov erer 34, 143 & Tots Vorepov—xaipois 41, 1. Cc

294

gen. reaw 8 torepov ris os Tupavy wy exBoniis padre éxardy 32, 8 bpetre ras wroXolrous juépas 40, § (Upat- poln de Caelo 294 @ 18, the only ref.) “‘Lyixlins dpxwy (481/0) 22, 40

Palvurmos &pywv (490/89) 22, 11

palvovras yap det oracifovres 13, 113 epdvy Td wéradda 22, 2

gpavepas 6pav (Yydous) col. 35s 33+ Pave- pws Anpodow 17, 53 . Hoav dodAot 40, 10

ddppaxov® pappadxwv, dlkar 57, 15

parka ¢, inf, after ob, 15, 18; 34, 123 45, 43 ol pdokovres 17, 5

Bairos 6 ’Axepdovoros 38, 22

Perdwvera wérpa 10, 5

gpépw’ (of pay) pépew rpets dBohovs 29, 32 (decree) ; (of expenditure) ra dvahw- para—veyxov 56, 25. (of election) (xopyyous Kwumbdots) al puvdal pépovow 56, 93_Tovs Xopyyovs rods évyveyudvous bro Tov puday 56, 10. xarerws ge- pbyrwy énl robros 38, 93 X- éveyKovres ent TH oupdope 33, 5. eréOnxe pépwr— 76 ypaypa 63, 23

gpevyw’ (of exiles) @puyey decpvylay 1, 3; egevye Tau dowrd 17, 43 TOY éE ’Apelou wdyou pevydvTav 47, 143 pevywr gu- iv 57, 21; (of the defendant) 48, 21; 53, 113 col. 36, 32

pnp pee 253 55,19; pact 6, 11; 7,18; 9, 53 16, 17; 17, 17; 18, 30, &e. — 14,133 16, 21. $y 56, 153

57, t

pbelpw ee médenov 26, 7

POlvovros OapynGvos, évdry 32, §

prravOpwros 16, 4, 30. Adv. 18, 17

pirapyupla (?) 5, 21 (Solon)

pirepyla 16, 24 (Rhet. 1361 @ 8)

gpirla 17, 15; 18, 93 19, 2

pron qmoy 12, 48 (Solon)

prdduouros 18, 4 (Zth. 1178 @ 34)

Piddvews dpxwv (527/6) 17, 2

pirovixlay Thy éverr@oay 5, 113 Thy mpos adApdous d. 13, 16

plros 23, 243 plroe Tots Tupdyvors 18, 24; trav Tod Tupdyvov gdlrwy 18, 30; Tods Tay TUpdyyeD plrous 22, 18, 253 girous 18, 32; pldos ray Tupdvywy 20, 25 TOV plrwy 20, 11; dia Tar op. 6, 8

poBor, brekapodpevor Tov 35, 24

PoBotvpevor mi KaTadvOGct rijs apxijs 38, 93 PoBnOévres wh—Karadvoy 36,5; po- es 15, 43 16, 343 poBoupevun abs.

* goveds 18, 36

govixdy (Gexucar) 4, 2 (Pol. 1269 @ 1, 1274 5 24, 1278 b 10, 1300 4 24)

povou dlknv, mpookdAnOels 16, 32; al rod povou Slkae 87, 123 gdvov Sikae Kat Tpavmaros 57, 14

Populovos 34, 24

GREEK

INDEX

opos* rods dbpous—rods Tpwrous 23, 215 drs Trav popwv 24, 11 (Pol. 1272 a 18); Hépous (Zap. ) dyouoa: vijes 24, 19

gpafw: eppacauny 12, 7, 20 (Solon); ppa- calaro 12, 51 (dd.

pparplac 2£, 23

Ppedrov, ev 57, 22

ppevos &vbobev 5, 7 15 (dd.

* ppotipia, dpxovres els TA 30, 7 (decree) * ppoupldes, vijes 24, 18

Ppoupol 24, 14, 19 (?); 62, 5

ppovpw abs. 24, 43 ra B00 inn 42, 333 TH dx pomrokw—ég pobpouv 37s 205 ppoupoi- ow Thy Movvrxlav—rhy "Aer fy 42, 21. (ot éxel ppovpodvres orparusrat Oec. ii 1351 a 28, the only ref.)

gpuydées 19, 8; 20, 165 34, 20; 37, %

puyiv, pevyur 57, ar

bin 14, 27

puhaxy 61, 73 Too cwuaros 14, 4, 93 7 Tis montrelas @. 25, 9; wept pudakys Tis xopas 43, 18

gudraxrypia 42, 33 (Fol. 1331 @ 20, 5 16; Rhet. 1360 2 9)

porak Tay vopwvr 4, 20; pUdaxas Tijs dpxfis 24, 8; decpwruv pirakes 24, 21; TOO Sco peornplov gptraxes 35, 6

PoAapXOL 30, 73 31,143 49, 10; 61, 23

puddrrw Ta Odopia PuradtTwot 3, 20; Td Wydlopara pvdarrer 54, 153; puddrre (riv x@pav) 61, 5. map’ avrois épv- Aarrov Tous éyvwopudvous 36, 14

gurérat 31, 4 (decree); 42, 15, 26; 61, 18

(Solon); évt gpecl 5,

uA 37, 25 38, £, 153 41, 23

Pury’ Tots Stxacrats rots THY PuAHY Tabryy elodyouow 48, 25; rots Thy d. Sixagfovaw 53, 14; Tovs Thy o. dixaforvras 58, 7. TH gd. Kandel els Td KANPwTHptov col. 31, 18. dvoty pudaiy 56, 13. gvdal rér- tapes 8, 11; 41, 8; (xopiyouds Kwuy- Bois) al pudat pépovor 56, 9; (xopz'yous) évyveypévous bd T&v gudGv 56, 10. Tats pudais 8, 4. dteAduevor ras pudds 61, 20; Kara pudds 22, 8, 223 42, 15, 28; 48, 1; 56, 13; 63, 2, 20. ék Tis pudfs Orns 62, 2, 4. For ris pudijs éxdorns e¢ sim., and for els éx rijs pu- js, v. ExaaTos

* pudoBacrreis rérrapes 8, 12; g. 41, 83 57) 31

* pudoxpively 21, 6

pvoel, TH 5, 10; 18, 3, 24

gow mpds dudorépous Fa TO kadas 16,

3 puvijs (?) 15, 17 pupa épdpacer 18, 27

xalpw* a ols éxapev h médus yeyvoudvas

35 2 * yao adhaden (?) 15,17 Xarerdrarov—«Kal mixpoTarov 2, 9

GREEK INDEX

xeheris éveyxévres 33, 53 X- pepovrav

3°

xXarkods duopets col. 36, 4,73 x. Wipor col. 35, 275 ormAnv XaAKAY 53, 25

Xapaxrhp, 6 dpxatos 10, 7

xaplfecGar Tots roAdois 28, 27

Xdpes* mpos Xdpuy dpuwAodyTas 35, 19

Adv, risrews xépw 18, 35; Tod Bed- tlorou xX. 35, 21; TovTwy xX. 29, 25 (de- cree); Ovoty x. 16, 7; Gy xX. 22, 25

Pl. xdpiow 41, 29

Xappos, father of Hipparchus, 22, 16

xaiva 12, 20 (Solon)

Xetpwvos, TOD xX. éverrwros, 37, I xetporovnrés 54, 16 (Rhet. ad Alex. 1424 a 14 xetporovnral dpxal, the only ref.) xeporovia® KpiOfvar mug xX. mavTas 34, 53 wpos Thy émixipwow THs Xetporovlas 41, 323 Tas xetporovlas kplvew 30, 25 (de- cree); Kplvovow 44, 12. dtararrovet TH xetporovig 61, 3 (frag. and Rhet. ad

Alex., the only reff.)

Xeporova’ 34, 26; 42, 18, 223 43, 3—53 46, 35 43 49) 9) 183 54, 17, 213 56, 243 57) 33 OF, 1, 17, 19, 23, 25) 27

xelpwv" xelpous 27, 23; xelpw 28, 2

xnpa éxnpwOy 12, 52 (Solon)

xirco. 17, 16; 19, 28; 24, 13, 143 35, 5 (2); xeAlous mevraxoctous 35, 2

Xiou 24, 7

xAapidas éxovres 42, 33 (frag. 458%, the only ref.)

xXorovuevot 12, 20 (Solon)

xopyyla met. 27, 18

Xopyyovs tpaywoois xalornoe Tpeis—xal Kwpwdois Kablorn wevte 56, 7—93 XO- pryovs kafioraow 54, 35. els AffAov x. 56, 20

xopyyoivra, maw 56, 18

xpelas karahaBovons 3, 8

xpetods, vd 12, 38 (Solon)

xpéa, of adypnudvor Tau 13, 21. Xpeuw Gmokorral 6, 33 11, 8; xpeay dmoKoTy 6, 11; 10, 23 12, 26; 13, 13 (Probl. and Oec., the only reff.)

xXPH 6, 215 15, 24 ,

Xphpara, mpocddvete 16, 6; Savergouevor 38, 8; diaxerprofow—édiayxerpliwor TH Xphuara 30, 10, 14; Xp. cvAdeyerat 47, 29; Ta KaraBaddopeva xXphuara 48, 33 ro iepav év ols Ta xpyuar’ éorly 44, 4. Xpnuarwy KaraBod} 47, 313 Xpnearwy ebirdpnoav 19, 20; xp. HOpoouevwv Tod- AOv 24, 13 Tu lepwr Xp. TaV dolwv Xp. 30, Sf. xphuacw AyToupye 29, 34 (decree)

xpnuarlgew 43, 14, 29 f3 44, 113 mepl otrov Kal wepl pudakis THs Xw@pas 43, 18. Mid. xpnparioduevos 15, 7

Xpno wav yeyvouevey 19, 7

* ypynornpiafopévors 19, 22 :

xpdvou tivds ob TodAod SieABdvTos 4, 23 xpdvou diamecdvros (?) Bpaxéos 35, 25+

295

jody xXpovoy 2, 23 5, 33 16, 383 18, 23; ov wodvUy Xp. 15, 33 Xp. ToooUTOv 3, 233 xp. Twa 28, 21; mAclw xp. 44, 2; els rov dAXov xp. 31, 18 (decree); —rordy xp. 30, 15 (decree); jer’ od Tov XP. 25, 243 34,13. Fl. dd Trav avrov xp. 13, 6; Twv xpovuv—pn éf- eAndrvOoTrw 56, 17; ev TovTOLs Tols xp. 3, 143 €v Tos TOTE xp. 26, 8; &v Tois ™porepov Xp. 28, 4

xpualov’ pl. 60, 21

Xpucody, dvdpidvra 7, 5; 55, 33

Xpaua, THs Baxrnplas col. 32, 73 xpwuara émvyéyparrat, Tots dixacrnplos col. 32, 8

Xpwpar rots Apdxovros Oecwols xpwuevor 7, 235 (voum) xpupevor 8, 6; (vdpots) odKére xpwvrar 8, 16; xpwrrae Tots érwrdpos kal mpos Tas oTparelas 53, 353 ws (To wAHGE) Sel xpioPar 12, 10; Xpwmevor TH elwOvig—mpgérnrt 22, 19; TH modee doy Tarps xpwuévous 28, 32. XpavTo Tw wav oTpaTNYPS TH 5 cuM- BotrAw 23, 16; Tols cvupdxots Seorori- Kwrépws éxpQvTo 24, 7. 6 Te XpHoeTat rois xphuacw 22, 32. exphoavrd To vouw 22, 123 xXpyoacPar rats—oupdo- pais 40, 18; ob xpyodmevot Kadds Tois mpdyuact 34, 13

xdpar 7% x. Ov dAlywr TW 4, 24. ekepya- fouévns Tis xwpas 16, 12; PudaKh Tijs X- 43, 18. é&y TH xdpg 19, II. ouve- mplavro moAhyy x. 6, 10; KaTa Thy x. 16, 8; els rhv x. 16, 143 (aTparnyds 6) éml thy x. 61, 53 Thy X- dvddacrov mot- oiow 40, 25

wpe ray Yipov, adriy udvyv col. 36, 9

xwplov 15, 6; 16, 20; 60, 13; x. aredés 16, 18. Pl. 24,173 47, 21, 243 52, 653 60, 8

xwpls 39, 26 (decree); xwpls wev—xupls 5é 47, 18; 53, 11. Not found c. gen. in ’AQ. rod.

yanrplar §0, 6 (only in corresp. frag.)

pevdeyypadpijs ypady 59, 10 Gay in cor- resp. frag.

pevdi THv alrlay elvar 6, 21 :

Wevdoxdyrelas ypapy 59, 10 (only in cor- resp. frag.)

pevdouapripia ra é "Apelov dryou 59, 175 cf. col. 36, 11, 13. Form pevdouap- tupiav in Pol. &c.

yngfouevor col. 37, 23 ay wh podlfnra col. 36, 33 els ods (sc. dupopéas) wol- fovrat of dixacrat col. 36, 6. 6 7 dv of Sicacral yydlowvrat 45, 11; odK eeorw ovdev dapoBothevrov— yngloacdar 45, 233 Wupidueve pyeulav dpxnv elvac puabopbpor 33, 9

Pipiopa -29, 0, 103 34, 273 40, 85 41, 26. Ta Wndlouara puddrrer 54, 14. yndlowara quoted (Pericles) 26, 22 f.

296

B.C. 411 (Pythodorus) 29, 1o—19 (with amendment); 29, 21—39; c. 303 c. 31. B.C. 403 (ai diadvoes em’ Evxdelbov) c.

39

yypov, Kipios—ris 9, 6. dliwow—rhy Pijpov 55, 23 f; els évéBadde Thy y. 55, 24. abrhy pbvyv yupetv rhy p. col. 36, 9g. wWhpor xadxal col. 35, 27; TerpuTrn- pévat, Wraypets, 2b. 29. yypwy, dpiOuds col. 36, 32

OS 12, 11 dpornra Kal rovnplay, mpds 37, 16 (not in this sense in Meteor. the only ref.) Gywos 51, 11. ayia, kadapa Kat dxiBdnra. 51, 13 avoduat rév Te mpiduevov Kal Goov dy rpl- nTaL 47,17 pay rhv mpoppnOetoay 30, 32 (decree) *Mpeds 33, 5 ws* ‘as’, ws Aéyouor 6, 7 f; 14, 26; 18, 323 pacly 18, 30; dyow 14, 25; dpuodo- yeirat 5, 12 Show’, ws (rq@ wAjGei) Set xpirPat 12, 10 ‘that’, ws oty jie 11, 5; 00 xpN Oavpatev 15, 243 épdpace 18, 26; ely 16, 27

GREEK INDEX

‘when’, ws éfémrece 15, 2; é&éweoov 28, 6; ov« edtvaro 18, 33; éAaBev 18, 35; épdvn 22, 29; eldey 25, 18; éze- Kparouv 38, I c. part. ws dv dd rob mpdyparos keluevov 7, 20 (ws av not noticed else- where in Ar. in this sense); duvdjevos modireberOar 28, 37; memovOus 14, 43 bvra 18,123 émavopOobvres 35,12; dro- Aoynoduevos 16, 33; wyvdowy 18, 343 MeGtdpuodpevos 19, 5; weraduaovres 36, 7 c. anf. ws elreiv 2, 125 cs eros elnely 49) 313 57, 8 c. gen. abs. 6, 53 13, 243 36,9 ¢. acc. abs. 7, 253 29, 19 c. numeralibus, ws érraxoctous 37, I oa superl. ws loatrara 30, 18 (decree) as=mpbs, ws Tov Shpuov 45, 3 dorep 8, 20; 9, 83 16, 33 24, 10; 61, 24. Womrep viv 3, 32 Wore c. ind. ob xaretyey éavrdév 18, 36; ob ouvémimrev Gv 21, 11.—c. inf. dmex- GéoOa xrrd 6, 14; dvatpéperOa 16, 6; dvanloxerOar Tovs émvetxets 16, 11; TOV abrov éxOpov elvas kal Pidrov 23, 233 Mh Otvacbat 49, 27 dperovpevar, ervyxavov 33, 7

ENGLISH INDEX.

’

The numerals refer to the dages; a and 4 denote the first and second columns of

the commentary.

For proper names not found here, see Greek Index.

Abbott’s History of Greece quoted, 17 a,

45 2

abbreviations in the Ms classified, xxxvi

Aegospotami, 132

Aeschines, Scho/. on F. LZ. 150 corrected, 131 6; Schol. on ii 87 quoted, 212

Alcmeonidae 1, 72—¥76

altars as places of refuge, 103 4

Ambracia, Cypselidae in, 67 2

amendment, formula for, 117 6

Ammonias, state-trireme, 230 a, cf. Keil, Solon. Verf. 149

amnesty after the fall of the Thirty and the Ten, 143 @

Anaceum, 60 6

Anacreon, 68 &

Andocides, de Myst. 78; 214 6 (cf. Keil, Solon. Verf. t10 f)

Androtion, lv; on Solon, 37 2; date of, 86 a; cf. Keil, Solon. Verf. 190 f

animals, damage done by, 188 @; judi- cial trial of, 216 6

Anthemion, 28, and Addenda, Ixxvii

Antiphon, 127

Anytus, 110 4, 132 6

Apollonius Rhodius, schola on, xxviii

arbitrators, 1Ig0—192

Archestratus, 134 a, and Addenda, \xxvii

Archinus of Ambracia, 67

Archinus, a leader of the moderate party, 404 B.C., 132 5, 144 2

archons, early history of, 6; official resi- dences of, 8—11; mode of appointment before Dracon, 12, 31; under Dracon, 14; under Solon, 29—31; under Cleisthenes, 86; their appointment

by lot, 29 4, 87 a; archonship opened to zeugitae, 106 6; oath of, 7, 25, 2033 salaries of, 231 4; scrutiny of, 201 4; archons of same name, how distin- guished, 129 3

chronological list of archons ("denotes those hitherto unknown)

621 * Aristaechmus, 12 0 -

594 Solon, 19 @, 49 a, 55 @

582 & 1 Damasias II, sof

560 Comeas, 55 @

555 * Hegesias, 57

527 *Philoneos, 65 3

511 * Harpactides, 75 3

508 Isagoras, 77 4

so1 *Hermocreon, 84 4

490 Phaenippus, 85

487 *Telesinus, 86 6

483 Nicodemus, 88 a, 89 @

481 * Hypsichides, 91 @

478 Timosthenes, 94 @

462 Conon, 100 4

487 Mnesitheides, 106 4

453 Lysicrates, 106 4

451 Antidotus, 106 4

432 Pythodorus, 108

412 Callias, 126 4

411 Mnesilochus, 128 a

411 Theopompus, 128 4

406 Callias ’AyyednOer, 129 6

405 Alexias, 132 @

404 Pythodorus, 133 4, 146 4

403 Eucleides, 141 @

4o1 Xenaenetus, 146 a

329 Cephisophon, 200 4

Areopagus, before Dracon, 11 and 31 4;

2098 ENGLISH INDEX

under Dracon, 18; under Solon, 33; revival of its authority after Persian war, 92; attacked by Ephialtes, roo f; privileges of, ror @; attacked by Pericles, 107; under the Thirty, 142 4; trials before, 172 4, 212. Cf. Keil, Solon. Verf. 100 f, 120

Arginusae, 129 4; overtures of Sparta after, 131 @

Aristides, archonship of, 87 a4; ostracism and recall of, g1; mpograrns rod Sjpov, 93; co-operates with Themis- tocles in building the walls of Athens, 93; withdraws the Ionians from al- liance with Sparta, 94; assesses the tribute, 22.; counsels the people to live in Athens and to assume the control of affairs, 2b.; promoter of the seventh change in the constitution, 147

Aristides, rhetor, xxv, 20 @, 45 @, 49 @, 147% Cf. Keil, Solon. Verf. 196 f

Aristogeiton, 69 f

Aristophanes, scholia to, xxviii

Aristotle and Macedonia, 59 a; Politics, xii f, xl, xliii—xlvi, lvili, 63.4, 66 a, 67 a, 76 a, 78, 83 &c.; Polsticus, xiv; mept Baowrelas, xiv (cf. Keil, Solon. Verf. 128—142); Odtkawparo, médewv, xiv; véuiua BapBapixd, xiv; modurelat, xiv—xxxi; style of, xlix; see ‘ Athenian Constitution’

assembly, public, under Dracon, 14; under Solon, 26; pay for attendance, instituted by Agyrrhius, 149; its final amount, 231. Number of meetings, 158; business at each, 159 f, 162 f

Athenaeus, xxvi

Athéné, statue of, 170 a; peplus of, 180 a, 223 @; treasurers of, 170, cf. 121

Athenian ascendancy, beginning of, 94

‘Athenian Constitution’, abstract of, lix —Ixvii; authorship of, xxxix—liv; au- thorities followed in, liv (cf. Keil, So- lon. Verf. 48, 51, 186, 205, 227, 231, and esp. 200 f); date of, xxxix; Berlin fragments of, xxxif; British Museum papyrus of, xxxiv—xxxix; language and style, xlvi—l; literature of, Ixvii— Ixxv; relation to the Politics, xliii— xlvi; lviii; 57 a, 83 a; rhythm, 1 and Addenda, \xxvii

Atthides, writers of, lv f (cf. Keil, Solon. Verf. 200 &c.)

Attica; men of the ‘Highlands’, the ‘Shore’, and the ‘Plain’, 54 «

Attic lunar year, 157 3

auditors, 193 @

Bauer, Prof. A., quoted, 56 4, 58 a, go 4, 1303

beasts of burden, damage done by, 118 2

Bergk quoted, xxxii f ,

Berlin Fragments, the, xxxi f, liv

Blass, Prof. F., quoted, xxxi f, xxxviii, 1, Ixxviii, 82 4, and, in the critical notes, passim

Bouzyges, 254 frag. 10

bowmen, citizens serving as, 96 4

Brauronia, 198 4 :

British Museum apyrus described, xxxiv f

Busolt, Prof. G., quoted, 14 @, 15, 17 &c.

Callixenus, 114 @

Cauer, F., criticised, 148 4

chiasmus, 124 6

Chios, 95 @

choregi, 204 £

chronology of rule of Peisistratus, 56

7 of later years of Themistocles,

IoI—3

Cicero’s mention of the IloNcre?a, xxi

Cimon, 104 f; accused by Pericles, 107; his liberality, 108 f

citizens, revision of the roll of, 53; regis- tration of, 150 ‘

citizenship, grants of, 196 4

Cleidemus, lv

Cleisthenes, 76—92

Cleitophon, 117 4

Clement of Alexandria, xxvi

Cleomenes, King of Sparta, 75—7

Cleon, 111 f

Cleophon, 112 f, 131

clerks, public, 194—6

cleruchi, 97 6

Cobet, marginal correction of Pollux viii 85, 202 6

Codrus, 6

coinage, Aeginetan and Euboic, 39

Comedy, choregz appointed for, 204

conflict of classes before Dracon and Solon, 3—5

conjectures proposed, (c. 2, 1) 4.4; (c. 3, 13) 7; (c. 4, 13 and 16) 16 dés; (c. 6, 19) 223 (c. 8, 24) 33; (c. 8, 28) 34; (c. 13, 24) 533 (c. 26, 5) 1043 (c. 28, 16) 112 @ (c. 35, 9 f) 134 4; (c. 38, 7) 1393 (C+ 39, 24) 1433 (C- 43, 15) 15943 (c. 45, 3) 1673 (c. 47, 14) 1723 (c. 49, 24) 1773 (c. 51, 17) 1853 (c. 54, 32 f) 1993 (c. 86, 46) 2103 (c. 57, 26) 2153 (c. 63, 3) 233 1-33 (c. 63, 8) 234; (col. 31, 1 f) 2373 (col. 31, 27) 2393 (col. 32, 9) 240; (col. 32, 15, 16, 19) 241. Schol. on Aeschin. /. Z. 150 corrected, 131 3. Photius, 5.v. qyenovia Sucacryplov cor- rected, 216 a@; mistake in Photius, s.v. wdpadot, accounted for, 230 a

Council of 401 under Dracon, 16; 400 under Solon, 33. Council of g00, in- stituted by Cleisthenes, 79 2; appoint- ed by lot, 157 a, 231 a; functions of, 168 f; their right of imprisoning, 166 6,175 5; salary of, 231 4; scrutiny on appointment to, 168 @; transfer of some

ENGLISH [INDEX

of their duties to the Assembly 148 4, or the law-courts, 180 4 crown of archon basileus, 216 a Crusius, Prof. O., quoted, 9 4, 44 4, 110 _ a 149 a Curtius, Prof. E., quoted, 9 4, 10, 54 a, &c. Cylon, 1—3 Cypselidae in Ambracia, 67 a

Damasias II, 50 f

Damonides, 10:

Dareste, M. R., quoted, 46 a

Deceleia, 131 @

Delos, festival at, 198, 199 4; amphi- ctyones, 232 a; choregiand architheoros, 205 6

Delphi, temple at, 74 a

Delphinium, court in precincts of, 213 a

demagogues, III

demes, names of, 82: number and dis- tribution of, 80 i

Demetrius Phalereus, xlii

Dicaearchus, xxi, xliii

dicasts, 6000, 96 4; number of, 190 4, 235 2; pay, 241 4; procedure for their allotment to the several law-courts, 233 £3 votes of, 246

Didymus, xxi f (cf. Keil, Solon. Verf.

59 f)

Diels, Prof. H., xxxiii, 3, 51 3

diobelia, 112 & (cf. Keil, Solon. Verf. 223)

Diogenes Laertius, xxv

Dionysia, 201 a, 204 4, 206 a@

‘district-judges’, 63 4

dowry, restitution of, 187 @

Dracon, constitution before, 6—12; con- stitution of, 12—18 (defended by Keil, Solon. Verf. 96—98, 202); laws of, 12 6, 23 6

Edinburgh Review, 1891, p.478 f, quoted, 18 4, 138 6

Eetioneia, 138 @

Eleusinia, 199 @

Eleusis, 141 f

Eleven, the, 99 4, 185 f

ephebt, 150—155

ephetae, 214; cf. Keil, Solon. Verf. 106 ff, 108

°

Ephialtes, 9g—104; cf. Keil, Solon. Verf. 120, 213

Epimenides, 3

Erechtheus, 250, 1. 3

Eretria, Knights of, aid Peisistratus, 59 3b; battle of, 411 B.C. 1282

Etymologicum Magnum, xxvil

Euboea, revolt of, 411 B.C., 128

Eucken, Prof. R., quoted, xlviii f, 3, 43 @, 76 a, 145 4 .

Euripides, scholia on, xxvii; 253 frag. 4

Eustathius, xxviii

299

Festivals, of Asclepius, 206; Brauronia, 198; Delian, 198, 205; Dionysia, 204 ; Heracleia, 198; Lenaea, 210 4; Pana- thenaea 223; Thargelia 204 f, 207

Five Thousand, the, 120, 126, 127, 128

fortresses of Attica, 123 @, 155 2

Forty, the, 188 4

Foucart, M., quoted, 97 2

Four Hundred, the, 113—128

Fragments, index of, 256

Gellius, xxv

generals, 85 ; election and duties of, 225 f; at Arginusae, 129 f

gennetae, 252 (cf. Keil, Solon. Verf. 64 f)

Gilbert, G., 7 4, 225 6, and passim

Giles, Mr P., quoted, 81 4

Girard, M. P., 151 4, 154 6

Gomperz, Prof., quoted, xlvii, 5 a, 14 a,

58a

Goodwin, Prof. W. W., 164 a, 222 4

Grote, quoted, 26 4, 35 4, 36 4, 37 4, 42.4, 56 a, 59 4, 63 4, 79 4, 81 a, 85, 127 4, 128 a, 131 a, 135 6, 164 4; supported by text, 90 4, 117 @

guards, on the acropolis, 97 @; over the dockyards, 26.

guardships, 98 4

Hager, Dr H., 118 4 &c.

Harmodius, 67—71; commemoration of, 217

Harpocration, xxvi

Hartel, Prof. von, quoted, 161 4

Haussoullier, M. B., quoted, 174 4, 237 f

Head, Mr B. V., quoted, 38 4, 39 4, 40

Headlam, Mr J. W., quoted, 1, 13—18, 152 @, 156 d, 157 4, 214 a, 231 a, 2328

Hegesistratus, 66 0, 67 4

heliaea, 215 b

Heracleia, 199 @

Heracleides of Clazomenae, 149 6

Heracleides Lembos, xxi, 250

Hermippus, xvi f

Herodotus, liv, 57 4; (v 66, 69) 78 a; (v 69) 79 4; (v 71) 1 4 (cf. Keil, Solon. Verf. 96, 117)

Hesychius, xxvii

hiatus, |, li (cf. Keil, Solon. Verf. 195)

Hicks, Mr R. D., 178 (. ¢.)

Hipparchus, 68

3 son of Charmus, 85 4

holidays, Athenian, 158 4 :

Homer, scholia on, xxviii; Solon’s remi- niscence of, 48 a

homicide, law of, 23 4; the Areopagus and its cognisance of, 100 4, 142 4; trials for, 212—6

hoplites (2500), 98 @

horses and horsemen, Soxiuacla of, 1771

houses, purchase-money of, 173; windows of, 183

Hultsch, quoted, 38 4

300

Ion, 146 4, 2501. 2, 251 frag. x

Tonisms in Solon’s verses, 46 4, 47 4; in Cleidemus, 58 a

Isocrates, li, 12 a, 30 a, 93 a; (cf. Keil, Solon. Verf. 78 ff, 89 ff)

Jackson, Dr H., quoted, 185 @, and in critical notes 22, 41, 44 &c.

Jet, Prof. R. C., quoted, 42 5, 44, 166 @

Keil, Prof. Bruno, quoted, Ixxiv, [xxvii

Kenyon, Mr F. G., quoted, xxxiv f, 4 a, 14 4, 25 4, 47 4, 74 4, 78, 86 4, 102, II0 a, 120 8, 122, 134 a, 139 2, 146 4, 191 @, 193 4, and in the critical notes passim

Knights (1200), 96 4; (1000) 1334; under the Thirty, 142. Of Eretria, 59 4

Kohler, Prof. U., quoted, Ixxiv, 39 a

Larmor, Mr J., quoted, 245 4

law-courts, allotment of, 221 4, 233 f; Gk. Index, s. vw. dixacrypia, “Apeios maryos, (rl) Aekgwly and Tad\adly, (év) Bpearou

law-suits, see Gk. Index, s. v. ypagatl, and dixae

leases of mines, 171 f; of sacred en- closures, 173 f; property of minors, 209 6

Leeuwen, Prof. van, quoted, xxxvi f, and in critical notes passim

Leipsydrium, 72 6

Lemnos, trrapxos sent to, 229 @

Leocorium, 70 a

Lesbos, 95 2

Liddell and Scott’s Lexécon, 183 a

Lipsius, Prof. J. H., quoted, 150 4, 158 2, 189 a2, 195 4, 219 6 &c.

lot, appointment by, 16 a, 29 f, 87, 230 4, 236 4; Council appointed by, 157 a, 230 a. See also Gk. Index, s.v. kAypd and Aayxdvw :

Lycurgus, administration of, 170 4, 200 a b

Lygdamis, 59 f

Macan, Mr R., quoted, lviii, Ixvi, 30 4,

372 Mahaffy, Dr J. P., quoted, xv, 89 4 maladministration, fines for, 194 6 Marmor Parium, 50 b &c. Maroneia, mines at, 89 4 Mayor, Rev. Prof. John E. B., quoted, 44, 55 a, 58 a, 154 b, 182 (2. c.) &c. Mayor, ee ae B., quoted, xlvii (z.), 21 (x. ¢.), 67 (2. ¢.), 148 (2. ¢.) &e. Megacles, son of Hippocrates, 87 4 Megarian war, 54. Meyer, P., quoted, 14 @ military discipline, 228 a@; period of military service, 191 @

ENGLISH INDEX

mines, 89 f, 171 f Miiller, Carl, xxix Munichia, 72, 226 @

naucrari, 32 6, 81 6; cf. Keil, Sol. Verf. . 93 ff

neutrals, Solon’s law against, 34 ‘

Newman, Mr W. L., quoted, xlv, lvi, 13 a, 20 d, 34 6, 71 b, 83 a, 85 4, 95 4, 96 @, 103 6, 114 , 167 a, 2004

Nicias, 114

Nicodemus, or Nicomedes, 89 @

Niké, figures of, 170

officials, home and foreign, 97 4; ap- pointed by lot, members of Council, 157, 231 @; other officials so appointed, 170—5, 181—201, cf. Gk. Index, s. v. KAnp&. Military officials, 225 f; elected by show of hands, 155 f; time of electing, 165 4. Scrutiny of, 202 a

oil from the sacred olive-trees, 223 f

Oncken, Prof. W., quoted, xxx

opisthodomos, 163 a

orthography ; see critical notes on del 20 f; ybyvopae 53 yeyveoxw 19; éordacla(?) 60; lepewotvn 83; Ayroupyla 108 4; Movnxla 72; o@few 92; cGos, cds 123

Ostracism, 84—92; 160 a; archeological evidence on, 88 a 4

Palladium, court in precincts of, 213 @ Pallene, 60 a

Panathenaea, 71 a2, 157 @, 198 a, 222 f Panathenaic vases, 223 0

papyrus, xxxviii

Paralos, 229 6 (cf. Keil, Solon. Verf. 149)

Paton, Mr W. R., quoted, 15 (. ¢.), 83

Patrizzi, xxix

Patrocleides, decree of, 214 4

paupers, relief of, 181 (cf. Keil, Solon. Verf. 75)

Peiraeus, demarch of, 200 4; generals set over, 226 4; party of, 140—5

Peisander, 127

Peisistratus, chronology of, 56 (cf. Kohler, on p. Ixxii, and Keil, Solon. Verf. 51); in Macedonia, 58

Pericles, 106—111; law of citizenship carried by, 106 4; his accusation of Cimon, 107; his successors, II

petitions, 161 @

Phanodemus, lv

Pheidon, 37 4

Philochorus, xix, lvi; on ostracism, 84 @

Philon’s cxevoO7xn, 168 4, 180 6

Philostephanus of Cyrene, xx

Phormisius, a leader of the moderate party 404 B.C., 132 3

Photius, xxvii; 5. v. qyeuovla dtxaoryplov corrected, 216 a; mistake, s. v. mépadot, accounted for, 230 @

*Phreatto’, 213 6

ENGLISH INDEX

Phyle, 137 ;

plans of buildings removed from cog- nisance of the Council, 180 a

Plato’s Republic, Politicus and Laws, x, xi; Rep. 558 8B, xliv; Gorgias 515 E, 110; cf. Keil, Solon. Verf. 158, 218 f; scholia on, xxviii

Pliny the Elder, xxiii

Plutarch and the Todreta:, xxiii f, 19 a; Theseus, 147 a, 251 frag. 2; Solon, xxili f, 1—3, 21, 24 f, 33-37, 41—48 (cf. Keil, Solon. Verf. 40, 48, 55, 164, 173, 175, &c.); Themistocles, 102; Cimon, 104 f, 107 £; Pericles, 106—9; Nicias, 2, 114 6

Polemon, 27 4

Pollux, xxv f, 28, 176 a, &c., and in the Testimonia, passim (cf. Keil, Solon. Verf. 64); corected by Cobet, 202 4

Poole, Mr R. S., quoted, 39 a

Poste, Mr E., quoted, 14 4, 21 a, 97 4, 118 @, 123 6, 142.4

Postgate, Dr, 20 (x. ¢.)

proedri, 163

proxenos, grants of title of, 196 a

prytaneum, court in precincts of, 216 6

prytanies, duration of, 157 4

Pythocleides, 255 frag. 13

Pythodorus, archon 432/1, 108 @; archon 404/3, 116 4, 133 6

quadriremes, 169 a Quarterly Review, Apr. 1891, quoted, 103 a

Reinach, Th., 13 4, 143 4 &c.

Richards, Mr H., quoted, xlvii f, 19 4, 61 4, and in critical notes passim

Ridgeway, Prof., 40 4

Robertson Smith, Prof., xxxi

Rose, V., xxx, 74 @ &c.

rotation in office, 16 f, 125 3

Riihl, F. xxi (7), lxxili, 147 4 &c.

sacrifices, commissioners of, 197 @

Salaminia, 230 a b

Salamis, battle of, 92; archon in, 200 6

salaries, 230 f

Samos, 95 @, 232 @

‘Sandwich marble’, 232 @

scholia, quotations from modreta: in, xxviii

Scholl, quoted, 219 4

Schémann, quoted, 133 2, 148 a, 164 6 &c.

Schvarcz, criticised, xlii f

scolia, 73, 77

seal of Athens, 163 4

Selden, xxix

Shute, Mr R., quoted, xl, lii f

Simonides, 68 a

slaves, damage done by, 187 4

Solon, liv, r8—48; date of his archon- ship, 49 f, 55 @3 legislation of, 23;

301

obscurities in his laws, 36 4, 1344; law against neutrality, 34; limited power of testation granted by, 135 a; verses of, 19—21; 44—48; democratic ten- dency of his reforms, 34; reform of coins, weights and measures, 37 (cf. Keil, Solon. Verf. 70 f, 163—172); withdraws to Egypt, 41; opposes Peisistratus, 55; ashes of,.254 frag. 11; eloayyeNlat, 34 a; KUpBes 236 (Keil, Zc. 58); 8poe 45 f; cecaxPera 21, 376

Solon and Peisistratus, 55, 66

Sophocles, his crparyyla, 166 a; scholium on O. C. ol, 223.

Strabo and the IDoNcretau, xxii

symmories, generals set over the, 226 a

taxes, Athenian, 95 f

Ten, the, appointed to succeed the Thirty, 139 4; their atrocities, 74.; superseded by another body of Ten, 140; excluded from the amnesty, 143 a; allowed to settle at Eleusis, 24. For other bodies of Ten, see Gk. Index, ». v. déxa

Themistocles, brings about building of triremes, 90 f; date of his archonship,

o 4; co-operates with Aristides in uilding walls of Athens, 93 4; accused

of Medism, 102; helps Ephialtes to tle aaa the Areopagus (B.C. 462), Ior

theoricon, 113 f, 156 a, 171 6

Theramenes, leader of aristocratical party, 1143; character of, 115. A leader of the 400, 127; joins in subverting them, 128. Leader of moderate party after Aegospotami, 133; opposes ex- treme measures of the Thirty, 136; put to death, 137. Cf. lxiii z

Theseum, 61 a, 230 8

Theseus, 147 2, 251 frag. 2, 253 frag. 4

thesmothetae, 218 f; clerk to, 201 4

Thettalus, 66 4, 68 4

Thirlwall justified, 59 a, 63 6

Thirty, the, established by Lysander, 133; their rule, 133—6; defeated at Munichia and expelled from power, 139; excluded from amnesty, allowed to settle at Eleusis, 143

Thompson, Mr E. S., quoted, 13 4, 75 4

Thompson, Dr W. H., quoted, 25 @

Thrasybulus, occupies Phyle and defeats forces:sent by the Thirty, 137; decree proposed by T. attacked by Archinus,

144

Three Thousand, privileged body under the Thirty, 137 @

Thucydides (i 126), 2 @; on Harmodius, liv, 69—71 ; (viii 67) 117 f, 125 a

Thucydides (son of Melesias), leader of aristocratical party, 111

Timaeus, xx

torch-races, 211 @

302

Torr, Mr Cecil, xxxix, 169 a, 185 4

treasurers, Ixxvii, 121, 170; treasurer of the Council, 181 4

treaties, 196 a

tribes, four in early times, 31 4; ten instituted by Cleisthenes, 83 4

triremes, building of, go f, 169 a

‘tyranny’, law against, 65

Tyrrell, Prof. R, Y., quoted, 22 4, 103 @

Tzetzes, xxvii

verbs, compound followed by simple, 194 a

votes of dicasts, 246; reckoning-board for, 248 6

Walker, Mr E. M., quoted, 105 @ ‘war-king’, 7

water-clock, 244 f

weights and measures, 184 @

ENGLISH INDEX

Weil, Prof. H., quoted, 14 7. ¢., 69 @

Wilamowitz, von, quoted, 97 f, 195 4, 218 a, and in critical notes pass7m

wills, 135 @

Wright, Prof. J. H., xix f, xxiv, lvii, lx

Wyse, Prof. W., quoted, 33 b, 62 4, 66 4, 85 a, gt 4,97 4 99 4, 103 4 119 4, 126, 190 2, 199 4 &c.; also in critical notes passim

Xanthippus, son of Ariphron, ostracised, 88 4; his dog, 254 frag. 12

Xenophon and the ’A@. mod., lv; his political writings, ix, x; Pseudo-Xeno- phon, ’A@. moA., ix (cf. Keil, Solon. Verf. 215)

year, lunar, 158 @

Zenobius, xxv; (vi 29) criticised, 113 3

CAMBRIDGE: PRINTED BY C. J. CLAY, M.A. AND SONS, AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.

BY THE SAME EDITOR.

Euripides.—Bacche. With Critical and Explanatory Notes, and with numerous Illustrations from Works of Ancient Art. 1880, Third Edition, 1892, pp. clv + 275, crown 8vo, gilt top, 125. 6a.*

Isocrates.—Ad Demonicum et Panegyricus, pp. xliv + 169, 1868, Second Edition, 1872, crown 8vo, 4s. 6a. Rivingtons (now Long- mans), London.

Demosthenes.—Select Private Orations. With Introductions and English Notes.

Part IJ.—Containing Pro Phormione, Contra Stephanum I, II, Nico-

stratum, Cononem, Calliclem. 1875, New Edition, 1886, pp. Ixxii + 271, crown 8vo, 75. 6a.*

Demosthenes.—Speech against the Law of Leptines. With Introduction, Critical and Explanatory Notes, and Autotype Facsimile from the Paris MS. 1890, pp. xlviii + 122, demy 8vo, gs.*

Cicero.—Ad M. Brutum Orator. A Revised Text. With Introductory Essays and Critical and Explanatory Notes, 1885, pp. . xcix++258, demy 8vo, 165.*

Aristotle.—The Rhetoric. With a Commentary by the late E. M. CoP, Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge, revised and edited (with Indices) by J. E. SANDys. With a biographical Memoir by the late H. A.J. MUNRO, 1877. 3 Vols, pp. xx+913, demy 8vo, 215.*

Dictionary of Classical Mythology, Religion, Literature, Art, and Antiquities. Revised and Edited from the German of Dr OskAR SEYFFERT, by Professor NETTLESHIP and Dr SaNnpys. With about 500 illustrations. Second Edition, 1891, with new and full Indexes of Contents and Illustrations; pp. 706, double columns, crown 4to, 21s. Swan Sonnenschein and Co., London (Macmillan and Co., New York).

An Easter Vacation in Greece, with lists of books on Greek Travel and Topography, and Time-tables of Greek Steamers and Rail- ways, by J. E. SANDYS, 1887, pp. 171, crown 8vo, 3s. 6d. Macmillan and Co., London and New York.

* Edited for the Syndics of the Cambridge University Press ; Cambridge Warehouse, Ave Maria ns London (Deighton, Bell and Co., Cambridge; F. A. Brockhaus, Leipzig ; Macmillan and Co., New York).

ARE edd fio Atesy,