ἡμέρᾳ μιᾷ (= ὁρᾶτε ὡς ἐγώ), Π.Α. 1259, 1592, Ι.Τ. 267, 1065, 1298, Ion 1090, Or. 273. In Ion 1553 we have no difficulty in determining the mood, for the negative settles the question once for all: οὐ γὰρ πολεμίαν με λεύσσετε. Although a synonym of opâre is used, the resemblance to the Prometheus passage is striking. In H.F. 1072 opâre is used absolutely, like the frequent öpa in the Oedipus Coloneus. Many examples might be cited from Euripides where the plural (so far as the sense is concerned) might have been taken for an imperative, as Hec. 1115 εἰσορᾷς ἃ πάσχομεν ; Η.Ε. 1117 ὁρᾷς γὰρ αὐτὸς εἰ φρονῶν ἤδη κυρείς, Ion 1337 ὁρᾷς τόδ' ἄγγος. Examples of opa μý are Ion 1523, Or. 208, [Rhes.] 570. In Cyclops 354 ὅρα τάδε and in Phoen. 118 εἰσόρα τὸν πρῶτον are found the only present imperatives of this verb (actual perception) in Euripides.

...

In Aristophanes, Pax 327 ff., we have a good illustration of the difference between the two tenses: ἢν ἰδού, καὶ δὴ πέπαυ μαι . . . ἀλλ ̓ ὁρᾶτ ̓, οὔπω πέπαυσθε. The remaining indicatives are Eq. 67 оpâтe την "Tλλav; Nub. 1326, Pax 264, ὁρᾶτε τὸν κίνδυνον ὡς μέγας, 891 ὁρᾶτ ̓ ὀπτάνιον ὑμῖν ὡς καλόν. In Lys. 837 and Plut. 215 the verb is used absolutely. The imperative seems to occur in Achar. 1227, but, if the mood is not indicative, it is to be explained as Pax 887 Bovλý, πρυτάνεις, ὁρᾶτε τὴν Θεωρίαν, where the present is peculiarly appropriate. Moreover, for metrical reasons alone we should expect to find öpa and opâre in a writer like Aristophanes more frequently than idé and ἴδετε (ἰδοῦ and ἴδεσθε, used by Homer and Aeschylus, being excluded by the exigencies of the style), whereas the present imperative in prose, as we shall see, is used but once, and there for a special reason. The examples of öpa in Aristophanes are Vesp. 799 opa TÒ χρῆμα (= eccere, just think), 1493 κατὰ σαυτὸν ὅρα, Αν. 651 ὅρα ὡς, Eccl. 3co ὅρα ὅπως.

So much for the poets. Of the prose writers Herodotus and Thucydides furnish very few examples of either öpa or ópâte. All1 are indicative (ópâтe Hdt. III. 137, IV. 1392; 1 Actual perception.

2 If the verb were plural in VII. 5 (ὁρᾷς τὰ ὑπερέχοντα ζῷα ὡς κεραυνοῖ ὁ θεός) the tendency would doubtless be to consider the mood imperative.

õpа öκws III. 36; öpa vvv (consider now) III. 134; opâte Thuc. I. 68, 3, V. 87; ὁρᾶτε ὅπως μή ΙΙΙ. 57, 1 ; ὅτῳ τρόπῳ VI. 33, 3). When we come to the philosophers we have a different tale to tell. In Plato examples of opa and opâte are particularly abundant. The prettiest illustration in all his works-indeed, in all Greek works of the distinction made in the use of the tenses of this verb in the imperative mood is afforded by a passage in the Republic (514 A and B). It is in the famous allegory of the cave: ἰδὲ γὰρ ἀνθρώπους οἷον ἐν καταγείῳ οἰκήσει σπηλαιώδει . . . μεταξὺ δὲ τοῦ πυρὸς καὶ τῶν δεσμωτῶν ἐπάνω ὁδόν, παρ' ἣν ἰδὲ τειχίον παρῳκοδομημένον.

Ορα τοίνυν παρὰ τοῦτο τὸ τειχίον φέροντας ἀνθρώπους σκεύη τε παντοδαπὰ ὑπερέχοντα τοῦ τειχίου καὶ ἀνδριάντας. The speaker bids his friend visualize the scene; but the first object to which he directs his attention is a fixed group, the second a fixed wall (hence idé in both instances), but the third consists of a succession of figures (ἀνθρώπους φέροντας σκεύη, hence the present opa). The aorist occurs also in 434 A, Alcib. 132 E idè σavтóv, Phaedo 72 A. So the first person idw Rep. 457 C, ïdwμev 603 C, Leg. 976 C, Charm. 172 C, Gorg. 455 A. An excellent example of öpa (as distinguished from idé of mental perception) is Rep. 432 С öpa ovv каì проðνμоû κατιδεῖν. In the first verb the effort is expressed by the tense; in the second by the verb itself (πpoľvμov), and so the aorist of the first verb is employed as a complement. This use of opa is naturally frequent in Plato: Rep. 358 D, 416 D, 613 E, Alcib. 115 C (öpa ei), 121 B, II Alcib. 139 D (ὅρα μή), Rep. 595 Α (ἀλλ' αὐτὸς ὅρα), Alcib. 117 C (ὅρα καὶ σù кowy), 104 C, II Alcib. 145 A, Rep. 596 B, Laches 188 C (Tóvde öρa öтws exe). Likewise the dual, Euthydemus 274 A (ἀλλ' ὁρᾶτον, ὦ Εὐθύδημέ τε καὶ Διονυσόδωρα, εἰ ἀληθῆ ἐλέγεTOV), and the plural, Symposium 192 E ópâтe ei toútov èpâte, Laches 187 D, Rep. 642 A.

One might be inclined to think that the reason why opâte is so rare is that the occasions for using the word in this form are comparatively unfrequent, whereas the singular öpa would be much commoner. In Xenophon, however, öpa occurs only twice: Cyropaedia III. 1, 27 öpa μý (bis) and opa

εἰ V. 4, 33. The plural, on the other hand, is abundant : Cyrop. II. 1, 18 (ópâte тà öñλa), III. 2, 12 (vôv dè ópâte dǹ èv οἴῳ ἐστέ), V. 1, 10 (αὐτοὶ ὁρᾶτε), IV. 1, 15 (ὁρᾶτε μή), IV. 2, 26 (ópâte öπws), IV. 5, 3 (avtoì ópâte), IV. 5, 44; IV. 5, 46; VII. 1, 22; VII. 5, 43; Symposium VIII. 3; Anab. I. 3, 16; III. 2, 4; III. 2, 29; III. 5, 5; IV. 6, 7; V. 2, 10 (тáde óρâTε· Ei μὲν κτέ); V. 6, 21 ; V. 6, 28; VI, 5, 16 (ὁρᾶτε πότερον). ΑΠ of these are indicative except those followed by μn, öπws, ei, and πότερον.

In the orators there is not a single example of opâte imperative. Lysias has eight of the indicative (XVI. 12, XIX. 2, XX. 3, XXI. 13, XXIV. 14, XXV. 34, XXXI. 12, Fr. 70) and two of the subjunctive opâte (XXVIII. 2, XXX. 33), but none of the singular öpa. The plural occurs but twice in Isaeus (IV. 15 and V. 39), and both are indicative. Demosthenes has seven examples of opa and twelve of opâre (intellectual perception). The indicative of actual perception occurs XXI. 189, XLV. 70, and of mental perception XXIII. 106. As a synonym of σкóтel, öрa is often found in Demosthenes, eg., ὅρα δ' οὕτωσι (ΧΧ. 21), ὅρα δὴ καὶ σKÓTTEL (XX. 84). The latter (σKÓTEL) is almost as peculiar in its behavior as πανε and παῦσαι, almost as regular as ἴδετε and opâre, that is to say, the singular imperative is usually present, whereas the plural is, as a rule, in the aorist; σKOTTEÛTE is rare, but σkéчaobe exceedingly common (Thuc. III. 47, 1; 57, 5; 57, 7; Ar. Pax 888; Isae. IV. 9, IX. 4, 30, 36; Xen. An. III. 2, 20), whereas σкÓTEL is the regular form for the singular, okéa unusual (Ar. Thesm. 160, 1114; Eccl. 124).1 Compare Plato II. Alcib. 143 E éπισкeάμeða. In like manner opμev instead of dwμev is very rare, but occasionally it is necessary; for, if one says öpa un, he would also naturally say opŵμev μý (Plato, Laches 196 C), but the optative never, except, of course, in dependent sentences, like Xenophon, An. III. 3, 2 (ei ovv ópánv vμâs KTẻ).2

1 In [Dem.] XLVI. 16 f. σκέψασθε . . . σκοπεῖτε . . . μὴ σκέψησθε.

...

2 After examining a large number of translations and editions in many languages, if haply I might find a single departure from the traditional interpretation of the passage under discussion, I discover that Hartung (Leipzig, 1852) renders: "Ihr seht in Banden einen unglücksel'gen Gott."

V.-Public Appropriations for Individual Offerings and Sacrifices in Greece.

BY DR. SUSAN BRALEY FRANKLIN,

BRYN MAWR.

A FRAGMENT of a decree, found on the Acropolis in Athens, relating to a public reward to be given to ὅσοι συνκατῆλθον ἀπὸ Φυλῆς has been supposed to be a part of the Archinus decree quoted by Aeschines, III. 187: ἐν τοίνυν τῷ Μητρώῳ παρὰ τὸ βουλευτήριον, ἥν ἔδοτε δωρεὰν τοῖς ἀπὸ Φυλῆς φεύγοντα τὸν δῆμον καταγαγοῦσιν, ἔστιν ἰδεῖν. ἦν μὲν γὰρ ὁ τὸ ψήφισμα γράψας καὶ νικήσας ̓Αρχῖνος ὁ ἐκ Κοίλης, εἷς τῶν καταγαγόν των τὸν δῆμον, ἔγραψε δὲ πρῶτον μὲν αὐτοῖς εἰς θυσίαν καὶ ἀναθήματα δοῦναι χιλίας δραχμάς, καὶ τοῦτ ̓ ἐστὶν ἔλαττον ἢ δέκα δραχμαὶ κατ ̓ ἄνδρα ἕκαστον, ἔπειτα κελεύει στεφανοῦσθαι θαλλοῦ στεφάνῳ αὐτῶν ἕκαστον ἀλλ ̓ οὐ χρυσῷ· τότε μὲν γὰρ ἦν ὁ τοῦ θαλλοῦ στέφανος τίμιος, νυνὶ δὲ καὶ ὁ χρυσοῦς καταπεφρόνηται. καὶ οὐδὲ τοῦτο εἰκῇ πράξαι κελεύει, ἀλλ ̓ ἀκριβῶς τὴν βουλὴν σκεψαμένην, ὅσοι αὐτῶν ἐπὶ Φυλῇ ἐπολιορκήθησαν, ὅτε Λακεδαιμόνιοι καὶ οἱ τριάκοντα προσέβαλλον τοῖς καταλαβοῦσι Φυλήν. Ε. Ziebarth has published the inscription in the Mittheil. d. k. d. arch. Inst. in Athen, XXIII. (1898), p. 27, and H. von Prott has given some new readings and a further discussion of the relation of the stone to the Archinus decree in the Mitth. XXV. (1900), p. 34.1 No one of the three formulas found in Aeschines and essential for an identification of the decree, viz., δοῦναι δὲ αὐτοῖς εἰς θυσίαν καὶ ἀναθήματα χιλίας δραχμάς, στεφανοῦσθαι ἕκαστον αὐτῶν θαλλοῦ στεφάνῳ, and τὴν δὲ βουλὴν σκέψασθαι ὅσοι αὐτῶν ἐπὶ Φυλῇ ἐπολιορκήθησαν, appears upon the stone, but it is supposed that they were written on the part now lost. The end of the decree is the usual place for the first two formulas,

1 Körte's article on this decree (Mitth. XXV. (1900), p. 392) reached me too late for more than a reference here.

and Ziebarth claims that we have no evidence that the heroes of Phyle were more than once rewarded. He places the decree in the archonship of Xenaenetus, two years after the return of the exiles from Phyle, and interprets the inscription to read that the citizenship was granted to those that came from Phyle, but that to those that fought at Munychia the privilege of looTéλeta was given (cf. Xen. Hell. II. 4. 25). von Prott considers it quite improbable that such honors to men and gods were deferred for two years, and puts the decree in the archonship of Pythodorus, immediately after the return of the exiles. He claims that most of the men at Phyle were citizens already, and calling attention to the compound, συγκατῆλθον, suggests that the citizenship was granted to the metics that were allies of 'those from Phyle,' while the special honors mentioned in Aeschines belonged to the ganzen Schaar.

It is not the purpose of this paper to undertake a new study of the inscription, but starting from the passage in Aeschines to throw some light on the meaning of the phrase, εἰς θυσίαν καὶ ἀναθήματα, and incidentally perhaps upon the inscription. What was the meaning of the ava@npara, why was the sacrifice made, and was it unusual for the state to bear the expense?

The literary evidence in regard to such sacrifices and offerings is very meagre, and references to this special event help but little. Several passages in the orations of Lysias make it clear that the courage and valor of these heroes was not forgotten or left unrewarded. Agoratus, accused of murder, finds his best claim for mercy in that ἐπὶ Φυλήν τε ᾤχετο καὶ σvукaтîìæε àñò Þvλîs (Lys. XIII. 77); and Lysias anticipates the same plea as the defence of Ergocles, who was charged with injuring Athenian citizens, namely, as aπò Φυλῆς κατῆλθε, καὶ ὡς δημοτικός ἐστι καὶ ὡς κινδύνων ὑμετέ pwv μeτéσxev (Lys. XXVIII. 12, 13). Of those that captured the Piraeus it is said: αὐτοὺς ὁ δῆμος ταῖς μεγίσταις τιμαῖς τετίμηκεν, ἱππαρχεῖν καὶ στρατηγεῖν, καὶ πρεσβεύειν ὑπὲρ avτov aiρоúμevoi (Lys. XXVI. 20), and of those from Phyle, κατελθόντες ἀπὸ Φυλῆς τιμῶνται ὑφ ̓ ὑμῶν ὡς ἄνδρες ἀγαθοὶ