DOI Artikel:
Buck, Carl Darling: Discoveries in the Attic Deme of Ikaria, 1888
DOI Seite / Zitierlink: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.8678#0118
INSCRIPTIONS FROM TIT ARIA.
103
In L 5, antidosw is first introduced, and one of the most important
points in the whole inscription is furnished by the last two letters.
For these letters can belong only to xpimdrcov; and we thus have the
only known instance of either aim'Socn,? or dvriS[Sco/j.i, when used in
the technical sense, governing a word meaning property. In the Attic
orators it is always an exchange of the liturgy, not of property which
is spoken of. Dittenberger, Blaschke, and Frankel believe that no
exchange of property was ever involved in the system, and give inter-
pretations of the word in accordance with their theory. Dittenberger
maintains that uvtl&oo-k; is used of the temporary confiscation which
each party makes upon the property of his opponent. Blaschke, sup-
ported by Frankel, claims that the word refers to Zuschiebung und
Zur'dclcschicbung of the liturgy by the two parties.18 There are pas-
sages in literature which seem to point clearly to an actual exchange
of property; but it is the object of Frankel's paper, referred to above,
to discredit the evidence of these passages. In an inscription like the
one under consideration, however, which furnishes the regulations of
the system, there can be no talk of jests, or private proposals for set-
tlement.19 On the contrary, the phrase is absolute proof that the ori-
ginal use of the word was that usually attributed to it, namely, an
actual exchange of property; however much its use in the fourth cen-
tury may vary from this. In the Orators it is either employed in
several distinct senses, or else there is a common meaning which has
escaped the scholars who have considered it. For example, how are
we to explain the phrase in the Phaerdppea (§ 10) fierd t«? dvnS6aei<;,
when no exchange of property had taken place?
In 1. 8, diro^alveiv is the word used by Demosthenes for the giving
in of an inventory of property by each of the two parties.20
In L 12, tov dyaXfiaroi must refer to some well-known temple
statue, perhaps the Ktdtbild of Apollo, as Uv0!coi is a possible resto-
ration in the preceding line, and in 1. 30 the Pythion is plainly men-
tioned. The oath was to be taken with the hand on the sacred statue.
In lines 15 and 17, the form •7rpa>ro-)(opot,q occurs. Athenaios21
mentions two plays having the title of 7rpoir6xopo<;. The lexicons
'8 Cf. Dittenberger, Ueber den Vermogenstausch, etc., p. 3 ff.; Blaschke, De antidoni
apud Athenienses, p. 8 ff.; Frankel, Hermes, xvm, p. 404, from whom the phrase
Zuschiebung und Zuruchschiebung is taken, as being a more compact translation of
Blaschke's Latin than is possible in English. 19Frankel, Z. c, pp. 446-8.
20 Cf., for example, \ 9 of the Phaenippea. 21 vi, 240; vu, 287.
103
In L 5, antidosw is first introduced, and one of the most important
points in the whole inscription is furnished by the last two letters.
For these letters can belong only to xpimdrcov; and we thus have the
only known instance of either aim'Socn,? or dvriS[Sco/j.i, when used in
the technical sense, governing a word meaning property. In the Attic
orators it is always an exchange of the liturgy, not of property which
is spoken of. Dittenberger, Blaschke, and Frankel believe that no
exchange of property was ever involved in the system, and give inter-
pretations of the word in accordance with their theory. Dittenberger
maintains that uvtl&oo-k; is used of the temporary confiscation which
each party makes upon the property of his opponent. Blaschke, sup-
ported by Frankel, claims that the word refers to Zuschiebung und
Zur'dclcschicbung of the liturgy by the two parties.18 There are pas-
sages in literature which seem to point clearly to an actual exchange
of property; but it is the object of Frankel's paper, referred to above,
to discredit the evidence of these passages. In an inscription like the
one under consideration, however, which furnishes the regulations of
the system, there can be no talk of jests, or private proposals for set-
tlement.19 On the contrary, the phrase is absolute proof that the ori-
ginal use of the word was that usually attributed to it, namely, an
actual exchange of property; however much its use in the fourth cen-
tury may vary from this. In the Orators it is either employed in
several distinct senses, or else there is a common meaning which has
escaped the scholars who have considered it. For example, how are
we to explain the phrase in the Phaerdppea (§ 10) fierd t«? dvnS6aei<;,
when no exchange of property had taken place?
In 1. 8, diro^alveiv is the word used by Demosthenes for the giving
in of an inventory of property by each of the two parties.20
In L 12, tov dyaXfiaroi must refer to some well-known temple
statue, perhaps the Ktdtbild of Apollo, as Uv0!coi is a possible resto-
ration in the preceding line, and in 1. 30 the Pythion is plainly men-
tioned. The oath was to be taken with the hand on the sacred statue.
In lines 15 and 17, the form •7rpa>ro-)(opot,q occurs. Athenaios21
mentions two plays having the title of 7rpoir6xopo<;. The lexicons
'8 Cf. Dittenberger, Ueber den Vermogenstausch, etc., p. 3 ff.; Blaschke, De antidoni
apud Athenienses, p. 8 ff.; Frankel, Hermes, xvm, p. 404, from whom the phrase
Zuschiebung und Zuruchschiebung is taken, as being a more compact translation of
Blaschke's Latin than is possible in English. 19Frankel, Z. c, pp. 446-8.
20 Cf., for example, \ 9 of the Phaenippea. 21 vi, 240; vu, 287.