Papers of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens (5.1886-1890)

IXSCRTPTIOXS FROM IKARIA.

101

We have first to ask whether we have to deal with an original decree
inaugurating the system or with a copy of an earlier regulation. De-
mosthenes10 states that antidosis was established by Solon. Frankel11
thinks that this statement is to be credited only to the tendency of the
Attic orators to ascribe all ancient public regulations to Solon; but
most scholars accept Demosthenes as a trustworthy witness. In any
case, there can be no doubt that antidosis was regulated at Athens at
a much earlier time than the date of our inscription; there is, how-
ever, nothing to prevent us from supposing that the system may at
this time first have been introduced from Athens into the deme of
Ikaria, and that the purpose of our decree was to furnish the neces-
sary regulations for its adaptation to the choregic system in force in
the domes.

The first line of the inscription is evidently the heading, and sym-
metry would seem to require something to be supplied on the right
side (t>7? ^o/37?7ta? ?). The heading crTrfKrj ... is, I think, unique;
but we may compare a passage of Demosthenes where he uses crrifkri
in the sense of Tfrifyia-fia-12 Line 2 gives the name of the mover,
while the decree proper begins in 1. 3, where we have the phrase twi»
SrjfioTcbv Kal ro)v T/ca[pta>7',13 with which we must compare the similar
phraseT/eaptet? . . . Kal 6 Sr/fios 6 ^licapiecov, which occurs in the dcme-
decree published above.14 In both cases, "Ikarians" is used in the
introduction in a general sense (i-i}rr]<f)[a0ai '\icapLevcnv and [eSo-^aejv
'IicapieiHTi), while it is afterward used in a special sense, as of a body
distinct from the demesmen. Of the same nature is the 'Itcapiov
dpyvplov of Inscr. No. 8. 3. I know of no better explanation than
that suggested by Professor Merriam, and given in the article on the
deme-decrce; namely, that the " Ikarians " in the restricted sense are
members of a gens claiming descent from the eponymous hero of the
deme. While it is true that most names of this class are of the
patronymic form in — Brjt;, —iS?;? such as JLvfio\Trl8ai, BpvriSat, etc.,
we have also in inscriptions15 Kijpvices and —a\a/xlvioi.

10 Phaenippea, 11. " Hermes, xvm, p. 444, Note 1.

12 Vs.Lcptin., ? 159: «al rrjs A7j/io</>avTou<n-7(\7js ntpl i)s ffatQopntwv, ht riyiypairrai, k.t.K.
131 supply —piG>v, not -pitW, since in fifth-century inscriptions the contracted form
is the rule, and even in one of our later inscriptions we have "iKapiuv.
"No. 1, p. 71.

15 Of. tov ytvovs toD KvpvKwv, DlTT., Syli., 385; 'ABfivaLov, vi, p. 274, Kal eir rb yt'vos
rb 2aAa/uj/tajj>.