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

188

A STUDY OF THE ATTIC PUR A TR Y.

believe it can be so understood. Apart from this, I think my view
preferable. That elaaywyij and hia&iKacrla are two distinct acts ap-
pears from A, 13-19, B, 12-18, £0-21, in spite of eiaayofievo and
eladyav (£', 24-, 37-38). As far as that goes, they might both come on the
same day. But the dissociation of the ela-aywyrj from the offering of
the victim on behalf of the child creates great difficulties. I will not
press the argument, that Hierokles ought to have written ttjv Se elcra-
ycoyi-jv Kal Trjv SiaSucaaLCiv rb Xoottov elvai ra varepqi erei k. t. X.,
if such was his intention. But what meaning could the sacrifice have,
if the child was not presented at the same time?

Buermann infers from the terms of the oath (/>', 52) that only sons,
and not daughters, were enrolled. He might have quoted, further,
A, 28 and B, 60. But, for the admission of daughters, we have the
evidence, not only of the Scholiast on Aristophanes, Acharnians 146,
but also of Isaios, in. 73-76. I therefore think it more likely that
the omission of reference to daughters in the oath and the psephisms
is due to carelessness.

Through the courtesy of Professor Pantazides, I have seen also, at
the last moment, the advance sheets of his discussion of the inscrip-
tion, shortly to appear in the 'F^v/xepU ' Ap-^aioXoyiKij, and have been
able to appropriate from him tw o or three valuable suggestions in
regard to minor points.

F. B. Takbell.

American School, Athens,
March VI, 1889.