¹ JHS. xlix. 4Google Scholar.

² Exploration archeologique de Délos, VI. (Paris Boccard, 1921)Google Scholar. Cf. Roussel, op. cit. 214, 223, 287, 305, 329, BCH. xxx. 610 ff.Google Scholar, Laidlaw, , History of Delos, 236 f.Google Scholar, 289 f., Durrbach, , Choix, pp. 198 f.Google Scholar, Ferguson, W. S., Hellenistic Athens, 391Google Scholar.

³ Cf. also von Schoeffer, V., RE. iv. 2495, F.Google ScholarDurrbach, , Choix des inscriptions de Délos, Nos. 72, 118, 119Google Scholar, Roussel, P., Délos (Paris, 1925), 17.Google Scholar The Poseidoniasts make a frequent appearance in the standard works on the Greek associations, Ziebarth, E., Das griechische Vereinswesen (Leipzig, 1896)Google Scholar, and Poland, F., Geschichte des griechischen Vereinswesens (Leipzig, 1909)Google Scholar, and are discussed in Ziebarth's recent work Beiträge zur Geschichte des Seeraubs und Seehandels (Hamburg, 1929), 93 ff.Google Scholar: cf. Burs, cxciii. 74Google Scholar.

⁴ Cf. Ziebarth, E., Beiträge zur Geschichte des Seeraubs, 95Google Scholar: Von der Verfassung der Berytier kennen wir wenig, da nicht einmal ein Dekret von ihnen erhalten ist.

⁵ Thus Picard's statement (op. cit. 271), ‘On notera que la communauté marchande de Bérytos, bien qu'administrée par un ἀρχιθιασίτης, ne prend pas le nom de thiase: elle est toujours désignée sous le nom de κοινόν', must be modified so far as the last clause is concerned. I omit from the reckoning the two passages (ll. 33, 44) in which σύνοδος, like σύλλογος (1. 77), denotes ‘meeting’. The term used in 1. 6 for societies in general is κοινά. For the meaning of κοινόν see Poland, 163 ff., Kornemann, E., RE. Suppl. iv. 915 ff.Google Scholar; for σύνοδος, συνοδίτης, Poland. 158 ff., for Poland, 16 ff.

⁶ Roussel, , Délos col. ath. 76 ff.Google Scholar, 90 note 3, 274 f., Laidlaw, op. cit. 202 ff.

⁷ Durrbach, , Choix, 85 1. 39Google Scholar.

⁸ Poland, 60, 194, BCH. liii. 337 ff.Google Scholar

⁹ BCH. xliv. 272 ff.Google Scholar Cf. Poland, 107 ff., Stöckle, , RE. Suppl. iv. 157 ff.Google Scholar, Jouguet, P., Bull. Inst. Fr. Arch. Or. xxxi. 12 ff.Google Scholar, Oertel, F., ZSav. 1. 57l ff.Google Scholar, Hasebroek, J., Trade and Politics in Ancient Greece, 1 ff.Google Scholar, Ziebarth, E., Beiträge zur Geschichte des Seeraubs, 45 f.Google Scholar

¹⁰ For the formulae of guild-decrees see Larfeld, , Handbuch, i. 542 ff.Google Scholar, ii. 818 ff., Gr. Epigr. ³ 420 ff.

¹¹ At Tomi (Waltzing, , Corp. prof. iii. 78f.Google Scholar, Nos. 217f., IGRom. i. 604), Nicomedia (IGRom. iii. 4) and Amastris, (BCH. xxv. 36)Google Scholar: cf. Poland, 114.

¹² Inschr. v. Magn. 117: cf. Poland, 83*, 152, 541. Distinct from this usage of the word is that which appears in the phrase (SIG. 921. 33, 42: see Wade-Gery's discussion in ClQu. xxv. 131 ff.Google Scholar).

¹³ Durrbach, Choix, No. 119. Poland's doubt (p. 462*) about the reading is due to his having had before him only the first edition of the text.

¹⁴ See the references given above in footnote 2, especially Durrbach, p. 198.

¹⁵ For the meaning ‘chapel’ he cites IG. vii. 2233, IBM. 813, BCH. v. 450Google Scholar (= IG. ix(i). 89): we may add IG. ii². 2337. 32, SIG. 985. 5. The recently discovered decrees of the Egyptian συγγεωργοί refer to a sum devoted (Bull. Soc. Arch. Alex. vii. 66 f.Google Scholar, ll. 5, 21: cf. 6, 9, 24), and an οἰκος also appears in a decree of the Amphiaraïstae at Rhamnus (IG. ii². 1322. 3).

¹⁶ See Poland, 335.

¹⁷ Cf. e.g. IG. ii². 338. 22, 360. 64, 1252. 19, 1259. 7, 1278. 6, iv. 748. 16.

¹⁸ See Poland, 496**, and especially A. Kuenzi, Ἐπίδοσις (Berne, 1923), which contains a full discussion, historical and linguistic, of the ἐπιδόσεις of the Greek states, but does not extend its survey to those of the Greek associations. The object of ἐπιδιδόναι here (1. 6) and in a number of cases collected by Kuenzi, 60 f., and Larfeld, , Handbuch, i. 494Google Scholar ( = Gr. Epigr. ³ 363), is , and the phrase is either used absolutely or followed by a simple infinitive or by εἰς or ἐπί governing a noun or το with the infinitive. Similar to the present expression is SEG. iii. 710. 5Google Scholar(Methymna), . Other examples, taken from guild-records, are IG. ii². 1309a 6 (εἰς), 1326. 39 (εἰς), 1328. 25 (absol.) and perhaps 1331. 13. In l. 10 of the Cairness decree we have ἐπέδωκεν τόκον (for this special usage see Kuenzi, 61 f.) and the word is frequently followed by sums of money (IG. ii². 1263. 18, 1277. 11, 1301. 6, 1322. 11, 1325. 22, 1326. 12, 15, SEG. i. 330B, iii. 121Google Scholar, BCH. xlvii. 373Google Scholar) or other objects (IG. ii². 1297. 4): elsewhere it is used absolutely (IG. ii². 1301. 16, 1322. 12, 1328. 2), as equivalent to (Cairness decree, l. 12, SEG. vi. 59. 18Google Scholar, vii. 74. 3). The purposes of public ἐπτδόσεις are classified by Kuenzi (67 ff.) as (a) military needs, (b) public buildings, (c) religious objects, (d) corn supplies and (e) financial requirements: those of the associations are mainly for buildings and repairs, whether sacred or secular. Cf. Robert, L., BCH. lvii. 505 ff.Google Scholar, Wilhelm, A., Mélanges Glotz, 899 ff.Google Scholar

¹⁹ The adjective occurs also in Plutarch, de audiendo, 10, Ptol, . Tetrab. 165Google Scholar, and Eustathius, Opusc. 2. 16 (ed. Tafel, 1832), and the adverb in LXX, Prov. xxv. 10, Origen, vii (Patrol. Graeca, xvii). 236 BGoogle Scholar, Hesychius, s.v. and Zonaras.

²⁰ I know no epigraphical parallel: in [Dem.] x. 28 we have and in Basil, , Epist. xiv. 1Google Scholar (Patrol. Graeca, xxxii. 275 B)Google Scholar, .

²¹ Quite different is the meaning of τὰ κοινά in IGRom. iv. 293 ii. 3 .

²² BCH. xxxvi. 5 ff.Google Scholar, 218. Two sons of a certain Μάαρκος are found in the list of contributors to a certain construction carried out by the Association (BCH. xliv. 309)Google Scholar.

²³ BCH. xxxvi, 102 ff.Google Scholar Cf. Roussel, P., Délos col. ath. 75 ff.Google Scholar, 272 ff., 32 9 f., Laidlaw, W. A., History of Delos, 208 ff.Google Scholar

²⁴ Cf. IG. xii(i). 1033. 7. Of the juxtaposition of εὑσέβεια to the gods and φιλοδοξία to a society another example occurs in IG. xii(3). 1270B 10 ff.

²⁵ See e.g. IG. ii². 1263. 15, 1270. 8, 1272. 7, 1308. 11, 1309b 11, 1310. 5, Bull. Soc. Arch. Alex. vii. 66Google Scholar (κατ' ἰδίαν): in these cases κοινεῖ precedes ἰδίαι, but the order of the Cairness decree is also that of IG. ii². 1326. 7, xi. 1061. 11 (cf. ii². 450. 13 ff., 844. 58, SIG 368. 4, 493. 8). That ἰδίαι means ‘in his relations with individuals’ rather than ‘in his individual capacity’ is proved, I think, by the fuller expressions used in IG. ii². 1304. 37 , 1327. 6 (cf. 1331. 3), and Durrbach, , Choix, 85. 7 ff.Google Scholar.

²⁶ IG. ii². 1028. 82, 1327. 14, Bull. Soc. Arch. Alex. vii. 67.Google Scholar Cf. SIG. 410. 14 , IG. xii(3). 1270A II .

²⁷ Busolt, , Griech. Staatskunde,³ i. 627Google Scholar. The commissioners here referred to may have been entitled ἐπιμεληταί, like Soterichus, who (IG. ii². 1273. 5: cf. 1260. 17, 1262. 4).

²⁸ The phrase recurs IG. ii⁸. 1338. 22, 26 (cf. 10, 36), xii(7). 241. 13. I n othe r guild-decrees a τέμενος is mentione d alon e (1330.25) or in conjunction with a ἰερόν (1332. 6), a ναός (1302. 7), or a βωμός; (1338. 11). For the part played by these τεμένη in the life of the guilds see Poland, 455 ff., 474.

²⁹ I take it that κατασκευή has its normal meaning of ‘construction,’ though it is claimed that the word is sometimes used instead of ἐπισκευή, ‘repair’ (Ziebarth, E., Burs. cxciii. 62)Google Scholar.

³⁰ IG. ii². 1299. 4, 54, 1302. 9, 1303. 7, SEG. iv. 230, 238, 396Google Scholar, Sardis, vii(i). 4. 5Google Scholar.

³¹ For guild-ἑστιάσεις see Poland, 260; for the ἑστίασις as ‘liturgy,’ RE. viii. 1315Google Scholar.

³² For guild-sacrifices see Poland, 31, 248, 255 ff., 390 ff.: add Bull. Soc. Arch. Alex. vii. 66Google Scholar. The verbs, other than θύειν and its compounds, usually employed in this connexion are, as here, ἐπιτελεῖν (e.g. IG. ii². 1338. 40, iv. 558. 12 = BCH. l. 498Google Scholar, SIG. 1068. 16, 1157. 31, OJh. xi. 103Google Scholar) and συντελεῖν (e.g. SIG. 1044. 27, 1106. 92, Rev. Phil. 1927, 123 f.Google Scholar).

³³ Cf. Poland, 496*, Kuenzi, op. cit. 59 f., Robert, L., BCH. lvii. 366 f.Google Scholar Good examples are IG. ii². 1299. 14, 1308. 13, 1318. 3, 1329. 17, 1330. 63, GDI. 3090. For ἐπαγγελία cf. SIG. 1116. 9, IG. xii(3). 1270A 11, 14. occurs, as here (1. 16), in ii². 1299. 71, [1308. 14], in 1299. 15, in 1329. 18.

³⁴ E.g. IG. ii². 785. 15, 1326. 7, 1330. 62, SIG. 591. 38, 611. 22, 700. 44, 800. 27, IG. xii(3). 1270A 6, GDI. 3090: cf. IGRom. iv. 293 ii. 2, Larfeld, Gr. Epigr. ³ 367.

³⁵ For examples of this ‘hortative’ clause in public and private decrees see Larfeld, Gr. Epigr. ³ 377 ff., 422 f., where many parallels to that of the Cairness decree will be found. For cf. IG. xii(i). 1033. 12, xii(3). 1270A 19, SIG. 721. 21, 748. 51, OGI. 339. 86, GDI. 3090: for SIG. 618. 15,800.29, OGI. 339. 88, IGRom. iv. 293 ii. 15, SEG. iv. 598. 13.

³⁶ The increasing popularity of the worship of Τύχη among the associations of the Greco-Roman world is emphasised by Poland, 226. Of the phrase here used numerous examples, dating from 302 B.C. onwards, will be found in the Attic decreta collegiorum et sodaliciorum (IG. ii². 1261–1346): cf. IG. xii(3). 1270.A 20, Bull. Soc. Arch. Alex. vii. 66, 67Google Scholar.

³⁷ See also IG. ii². 1330. 14 (where φιλοφρόνως might be restored in place of φιλανθρώπως, JHS. ix. 248Google Scholar (restored BCH. l. 491)Google Scholar, AM. xxxii. 259Google Scholar, BCH. lvii. 7Google Scholar ( = SEG. vii. 62Google Scholar) and the passages collected on p. 53, Bull. Soc. Arch. Alex. vii. 66Google Scholar, 11. 5, 8, SEG. iv. 433Google Scholar.

³⁸ Cf. (IG. ii². 1299. 28, 78, 1304. 45, 1329. 29). For these αὐλαί see Poland, 469; for this use of the word τόπος, Poland, 453 f., 475.

³⁹ Similarly the Delian association of Tyrian Heracleϊstae orders the erection of a portrait (γραπτή εἰκών) of its priest and benefactor, Patron (Michel, 998. 42), while at Pergamon the statues of Diodorus are to be erected (AM. xxxii. 246Google Scholar = IGRom. iv. 292. 26). Cf. BCH. xiii. 240Google Scholar.

⁴⁰ For the occurrence of vctol in association-records see Poland, 459; for that of προστῷα, Poland, 468 f. A στοά belonging to the Delian Poseidoniastae appears in BCH. vii. 474 f.Google Scholar, Nos. 2, 3. Προστῷα also occurin IG. ii². 204. 27, 1271. 5, 1322. 6, 1666B 53, 1675. 3, 1680. 1, xii (7). 434 (Aegiale), CIG. 2694b 10 (Mylasa). The form irpda-roov found in our decree recurs at Aperlae (IGRom. iii. 690) and perhaps at Panamara (SEG. iv. 272Google Scholar), and as an occasional variant in MSS.; the scholiast on Iliad, xx. 11Google Scholar uses πρόστοος adjectivally in the phrase τόποι πρόστοοι. Cf. τετράστοον, BCH. lvi. 293Google Scholar.

⁴¹ For other examples of cf. IG. ii². 1012. 17, 1327. 24, v(2). 516. 23, SIG. 1068. 21 (Patmos), OG/. 51.22 (Ptolemais),565.3 (Oenoanda), 571. 4 (Cadyanda), and in general Poland, 431 ff.; for the ἱερα, Poland, 457 f.

⁴² See Poland, 434.

⁴³ BCH. xxiii. 78Google Scholar: cf. Poland, 84, 109. For the at Delos cf. Laidlaw, , History of Delos, 156, 189 f.Google Scholar, 198 f., Roussel, , Delos col. ath. 176 ff.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ BCH. i. 86 f.Google Scholar, viii. 128 f., 488 ff., xxxvi. 67, xlv. 471 ff. ( = SEG. i. 334AGoogle Scholar). Cf. Roussel, op. cit. 83, 227, 312, Durrbach, , Choix, 132Google Scholar.

⁴⁵ BCH. xi. 269Google Scholar, xxxi. 45 6 f., xxxvi. 37 f., 218; cf. Durrbach, , Choix, 138Google Scholar, SEG. i. 334GGoogle Scholar. For a third banker, Lucius Aufidius, see BCH. xxxiv. 398Google Scholar, xxxvi. 19.

⁴⁶ BCH. xxxvi. 141 ff.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Les Trafiquants Italiens dans l'Orient Hellénique (Paris, 1919), 197 ff.Google Scholar, 291 ff.

⁴⁸ Poland, 321, 437 f. For the cult of the εὐεργέται in the later Hellenistic period see the materials collected by Robert, L., BCH. 1. 499 f.Google Scholar Cf. IG. ii². 1277. 26.

⁴⁹ OGI. 591 and note 5, Roussel, op. cit. 91.

⁵⁰ The word recurs in the statutes of the Iobacchi (IG. ii². 1368. 74), where I take it to denote ‘seat’ rather than ‘booth’: the latter meaning is given to it by von Hiller, following Maass and Dittenberger (SIG. 1109, note 46). Similarly the Egyptian σύνοδος at Delos resolves (Roussel, , Cultes égypt. 204Google Scholar) and an Egyptian society of συγγεωργοί decrees (Bull. Soc. Arch. Alex. vii. 66 f.Google Scholar, ll. 11, 26). Cf. Poland, 436, 477, Robert, L., Rev. Phil. lx. 274Google Scholar.

⁵¹ The title θύτης does not occur in any other association-record, though and προθύτης are found (Poland, 359, 390): , however, has been convincingly restored in an inscription of σύμμολποι from Tira (AM. xxiv. 93Google Scholar; cf. Rh. Mus. lv. 512Google Scholar, Poland, 390: Contoleon's ὁ ἱ[ερε]ύς, REG. xii. 384Google Scholar, is much less probable). Elsewhere θύτης apparently denotes a public official, e.g. IG. ix(2). 1234, xiv. 617, and especially SIG. 589. 18 (see note ad loc.). Here it may well refer to the Association rather than to the state, for a decree of a society could hardly bestow a seat next to that of the public ‘sacrificer’ at a state ceremony.

⁵² Σύνοδς in ll. 33, 44 means ‘meeting,’ not ‘association,’ as in SIG. 705. 61, 1100. 30, etc.: for this use of the word see Poland, 247 f. Occasionally it denotes ‘contribution,’ as in SIG. 706. 15, 1101. 7 (cf. Roussel, Cultes égypt. 85).

⁵³ The usual term is προεδρία (Poland, 436): for κλισία ἒντιμος and κ. ἡ πρώτη cf. note 50. Πρωτοκλισία, denned by Suidas as , occurs only in the Gospels (Matt, xxiii. 6, Mark xii. 39, Luke xiv. 7, 8, xx. 46) and in Christian writers from Clement of Alexandria (Strom, vii. 16Google Scholar) onwards. The meaning of τὰ πρωτοκλίσια in ii Macc. iv. 21Google Scholar is doubtful, though it may be a variant of the other.

⁵⁴ IG. xi. 203A 57 (269 B.C.), 274. 17, 287A 89 (250 B.C.), Inscr. Délos, 401, 16 ff. (190 B.C.), 406B 68 ff., 440A 45, 60 ff, 442A 219 ff. (179 B.C.), 445. 1 ff. (178 B.C), 452. 7 ff., 461.Ab 25, Bb 50 ff. (169 B.C.), BCH. xxxiv. 141Google Scholar.

⁵⁵ For the Ποσίδεια at Delos see Durrbach, F., BCH. xxix. 525 ff.Google Scholar, xxxiv. 144 f., Roussel, P., Délos col. ath. 273 f.Google Scholar, Nilsson, M. P., Griechische Feste, 82Google Scholar; for the Poseidon-cults of the other islands, Nilsson, op. cit. 81 ff. Especially important is the joint festival of Poseidon and Dionysus at Tenos (IG. xii(s). 804–55 passim). The name of the festival is written consistently Ποσίδεια in the Delian and Tenian records (except Ποσίδεια in IG. xii(5). 838). Elsewhere we have in IG. v(i). 213, Ποσίδεα in IG. iv (1)². 629, v(1). 656, 1387, Ποσείδεα in IG. vii. 47 and Hesych. s.v., Ποσίδεα in IG. xii(2). 71. Less common are the forms Ποσειδώνια (IG. ix(2). 614?, Strabo, x. 487, Athen. xiii. 590 f) and Ποσειδάνια (SIG. 1028, 1067, SEG. iv. 178).

⁵⁶ Délos col. ath. 273 note 8.

⁵⁷ Op. cit. 91, 271.

⁵⁸ The word ἄγω occurs in this sense in classical Greek, e.g., Thuc. v. 54. Th e phrase here used finds close parallels in Roussel, , Cultes égypt. 205Google Scholar, SIG. 1068. 21 (Patmos) , SEG. i. 330B 9 (Istria) , Bull. Soc. Arch. Alex. vii. 66. 11, 67. 27Google Scholar (cf. 66. 15, 67. 32, 45) , SEG. iv. 598. 14Google Scholar, OGI. 763. 52 and note 41. I n view of these examples, I suggest that IG. ii². 1330. 38 should be restored . rather than . The decree Roussel loc. cit. proceeds , on which he comments ‘je donne ἰεροποικ.., qui, manifestement, a été gravé, mais qui ne m'a permis aucune restitution.’ A possible restoration would be ἰεροποϊκ[άς], an adjective which, regularly formed (cf. τειχοποϊκῶν SIG. 368, 39, Milet, i. 138Google Scholar. 33, τριηροοποϊκῶν IG. ii². 1617. 121, 1622. 389) though hitherto unattested, would agree with the word δραχμάς represented by the symbol . For the celebration of see Poland, 250 f. [Since writing the foregoing note I find that Ziebarth (Burs, cxciii. 75Google Scholar) has already restored in the Delian decree.]

⁵⁹ The word recurs in the same sense in Plut. op. cit. vii. 6, 2 and probably in Aristoph. Pax, 1266. Plutarch adds the remark that , which, though applicable mainly to dinners at which royalty was entertained, illustrates also Minatius' position at Delos.

⁶⁰ For the religious gatherings of associations see Poland, 247 ff., for their business meetings, Poland, 330 ff., for monthly gatherings as characteristic of Greek societies, Poland, 252.

⁶¹ For the bestowal of golden crowns see Poland, 428 ff.

⁶² For these proclamations, usually denoted, as here, by , see Poland, 441 ff. and cf. SEG. i. 330B 12Google Scholar. I should prefer to restore this verb, rather than κηρύσσω, in SEG. iv. 598. 34Google Scholar.

⁶³ Similar phrases occur in IG. xi. 1061. 20 (Delos) , SEG. i. 330B 21Google Scholar (Istria) , IGRom. iv. 159. 13 (Cyzicus) .

⁶⁴ For this remission see Wilhelm, A., ÖJh. v. 138Google Scholar; for ἀτέλεια and other exemptions granted by Greek societies, Poland, 436 f.

⁶⁶ The phrase occurs in Pap. Masp. 67168. 29. The treasurer of the Athenian Iobacchi is ἀνείσφορος during his two years' tenure of office (SIG. 1109. 158): ἀνείσφορος recurs in IG. xiv. 951. 12, Syria, xv. 35Google Scholar, ἀνεισφορια Sammelbuch, 5225. 4, SIG. 612B 3, Syria, xv. 34Google Scholar, ÖJh. xiv. Beiblatt, 126Google Scholar. Ἀνεισφόρου should probably be restored in SIG. 612C 4 for ἀνεισΦορήτου, which is found nowhere else. For ἀσύμβολος cf. SIG. 1045. 9 (Arcesine), 1046. 18 (ἰερουργοί of Athena Itonia), 1113 (Adoniastae of Loryma), JHS. ix. 248Google Scholar (a Cyprian society): see also SIG. 1045.21 .

⁶⁶ Cf. IG. xiv. 951. 12 , SIG. 409. 17 , Dem. xviii. 91, Diod. ii. 40, etc. Elsewhere it stands alone, e.g. IG. vii. 2413, SIG. 647. 42, Sardis, vii(i). 2.2 1Google Scholar (ἀλητ-), Documenti ant. dell' Afr. Hal. ii. Cirenaica, 127, Oxy. Pap. 62. 2, Pap. Soc. Hal. 440. 4. The privilege so granted, whether by the state (SIG. 880. 55, IGRom. iv. 295, IG. xii(s). 721. 3 (cf. SEG. iii. 748), SEG. iv. 285, 307Google Scholar, Oxy. Pap. 40. 10, Pap. Fiorent. 382. 3) or by a society (SEG. iv. 515. 15Google Scholar), is called ἀλειτουργησία (wrongly spelt -γεσία in Sammelb. 4224. 15): the form ἀλειτουργία, cited by LS. from Benndorf-Niemann, , Reisen in Lykien u. Karien, 78Google Scholar, No. 55, is now shewn (TAM. ii. 221Google Scholar) to be a mistaken reading of the stone. A periphrasis is used in Syria, xv. 34Google Scholar. Euseb, . Hist. Eccl. x. 7Google Scholar has (sic) .

⁶⁷ But cf. ἀσχόλία, BGU. iv. 1202. 4Google Scholar (APF. v. 432)Google Scholar, ἀσχόλημα, Oxy. Pap. 977.

⁶⁸ Poland 446** interprets -rima in IG. xii(3). 253. 7 as ‘penalties’: I am not convinced that he is right.

⁶⁹ Cf. SIG. 535. 12, 705. 11, 1007. 27, IG. xi. 1061. 11.

⁷⁰ In SIG 1104 von Hiller reads : if any change is to be made, I prefer Dittenberger's (SIG ². 732, note 21; cf. BCH. lvii. 56)Google Scholar. Cf. IG. ii². 1046. 32, xii(9). 234. 46, 236. 26, 43, 239. 5, Inschr. Perg. 253. 13, Larfeld, Gr. Epigraphik ³, 377 ff., 422 f.

⁷¹ E.g. IG. ii². 850. 4, 945. 13, 1323. 15, 1327. 6, 1345, SIG. 623A 2, 662. 17, 1068. 6.

⁷² E.g. SIG. 490. 2, 578. 40, 672. 16, IG. xii(7). 69. 38, xii(9). 191A 30.

⁷³ Cf. SIG. 366. 13, 526. 47, 633. 114, 997. 6, OGI. 266. 50, 532. 2 8 ff., Inschr. Priene, 201–3, AM. xxxii. 298Google Scholar. For the curse in Greek law see Ziebarth, E., Hermes, xxx, 57 ff.Google Scholar, RE. vi. 2771 ff.Google Scholar Good examples of the use of a curse for the protection of a tomb or other monument are SIG. 38. 35 ff., 1238–41, Corinth, viii(i). 136Google Scholar, SEG. i. 470Google Scholar, iii. 304, vi. 802, IG. iii. 1417–22, Sardis, vii(i). 152Google Scholar, ÖJh. xxviii. Beiblatt, 172 f.Google Scholar

⁷⁴ The phrase recurs in CIG. 2664 (Halicarnassus), . In Sardis, vii(i). 152Google Scholar the editors have restored . In the Amphictyonic oath inscribed at Delphi in 117 B.C., the word is used: (SIG 826C 14). With the σωτηρία of this formula cf. the σώιзεοθαι of the Delian decree (l. 63). In BCH. xi. 454Google Scholar [ὂνη]σις should be restored in place of [ποίη]σις.

⁷⁵ With (1. 64 ) cf. IG. ii². 1328. II, SIG. 578. 48.

⁷⁶ Contrast the clause in the statutes of the Attic Society of Iobacchi (IG. ii². 1368. 90 ff.) imposing a penalty on , with which we may compare St. Paul's words in I Cor. vi. 1 ff. For the phrase (ll. 66, 68, 80) cf. IG. xii(7). 3. 44, 515. 119, SIG. 629. 20, 1157. 59. The simple dative indicates the person who may bring the action, the dative with ἐν the tribunal before which the action lies, e.g. (SIG. 494. 7).

⁷⁷ The epithet is not repeated in l. 80, but presumably the same drachma is intended in both passages.

⁷⁸ IG. ii². 1013. 29 ff., 1028. 30, 40, 1029. 24,1030.27. Cf. RE. s.vv. Stephanephoros, Στεφανηφόρου δραχμαί. I have to thank Dr. J. G. Milne and Mr. D. B. Harden for their kind help in dealing with this numismatic problem.

⁷⁹ BCH. vii. 472Google Scholar (ἀρχιθιασίτης); 467 ( = OGI. 591), 470, 471 (ἀρχιθασιτεύω); xxxi. 446 (ἀρχιθιασεύω). This last word is, however, due, as Poland suggests (p. 545), to an error, as is clear from the photograph (fig. 8).

⁸⁰ Michel, 998 ( = Durrbach, , Choix, 85Google Scholar) 3, 46, 54, 55, IG. xi. 1228. 2, 14, 1229. 2, 14. For the form of the word see Poland, 16; for the functions of the office, Poland, 348, 352 f.

⁸¹ Πομπεύω is used intransitively in l. 71, transitively in l. 75. has been restored by L. Robert in a decree of Ilium (SEG. iv. 663Google Scholar). Cf. Poland, 266 f.

⁸² Ὑποδοχή is similarly used in SIG. 1107. 12, OGI. 339. 86, IG. xii(1). 155. 49 and should be estored in SBWien, cxxxii. 2. 14. See the discussion of in Poland, 260.

⁸³ Cf. IG. ii². 1254. 21 (REG. xliv. 295Google Scholar) , 1325. 30 , ix(1). 694. 95 .

⁸⁴ In decrees of associations we find frequent references (e.g. IG. ii². 1263. 9 ff., 1277. 16, 1282. 9, 1284. 26, 1318. 6, SEG. iii. 128Google Scholar) to the rendering of accounts by those entrusted with the financial concerns of their guilds (cf. Poland, 423); but I recall no other instance of the word γραπτός in this connexion.

⁸⁵ See the evidence collected by Oehler, in RE. ii. 802Google Scholar and Liebenam, W., Städteverwaltmg, 293Google Scholar f., 565.

⁸⁶ See in general Poland, 377.

⁸⁷ Cf. (Dem. xix. 201), (Heberdey-Wilhelm, , Reisen in Kilikien, 58Google Scholar), (SIG. 685. 81), (BCH. l. 17 = Fouilles de Delphes, iii(1). 159, No. 294). Two well-known inscriptions contain a considerable portion of the ἀραί, or ἐπαραί, of Teos (SIG. 37, 38, Tod, , Greek Hist. Inscr. 23Google Scholar: cf. Olivieri, A., Atti Napoli, n.s. xi. 35 ffGoogle Scholar., SIG. 578. 60). A. Wilhelm Has recently discussed the decree of the Clytidae, in ÖJh. xxviii. 197 ff.Google Scholar

⁸⁸ The right was, we may assume, normally coextensive with membership of the association: cf. IG. ii². 1275. 14 . For numerous examples of the right of accusation given in public documents to see Ziebarth, E., Hermes, xxxii. 609 ff.Google Scholar

⁸⁹ For the orde r of the words (l. 84) cf. SIG. 672. 66, 722. 9, IG. xii(1). 155. 30. The more usual order is followed in l. 70.

⁹⁰ This is, I think, a legitimate inference from the words . Cf. IG. ii². 1339. 19, Appian, BC. i. 12, 100, Plut., Tib. Gracchus, 11Google Scholar, Hal., Dion.Ant. Rom. x. 57Google Scholar. So also the statutes of the Iobacchi prescribe (IG. ii². 1368. 86).

⁹¹ Cf. the very similar provision IG. ii². 1241. 38 ff. Ἐνεχυρασία and εἴσπραξις are associated, as here, in SIG. 955. 30 . The phrase , used in [Dem.] xlvii. 76, recurs in an Imperial rescript to Pergamum, OGI. 484. 41, 46, 59 (cf. 50): in the law of the Pergamene astynomi we have (OGI. 483. 82). In Roussel, , Cultes égypt. 206Google Scholar is a very probable restoration. Cf. RE. v. 2561.

⁹² To the examples cited in LS. εὐθύνω III. 2 add Pap. Teb. 53. 22, Gnomon, 62, 63, 70, 99, A. Peyron, , Pap. Graeci, i. 3. 10Google Scholar.

⁹³ Cf. Wilhelm, , ÖJh. xii. 128 fGoogle Scholar., SIG. 975. 23 (Delos), OGI. 665. 30, BCH. lvii. 407Google Scholar, SEG. vi. 682Google Scholar. A striking parallel to our phrase is (SIG. 1157. 84).

⁹⁴ Why εἰσαγγελία is used in l. 89 instead of προσαγγελία (cf. ll. 83, 86) I cannot say.

⁹⁵ In l. 58 must mean ‘neither private member nor official,’ and in the decree of the Rhodian we have the phrase (IG. xii(1). 155. 97), in which ἄρχων certainly denotes guild-official (cf. ll. 20, 29, 71, 86, 99 and Poland, 361†*). Somewhat different is the use of ἰδιώτης in the law of the ὀργεῶνες of Bendis (IG. ii². 1361. 4: cf. Poland, 422).

⁹⁶ See Larfeld, , Gr. Epigr.³ 426 fGoogle Scholar., Handbuch, i. 545 fGoogle Scholar., ii. 827 ff.

⁹⁷ In IG. ii². 950. 20, 987. 2, 997. 6, 1011. 62,1231. 15, SEG. i. 330B 23 τόδε is omitted.

⁹⁸ Larfeld, , Gr. Epigr.³ 410 ffGoogle Scholar., 426, Handbuch, i. 534 ffGoogle Scholar., 545, ii. 695 ff., 827 f.

⁹⁹ Cf. SIG. 570.26 , IG. xii(7). 228. 26 , SIG. 722. 6 .

¹⁰⁰ Cf. IG. ii². 1338. 13, 1343. 13, 16, 19, 21, 24, BCH. xxxvi. 413Google Scholar (Delos), etc. In BCH. liii. 339Google Scholar we have the variant .

¹⁰¹ IG. ii². 958. 3, 39, BCH. xxix. 533Google Scholar, xxxi. 425 ( = Michel, 1531 = Durrbach, , Choix, 80Google Scholar), ll. 3, 16: cf. Roussel, , Délos col. ath. 396 ffGoogle Scholar. He is dated 155/4 or 154/3 by Kirchner (IG. ii². 958, ii² (4), p. 20), 153/2–149/8 by Ferguson, (Ath. Tribal Cycles, 169Google Scholar: cf. Ath. Archons, 67 f.), 153/2 or 152/1 by Kolbe, (Att. Archonten, 109)Google Scholar, 153/2–151/0 by Roussel (op. cit. 359) and Durrbach, (Choix, p. 129)Google Scholar, 153/2 by Dinsmoor, (Archons of Athens, 222, 265)Google Scholar.

¹⁰² Reisch, E., De musicis Graecorum certaminibus, 111 ff.Google Scholar

¹⁰³ I agree with Dittenberger (IG., loc. cit.) that in l. 3 Εὐάριος τῶ should be retained in preference to Εὐαρ(μ)όστω, suggested by Fick and favoured by Meister, (SGDI. i. p. 395)Google Scholar, and to Εὐαρ⟨μ⟩στω, proposed by Larfeld, (Syll. Inscr. Boeot. 32)Google Scholar. Εὐαρμοστος and Εὐαρμστος are unknown in Boeotia, whereas Εὐαρεις and Εὐαρίδας are attested by other Orchomenian inscriptions (IG. vii. 3172. 11, 3215: cf. 1752. 17).

¹⁰⁴ For the reference to the first edition of Clarke we may substitute Clarke, E. D., Travels in various Countries of Europe, Asia and Africa⁴ (London, 1818), vii. 203 ffGoogle Scholar. Add Leake, W. M., Travels in Northern Greece, ii. 632Google Scholar, where a copy in minuscules is given.

¹⁰⁵ I cannot see any trace of them below l. 39 of the inscription.

¹⁰⁶ For such double ethnics cf. Van der Mijnsbrugge, M., The Cretan Koinon, 33Google Scholar.

¹⁰⁷ Cf. Preller-Robert, , Griech. Mythol.⁴ i. 481Google Scholar, Kern, O. in RE. iii. 2167Google Scholar, Gruppe, O., Griech. Mythol. i. 81Google Scholar, Nilsson, W. M., Griech. Feste, 413Google Scholar, Farnell, L. R., Greek Cults, v. 426 ff.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁸ Cf. Nilsson, op. cit. 12 f., Jessen, in RE. viii. 2263Google Scholar, Cook, A. B., Zeus, ii. 900Google Scholar.

¹⁰⁹ (IG. vii. 416. 10) is probably either his father or his son.

¹¹⁰ (Fouilles de Delphes, iii (2). 47Google Scholar ( = SIG. 698) 7, 26) and (Fouilles, iii (2). 48Google Scholar (= SIG. 711L) 35) were almost certainly members of the same family as the of the Orchomenian list (l. 8). On the τεχνῖται see Poland, , RE. VA. 2473 ff.Google Scholar