¹ The inscriptions previously published are to be found in (1) Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology (Liverpool,) iii. pp. 145 ff. (‘Greek Inscriptions from Thessaly’); (2) B.S.A. xvii. pp. 193 ff. (‘A Latin Inscription from Perrhaebia’); (3) B.S.A. xviii, pp. 133 ff. (‘Inscriptions from Beroea’); (4) ibid. pp. 166 ff. (‘Inscriptions from Upper Macedonia’).

Dr. A. S. Arvanitopoullos, Ephor of Antiquities under the Greek Government, informs me by letter that he has copied several of these inscriptions within the last few months, and has collected many inscriptions and other antiquities into a museum at Elassona. He has not yet (October 1913) published any of these texts, except in a preliminary notice in Ἐφ Ἀρχ. 1912, p. 265.

² For another inscription, and a stamped tile, which seems to indicate that this was the site of Meliboea, , see Liverpool Annals, iii. pp. 157Google Scholar f., Nos. 11, 12, and topographical note ad loc. The site is c'ose to the sea in Lat. 39° 40′, Long. 22° 54′ E. (Greenwich).

³ No other Thessalian inscription has such a markedly curved upsilon; in ix. 2, 271 it is slightly curved, but this is apparently earlier and very roughly engraved.

⁴ I. G. ix. 2, 821 as ᾿Αμφείων in northern Greece cf. I.G. vii. 2781, 1. 27; ᾿Αμφιώ ibid. 2489, 1. 2; cf. Bechtel-Fick, , Gr. Personennamen, pp. 56Google Scholar f. For Ανφ =᾿Αμφ in Thessalian inscriptions cf. I.G. ix. 2, 110b, 1. 6, 1278: neither of these is at all early.

⁵ Φρόνιμος a libertus, ix. 2, 563; Φροντίς feminine, ib. 1351 : cf. Φρονήμων I.G. ii. 3, 3100 (a Cretan at Athens), and Bechtel-Fick, op. cit. pp. 282 f.

⁶ For a similar dedication to Dionysus see I.G. ix. 2, 574 from Larissa.

⁷ He tells me that he took it for an ethnic, not seeing any more letters after ϵυς. But Thessalian dedications containing the word ἱϵρητϵύσος vel sim. are not rare; cf. ix. 2, 348, 1040α [418, 574 restored].

⁸ It is found in Macedonia, , at Dium, C.I.G. 1964Google Scholar (= Demitsas, Η Μακεδονια No. 175) and is common in the Imperial Age.

⁹ For the accusative in -αν cf. I.G. ix. 2, 937, 1087 etc: for γυνε῀κα ibid. 940, 942; for ἠαντ έαυτ ibid. 977. For ἤρως of a dead woman, ibid. 930, 932, 934, 936, etc., etc.

¹⁰ A similar stele, uninscribed, was found together with this one, and another was seen by Mr. Wace at Elassona.

¹¹ ix. 2, 851, 866.

¹² ix. 2, 89a, 1. 27, 583.

¹³ ix. 2, 758; cf. χέραι ibid. 959, 973.

¹⁴ E.g. at Beroea, , B.S.A. xviii, pp. 133Google Scholar ff. Nos. 5, 11, 22.

¹⁵ For names in -μβροτος cf. Bechtel-Fick, op. cit. p. 198, and a few cognate names, none from the Greek mainland, in -μοπτος the present form would seem transitional between these two classes. The genitive in -οι is not unusual in an early inscription in Thessaly, cf. ix. 2, 505, 506, etc.

¹⁶ ᾿Επίσημα appears from L. and S. to be used only by Simonides, Aeschylus, and Euripides. For ἐπίσημον cf. the Delian Inventory, Dittenb., Syll. ²588Google Scholar, 11. 3, 5, 191, etc.; it is common in both prose-writers and poets.

¹⁷ The find-spot of I.G. ix. 2, 1110.

¹⁸ Cf. νάσω ἔδεθλον Kaibel, , Epigr. Gr. 978, 1. 9Google Scholar.

¹⁹ Cf. ᾿Αρισστέασ I.G. ix. 2, 9, 1. 4; Αρισστονίκη 304.

²⁰ See I.G. ix. 2, Index I. s.v.

²¹ See especially Kip, G., Thessalische Studien (Halle, 1910) pp. 112Google Scholar ff.

^21a Kern, , I.G. ix. 2, p. 265Google Scholar, attributes all the inscriptions at Elassona to Azorus, but without sufficient reason, though he may be right in some cases.

²² I.G. ix. 2, 21, 325 a, 1268.

²³ 1268, 11. 43, 45; above, No. 9, 1. 2.

²⁴ Θειρίων I.G. ix. 2, 272; Θέρσων ibid. 275, 1. 13; Θέρσουν ibid. 517, 1. 55; Θεύρων ibid. 74, 1. 2.

²⁵ Cf. ibid. 1174; and the masculine names Φιλῖνοσ ibid 740, 1232, 1. 3; Φιλῖνοσ ibid. 517, 1. 56; Φιλῖνα seems a new name in Thessaly.

²⁶ Ibid. 1295 a, 11. 7, 10, 12 (the same man).

²⁷ See below, p. 330.

²⁸ See Renseh, G., De Manumissionum Titulis apud Thessalos (Diss. Phil. Halenses, xviii, pp. 107 ff.)Google Scholar. Cf. I.G. ix. 2, 1044, 11. 5, 6, ἠ ἀπελευθερωθεῖσα- - -τῆς παραμονῆσ 1296 a, 1. 8, ἀ]πολυθεὶς τῆς π (see below, No. 13a for correction of the reading πραχθεῖς in the Corpus); Dittenb., Syll. ²863, 11. 2, 3Google Scholar, ἀπέλυσε ᾿Αμμία τᾶς παραμονᾶς Σύνφορον (as a reward far having ransomed her mistress who had been taken, prisoner in. some fighting, see Dittenberger'snote ad loc); and in general, Calderini, , La Manomissione, etc. pp. 277 ffGoogle Scholar.

²⁹ In I.G. ix. 2, 1121, 1. 1, where ἀπελύθη appears alone in a similar inscription, the stone is incomplete.

³⁰ I.G. ix. 2, 1299, 1. 1; 1300, 11. 2, 9.

³¹ The simplest conjecture is Δωρόφιλος which is not known in Thessaly; but cf. Φιλόδωροσ I.G. ix. 2, 555, 1. 2 (not a very appropriate name for a ταμίασ)

³² B.M.C. Thessaly to Aetolia, pp. 1, 2, 5.

³³ I.G. ix. 2, 1042, 11. 21, 22.

³⁴ Ibid. 568, 1. 3.

³⁵ Ibid. 1297, 11. 17, 59.

³⁶ Ibid. Index i. s.vv. Σύρα Σύριους Σύροσ

³⁷ In Thessaly we find inter alia ῾Απελλᾶσ ῾Ασκλᾶς Δαμᾶς Δημᾶς ῾Επαφρᾶς ῾Ερμᾶσ Ζωσᾶς ῾Ηρακλᾶς Μητρᾶς Σω[σ]ᾶς φανᾶσ Αλεξᾶς at Olympia, Dittenb., Syll. ²612, 11. 27, 32Google Scholar; at Sparta, , I.G. v. 1, 62, 188, 675Google Scholar. Παρμᾶς I cannot find elsewhere; but cf. Παρμενᾶς etc., Bechtel-Fick, p. 19. In general cf. Kühner-Blass, , Ausführliche Grammatik der gr. Sprache, i. pp. 493 f.Google Scholar; Mayser, , Grammatik der gr. Papyri, p. 253Google Scholar; Bechtel-Fick, pp. 29 f.

³⁸ I.G. ix. 2, Index vi. 4.

^38a Presumably formed from γάζα in 1295a, 1. 3, Atvanitopoullos reads Γαζαίου for [Παν] αχαίου as the father of the ταμίας Lysimachus, ᾿Εφ.᾿Αρχ 1912, p. 265; they are clearly the same persons as here.

³⁹ Ibid. 1296a, 1. 20. Cf. Rensch, op. cit. pp. 118 ff.; in general, Calderini, op. cit. pp. 272 ff. Note that in I.G. ix. 2, Index iv. 6 the reference to No. 1268 should read 1. 33 not 1. 13.

⁴⁰ Cf. I.G. xiv. 1323.

⁴¹ For Zω names cf. Bechtel-Fick, p. 133.

⁴² I.G. ix. 2, 338, 1. 1. The site of Κυρϵτιαί is at Demeniko, some ten miles S.W. of Elassona.

⁴³ I.G. ix. 2, 1282, 1. 36.

⁴⁴ I.G. ix. 2, 102a, 11. 4, 5, τὸ ἐκ τοῦ[νόμ]ου στατῆρας ιέ and in 109, at Halos, passim.

⁴⁵ See above, note on 1295 a, 11. 24 f. for another instance of this verb; this was conjecturally restored by Rensch, op. cit. p. 112.

⁴⁶ Cf. ᾿Αρναῖος I.G. ix. 2, 517, 1. 59; ᾿Αρνάος ibid. 465; ᾿Αρνείας ibid. 707; ᾿Αρνιάδας ibid. 281, 1. 15; ᾿Αρνίας ibid. 1232, 1. 2; ᾿Αρνόφιλος ibid. 13, 1. 15, 34, 289 b; cf. Bechtel-Fick, 125.

⁴⁷ Cf. I.G. ix. 2, Index vi. 4; and see above, p. 324, note 38.

⁴⁸ This is after all the simplest, though not necessarily the correct, explanation of the difficulty.

⁴⁹ Cf. I.G. ix. 2, Index vi. 4; e.g. λοιπῶν τριῶν 1282, 1. 14.

⁵⁰ It is common in Asia Minor, Dittenb., O.G.I. 220, 221, 268, 344Google Scholar; I.G. ad Res. Pert. iii. 462, 467, 474, 515 (= O.G.I. 571).

⁵¹ I.G. ix. 2, 1268, 1. 5; from Doliche (Duklista).

⁵² Cf. Δημώ, I.G. ix. 2, 988; Bechtel-Fick, p. 96.

⁵³ I.G. ix. 2, pp. xxiv f. and Nos. 206, 1040 b, 1042; and see below, p. 331.

⁵⁴ Perhaps the least unlikely would be ἀρρεν ᾿Αρ(ρ)ενέλαος is not impossible, for such names as Αρρενείδησ (Dittenb., O.G.I. 747Google Scholar) are known. Between this and ᾿Αρ<ε>νέλαοσ I am unable to decide.

⁵⁵ iii. pp. 145 ff.

⁵⁶ Rev. Phil. 1911, pp. 123 ff. Nos. 30, 34 b; 282 ff., No. 40.

⁵⁷ As I had suggested, Annals, loc. cit. p. 152.

⁵⁸ Cf. op. cit. p. 153.

⁵⁹ Signifies a practor hitherto unknown.

⁶⁰ Signifies a, praetor hitherto known only from coins(?)

⁶¹ B.C.H. 1911, pp. 231 ff. No. 4.

⁶² Εενόδοκος Μόνιμος ᾿Επικράτης Κέφαλοσ ᾿Αμεινίασ

⁶³ The latter, cf. 1042 i., seems more likely.

⁶⁴ Cf. 1040 b.

⁶⁵ Conceivably the arrangement was changed, but this is not capable of proof.

^65a He was also honoured by the city of Gonnus, Ἐφ Ἀψχ. 1912, p. 60, No. 89.

⁶⁶ Θαύμανδροσ is not a known Thessalian name, nor does it occur in Bechtel-Fick's Gr. Personennamen.

⁶⁷ I.G. ix. 2, 479.

⁶⁸ I am almost certain that the stone has Y not but no alternative restoration is at all necessary.

⁶⁹ Note that Αριστοκράτησ and Θερσιμένησ make their accusative in -ην though the latter (1. 41) has its genitive in ουσ

⁷⁰ This must be distinguished from the inscriptions which relate to arbitration between two or more states, as here the cases settled were all within one state. For the other and more important class, see Tod, , International Arbitration amongst the Greeks (Oxford, 1913)Google Scholar. Both classes are treated by Sonne, E., De Arbitris Externis…Quaestionts Epigraphicae (Göttingen, 1888)Google Scholar. Only the honours paid to the arbitrators are of interest in the present connexion, cf. especially i. G. v. 1,1111 (= S.G.D.I. 4530 = Tod, IV); I.G. vii. 4130, 4131 (= Tod, XVIII, XIX); B.C.H. xxxv. (1912), p. 460 ff. (= Tod, XXII); I.G. Rom. iv. 247 (= Tod, LXXI); Sterett, Papers Am. Sch. i. No. 26 (= Tod, LXII), etc.

⁷¹ Ἐϕ. Ἀρχ. 1911, pp. 129 ff., Nos. 64 ff.

⁷² Loc. cit. No. 86.

⁷³ Loc. cit. No. 83, where the restoration is doubtful.

⁷⁴ Loc. cit. Nos. 81, 85, where they are described as οἰ περὶ τὸν δεῖνα

⁷⁵ For one example, of many, outside Thessaly, see Dittenb. Syll. ² 234, l. 11, from Phigaleia.

⁷⁶ Nos. 65, 74, 75, 76; in No. 66 the restoration is doubtful; and apparently Nos. 65 and 74 are from the same inscription, and should join exactly. Dr. Arvanitopoullos tells me that this is highly probable, but that he has not yet been able to verify it with the stones.

⁷⁷ In l. 20 the resolution of the city of Phalanna is to be communicated to Metropolis. There were, however, two cities called Metropolis, see below, pp. 336 f.

⁷⁸ Cf. τὸ ἀστικὸν δικαστήριον in Amorgos, Dittenb., Syll. ²511, ll. 32, 49Google Scholar, which may be a parallel.

⁷⁹ E.g. Dittenb., Syll. ²314, l. 24Google Scholar, the wellknown inscription relating to the dispute about the Ager Denthcliates (cf. Tod, op. cit. No. I). Cf. Ἐϕ. Ἀρχ. 1911, pp. 134 f., No. 70, ll. 12–15,. τὴν ἀναστροφὴν καὶ δικαστειαν πεπόηνται

⁸⁰ E.g. I.G. ix. 2, 1103, ll. 11 ff.; 520, 1. 9;. I.G. vii. 4131, 1. 10, etc., etc.; cf. ἀξίως τῆσ πατρίδος καὶ τοῦ ἔθνουσ ix. 2, 508, 1. 6. In loc. cit. No. 70, the same words are used as here, ἀξίως αὐτῶν τε καὶ τῆς ἐξαπο στειλάσης πόλεωσ

⁸¹ Cf. I.G. ix. 2, 507, ll. 18 ff. [σπεύδοντασ] [τ]ὰ[σ] μὲν[π]λ[ε]ί[στ]α[σ] τῶν [κρισ]έων συν[λ]ύ σα[ντασ] τούς δια[φερο] [μ]ένο[υσ] είς ὀμ[όν]οιαν καταστῆσαι τοῖς δὲ ἄλλοις - - - cf. Dittenb., Syll. ²924, ll. 18 ff.Google Scholar; ibid. 216, 11. 7, 13; I.G. vii. 4130, 11. 16 ff.

⁸² Ἐϕ. Ἀρχ, loc. cit. No. 70, ll. 15 ff.

⁸³ Dittenb., Syll. ²721, 1. 32Google Scholar(ξένιον) Delos; ibid. 281, 1. 16; 930, 1. 64, Delphi.

⁸⁴ I.G. ix. 2, Index IV. 4; Εφ.᾿Αρχ loc. cit., Nos. 64 ff. In general, Sonne, op. cit. pp. 90 f., who quotes a few cases of sums of money voted to dikasts (and ibid. pp. 73 f., note 46).

⁸⁵ Cf. Dittenb., Syll. ²269Google Scholar, 1. 40 (Magnesia ad Maeandrum); 314, 1. 26 (Elis); 664, 1. 22 (Asino Messeniae); 721, 1. 33 (Delos), etc.

⁸⁶ The first word of No. 1231 may equally well be restored as [ἀσφάλει]αν not [ἀσυλι]αν

⁸⁷ Polyb. xviii. 46; cf. Kip, G., Thessalische Studien (Halle, 1910), p. 112Google Scholar.

⁸⁸ Kip, op. cit. pp. 123 f.

⁸⁹ I.G. ix. 2, 1228.

⁹⁰ Kern says of I.G. ix. 2, 1231, litterae secundi a. Chr. n. saeculi exeunlis; Kip, p. 123, is wrong in saying that it ‘nach Kern in dem Anfang des zweiten Jahrhunderts gehört.’

⁹¹ Pp. 119 f.

⁹² Ἐϕ. Ἀρχ. loc. cit. Nos. 81, 82.

⁹³ Ibid. No. 64.

⁹⁴ Ibid. No. 70.

⁹⁵ Ibid. No. 68.

⁹⁶ Demitsas also refers to its being copied by an English traveller in 1885, op. cit. p. 240, note 2; but I cannot trace any subsequent publication. Sir Arthur Evans kindly tells me that he is the traveller in question, and that owing to the unfortunate loss of his squeeze after his return from this journey he decided not to re-publish the stone from his copy alone. He had indicated this inscription as a special objective to Mr. Wace.

⁹⁷ Sakellarios, who publishes the copy in Arch. Zeit., loc. cit. says there are only four lines of signatures in smaller letters.

⁹⁸ No doubt the censilor Macedoniae of the time of Hadrian, see below, note on 1. 17.

⁹⁹ B.S.A. xviii, p. 179.

¹⁰⁰ p, 327. The position of the city is not clearly defined If this conjecture should be correct we shall have to emend the text to Εραττύνα I can find no other mention of the place.

¹⁰¹ (1) At Thessalonica, , Acts, xvii. 5Google Scholar; Demitsas, Nos. 364–368 (369 is surely another copy of 365); (2) at Lete, Dittenb., Syll. ²318Google Scholar (= Demitsas, No. 675); (3) at Derriopus, Demitsas, Nos. 258 (= Tozer, , Highlands of European Turkey, ii. p. 358)Google Scholar, 260 (cf. Tarn, , Antigonos Gonatas p. 197Google Scholar, note 99 for further references); (4) at Heracleia Lyncestis, Demitsas, No. 248 (Tarn, loc. cit., 1. 7 of note, wrongly writes 368 for 248); (5) at Amphipolis, , Perdrizet, , B.C.H. 1894, p. 419Google Scholar (= Demitsas, No. 886); outside Macedonia, , at Panticapaeum, I. G. Rom. i. 871, 1. 20Google Scholar.

¹⁰² Cf. Plutarch, , Cicero, C. 36Google Scholar. Contrast with this Dittenb., O.G.I. 578Google Scholar, 1. 14, where the word is explained as meaning previous holders of the post of ἔπαρχοσ being formed on the analogy of ὐπατικόσ

¹⁰³ This appears under various names in inscriptions. It is frequently mentioned especially in those earlier than the Imperial Age, dealing with questions of arbitration. E.g., δαμοσία χώρα, I.G. ix. 2, 89Google Scholar (= Dittenb., Syll. ²307)Google Scholar, l. 20; Dittenb., Syll. ²154Google Scholar, ll. 4, 9, 11, 28 (cf. γέαι, δημόσιαι in l. 40); I.G. ix. 2, 205Google Scholar ( = Syll. ² 425), ll. 12, 13. ἐγκτήματα, Δημόσια, I.G. ii. 1, 17Google Scholar (= Syll. ² 80), l. 28. Cf. Δημόσιον τὸ χωρίον, relating to land adjoining the wall of Nisyrus, , I.G. xii. 3, 86Google Scholar (Syll. ² 458), with which cf. Syll. ² Nos. 457, 459, 460. In a long inscription of the Imperial Age, from Thisbe in Boeotia, relating to planting with trees and vines public lands hitherto ploughed, we have two references to χωρίον, δημόσιον; see I.G. vii. 2226Google Scholar (= Syll. ² 533), ll. 2, 40.

¹⁰⁴ It is of frequent occurrence. Cf. Dittenb., Syll. ²820, 827, 830Google Scholar; Inscr. Jur. Gr. pp. 108 ff.

¹⁰⁵ Contrast the abstract sense, κατοχὴν ταὺ της τῆς χώρας ἐξε[χώρησαν] Dittenb., Syll. ²928Google Scholar, l. 45.

¹⁰⁶ Cf. Syll. ² 928, ll. 74, 87; 929, ll. 42 (τόπους), 55 (χώραν), 105 (νῆσον).

¹⁰⁷ Dittenb., O.G.I. 437, l. 42Google Scholar.

¹⁰⁸ It is common in classical authors. In inscriptions, e.g. Syll. ² 140, l. 5, of retiring from an office; O.G.I. 763, ll. 45, 46, of abandoning an undertaking.

¹⁰⁹ Pherecrates, Πέρσαι, 1, 2; cf. the metaphorical use of χαρακίζω, Aristotle, , P.A. iv. 6, 14Google Scholar.

¹¹⁰ Χαράσσϵιν is used of ploughing, metaphorically except in Anth. Pal. vi. 238, scarcely sufficient justification for its use in this sense in an inscription; still less for that of χαρακίζϵιν.

¹¹¹ O.G.I. 483, 1. 29; contrast δίοδος, the right of passing through territory (for military purposes), O.G.I. 437, ll. 67, 71.

¹¹² C.I.L. iii. 1463, cf. iii. 21 (and iii. Suppl. 6625); Prosopogr. Imp. Rom. iii. p. 301, No. 56.

¹¹³ Cf. Dittenb., O.G.I. 383, ll. 76, 205Google Scholar; 480, l. 9; 484 (= I.G. Rom. iv. 352) l. 36; cf. διάταγμα in the same sense, O.G.I. 441, l. 88; 458, l. 81.

¹¹⁴ Above, note on the ll. 4, 5 ad fin. I.G. vii. 2226, ll. 47 ff. as restored by Dittenberger, (Syll. ²533, note 27)Google Scholar.

¹¹⁵ Cf. Dittenb. loc. cit. note 3.

¹¹⁶ B.S.A. xviii. p. 179, note 5.

¹¹⁷ A normal use of the word. For a good parallel for this form of the infinitive, unless it is merely a slip of the engraver, cf. προσίναι in an inscription from Lindus, Dittenb., Syll. ²567Google Scholar, l. 2, and note 1, which successfully defends προσίναι as against προσῖναι= προσεῖναι

¹¹⁸ Verbs so compounded seem peculiarly rare, cf. καταποστέλλω in a papyrus, Mayser, , Grammatik der gr. Papyri, p. 499Google Scholar (= Paris Papyri [1865], 63, 5, 137), and καταποφαίνομαι in Athanasius (only?).

¹¹⁹ A practice with which we are familiar among the penalties for violation of graves. E.g. I.G. Rom. i. 586, 588, 661, 806, 841, prescribing an equal fine to the ταμεῖον and the city; in ibid. i. 823 the word φίσκοσ is used in a similar ordinance.

¹²⁰ E.g. Dittenb., Syll. ²334Google Scholar, l. 30, of reference to the Roman Senate; O.G.I. 761, l. 2, of reference to Ptolemy XI. of Egypt.

¹²¹ I.G. Rom. i. 785. Instances of ἡγϵμὼν are too numerous to quote, but cf. Dittenberger's, note (O.G.I. 561Google Scholar, note 4) on the word.

¹²² Ibid. i. 573, 669, 670, 672, etc.

¹²³ Prosopogr. Imp. Rom. ii. p. 242, No. 527.

¹²⁴ Ibid. No. 530.

¹²⁵ Ibid. No. 531.

¹²⁶ For ϵἰς τὸ διηνϵκὲς cf. Appian, , B.C. i. 4Google Scholar. The adjective is common in inscriptions.

¹²⁷ I cannot be certain of the second Ε of ἐπϵὶ on the squeeze: if inserted at all it was ligatured to the Π with very short crossstrokes, which it is hard to distinguish from scratches on the stone.

¹²⁸ Cf. R.E.G. xii. (1899), p. 169, No. 1, from Thessalonica.

¹²⁹ For the use of ἀφανίζϵιν in the sense of damaging an inscription cf. Dittenb. Syll. ² 602, l. 7; of damaging an epitaph, ibid. 892, l. 2.

¹³⁰ For this see Dittenb. Syll. ² Index vi. s.v. ἄκυρος.

¹³¹ Κπατεῖσθαι being equal to τηρεῖσθαι or φυλάσσεσθαι

¹³² Cf. Syll. ² 656, ll. 38 ff., and notes 8 and 9 ad loc.

¹³³ But we have πολιτάρχης in ll. 27, 42.

¹³⁴ At Athens it occurs once in the fourth century (perhaps a mere slip), I. G. ii. 49; in Papyri, several examples as early as 160 B.C., cf. Mayser, , Grammatik der gr. Papyri, pp. 213 ffGoogle Scholar.

¹³⁵ I have to thank Mr. M. N. Tod for valuable suggestions and criticism, especially in tlie last of these inscriptions.