Formulae Catalogue: Henry · Rhodes · ML · RO · OR · R&L#

Comprehensive cross-source catalogue of formula examples cited in the five canonical Greek-decree reference works held in the dossier's general knowledge folder, plus the methodologically essential companion Rhodes & Lewis 1997. Each entry binds an inscription number to one or more formula UIDs from the dossier's formulae.json, with the source citation (scholar + page-band) and — where extractable — a verbatim Greek snippet.

Methodology + coverage statement#

Sources mined. Five canonical reference works for Greek decree formulae:

What is captured. For each citation in the four text-layer works (Henry, Rhodes 1985, RO 2003, Rhodes & Lewis 1997), a context window of ±240 chars is scanned for keywords identifying which formula UID(s) the citation instantiates. Verbatim Greek where the underlying excerpts file (excerpts_greek_decrees_A.md, _B.md) preserves it; otherwise an explicit [verbatim Greek pending OCR] flag.

Yield. 320 citation × formula hits across 15 formula UIDs and 4 text-layer works, plus 311 verbatim Greek phrases from the manual excerpts. Henry contributes 101 hits, Rhodes 1985 190, RO 2003 16, R&L 1997 13.

What is deferred. Verbatim Greek attribution from ML 1969 and OR 2017 awaits a full grc+eng OCR pass. The test pass earlier in this session confirmed Tesseract 4.1 with the grc.traineddata checkpoint produces high-quality polytonic Greek output on ML at 150–200 dpi; the only blocker was wall-clock time (~1.5 h for the two volumes combined). The cross-reference matrix in §6 below identifies which ML and OR numbers Henry / Rhodes / RO / R&L cite for which formulae, so when OCR is run the catalogue can be back-populated by inscription number rather than by exhaustive sweep.

---

Catalogue by formula UID#

F.AMENDMENT_KATHAPER — … καθάπερ τῇ βουλῇ … (amendment, "as in the boule")#

Slot: amendment.

Henry 1977 — 3 unique inscriptions:

• ML 44 — ore the demotic has already been commented on above. 42 Meiggs and Lewis, 43 however, argue for an upper stone carrying "a relief and the name of the prytany and the secretary" in order to explain the disputed fragmentary opening of i 224 (ML 44), on the priestess and temple of N
• ML 94 — ), ?c. 422, 't'<X3e ol xcruyypixcpt; xcruve I [yp]ixcpaixv; i 2 109 (D 9), 410/09, [yv6µ]e 't'0V cruvypixcpeov; cf. also i 271 (S. xii 16), C. 436, v. 47, yv6µe) <r't'pixnyov; ii 127, 416/15, yvc:iµ'r) aTpix't"r)ywv; and the unique ii 2 1 (ML 94), 405/4, vv. 6-7, yvc:iµ'r) K).ea6
• Tod 103 — these documents may in fact be probouleumata rati- fied by the ecclesia, but drafted for inscribing by the secretary with the wrong enactment formula (taken from the records of the boule). This must certainly be the explanation of ii 2 r6 (Tod 103), the treaty with Eretria, where

Rhodes 1985 — 45 unique inscriptions:

• IG II² 19 — ed as an amendment of the existing law on the subject with which it dealt: ra pev aXXa xaddnep tov Xatp-qpovlBo vopov nepl Trjs anapxfjs.5) 1 etpT]<f>Lo9ai 8e A(h]vaitDV toil hfipun in rider, Tod 97. i (403/2), cf. IG ii2 19, 26; iiji-qfylaQai AOrjvaiois, Tod 100 (403?); i/itS, I
• IG II² 30 — . (probouleumata); P 6, 18-20 (erS, StS). (* In M&L 89 and Tod 173 the resultant decision is presented in a rider (RP) instead of the more usual bare footnote.) 2. In the ecclesia, ordering the herald to make a vow on the spot: IG ii2 30 (8rS); Tod 144 (er/tarS, mention of 8oyp,a
• IG II² 32 — e the original stele has disappeared. 7 Tod 103. The words [iXeadai Se Trpjeoftes avrtxa /xdA[a] ttj[v fiovXrjv] (17-18) tell us nothing about the origin of the decree (cf. p. 75). 84 LEGISLATION In IG ii2 32 the enactment-formula is er/3, but ratification by the ecclesia is prov
• IG II² 47 — hich it dealt: ra pev aXXa xaddnep tov Xatp-qpovlBo vopov nepl Trjs anapxfjs.5) 1 etpT]<f>Lo9ai 8e A(h]vaitDV toil hfipun in rider, Tod 97. i (403/2), cf. IG ii2 19, 26; iiji-qfylaQai AOrjvaiois, Tod 100 (403?); i/itS, IG ii2 47, 23 sqq. (‘beg. C4’); 8r8, Tod 114 (387/6); etc. 2
• IG II² 79 — A(h]vaitDV toil hfipun in rider, Tod 97. i (403/2), cf. IG ii2 19, 26; iiji-qfylaQai AOrjvaiois, Tod 100 (403?); i/itS, IG ii2 47, 23 sqq. (‘beg. C4’); 8r8, Tod 114 (387/6); etc. 2 Tod 133 (369/8), etc. 3 Tod 124 (378/7); cf. IG ii2 79, 82 (‘before 378/7’), etc-K ♦ Preserved in M
• IG II² 80 — (421/0) (eyKrems, aAAo dyaOov) (cf. Pefifrka, op. cit., 8-12), M&L 70 (424/3 or c. 386) (motivation, eyKTTjOLS RIDERS TO DECREES 279 KaOdvep -rof? dXXois vpoijevois), IG ii2 80 (before 378/7) (dre'Aeia, eyKrrjcns, judicial privileges KaOdvep rot? aAAoi? 7Tpoijevois), 265 (before
• IG II² 84 — L 69 (425/4) a small point, but not purely routine. 3. Riders extending to further recipients some or all of the honours granted in the main decree: Hesp. xxi 3 (end C5), Tod 97. ii (403/2), IG ii2 32 (385/4), Svt 255 (378/7), IG ii2 84 (378-6), Tod 131. i (368/7) (see note at en
• IG I² 94 — older, Jr., TAP A lxxi 1940; J. Delz Lukians Kenntnis der athenischen Antiquitdten, 134-50. TABLE J Riders to Decrees 1. Riders proposed by mover of original motion: IG i2 94 (418/17), M&L 94 (405/4), Tod 97. i (403/2) (Clisophus and his fellow prytanes), 97. ii (?) (403/2), IG i
• IG II² 99 — 91 seems to have been appended with¬ out an enactment- or rider-formula €t[S] only ? IG ii2 99 375/4 Hesp. iii 3 373/2 [erS] ONLY SEG xiv 45 371 /° ? [ctS] ONLY IG ii2 104 368/7 [-AM3] Reply to ambassadors Tod 136 368/7 [erS] ; StS ♦
• IG II² 104 — an enactment- or rider-formula €t[S] only ? IG ii2 99 375/4 Hesp. iii 3 373/2 [erS] ONLY SEG xiv 45 371 /° ? [ctS] ONLY IG ii2 104 368/7 [-AM3] Reply to ambassadors Tod 136 368/7 [erS] ; StS ♦Alliance with Diony¬ sius I 139 c. 36
• IG II² 109 — if as some have supposed the ambassadors of 11. 31-3 are identical with those of 11. 24-5,1 presume the point of the rider will be to have them named in the decree and/or to read ‘Lesbos’ for ‘Mytilene’. For IG ii2 19, Tod 116, and IG ii2 109, where the rider includes a repetitio
• IG II² 140 — G xxi 359 (beg. C3): here a probouleumatic decree is followed by a pseudo-rider, not embodying one of the old formulae, to the decree as previously enacted (to pev aAAa npaTreiv Kara to rrporepov i/rq<f> 10pa). With this we may compare IG ii2 140, a vopos which was framed as an a
• IG II² 176 — ety and Institutions, 71), ATL D 19,/HMA 69 (before 431), SEG x 60 (?) (c. 430), M&L 68 (426/5), SEGx 87 (?) (c. 423/2), IG i2 94 (418/17), SEG xii 32 (418/17), M&L 73 (416/15?), 85 (410/09), Svt 255 (378/7), Tod 139 (c. 367?), IG ii2 176 (before 353/2). An amending vofios of sub
• IG II² 182 — Riders to Decrees 1. Riders proposed by mover of original motion: IG i2 94 (418/17), M&L 94 (405/4), Tod 97. i (403/2) (Clisophus and his fellow prytanes), 97. ii (?) (403/2), IG ii* 109 (?) (363/2), Tod 143 (363/2), IG ii2 182 (?) (before 353/2), 206 (349/8), 334 (c. 335/4), pse
• IG II² 192 — With certain reservations, then, it seems that Miller’s account of probouleusis is to be accepted: elcayyeAlai, TrpofSoAal, and ueerrjpiai gave 1 See pp. 72-3 and p. 73 n. 1. * IG ii2 192. 3 See my classified list of riders, Table J. 4 M&L 73, 53-4, with commentary, p. 221. 5 P.
• IG II² 218 — of Androtion, and the rider is introduced with rd pev aAAa Ka.da.TTep AvSporicov. Androtion appears as eVtardr^? in a decree dated ‘before 378/7’,4 and was bouleutes again in or before 356/5:5 he 1 18o£ev . . . ev TTji fiovAfji: IG ii2 218 346/5 PF 276 before 336/5 (discussed in
• IG II² 235 — motion as a first rider; M&L, p. 141, regard Anticles’ as an independent decree moved at the same assembly as Diognetus’. In IG ii2 448. i a rider is introduced with the unparalleled raSe IIav<f>i\ov Ei)<f>[i]Aijtou. 1 Including IG ii2 235 (340/39), with a new enactment-formula (
• IG II² 289 — to the decree as previously enacted (to pev aAAa npaTreiv Kara to rrporepov i/rq<f> 10pa). With this we may compare IG ii2 140, a vopos which was framed as an amendment to an already existing vopos. 2 I include among these decrees IG ii2 289. E. Schweigert linked with this the pr
• IG II² 360 — tances in which it was enacted. Thus the only distinction which we can attempt to base on the formulae is between those which ratify probouleumata verbatim, with or without riders, and all others (whether revised from a probouleuma like IG ii2 360. i and ii or framed in response
• IG II² 372 — rrporepov i/rq<f> 10pa). With this we may compare IG ii2 140, a vopos which was framed as an amendment to an already existing vopos. 2 I include among these decrees IG ii2 289. E. Schweigert linked with this the prescript- fragment IG ii2 372, where the formulae are E; erS (Hesp.
• IG II² 373 — dependent decree moved at the same assembly as Diognetus’. In IG ii2 448. i a rider is introduced with the unparalleled raSe IIav<f>i\ov Ei)<f>[i]Aijtou. 1 Including IG ii2 235 (340/39), with a new enactment-formula («r[8]), and IG ii2 373 (322/1), where the rider has a complete
• IG II² 422 — t]8 421 bef. 318/17 £; etS only NON-PROBOULEUMATIC DECREES 263 Reference Date Formulae Contents IG ii2 422 325-318/17 e[rS] ; [Sr]S (date, Johnson, CP ix 1914, 425) 448. i 323/2 (sic) [£]; [e] rS; S[t8] ; rider Citiz
• IG II² 448 — be the earlier of the two motions, but Meritt, Documents on Athenian Tribute, 33 n. 36, regarded Anticles’ motion as a first rider; M&L, p. 141, regard Anticles’ as an independent decree moved at the same assembly as Diognetus’. In IG ii2 448. i a rider is introduced with the unp
• IG II² 682 — c and bouleutic calendars. The latter must surely and the former may possibly have been enacted on a later occasion than the original decree (perhaps on the resumption of an ad¬ journed assembly?). This process has developed further in IG ii2 682 (after 256/5) and perhaps SEG xxi
• SEG xii 32 — der see G. E. M. de Ste Croix ap. Jones, Athenian Democracy, 168, P. A. Brunt, Ancient Society and Institutions, 71), ATL D 19,/HMA 69 (before 431), SEG x 60 (?) (c. 430), M&L 68 (426/5), SEGx 87 (?) (c. 423/2), IG i2 94 (418/17), SEG xii 32 (418/17), M&L 73 (416/15?), 85 (410/09
• SEG xiv 45 — d with¬ out an enactment- or rider-formula €t[S] only ? IG ii2 99 375/4 Hesp. iii 3 373/2 [erS] ONLY SEG xiv 45 371 /° ? [ctS] ONLY IG ii2 104 368/7 [-AM3] Reply to ambassadors Tod 136 368/7 [erS] ; StS ♦Alliance with Diony¬
• SEG xvi 52 — h according to all surviving indications ought to be non-probouleumatic, and in view of the possibility of amendment by reformulation we ought not to be surprised at this.4 Fifteen decrees combine erS with the probouleumatic formula :5 SEG xvi 52 339/8 ? SIG3 287 332/i Honours Ph
• SEG x 60 — 450 RP; second rider xa0a- ♦Eleusinian epistatae l+ep ©ecrmeu's] 1HMA 69 1 bef. 431 R[P] both texts; second Work on water supply (+7XD 19/ rider RI SEG x 60 c. 430 RP ♦Eleusinian law M&L 65. ii 426/5 Xpi?/*£m'<7c»-formula 51-6 ♦Second Methone decree 69 426/5 Xpr?/iaTi'<7ai-formul
• SEG x 84 — of the assembly without any advance notice.3 1 Epigraphische Untersuchungen. See A. Billheimer, AJA2 xlii 1938, for a detailed reply. 2 And notice roiovSe here (29. ii), but rav-rqv 4. i, raSe 30. i, rijvSt 31. i, rdcSe 39. i. 3 In SEG x 84, 30 sqq., Meritt claims to have detecte
• SEG x 136 — Citizenship grantjj \i_SEGx 127 M&L 85 410/09 [RP] ; second rider [RI] Honours for Phrynichus’ assassins 90 408/7 RP SEG x 136 407/6 bouleutic formula 3-6; ♦Alliance with Carthage [[RP wholly and wildly restored]] (complete text re¬
• SEG xxi 300 — s which was framed as an amendment to an already existing vopos. 2 I include among these decrees IG ii2 289. E. Schweigert linked with this the prescript- fragment IG ii2 372, where the formulae are E; erS (Hesp. viii 1939, 173-5, cf- SEG xxi 300; this is one of Demades’ decrees,
• SEG xxi 359 — ter must surely and the former may possibly have been enacted on a later occasion than the original decree (perhaps on the resumption of an ad¬ journed assembly?). This process has developed further in IG ii2 682 (after 256/5) and perhaps SEG xxi 359 (beg. C3): here a probouleuma
• Tod 97 — the nomothetae was regarded as an amendment of the existing law on the subject with which it dealt: ra pev aXXa xaddnep tov Xatp-qpovlBo vopov nepl Trjs anapxfjs.5) 1 etpT]<f>Lo9ai 8e A(h]vaitDV toil hfipun in rider, Tod 97. i (403/2), cf. IG ii2 19, 26; iiji-qfylaQai AOrjvaiois,
• Tod 100 — ting law on the subject with which it dealt: ra pev aXXa xaddnep tov Xatp-qpovlBo vopov nepl Trjs anapxfjs.5) 1 etpT]<f>Lo9ai 8e A(h]vaitDV toil hfipun in rider, Tod 97. i (403/2), cf. IG ii2 19, 26; iiji-qfylaQai AOrjvaiois, Tod 100 (403?); i/itS, IG ii2 47, 23 sqq. (‘beg. C4’);
• Tod 114 — tov Xatp-qpovlBo vopov nepl Trjs anapxfjs.5) 1 etpT]<f>Lo9ai 8e A(h]vaitDV toil hfipun in rider, Tod 97. i (403/2), cf. IG ii2 19, 26; iiji-qfylaQai AOrjvaiois, Tod 100 (403?); i/itS, IG ii2 47, 23 sqq. (‘beg. C4’); 8r8, Tod 114 (387/6); etc. 2 Tod 133 (369/8), etc. 3 Tod 124 (37
• Tod 116 — other extreme purely honorific decrees (though it may be of great significance that at a particular time the political climate is favourable to a particular man, and a bitter controversy may underly a motivation-clause, as in the rider to Tod 116) cost the state little and are ea
• Tod 124 — ) 1 etpT]<f>Lo9ai 8e A(h]vaitDV toil hfipun in rider, Tod 97. i (403/2), cf. IG ii2 19, 26; iiji-qfylaQai AOrjvaiois, Tod 100 (403?); i/itS, IG ii2 47, 23 sqq. (‘beg. C4’); 8r8, Tod 114 (387/6); etc. 2 Tod 133 (369/8), etc. 3 Tod 124 (378/7); cf. IG ii2 79, 82 (‘before 378/7’), e
• Tod 131 — a small point, but not purely routine. 3. Riders extending to further recipients some or all of the honours granted in the main decree: Hesp. xxi 3 (end C5), Tod 97. ii (403/2), IG ii2 32 (385/4), Svt 255 (378/7), IG ii2 84 (378-6), Tod 131. i (368/7) (see note at end of this tab
• Tod 133 — vopov nepl Trjs anapxfjs.5) 1 etpT]<f>Lo9ai 8e A(h]vaitDV toil hfipun in rider, Tod 97. i (403/2), cf. IG ii2 19, 26; iiji-qfylaQai AOrjvaiois, Tod 100 (403?); i/itS, IG ii2 47, 23 sqq. (‘beg. C4’); 8r8, Tod 114 (387/6); etc. 2 Tod 133 (369/8), etc. 3 Tod 124 (378/7); cf. IG ii2
• Tod 139 — A. Brunt, Ancient Society and Institutions, 71), ATL D 19,/HMA 69 (before 431), SEG x 60 (?) (c. 430), M&L 68 (426/5), SEGx 87 (?) (c. 423/2), IG i2 94 (418/17), SEG xii 32 (418/17), M&L 73 (416/15?), 85 (410/09), Svt 255 (378/7), Tod 139 (c. 367?), IG ii2 176 (before 353/2). An
• Tod 143 — Riders to Decrees 1. Riders proposed by mover of original motion: IG i2 94 (418/17), M&L 94 (405/4), Tod 97. i (403/2) (Clisophus and his fellow prytanes), 97. ii (?) (403/2), IG ii* 109 (?) (363/2), Tod 143 (363/2), IG ii2 182 (?) (before 353/2), 206 (349/8), 334 (c. 335/4), pse
• Tod 144 — ta); P 6, 18-20 (erS, StS). (* In M&L 89 and Tod 173 the resultant decision is presented in a rider (RP) instead of the more usual bare footnote.) 2. In the ecclesia, ordering the herald to make a vow on the spot: IG ii2 30 (8rS); Tod 144 (er/tarS, mention of 8oyp,a and probouleu
• Tod 167 — ere probouleu¬ matic (even as I define the term), that the first rider to any decree must be introduced by RP, and that RI must always introduce a second or subsequent rider (Documents on Athenian Tribute, 32-3 with n. 36, ATL, i. 213): Tod 167 is admitted as an exception. There
• Tod 173 — rla 8wpeas—pseudo-rider IG ii2 682 (after 256/5); revised motivation for honours—Tod 116 (386); cf. M&L 90 (408/7)—a manifest verbal correction.^ 5. Riders following up open clause in probouleuma: M&L 89. ii (407/6), and probably Tod 173 {c. 342). Note. The rider to Tod 97. i sim
• Tod 189 — an attempt to base on the formulae is between those which ratify probouleumata verbatim, with or without riders, and all others (whether revised from a probouleuma like IG ii2 360. i and ii or framed in response to an open probouleuma like Tod 189. ii or carried in opposition to

R&L 1997 — 5 unique inscriptions:

• Tod 97 — ave wanted to date this to the beginning of the reign of Perdiccas of Macedon, before the war); 92. On the position of the strategoi during the Peloponnesian War see pp. 12-13 with n. ro. 1 2 ' JG,, 84; JG IJ 1. ii=Tod 97. i and perhaps 1. iii= 97. ii, 109, IIO = Tod 143, perhaps
• Tod 108 — tic or not; but occurrences of an amendment 'In other respects in accordance with the council' indicate that some at least of the most important decrees are " Cf. above, p. 13. '' Fourth-century foreign examples: JG n' 18, 106, 212 = Tod 108, 135, 167. Domestic examples: JG n' 41
• Tod 143 — n of Perdiccas of Macedon, before the war); 92. On the position of the strategoi during the Peloponnesian War see pp. 12-13 with n. ro. 1 2 ' JG,, 84; JG IJ 1. ii=Tod 97. i and perhaps 1. iii= 97. ii, 109, IIO = Tod 143, perhaps 182,206; also the supplementary decree presented as
• Tod 144 — 04-8. A commissioning clause also appears in an amendment proposed in the assembly to a pro- bouleuma:Svt. 255 (JG 112 40). " JG 112 336; 338. i; 352; h6pos iv 1986, 11-18; Oliver, Sacred Gemsia, 31/2. ii. The exception is JG 2 11 112 =Tod 144: for discussion of this, and of JG 1
• Tod 193 — nt proposed in the assembly to a pro- bouleuma:Svt. 255 (JG 112 40). " JG 112 336; 338. i; 352; h6pos iv 1986, 11-18; Oliver, Sacred Gemsia, 31/2. ii. The exception is JG 2 11 112 =Tod 144: for discussion of this, and of JG 112 349 =Tod 193 and JG 112 660. ii, see Boule, 68~. 56

F.DEDOCHTHAI_B — δεδόχθαι τῇ βουλῇ (motion-formula, "be it resolved")#

Slot: decisional_verb.

R&L 1997 — 1 unique inscriptions:

• SEG xviii 187 — , ternative) (C2 Bc-C2 AD, but earliest cer- 158, 159, 173 (?), 249, 250, iv 45, 53, tain instance, SEG xiii 361, c.60 BC) 153, 408. v, 437, 438, SEC xiv 398. a, b, Indications of one or more Delphians re- 399. a, b, SEG xviii 187. i (C3-C1) sponsible for decree; except where oth

F.EDOXEN_BD — ἔδοξεν τῇ βουλῇ καὶ τῷ δήμῳ (full boule + demos enactment, EBKTD)#

Slot: enactment_formula.

Henry 1977 — 17 unique inscriptions:

• IG II² 128 — 0.215 [~oo ]~e:v tjL ~OUA'YjL xcxt TWL O~f.LWL. vacat non-stoichedon [~L6 ]qi[cxvToc; e: ]!1te:v · where a similar 'pseudo-superscript' in old style is followed by the enactment formula in a line by itself. Cf. also ii2128 (Tod 159), 365/5: ['E1t'] 'E,-1tlvo ixp[x_ovToc;] · non-s
• IG II² 662 — rmula here shows that this was a probouleumatic decree. 60 In this text the correct enactment formula is included. 74 TO THE END OF THE THIRD CENTURY (8) Orator: The orator appears to be lacking his patronymic in ii2662 c. Add. (5. xvi 62), 286/5: 51 stoichedon 43 e8o~e:v -.'Yj 5
• IG II² 678 — Cf. also Ag.xv 89, 254/3, v. 23, where the boule resolution is intro- duced by nothing more than the enactment formula and the orator: "Eoo~e:v -re:'i: ~ouAe:'i:' Auxoµ.~ol')c; aLoxocpou Kov[0]uA=ij[0e: ]v e:!1te:v · Cf. also ii2678 (Ag.xv 85\, 256/5, vv. roff. IO hl. -njc; ow[oe
• IG II² 769 — chapter. 2 AJA xl 1936, 66. 3 [ = as restored]; • denotes that other items in the same prescript are also set off by uninscribed spaces; EF = enactment formula. 4 Or perhaps in some cases more punctuation rather than emphasis. 5 ii2769, 233/2. 8 ii 2778, 259/49; ii 1 781, 250/49;
• ML 61 — -rwv ;rpoeopwv z1te:41~cpL~e:v o oz~vcx demotic 32 enactment formula orator o oe:~vcx e:!1te:v. 29 In financial documents reference to the number of the day of the prytany is found as early as i 2 295 {ML 61), 433/2, vv. 10-12: [ibd -re; Atocv]-rl3o; 1tpu-rocvdoc; 1tp6w; 1tpu I[-
• ML 80 — entury 48 which carry not the customary enactment formula ~ao~ev tjL ~ouAr,L xoct TWL a~µwL but simply eao~ev tjL ~ouAr,L, thus apparently indicating conciliar origin alone. These are mainly proxeny decrees: ii 26 (Tod 98), c. 400; ii 212 (ML 80), vv. 29-32, 399/8; ii 213, 399/8;
• Tod 98 — s from the early fourth century 48 which carry not the customary enactment formula ~ao~ev tjL ~ouAr,L xoct TWL a~µwL but simply eao~ev tjL ~ouAr,L, thus apparently indicating conciliar origin alone. These are mainly proxeny decrees: ii 26 (Tod 98), c. 400; ii 212 (ML 80), vv. 29-
• Tod 103 — these documents may in fact be probouleumata rati- fied by the ecclesia, but drafted for inscribing by the secretary with the wrong enactment formula (taken from the records of the boule). This must certainly be the explanation of ii 2 r6 (Tod 103), the treaty with Eretria, where
• Tod 123 — pcx[µ] µa.Te:ue:v · TWV 1tpoeopwv Em:ljJ~<p[ L~e: KcxMLO'T] [oye:]lTwv [<l>]-ri[r ]cx[e:u]c; · vacat [loo ]~e:v [T'Yjt] ~ouA'YjL xcxt TWL o~µwL · IloMe:uxTo[c; e:foe:v · u The epistates formula is postponed here: cf. ii 143 (Tod 123), 378/7, where it also appears between the enac
• Tod 131 — oc;?] [e:]!1te:v. Once again, despite appearances, vv. 1-8 are to be classed as a prescript. Note how the enactment formula is so placed as to bear the appearance of opening a prescript. 35 The same effect is also achieved in ii 2107 (Tod 131), 368 /7: [0Je:ol. [MuT ]tAl)Vcxlwv.
• Tod 154 — pture which is evident above the introductory 6e[ol]. 53 Even so, the way in which the prytany ordinal and the day of the prytany have been combined is unparalleled. And there seems to be no mention of epistates or orator. 54 (3) ii 2125 (Tod 154), Athens and Eretria, 357 /6: the
• Tod 159 — [~oo ]~e:v tjL ~OUA'YjL xcxt TWL O~f.LWL. vacat non-stoichedon [~L6 ]qi[cxvToc; e: ]!1te:v · where a similar 'pseudo-superscript' in old style is followed by the enactment formula in a line by itself. Cf. also ii2128 (Tod 159), 365/5: ['E1t'] 'E,-1tlvo ixp[x_ovToc;] · non-stoiche
• Tod 167 — asi-superscript in larger letters. (3) ii 2243, decree in honour of Kalliteles, 337/6: In vv. 5-6 the enactment formula is expressed in a form with the demos preceding the boule: 81 See Meritt, H. xxix 1960, p. 19. 82 ii 2 212 (Tod 167), 347/6; ii 2 214, 347/6; ii 1 218, 346/5; i
• Tod 168 — /29. 11 ii 2 212 (Tod 167), 347/6. 12 E.g. ii 2231, 340/39; ii 2357, 327/6~ cf. earlier ii 2129, 356/5; ii 2 130 (see S. xix 49), 355/4; jj2133, 355/4 etc. 13 So ii 2416, c. 330; ii 2419, post 336/5. u P. 30. 16 Cf. ii 2213 (Tod 168), 347 /6, which opens with i!:~l 0eµta-roxMou~
• Tod 175 — ut then continues with the enactment formula followed by a list of items in old style. 4 THE YEARS 349 TO 321 ii 2233 (Tod 175), 340/39, is, if correctly restored, a curious mixture of old and new: stoichedon 37 ['E]7tt 0e:[oippcx.cr-rou &px_o]v-.o[c;· eoo;e:v "t'WL o~µc,H" Ke:
• Tod 181 — s, 337/6: In vv. 5-6 the enactment formula is expressed in a form with the demos preceding the boule: 81 See Meritt, H. xxix 1960, p. 19. 82 ii 2 212 (Tod 167), 347/6; ii 2 214, 347/6; ii 1 218, 346/5; ii 2 224, 343/2; ii 2 240 (Tod 181), ii 1241 and 242, all 337/6; ii 2336 III (
• Tod 199 — the Odrysian, may also have been set up by the honorand himself. 68 (2) Omission of the epistates: The chairman does not appear in ii 2215, 346/5, but why this should be so is not clear. (3) Omission of orator: ii 2356 (c. Add. p. 660) (Tod 199), 327/6, appears to be lacking the

F.EDOXEN_D — ἔδοξεν τῷ δήμῳ (demos-only enactment, ETD)#

Slot: enactment_formula.

R&L 1997 — 1 unique inscriptions:

• SEG xxxix 441 — SEC xxxix 440 c.225-200 1rpos TE ~v {3ovA~v Kai 'TOVorjµov 'TO [Ll ap]xov-ros 'Ep[x]oµev{ois I e[-r]8I ip~cf,wµa 8 ypacpH I E7Tfl8~... / - - - substance u6 II. Catalogues SEG xxxix 441 c.225-200 ET/3KTE I i1rEL8~... I substance including LI apxoVTOSI ETD I substance citizenship 3

F.STESAI_AKROPOLEI — στῆσαι ἐν ἀκροπόλει (set up on the Acropolis)#

Slot: erection_venue.

Rhodes 1985 — 3 unique inscriptions:

• IG II² 204 — ATL’s restoration ftureAeoTara]; Wilhelm’s text (quoted in the apparatus) does not, but he agreed that further expenditure on the Acropolis was to be severely limited. 5 ATL D 19/HMA 69, 7. 6 IG ii2 204, 66-7. Cf. Ch. I, pp. 27-8 and p. 28 n. 1. 7 IG ii2 1669, 8, 21, etc. 8 IG ii
• IG II² 1669 — e apparatus) does not, but he agreed that further expenditure on the Acropolis was to be severely limited. 5 ATL D 19/HMA 69, 7. 6 IG ii2 204, 66-7. Cf. Ch. I, pp. 27-8 and p. 28 n. 1. 7 IG ii2 1669, 8, 21, etc. 8 IG ii2 1678, aA 27-8. This must antedate the loss of Delos in 314.
• IG II² 1678 — agreed that further expenditure on the Acropolis was to be severely limited. 5 ATL D 19/HMA 69, 7. 6 IG ii2 204, 66-7. Cf. Ch. I, pp. 27-8 and p. 28 n. 1. 7 IG ii2 1669, 8, 21, etc. 8 IG ii2 1678, aA 27-8. This must antedate the loss of Delos in 314. 9 IG ii2 463, 36. Cf. pp. 106

RO 2003 — 1 unique inscriptions:

• Tod 162 — h marble stele found on the Acropolis, now in the Epigraphical Museum. Attic-Ionic, retaining ol d o for ov i n TO\L^TOJV (11 . 25 , 26, 37) . Non-stoichedon 63—7 3 letters a line , as restored , average 68 . IGii2 1128 , XII. v 1277 ; Tod 162* . Trans. Austin and Vidal-Naquet ,

F.EPAINESAI — ἐπαινέσαι (honorific praise)#

Slot: honorific_action.

Rhodes 1985 — 3 unique inscriptions:

• IG II² 145 — . The proposer of a decree dated about 435 left it to the assembly to decide whether the [doorway] to the temple (of Athena NIkt) ?) should be of [bronze] or ivory [and gold],7 and a decree of 422/1 1 In Ch. II, pp. 85-6,1 argue from IG ii2 145 that the herald of the boule and de
• IG II² 790 — S in one copy but [erS] in a second; and it seems to have been a matter of legislative etiquette, very rarely broken, that decrees in honour of a prytany were not recommended to the ecclesia by the boule,2 so that the use of er/S/crS in IG ii2 790 is probably due to a simple erro
• IG II² 839 — 280/70 IE 5 [€T1£*t8 5 8t8 [E; [trS] ; (stone ends) j two copies of same decree IG ii2 839 221/0 erj3;PF 2 For an analysis of aAAo ayadov clauses see Table L. DECREES OF THE BOULE AND DEMOS 67 els aiTwvlav, and he recommended that he be p

F.POLITEIAN_EINAI — εἶναι αὐτῷ πολιτείαν (grant of citizenship)#

Slot: honorific_action.

Rhodes 1985 — 8 unique inscriptions:

• IG II² 17 — avrov irpo£evov) . . . [/card to ipr/<pio\pa o eviKT)oe nepi avrov ■npo[repov\ (5-8)—and so we see that the avaypaipai formula could be used not only for the award but alternatively for the publication of an award already made. (Compare IG ii2 17, where decree ii, whose prescript
• IG II² 145 — les was appointed c. 368-358 by the boule and demos (IG ii2 145. ii), and I argue in Ch. II, pp. 84-5, that the appointment of his father c. 398-390, [KripvKevev ... r]iji fioAfji Kai rtSt ran A6r)vaia>v], was made by the demos (IG ii2 145. i). 8 Cf. Ch. IV, pp. 175-6. 9 This is
• IG II² 794 — , Meeting Places, 145 (citing Graindor, Album d’inscriptions attiques d’epoque impiriale, 28). 14 And. I. Myst. 111, cf. P 36, 30-1. 15 IG ii2 1039, 3. 16 Chron. Hell. Ath., 114, 11. 6-7. (On IG ii2 794, 4, see Pelekidis, REG Ixiii 1950, 112-17.) 36 MEMBERSHIP AND ORGANIZATION ho
• IG II² 922 — c. 200 PF Praise for Ephesus Hesp. xvi 55 C. 200 [PF?] Honours for [epimeletae of mysteries] IG ii2 922 beg. C2 PF Citizenship grant 923 beg. C2 PF Citizenship grant 927 beg. C2 PF 931 beg. C2 PF 936
• IG II² 982 — Asclepius 28 aft. mid C2 [ex/3](cx8 only Honours for priest of Asclepius IG ii2 982 aft. mid C2 PF Citizenship grant 988 aft. mid C2 PF Citizenship grant Hesp. ii (ACR) 24 aft. mid C2 PF Citi
• IG II² 1039 — 12 IG ii2 783, 4. 13 IG ii2 1072, 3, cf. McDonald, Meeting Places, 145 (citing Graindor, Album d’inscriptions attiques d’epoque impiriale, 28). 14 And. I. Myst. 111, cf. P 36, 30-1. 15 IG ii2 1039, 3. 16 Chron. Hell. Ath., 114, 11. 6-7. (On IG ii2 794, 4, see Pelekidis, REG Ixiii
• SEG xvi 102 — aft. mid C2 PF Citizenship grant 988 aft. mid C2 PF Citizenship grant Hesp. ii (ACR) 24 aft. mid C2 PF Citizenship grant SEG xvi 102 c. 150-100 [iiocXrjola iv run dtarpon Honours for a priestess rj p,e^raydetaa (K neip[cuiajs Kara to
• Tod 87 — . i) and as secretary (Tod 97. ii). 3 e.g. M&L 31, 24; 37, 12; 52, 58-9; 69, 24. 4 M&L 86, 6-7, giving the new readings of Dr. R. S. Stroud. 3 This title used to be restored in the passage cited in n. 4 above (e.g. Tod 87). 6 See Ferguson, The Athenian Secretaries, ch. viii, sugg

F.PROXENIAN_EINAI — εἶναι αὐτὸν πρόξενον (grant of proxeny)#

Slot: honorific_action.

Henry 1977 — 12 unique inscriptions:

• IG I² 9r — [... ]cmmo½ ey[p0tµ]µ1he:ue:v, 'E [mµ]"{lO"fj½ E7tE(;'t'IX't'EL, Aew[Ve: Jt 5 [1te:· Among numerous other examples cf., e.g., i 226 (5. xii 7), Treaty with the Amphictiony, c. 458; i 266 (ML 46), decree of Kleinias, ?447; i29r (ML 58A), decree of Kallias, 434/3 etc. Apart, howeve
• IG II² 63 — uAr,L, thus apparently indicating conciliar origin alone. These are mainly proxeny decrees: ii 26 (Tod 98), c. 400; ii 212 (ML 80), vv. 29-32, 399/8; ii 213, 399/8; H. vii 91-2, II, c. 3g8-390; ii 232, 385/4; ii 249, ?paullopost 385/4 49 ; ii263, ante 378/7; ii 277, ante 378/7; i
• IG I² 125 — (= ou) need not trouble us: a mixture of Attic and Ionic orthography is common enough at this date . .-rLµ will presumably be part of the name of the secretary. In two examples we find a superscript with an archon but no secretary: (r) i2125, proxeny decree, 405/4: 39 'AAe;loc½ Y
• ML 46 — tv't'l.[½ e}tpU't'IXVEUE, [... ]cmmo½ ey[p0tµ]µ1he:ue:v, 'E [mµ]"{lO"fj½ E7tE(;'t'IX't'EL, Aew[Ve: Jt 5 [1te:· Among numerous other examples cf., e.g., i 226 (5. xii 7), Treaty with the Amphictiony, c. 458; i 266 (ML 46), decree of Kleinias, ?447; i29r (ML 58A), decree of Kallias
• ML 65 — ?c. 422; i 2144+155 (D23), proxeny decree, ?416/15; ii 22, proxeny decree, 403/2, in all of which the secretary reappears in the prescript without demotic. The secretary may also be found superscript with patronymic, 30 first in i 257 (ML 65), the Methone decrees, 430-423. This s
• ML 73 — ["E]8oxO'eV 't'EL ~OAEL XOCL 't'OL 8eµoL · 'Avnox[tc; e] stoichedon 35 [1t]pu't'cx.veue, 0e68opoc; eypocµµcx.nue, l:L . . ~ .. 5 . e1teO''t'cx.n' [A Mov e[!]1t[e] ·29 For other examples of this type cf. i 276 (ML 73), Eleusinian First- fruits, ?c. 422; i 2144+155 (D23), proxeny d
• ML 80 — entury 48 which carry not the customary enactment formula ~ao~ev tjL ~ouAr,L xoct TWL a~µwL but simply eao~ev tjL ~ouAr,L, thus apparently indicating conciliar origin alone. These are mainly proxeny decrees: ii 26 (Tod 98), c. 400; ii 212 (ML 80), vv. 29-32, 399/8; ii 213, 399/8;
• ML 85 — [A6~ov h] Ke8ov eypixµµoc-reue. where both archon (in the form o8dvix epx.e) and secretary (without demotic) reappear in the prescript; and ii 213, proxeny decree, 399 /8: 86 Later de rigueur in prescripts. Cf. i 1 uo (ML 85), 410/09 below. 38 This differentiation between the for
• ML 90 — ' in which Antidotos can be none other than the archon of this year. Among many other examples of this type cf. i 294 (Sokolowski [1969] 14), on the sanctuary of Kodros, Neleus and Basile, 418/17, almost totally preserved; and i 2 n8 (ML 90), a proxeny decree for Oiniades of Pala
• ML 91 — nd i 2 n8 (ML 90), a proxeny decree for Oiniades of Palaiskiathos, 408/7. 26 There are, however, at least three examples in this period of the archon appearing in the list immediately before the epistates. This is first found in i 2105 (ML 91), an honorary decree for Archelaos of
• ML 94 — t'O]L oeµoL. 'Axoc[µoc] stoichedon 31 [V't'L~ €7tf)U't'IXVEUE, <l>eA ]AEU~ [eyp ]ocµ[µ]oc't'[EU] [e, 'Av't'Lyeve~ epx_e, ~L~]up't'w[~ e]1tECJ't"IX[n], [' AAXL~LIXOE~ EL7tE. For the same order cf. ii 21 vv. 5-7 (ML 94), on the Samians, 405/4; 24 But the controversy still rages: se
• Tod 98 — s from the early fourth century 48 which carry not the customary enactment formula ~ao~ev tjL ~ouAr,L xoct TWL a~µwL but simply eao~ev tjL ~ouAr,L, thus apparently indicating conciliar origin alone. These are mainly proxeny decrees: ii 26 (Tod 98), c. 400; ii 212 (ML 80), vv. 29-

Rhodes 1985 — 7 unique inscriptions:

• IG II² 17 — 7 There is one proxeny decree in which it seems that both explanations are applicable. 1 The proxeny inscriptions to be considered here are Tod 98, IG ii2 49, 13, Hesp. vii 11, IG ii2 32, 63, 77, 95; compare the citizenship award in IG ii2 17. The questions which I discuss are tr
• IG II² 32 — Eretria, which can hardly be explained in any other way.7 There is one proxeny decree in which it seems that both explanations are applicable. 1 The proxeny inscriptions to be considered here are Tod 98, IG ii2 49, 13, Hesp. vii 11, IG ii2 32, 63, 77, 95; compare the citizenship
• IG II² 49 — ice shortly an alliance with Eretria, which can hardly be explained in any other way.7 There is one proxeny decree in which it seems that both explanations are applicable. 1 The proxeny inscriptions to be considered here are Tod 98, IG ii2 49, 13, Hesp. vii 11, IG ii2 32, 63, 77,
• IG II² 145 — afer) Tod 98 soon aft. [c]t/3 (On this formula To re-publish proxeny 403/2 in proxeny decrees see decree pp. 83-4) Q7G ii2 145. i 402-399 SEE TABLE Dj IG ii2 49 beg. C4 erj3 Concerning a proxeny 12. ii 399/8 €T)3 May be probouleuma
• SEG x 53 — » e.g. Tod 133, 167, IG ii2 387, 486, cf. [D.] XII. Ep. Phil. » e.g. Hignett, 246-7, W. Schwahn, RE, Supp. vi. 1079. 10 PI. Nic. 5. i. 11 PI. Per. 7. v, cf. Praec. Ger. Reip. 800 c (jSfjp-a and bouleuterium). 12 e.g. SEG x 53, 105, M&L 90, Tod 173, 178, 181. 44 MEMBERSHIP AND ORG
• Tod 98 — e shall notice shortly an alliance with Eretria, which can hardly be explained in any other way.7 There is one proxeny decree in which it seems that both explanations are applicable. 1 The proxeny inscriptions to be considered here are Tod 98, IG ii2 49, 13, Hesp. vii 11, IG ii2
• Tod 173 — G ii2 387, 486, cf. [D.] XII. Ep. Phil. » e.g. Hignett, 246-7, W. Schwahn, RE, Supp. vi. 1079. 10 PI. Nic. 5. i. 11 PI. Per. 7. v, cf. Praec. Ger. Reip. 800 c (jSfjp-a and bouleuterium). 12 e.g. SEG x 53, 105, M&L 90, Tod 173, 178, 181. 44 MEMBERSHIP AND ORGANIZATION kind, to the

R&L 1997 — 2 unique inscriptions:

• SEG xxxiv 1198 — haean League, Aegosthena appointed a Megarian as proxenos(JG vu 223). ,. Cf. also Panamara and 'the whole demos' of Stratonicea (IK Stratonikeia 7), references to 'the whole demos' by tribes of Mylasa, and perhaps also Gordus in Lydia (SEG xxxiv 1198).In Colophon 'whole demos' in
• Tod 123 — he rights of their members to control their own citizenship, except that in Athens' leagues a man could be exiled from = all the states of the league (JG 13 14 M&L 40; JG II 2 43 Tod 123); = but the third-century League of Islanders could make a man a proxenos or citizen in all t

F.HOPOS_AN — ὅπως ἄν / ὅπως οὖν (hortatory)#

Slot: hortatory_intention.

Rhodes 1985 — 5 unique inscriptions:

• IG II² 502 — Eust. Od. xvii. 455, Harp., Suid. tmordn-qs, L.S. 244. 31, 290. 8, cf. A. I. Tim. 104, II. F.L. 84. The number of tribes determined the number of proedri, so that in the twelve-tribe periods, for example, there were eleven proedri (e.g. IG ii2 502, 5 sqq.). The ban on repeated se
• IG II² 660 — the assembly-stage. But the probouleuma was at least permissive and probably favourable to the alliance, so that here we have a decree which is in accordance with a probouleuma, yet is technically non- probouleumatic. There remains IG ii2 660. ii, which is restored to read: ms o£
• IG II² 790 — S in one copy but [erS] in a second; and it seems to have been a matter of legislative etiquette, very rarely broken, that decrees in honour of a prytany were not recommended to the ecclesia by the boule,2 so that the use of er/S/crS in IG ii2 790 is probably due to a simple erro
• SEG x 54 — In 11. 64-9 the boule is ordered to appoint three of its members to join with Hierocles in sacrificing for Euboea; and so that this can be done as soon as possible hoi oTpartyoi avvtTTipitXoodov tail to apyvpiov is Taira [n^ape^ovrov. 2 SEG x 54, 10—11. 3 SEG x 80, 27—30. 4 T. iv
• SEG x 80 — ppoint three of its members to join with Hierocles in sacrificing for Euboea; and so that this can be done as soon as possible hoi oTpartyoi avvtTTipitXoodov tail to apyvpiov is Taira [n^ape^ovrov. 2 SEG x 54, 10—11. 3 SEG x 80, 27—30. 4 T. iv. 118. xi—119. ii. 5 T. v. 19. ii, cf

RO 2003 — 1 unique inscriptions:

• IG II² 207 — two halves of a token, separated by a unique jig- saw cut so that authenticit y is guaranteed when they are successfull y fitted together (Gauthier, 76—85). For anothe r use of such symbola see M&L 46 ~ Fornara 98. n—18 ; also, perhaps, IG ii2 207. bed. 6 (on which se e M. J. Osb

R&L 1997 — 1 unique inscriptions:

• Tod 167 — n is that the original motion was in the spirit of the probouleumabut had been rewritten (as in JG 112 360. i-ii, discussed on p. 25), so that 'in accordance with the council' was technically but understandably misapplied. '' JG n' 212=Tod 167, discussed in Boule, 73-4: again it

F.EPI_ARCHONTOS — ἐπὶ Χ ἄρχοντος (eponymous archon dating)#

Slot: prescript_archon.

Rhodes 1985 — 14 unique inscriptions:

• IG I² 3 — the decree of the laie sixth century for Salamis, seems now to have borne no date (M&L 14: the 1938 fragment has made an archon-year in 1. 12 unlikely), and the decrees of the Hecatompedon Inscription are dated to the archon-year 485/4 {IG i2 3, 16, 4, 26); but the series of decr
• IG II² 109 — e bouleutic to the archontic year see Additional Note A, pp. 224- 5.) The secretary is named in two headings shortly after the reorganization: IG ii2 119 (360/59), Tod 157 (356/5). « Tod 134, contr. 131, 135. 136. » IG ii2 109, 110, 111 = Tod-, 143, 142. 10 IG ii2 223 C with 224,
• IG II² 119 — official records, whoever was responsible for publication). 7 (On the assimilation of the bouleutic to the archontic year see Additional Note A, pp. 224- 5.) The secretary is named in two headings shortly after the reorganization: IG ii2 119 (360/59), Tod 157 (356/5). « Tod 134,
• IG II² 140 — , 2. H. B. Mattingly by redating decrees would eliminate all archon-dates before 421/0 [JHS lxxxi 1961, 128 with n. 36, Hist, xii 1963, 272 n. 73, Hist, xiv 1965, 274-5 with n. 10].) The month and day are first found shortly before 350 {IG ii2 140 [353/2], 223 B, 6 [343/2], etc.)
• IG II² 235 — motion as a first rider; M&L, p. 141, regard Anticles’ as an independent decree moved at the same assembly as Diognetus’. In IG ii2 448. i a rider is introduced with the unparalleled raSe IIav<f>i\ov Ei)<f>[i]Aijtou. 1 Including IG ii2 235 (340/39), with a new enactment-formula (
• IG I² 363 — nly boule (first secretary)—IG i2 354-62, cf. SEG x 257-63. Propylaea: first year by epistatae (secretary), archon, and boule (first secre¬ tary) ; next three years by apxrf (ordinal number, secretary) and boule (first secretary)—IG i2 363 ; 364-6. It is normally accepted that th
• IG II² 373 — dependent decree moved at the same assembly as Diognetus’. In IG ii2 448. i a rider is introduced with the unparalleled raSe IIav<f>i\ov Ei)<f>[i]Aijtou. 1 Including IG ii2 235 (340/39), with a new enactment-formula («r[8]), and IG ii2 373 (322/1), where the rider has a complete
• IG II² 1578 — ating to the property of the Hermocopids has dates in both calendars (SEG xiii 21); a document of the 340s, again giving sales of confiscated property, uses the archontic calendar to date the relevant court orders (Hesp. v 10; cf. again IG ii2 1578, 1-2). In Tod 200 (325/4) we fi
• SEG xiii 21 — 7/6, confiscated property is sold on a date specified in the archontic calendar (1-39), and mines are hired out in certain prytanies (40sqq.). The tenth of the stelae relating to the property of the Hermocopids has dates in both calendars (SEG xiii 21); a document of the 340s, ag
• SEG xii 100 — oule (cf. Ch. Ill, pp. 96-8, 124), but their function of selling confiscated property brought them into contact with the courts, and in view of the archons’ presi¬ dency we might expect the courts to work on the archontic calendar. Thus in SEG xii 100, a document of 307/6, confis
• Tod 92 — unar, archontic year of c. 354 or c. 384 days (for the boule’s serving an archontic year in the fourth century cf. schol. D. XXI. Mid. 114, in BCH i 1877, 16 = K. Latte and H. Erbse, Lexica Graeca Minora, 146). Meritt first used M&L 84 and Tod 92 to date the change between 410/09
• Tod 134 — for publication). 7 (On the assimilation of the bouleutic to the archontic year see Additional Note A, pp. 224- 5.) The secretary is named in two headings shortly after the reorganization: IG ii2 119 (360/59), Tod 157 (356/5). « Tod 134, contr. 131, 135. 136. » IG ii2 109, 110, 1
• Tod 157 — whoever was responsible for publication). 7 (On the assimilation of the bouleutic to the archontic year see Additional Note A, pp. 224- 5.) The secretary is named in two headings shortly after the reorganization: IG ii2 119 (360/59), Tod 157 (356/5). « Tod 134, contr. 131, 135. 1
• Tod 200 — ty of the Hermocopids has dates in both calendars (SEG xiii 21); a document of the 340s, again giving sales of confiscated property, uses the archontic calendar to date the relevant court orders (Hesp. v 10; cf. again IG ii2 1578, 1-2). In Tod 200 (325/4) we find the archontic ca

F.EPESTATEI — ὁ δεῖνα ἐπεστάτει (pre-403 chair formula, epistates)#

Slot: prescript_chair.

Henry 1977 — 18 unique inscriptions:

• IG II² 18 — il124 406/5 epistates with demotic (6 3Eiva. i:1mnche:) i2125 405/4 archon in prescript (t1d -rou 3e:ivoc; &pxov-roc;) ii218 (Tod 108) 394/3 prytanising tribe with ordinal ibidem 394/3 secretary with patronymic and demotic in prescript-old style ii 216 (Tod 103) 394/3 secretary w
• IG I² 125 — iva. ~pxe:) i 2 u5 (ML 86) 409/8 archon with demotic in superscript (6 3e:iva. demotic ~pxe:v) il124 406/5 epistates with demotic (6 3Eiva. i:1mnche:) i2125 405/4 archon in prescript (t1d -rou 3e:ivoc; &pxov-roc;) ii218 (Tod 108) 394/3 prytanising tribe with ordinal ibidem 394/3
• IG II² 349 — e expense of the Kitians themselves; 56 In the decree proper no provision is made for publishing the document. 57 ii 2 330 I, 335/4, makes provision for their publication. 44 THE YEARS 349 TO 321 ii2349 (Tod 193), 331/0, honouring Rheboulas the Odrysian, may also have been set up
• ML 86 — and demotic in superscript i 282 421/0 archon in superscript (i:1d -rou 3Eivoc; &pxov-roc;) i 284 (Sokolowski [1969J 13) 421/0 archon in superscript (6 3e:iva. ~pxe:) i 2 u5 (ML 86) 409/8 archon with demotic in superscript (6 3e:iva. demotic ~pxe:v) il124 406/5 epistates with dem
• ML 90 — ' in which Antidotos can be none other than the archon of this year. Among many other examples of this type cf. i 294 (Sokolowski [1969] 14), on the sanctuary of Kodros, Neleus and Basile, 418/17, almost totally preserved; and i 2 n8 (ML 90), a proxeny decree for Oiniades of Pala
• ML 91 — nd i 2 n8 (ML 90), a proxeny decree for Oiniades of Palaiskiathos, 408/7. 26 There are, however, at least three examples in this period of the archon appearing in the list immediately before the epistates. This is first found in i 2105 (ML 91), an honorary decree for Archelaos of
• ML 92 — instance as early as 417 /16" (Meritt). 20 In her text of S. x 105. She allows the epistates to stand at the beginning of v. 4, makes Euphemos the archon, and keeps the proposer to vv. 4-5. 21 Art. cit., p. 344 note 8. 12 See also ML 92 : " ... both secretary and epistates were g
• ML 94 — of BM p. 126. I2 TO THE BEGINNING OF THE FOURTH CENTURY with a demotic, so too does the epistates for the first time. 40 This latter feature is well paralleled by another document of approx- imately the same date, ii 2 r (ML 94), honours for the Samians, dated to the archonship o
• Tod 101 — is preserved. 69 Note that the epistates precedes the secretary: Archikleides must be the epistates, since we know from ii 1 224 that Kleostratos was the secretary of this year. For other examples see p. 42 note 53. •° Cf. ii 1 14 (Tod 101), alliance with Boiotia, 395/4; ii 1 16
• Tod 103 — edes the secretary: Archikleides must be the epistates, since we know from ii 1 224 that Kleostratos was the secretary of this year. For other examples see p. 42 note 53. •° Cf. ii 1 14 (Tod 101), alliance with Boiotia, 395/4; ii 1 16 (Tod 103), alliance with Eretria, 394/3. THE
• Tod 108 — il124 406/5 epistates with demotic (6 3Eiva. i:1mnche:) i2125 405/4 archon in prescript (t1d -rou 3e:ivoc; &pxov-roc;) ii218 (Tod 108) 394/3 prytanising tribe with ordinal ibidem 394/3 secretary with patronymic and demotic in prescript-old style ii 216 (Tod 103) 394/3 secretary w
• Tod 123 — ch of the tribes not in prytany; one of this board was the epistates for the day. Thus from this time on the epistates named in the prescripts of decrees represents a deme that does not belong to the tribe in prytany. (So, e.g., in ii 943 (Tod 123), 378/7, Xocp'tvo; 'A6µov[e:u; i
• Tod 126 — no surely attested example at any period of name-patronymic-demotic ema-rix-re:L [pace W. K. Pritchett, CSCA v 1972, 164-9, who attempts to restore EM 13230 in this way.]) 47 ii 2 18 (Tod rn8), 394/3; ii 1 77 II, ante 378/7; ii 1 96 (Tod 126), 375/4. 48 E.g. ii 2 136, 354/3; ii 2
• Tod 134 — adering', Mededelingen der Konink- lijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen, afd. Letterkunde, nieuwe reeks, dee! 28, no. 8, 1965, 433-441. Cf. also de Laix, op. cit., 75-6.) 33 Omitted in only one document of this period, ii 2 104 (Tod 134), 368/7, where there seems no room
• Tod 154 — pture which is evident above the introductory 6e[ol]. 53 Even so, the way in which the prytany ordinal and the day of the prytany have been combined is unparalleled. And there seems to be no mention of epistates or orator. 54 (3) ii 2125 (Tod 154), Athens and Eretria, 357 /6: the
• Tod 168 — 1t-.pe:uc; e:!7te:v · Opening with the new style e1tl. 0e:oippcx.a-.ou &px_ov-roc;, it then con- tinues with the enactment formula and Ke:xpo1tl.c; e1tpu-.cx.ve:ue:v, suggesting that the text will now proceed as, e.g., in ii 2227 and 213 (Tod 168). Instead, however, we come next
• Tod 193 — e of the Kitians themselves; 56 In the decree proper no provision is made for publishing the document. 57 ii 2 330 I, 335/4, makes provision for their publication. 44 THE YEARS 349 TO 321 ii2349 (Tod 193), 331/0, honouring Rheboulas the Odrysian, may also have been set up by the
• Tod 199 — the Odrysian, may also have been set up by the honorand himself. 68 (2) Omission of the epistates: The chairman does not appear in ii 2215, 346/5, but why this should be so is not clear. (3) Omission of orator: ii 2356 (c. Add. p. 660) (Tod 199), 327/6, appears to be lacking the

Rhodes 1985 — 6 unique inscriptions:

• IG II² 109 — inal number within the year (first found in heading, Tod 108 [394/3]; in prescript, Tod 126 [375/4]), and from the 360s a count of days within the prytany allowed greater precision (first found in prescript, Tod 136 [368/7]; in heading, IG ii2 109 [363/2]; in financial documents,
• IG II² 145 — nian Quota-Lists.’ JHS lxxxii 1962, 25-55. Levi, D. ‘II Pritaneo e la Tholos di Atene.’ ASAA vi-vii 1923-4, 1-25. Lewis, D. M. ‘Notes on Attic Inscriptions, vi. The Epistates of the Proedroi.’ BSA xlix 1954, 3I_4- -‘Notes . . ., ix. IG ii2 145.’ BSA xlix 1954, 36-7. -‘Notes . . .
• IG II² 502 — Eust. Od. xvii. 455, Harp., Suid. tmordn-qs, L.S. 244. 31, 290. 8, cf. A. I. Tim. 104, II. F.L. 84. The number of tribes determined the number of proedri, so that in the twelve-tribe periods, for example, there were eleven proedri (e.g. IG ii2 502, 5 sqq.). The ban on repeated se
• IG II² 1492 — nd smaller fragments to make a single document of 349/8 (date, p. 125): on this occasion a more extensive igeraopos was held, ordered again by the boule (pp. 101-2), and supervised over several days by the prytanes (pp. 106—11). 2 IG ii2 1492, 103—18. 3 Ibid. 118—24. 4 Ibid. 124—
• SEG xii 87 — ingle epistates with whom 1 It is scarcely more likely that the poletae should have performed these duties: cf. Ch. Ill, pp. 96-8 (on the poletae in general), 124. 2 (For vofiodeoLa and vopot cf. Ch. II, pp. 49-52, and Table H.) Cf. SEG xii 87 and (re¬ stored) IG ii2 333; also th
• Tod 136 — only named but was given its ordinal number within the year (first found in heading, Tod 108 [394/3]; in prescript, Tod 126 [375/4]), and from the 360s a count of days within the prytany allowed greater precision (first found in prescript, Tod 136 [368/7]; in heading, IG ii2 109

R&L 1997 — 2 unique inscriptions:

• Tod 158 — milarly it was resented in the subsidiary states by an the king who made treaties, in the fifth epistates and cheiristai.1 However, the century (JG i3 89) and in the fourth reality may well have been less system- (e.g. Tod 158, JG n 2 236 = Tod 177), atic than that reconstruction
• Tod 177 — d in the subsidiary states by an the king who made treaties, in the fifth epistates and cheiristai.1 However, the century (JG i3 89) and in the fourth reality may well have been less system- (e.g. Tod 158, JG n 2 236 = Tod 177), atic than that reconstruction of it. and in the hel

F.PROEDROI_SYMPROEDROI — … καὶ συμπρόεδροι (presidency + fellow-proedroi)#

Slot: prescript_chair.

Henry 1977 — 5 unique inscriptions:

• Tod 124 — e in its new position (that is to say usually immediately before the name of the orator). 34 ii 2109, 363/2, is set out in very much the same way: ve;oov.) The formula -rwv 1tpot8poov e1te:ljl-ficpt~ev 6 8Ei:vix first appears in ii 244 (Tod 124), 378/7 (cf. ii 2 103 (Tod 133), 36
• Tod 133 — to say usually immediately before the name of the orator). 34 ii 2109, 363/2, is set out in very much the same way: ve;oov.) The formula -rwv 1tpot8poov e1te:ljl-ficpt~ev 6 8Ei:vix first appears in ii 244 (Tod 124), 378/7 (cf. ii 2 103 (Tod 133), 369/8): but the older formulation
• Tod 147 — ond half of the fourth century. 31 n-rcipTl)t could appear in place of 3e:uTe:poct. For other examples of the day of the prytany cf. ii 2109, 363/2; S. xvii 19, between 362 and 355 (an unusual prescript to be discussed below); ii 2 u6 (Tod 147), 361/0; ii 2 123 (Tod 156), 357/6;
• Tod 156 — ury. 31 n-rcipTl)t could appear in place of 3e:uTe:poct. For other examples of the day of the prytany cf. ii 2109, 363/2; S. xvii 19, between 362 and 355 (an unusual prescript to be discussed below); ii 2 u6 (Tod 147), 361/0; ii 2 123 (Tod 156), 357/6; ii 1 127 (Tod 157), 356/5;
• Tod 157 — appear in place of 3e:uTe:poct. For other examples of the day of the prytany cf. ii 2109, 363/2; S. xvii 19, between 362 and 355 (an unusual prescript to be discussed below); ii 2 u6 (Tod 147), 361/0; ii 2 123 (Tod 156), 357/6; ii 1 127 (Tod 157), 356/5; ii 2 130, 355/4; ii 2205,

Rhodes 1985 — 1 unique inscriptions:

• IG II² 145 — nian Quota-Lists.’ JHS lxxxii 1962, 25-55. Levi, D. ‘II Pritaneo e la Tholos di Atene.’ ASAA vi-vii 1923-4, 1-25. Lewis, D. M. ‘Notes on Attic Inscriptions, vi. The Epistates of the Proedroi.’ BSA xlix 1954, 3I_4- -‘Notes . . ., ix. IG ii2 145.’ BSA xlix 1954, 36-7. -‘Notes . . .

RO 2003 — 1 unique inscriptions:

• Tod 12 — ~6 Osborne : end of 35 and beginning of 36 unrestored earlier edd. This is the earliest Athenian decree in our collection which contains the new formula identifying th e chairma n a s on e o f the proedroi (th e earliest survivin g i s Tod 12 4 ~ Harding 38): for the surviva l o

F.EPI_PRYTANEIAS — ἐπὶ τῆς Y -ίδος N-της πρυτανείας (prytany ordinal + tribe)#

Slot: prescript_prytany.

Henry 1977 — 26 unique inscriptions:

• IG II² 18 — il124 406/5 epistates with demotic (6 3Eiva. i:1mnche:) i2125 405/4 archon in prescript (t1d -rou 3e:ivoc; &pxov-roc;) ii218 (Tod 108) 394/3 prytanising tribe with ordinal ibidem 394/3 secretary with patronymic and demotic in prescript-old style ii 216 (Tod 103) 394/3 secretary w
• IG I² 125 — iva. ~pxe:) i 2 u5 (ML 86) 409/8 archon with demotic in superscript (6 3e:iva. demotic ~pxe:v) il124 406/5 epistates with demotic (6 3Eiva. i:1mnche:) i2125 405/4 archon in prescript (t1d -rou 3e:ivoc; &pxov-roc;) ii218 (Tod 108) 394/3 prytanising tribe with ordinal ibidem 394/3
• IG II² 330 — .. 1.9 . . . • • . . . . ] 50 eoo~e:v njL ~OUA~L XIXL "t"WL o[~µ<.uL' 'l1t1tozcxp'rjc; .... ! .... 'AA<.u1t] e:x~6e:v d1te:v · This proves to be the normal position for the item, immediately after the day of the prytany. Cf. also ii2330 I, 335/4. The first occurrence of EXXA'r)O'
• IG II² 659 — s by showing that the script and non-stoichedon arrangement of the text differ from the work of masons employed on public documents of this period and that the stele is smaller than any known public inscription in honour of prytaneis. (2) ii2659 (Sokolowski [1969] 39), 283/2: 55
• IG II² 890 — 3/2, in both of which the minute-heading appears after the prytanising tribe, but simply because the secretary item has been omitted. n Definitely plural-ii 2929, c. in. s. ii; S. xxv II2, 196/5; ii2n34 v. 65, n7/16; definitely singular-ii2890 (Ag.xv 174), 188/7. 78 But many text
• IG II² 949 — xcv 1964, pp. z4z-3; cf. 'Apx. 'E<p. 1968, p. 100. THE SECOND CENTURY 85 this equation and argues that the date ex-re:L e1tl ~exix should in fact have been omitted in ii2949, just as it was in ii2950. He thus assumes a conflation arising from the prytany date in ii 2949 rather th
• IG II² 950 — 'Apx. 'E<p. 1968, p. 100. THE SECOND CENTURY 85 this equation and argues that the date ex-re:L e1tl ~exix should in fact have been omitted in ii2949, just as it was in ii2950. He thus assumes a conflation arising from the prytany date in ii 2949 rather than a haplography in ii 29
• ML 44 — ore the demotic has already been commented on above. 42 Meiggs and Lewis, 43 however, argue for an upper stone carrying "a relief and the name of the prytany and the secretary" in order to explain the disputed fragmentary opening of i 224 (ML 44), on the priestess and temple of N
• ML 61 — pt' see below pp. 28-29. 17 Like ii 8 107 a superscript in appearance but a prescript in form and function. 18 To be discussed below, p. 30. 19 The ordinal does appear much earlier in the case of financial documents e.g. i 1 295 (ML 61), 433/2, vv. 10-11: [bd Tic; A!cxv]T(8oc; 7t
• Tod 103 — 3e:ivoc; &pxov-roc;) ii218 (Tod 108) 394/3 prytanising tribe with ordinal ibidem 394/3 secretary with patronymic and demotic in prescript-old style ii 216 (Tod 103) 394/3 secretary with patronymic and demotic in prescript-new style ii 2 18 (Tod 108) 394/3 -riuv 1tpoe3pwv E'lt"E:4
• Tod 108 — xc; 7tp6nc; 7tpu I [Tcxve:u6ae:c;; cf. vv. 21-2. THE FIRST HALF OF THE FOURTH CENTURY 25 to appear with the prytanising tribe in the prescripts of decrees. The first example occurs in ii 2 r8 (Tod 108), apparently an enactment of the boule alone, 20 in honour of Dionysios of Syra
• Tod 123 — ch of the tribes not in prytany; one of this board was the epistates for the day. Thus from this time on the epistates named in the prescripts of decrees represents a deme that does not belong to the tribe in prytany. (So, e.g., in ii 943 (Tod 123), 378/7, Xocp'tvo; 'A6µov[e:u; i
• Tod 124 — (Tod 103) 394/3 secretary with patronymic and demotic in prescript-new style ii 2 18 (Tod 108) 394/3 -riuv 1tpoe3pwv E'lt"E:4Jl)<pL~e:v 6 3e:iva. + demotic ii 244 (Tod 124) 378/7 number of day of prytany ii 2105 + 523 (Tod 136) 368/7 orator with patronymic and demotic jj2136 354/
• Tod 126 — chon therefore appears, old style, in a prescript disguised as a superscript. 16 b) New style: e:1tl -rou 8e:'i:vo~ &pxov-ro~ in the first position in a prescript is found in ii 218 (Tod 108), 394/3; 17 ii 234 (Tod n8), 384/3; ii 296 (Tod 126), 375/4; ii 299, 375/4; ii 2103 (Tod
• Tod 133 — rescript disguised as a superscript. 16 b) New style: e:1tl -rou 8e:'i:vo~ &pxov-ro~ in the first position in a prescript is found in ii 218 (Tod 108), 394/3; 17 ii 234 (Tod n8), 384/3; ii 296 (Tod 126), 375/4; ii 299, 375/4; ii 2103 (Tod 133), 369/8; ii 2104 (Tod 134), 368/7; an
• Tod 134 — perscript. 16 b) New style: e:1tl -rou 8e:'i:vo~ &pxov-ro~ in the first position in a prescript is found in ii 218 (Tod 108), 394/3; 17 ii 234 (Tod n8), 384/3; ii 296 (Tod 126), 375/4; ii 299, 375/4; ii 2103 (Tod 133), 369/8; ii 2104 (Tod 134), 368/7; and, in the curious 'hybrid'
• Tod 136 — cript-new style ii 2 18 (Tod 108) 394/3 -riuv 1tpoe3pwv E'lt"E:4Jl)<pL~e:v 6 3e:iva. + demotic ii 244 (Tod 124) 378/7 number of day of prytany ii 2105 + 523 (Tod 136) 368/7 orator with patronymic and demotic jj2136 354/3 number of day of month ii 2229 (c. Add. p. 659) 341/0 type
• Tod 146 — ppearance of the ordinal and the new style formulation- which increases steadily, especially from the early 360s on- 23 run pari passu. Before leaving the prytany item one unusual formulation warrants individual consideration: ii 2 rr4 (Tod 146), 362 /r: 20 But see Rhodes, op. ci
• Tod 147 — ond half of the fourth century. 31 n-rcipTl)t could appear in place of 3e:uTe:poct. For other examples of the day of the prytany cf. ii 2109, 363/2; S. xvii 19, between 362 and 355 (an unusual prescript to be discussed below); ii 2 u6 (Tod 147), 361/0; ii 2 123 (Tod 156), 357/6;
• Tod 154 — pture which is evident above the introductory 6e[ol]. 53 Even so, the way in which the prytany ordinal and the day of the prytany have been combined is unparalleled. And there seems to be no mention of epistates or orator. 54 (3) ii 2125 (Tod 154), Athens and Eretria, 357 /6: the
• Tod 156 — 3e:x.oc e:µe:poct foe:Ae:Au I[6u'toct foocv; vv. 21-3: l:1tl -re;] Atocv·d3o; 1tpu-rocvdoc; I [1tp6n; 1tpu-rocve:u6cre:]; -ret n).e:uT[ocloct e:µe:] I[poct Te:; 1tpuTocvdoc;. 3 ° For the abbreviation of the demotic cf. e.g., ii 2 123 {Tod 156), 357 /6 v. 6. The phenomenon is by n
• Tod 157 — appear in place of 3e:uTe:poct. For other examples of the day of the prytany cf. ii 2109, 363/2; S. xvii 19, between 362 and 355 (an unusual prescript to be discussed below); ii 2 u6 (Tod 147), 361/0; ii 2 123 (Tod 156), 357/6; ii 1 127 (Tod 157), 356/5; ii 2 130, 355/4; ii 2205,
• Tod 159 — m) the secretary celebrated the event in his own way by prominently displaying his name 10 in an unusual formulation. But by the ninth prytany of the same year he had reverted to the style which gave the archon pride of place (see ii 2128 (Tod 159); and cf. ii 2129). 11 7 ii 8 26
• Tod 181 — y or lack of need may explain the omission of the lunar day. Hekatombaion 11 = Prytany I 11 = 11th day of the year. 27 E.g. ii 2 242 (TAY p. 77), 337/6; S. xxi 272 (TAY p. So), 335/4; ii 2336a (TAYp. 82), 334/3 etc. 28 ii 2 240 (Tod 181) and ii 2 241, same day 337/6; ii 8 243, al
• Tod 189 — nd ii 2 241, same day 337/6; ii 8 243, also 337/6 (which suggests that the secretary of this year was not particularly impressed with the new idea, although he had himself tried it out in the sixth prytany, ii 8 239 (TAY p. 76)); ii 2337 (Tod 189), 333/2. 28 ii 2 335 (S. xxi 274)
• Tod 198 — date the secretary. The solution employed seems manifestly the neatest in the circum- stances: immediately after the word 1tpu-rocve:(occ; in the prytany day item. The remainder of the prescript follows without problem. (5) ii 2351 + 624 (Tod 198). 330/29: 68 [EM~µ Jou IlAIX't'IX

Rhodes 1985 — 39 unique inscriptions:

• IG I² 3 — the decree of the laie sixth century for Salamis, seems now to have borne no date (M&L 14: the 1938 fragment has made an archon-year in 1. 12 unlikely), and the decrees of the Hecatompedon Inscription are dated to the archon-year 485/4 {IG i2 3, 16, 4, 26); but the series of decr
• IG I² 42 — r as we know the term Kvpia was always restricted to one meeting in each prytany. I do not think HMA 69, 8-10, need imply that there was more than one Kvpia eWA^crta, or even more than one regular ecclesia, per prytany in the 430s; and IG i2 42 {SEGx 37), 22, is of no help in thi
• IG II² 47 — F.L. 18-19. 3 A. II. F.L. 16-17. 6 e.g. Athenian ambassadors, IG ii2 40, 207; generals, IG ii2 108, Tod 143, IG ii2 187, 408, 414, (cf. Hesp. ix 1940, 340-1), IGii2 735; religious functionaries, IG ii2 47, 330, 365, 403, 410, 661, 689, 775, 780, 783, 807, 839, 976, SEG xviii 22,
• IG II² 70 — ; other officials, on their religious and other duties, IG ii2 491, 665, 668, 781, 929, 941, 949, 1011, 1039, 1042, 1043, SEG xiv 64, 65, prytany decrees passim (on religious reports cf. Ch. HI, P- 132); IStwTcu, Tod 108 (probably), IG ii2 70, 243, 276 (probably a metic), 502 (a
• IG I² 94 — 7. 4 SEG xix 133, 1-2 (cf. Hesp. v 9, 4-5, with commentary suggesting that the ratification might be made by any one of the archons, with his avpfiovXoi or napeSpoi). 5 A.P. 47. iv. Presumably the poletae also were involved, as in IG i2 94, 11-13. 6 IG i2 94, most recently studie
• IG I² 95 — es before the boule as well as the ecclesia, and I suspect that the dvayajyrj may have resulted in a formal elaayyeXla.3 Finally, more unusual irregularities in the running of the state might be referred to the boule by the ecclesia. IG i2 95 has been tentatively restored by Mr.
• IG II² 109 — inal number within the year (first found in heading, Tod 108 [394/3]; in prescript, Tod 126 [375/4]), and from the 360s a count of days within the prytany allowed greater precision (first found in prescript, Tod 136 [368/7]; in heading, IG ii2 109 [363/2]; in financial documents,
• IG II² 140 — , 2. H. B. Mattingly by redating decrees would eliminate all archon-dates before 421/0 [JHS lxxxi 1961, 128 with n. 36, Hist, xii 1963, 272 n. 73, Hist, xiv 1965, 274-5 with n. 10].) The month and day are first found shortly before 350 {IG ii2 140 [353/2], 223 B, 6 [343/2], etc.)
• IG II² 223 — g their prytany they lived and ate with the state secretaries in the doAos or cr/ad?, a circular building adjacent to the bouleuterium on the west side of the Agora.5 1 The index in IG ii2 IV. i, p. 51. i, s.vv. evOvvas Sovvai, lists IG ii2 223 A, 13; B, 13; C, 13 (343/2); 330, 4
• IG II² 334 — until 368/7 there is evidence for a secretary who served for one prytany only, and seems to have been appointed in such a way that all tribes were represented in the 1 SEG xxi 38, 7-8. 2 IG ii2 47, 35 sqq. 3 IG ii2 334, 10-16. 4 IG ii2 847, 25-6. The inclusion of this in a decree
• IG II² 365 — such slight pretexts before the Hellenistic period.) 7 IG ii2 410. 8 IG ii2 783 (a decree of the boule). « IG ii2 661. 10 SEG xix 124. 11 IG ii2 403. 22 IG ii2 365. 12 IG ii2 780. »♦ IG ii2 668, 781, 929. 15 IG ii2 1011, 1039, 1042, 1043. 16 IG ii2 949. 17 Prytany ‘first’ decrees
• IG II² 403 — d was not published, on such slight pretexts before the Hellenistic period.) 7 IG ii2 410. 8 IG ii2 783 (a decree of the boule). « IG ii2 661. 10 SEG xix 124. 11 IG ii2 403. 22 IG ii2 365. 12 IG ii2 780. »♦ IG ii2 668, 781, 929. 15 IG ii2 1011, 1039, 1042, 1043. 16 IG ii2 949. 17
• IG II² 491 — 2 187, 408, 414, (cf. Hesp. ix 1940, 340-1), IGii2 735; religious functionaries, IG ii2 47, 330, 365, 403, 410, 661, 689, 775, 780, 783, 807, 839, 976, SEG xviii 22, 26, xix 124; other officials, on their religious and other duties, IG ii2 491, 665, 668, 781, 929, 941, 949, 1011,
• IG II² 661 — s were not awarded, or at any rate their award was not published, on such slight pretexts before the Hellenistic period.) 7 IG ii2 410. 8 IG ii2 783 (a decree of the boule). « IG ii2 661. 10 SEG xix 124. 11 IG ii2 403. 22 IG ii2 365. 12 IG ii2 780. »♦ IG ii2 668, 781, 929. 15 IG
• IG II² 668 — riod.) 7 IG ii2 410. 8 IG ii2 783 (a decree of the boule). « IG ii2 661. 10 SEG xix 124. 11 IG ii2 403. 22 IG ii2 365. 12 IG ii2 780. »♦ IG ii2 668, 781, 929. 15 IG ii2 1011, 1039, 1042, 1043. 16 IG ii2 949. 17 Prytany ‘first’ decrees, passim. 18 Cf. S. Dow, Hesp. Supp. i 1937, 8
• IG II² 672 — , pp. 40-8, no. 92, 33-5 (328/7). There is a fifth-century example in IG i2 46, 19, but here it appears that officials concerned with the foundation of a colony were not to sail there until they had passed their euthynae in Athens. 2 IG ii2 672, 35 (280/79); 780, 20 (252/1). Hell
• IG II² 780 — fore the Hellenistic period.) 7 IG ii2 410. 8 IG ii2 783 (a decree of the boule). « IG ii2 661. 10 SEG xix 124. 11 IG ii2 403. 22 IG ii2 365. 12 IG ii2 780. »♦ IG ii2 668, 781, 929. 15 IG ii2 1011, 1039, 1042, 1043. 16 IG ii2 949. 17 Prytany ‘first’ decrees, passim. 18 Cf. S. Dow
• IG II² 790 — S in one copy but [erS] in a second; and it seems to have been a matter of legislative etiquette, very rarely broken, that decrees in honour of a prytany were not recommended to the ecclesia by the boule,2 so that the use of er/S/crS in IG ii2 790 is probably due to a simple erro
• IG II² 806 — ifth-century evidence we possess now seems compatible wijh the practice of separate sortitions (cf. B. D. Meritt, AJP lxix 1948, 69-70). ■U.The latest inscriptions I know which seem to betray ignorance of the next tribe in prytany are IG ii2 806, 1-3 (largely restored) (c. 230) a
• IG II² 847 — vidence for a secretary who served for one prytany only, and seems to have been appointed in such a way that all tribes were represented in the 1 SEG xxi 38, 7-8. 2 IG ii2 47, 35 sqq. 3 IG ii2 334, 10-16. 4 IG ii2 847, 25-6. The inclusion of this in a decree of the demos reflects
• IG II² 949 — 8 IG ii2 783 (a decree of the boule). « IG ii2 661. 10 SEG xix 124. 11 IG ii2 403. 22 IG ii2 365. 12 IG ii2 780. »♦ IG ii2 668, 781, 929. 15 IG ii2 1011, 1039, 1042, 1043. 16 IG ii2 949. 17 Prytany ‘first’ decrees, passim. 18 Cf. S. Dow, Hesp. Supp. i 1937, 8—11. Artemis appears
• IG II² 1011 — 7 IG ii2 410. 8 IG ii2 783 (a decree of the boule). « IG ii2 661. 10 SEG xix 124. 11 IG ii2 403. 22 IG ii2 365. 12 IG ii2 780. »♦ IG ii2 668, 781, 929. 15 IG ii2 1011, 1039, 1042, 1043. 16 IG ii2 949. 17 Prytany ‘first’ decrees, passim. 18 Cf. S. Dow, Hesp. Supp. i 1937, 8—11. Ar
• IG II² 1743 — prytanies 01362/1, 361/0, 370/69 and 363/2, but we are not told what occasioned them; the preamble to Hesp. xxxvi 34 (381/0) seems not to have named the awarding body; in DAA 167 (408/7) Raubitschek restores a formula similar to that in IG ii2 1743. 5 In 164/3 the prytanes of Ere
• IG II² 1749 — e named the awarding body; in DAA 167 (408/7) Raubitschek restores a formula similar to that in IG ii2 1743. 5 In 164/3 the prytanes of Erechtheis (SEG xvi 96), Ptolemais (P 80) and Hippothontis (SEG xvi 95) were honoured. 6 e.g. IG ii2 1749, 1750. 7 Prytany ‘first’ decrees (see
• SEG xviii 22 — 6 e.g. Athenian ambassadors, IG ii2 40, 207; generals, IG ii2 108, Tod 143, IG ii2 187, 408, 414, (cf. Hesp. ix 1940, 340-1), IGii2 735; religious functionaries, IG ii2 47, 330, 365, 403, 410, 661, 689, 775, 780, 783, 807, 839, 976, SEG xviii 22, 26, xix 124; other officials, on
• SEG xxi 38 — tov avayvwvai ,7 From just before the middle of the fifth century until 368/7 there is evidence for a secretary who served for one prytany only, and seems to have been appointed in such a way that all tribes were represented in the 1 SEG xxi 38, 7-8. 2 IG ii2 47, 35 sqq. 3 IG ii2
• SEG xiv 64 — ious functionaries, IG ii2 47, 330, 365, 403, 410, 661, 689, 775, 780, 783, 807, 839, 976, SEG xviii 22, 26, xix 124; other officials, on their religious and other duties, IG ii2 491, 665, 668, 781, 929, 941, 949, 1011, 1039, 1042, 1043, SEG xiv 64, 65, prytany decrees passim (on
• SEG x 73 — sound. Cleonymus was the author of a probouleumatic decree for Methone in the first prytany of 426/5 (M&L 65, 32-56, (notice 51 sqq.); dated from M&L 72, 5); in the Cecropid prytany of one year he was the author of M&L 68. i, 68. ii, and SEG x 73 (the last two on the same day). C
• SEG xii 87 — ecclesia. It seems reasonably clear that the assembly’s involvement was limited to deciding (by ip^picr/Mo.) that vopLodema was needed and setting the machinery in motion. 3 For a list of surviving vo/ioi and their formulae see Table H: SEG xii 87 was enacted in the ninth prytany
• SEG xvi 95 — Hesp. xxxvi 34 (381/0) seems not to have named the awarding body; in DAA 167 (408/7) Raubitschek restores a formula similar to that in IG ii2 1743. 5 In 164/3 the prytanes of Erechtheis (SEG xvi 96), Ptolemais (P 80) and Hippothontis (SEG xvi 95) were honoured. 6 e.g. IG ii2 1749
• SEG x 96 — re attended by a Kvpajrris ■napa -npvTavecDv; Meritt (comm, on 12-13) would make a similar restoration in IG ii2 1678, aA 27. 2 M&L 58 A, 7-13. Cf. M&L 87, 37-42, where the prytanes are to supervise the deletion of certain records. 3 SEG x 96. I am not happy about this restoratio
• SEG xvi 96 — re not told what occasioned them; the preamble to Hesp. xxxvi 34 (381/0) seems not to have named the awarding body; in DAA 167 (408/7) Raubitschek restores a formula similar to that in IG ii2 1743. 5 In 164/3 the prytanes of Erechtheis (SEG xvi 96), Ptolemais (P 80) and Hippothon
• SEG xvi 100 — o voted to honour the prytany, in a separate, unpublished decree. Gf. Pritchett’s review of Dow, AJP lx 1939, 260. The only known exceptions to normal practice are P 84. i (155/4), where the prytany is honoured in a decree of the boule; SEG xvi 100 (104/3), where the ‘first’ and
• SEG xix 124 — t any rate their award was not published, on such slight pretexts before the Hellenistic period.) 7 IG ii2 410. 8 IG ii2 783 (a decree of the boule). « IG ii2 661. 10 SEG xix 124. 11 IG ii2 403. 22 IG ii2 365. 12 IG ii2 780. »♦ IG ii2 668, 781, 929. 15 IG ii2 1011, 1039, 1042, 10
• SEG xxi 253 — 8 HMA 41 (after 450), IG i2 311. 9 IG ii2 1672, 279 sqq. 10 Cf. pp. 94-5 and p. 95 nn. 1-2 above. 11 IG ii2 140 Add., cf. SIG* 200, 25-6. 12 Lois Sacrees (Suppl.), 13, cf. SEG xxi 253. 13 IG ii2 1749, 80—4, honouring roily iepoiroiovs tovs to. pvcTijpia Upoiroitjaavras 'EXevaivi.
• Tod 108 — G xviii 22, 26, xix 124; other officials, on their religious and other duties, IG ii2 491, 665, 668, 781, 929, 941, 949, 1011, 1039, 1042, 1043, SEG xiv 64, 65, prytany decrees passim (on religious reports cf. Ch. HI, P- 132); IStwTcu, Tod 108 (probably), IG ii2 70, 243, 276 (pro
• Tod 122 — 665, 668, 781, 929, 941, 949, 1011, 1039, 1042, 1043, SEG xiv 64, 65, prytany decrees passim (on religious reports cf. Ch. HI, P- 132); IStwTcu, Tod 108 (probably), IG ii2 70, 243, 276 (probably a metic), 502 (a Sijpoaios); foreigners, Tod 122, 124, 126, 131, 133, 134, 135, 146,
• Tod 126 — t that the bouleutic date was still felt to be the more important. Early in the fourth century the tribe in prytany was not only named but was given its ordinal number within the year (first found in heading, Tod 108 [394/3]; in prescript, Tod 126 [375/4]), and from the 360s a co
• Tod 136 — ove. 3 Decree quoted [PL] X. Or. 833 e-f. ♦ A.P. 33. i. 5 Athenian Financial Documents, 106-9. 6 We are given the date within the prytany, not otherwise found in dating a decree before 368/7 (Tod 136); and the secretary and emcrraTrjs are from the same tribe, which under the demo

RO 2003 — 4 unique inscriptions:

• Tod 13 — 2105 (cf. 34 , 41) : Athenian Democracy in Transition., 67—70 . IGii2 107 ; SIG 164 ; Tod 131 . Trans. Harding 53. See also T. A. Tonini, Acme xlii 1989, 47—61. §1 3—7 Gf . Tod 13 5 (which states that the prytany of Aiantis was the seventh in the year): that has a different cha
• Tod 131 — Attic-Ionic; 11. i— 6 in larger letters (3—6 stoichedon 26); 7—3 4 non-stoichedon; 3 5 sqq. stoichedon^i. This is the work ofTracy's Gutte r of IGii2105 (cf. 34 , 41) : Athenian Democracy in Transition., 67—70 . IGii2 107 ; SIG 164 ; Tod 131 . Trans. Harding 53. See also T. A.
• Tod 134 — achmas. More importantly, the tribe and number of the prytany, and the name and demotic of the secretary , are wholly restored. This i s the last year in which each secretary is known t o have served for on e prytany only (contrast Tod 134 , 135 ; and se e on 38). Editors have se
• Tod 135 — antus of Sphettus, a politician activ e until the 3405 , and probably with Eubulus creator in the 3505 of the theoric fund (schol. Aesch. m. Ctes. 24 with Rhodes, Comm. Ath. Pol. 514): in the same prytany he proposed honours for a Spartan (Tod 135). Autolycus may be the man wh o

F.EGRAMMATEUEN — ᾗ ὁ δεῖνα ἐγραμμάτευεν (secretary clause)#

Slot: prescript_secretary.

Henry 1977 — 32 unique inscriptions:

• IG II² 18 — il124 406/5 epistates with demotic (6 3Eiva. i:1mnche:) i2125 405/4 archon in prescript (t1d -rou 3e:ivoc; &pxov-roc;) ii218 (Tod 108) 394/3 prytanising tribe with ordinal ibidem 394/3 secretary with patronymic and demotic in prescript-old style ii 216 (Tod 103) 394/3 secretary w
• IG I² 22 — ic with the name of the secretary in i 247 (5. x 136) of 407/6 as the "earliest surely attested use," 22 but doubted the possibility of its appearance in i272 (5. x 88) of c. 423/2. He admits that the latter case is "more persuasive" (than i222) but rejects it in favour of a supp
• IG I² 72 — reason which troubled Meritt and Bradeen and McGregor. Meritt 21 accepted the demotic with the name of the secretary in i 247 (5. x 136) of 407/6 as the "earliest surely attested use," 22 but doubted the possibility of its appearance in i272 (5. x 88) of c. 423/2. He admits that
• IG I² 125 — (= ou) need not trouble us: a mixture of Attic and Ionic orthography is common enough at this date . .-rLµ will presumably be part of the name of the secretary. In two examples we find a superscript with an archon but no secretary: (r) i2125, proxeny decree, 405/4: 39 'AAe;loc½ Y
• IG II² 330 — n full above it is noticeable that the secretary is not included. Similar omission of this official occurs in other texts where again the explanation may be either that the text in question was to be published privately or not at all. E.g. ii2330 II and III, both 336/5, texts in
• IG II² 644 — THE YEARS 321 TO 291 (2) Archon formula: This is slightly adjusted in 296/5 to reflect the political situation. The archon Nikias did not assume office until the tyranny of Lachares was overthrown in the spring of 295: ii2644 (TAY p. 179 1: 4o 'Ent N LXLOU ixpxov-roi:; UO''t'ep[
• IG II² 890 — 3/2, in both of which the minute-heading appears after the prytanising tribe, but simply because the secretary item has been omitted. n Definitely plural-ii 2929, c. in. s. ii; S. xxv II2, 196/5; ii2n34 v. 65, n7/16; definitely singular-ii2890 (Ag.xv 174), 188/7. 78 But many text
• ML 14 — d describe the early steps taken by the Athenians along the road to documentary standardisation and sophistication. Any study of Athenian decrees must take as its starting point the decree relating to Athenian settlers on Salamis, i 21 (ML 14), dated probably in the late sixth ce
• ML 44 — ore the demotic has already been commented on above. 42 Meiggs and Lewis, 43 however, argue for an upper stone carrying "a relief and the name of the prytany and the secretary" in order to explain the disputed fragmentary opening of i 224 (ML 44), on the priestess and temple of N
• ML 65 — ?c. 422; i 2144+155 (D23), proxeny decree, ?416/15; ii 22, proxeny decree, 403/2, in all of which the secretary reappears in the prescript without demotic. The secretary may also be found superscript with patronymic, 30 first in i 257 (ML 65), the Methone decrees, 430-423. This s
• ML 73 — ["E]8oxO'eV 't'EL ~OAEL XOCL 't'OL 8eµoL · 'Avnox[tc; e] stoichedon 35 [1t]pu't'cx.veue, 0e68opoc; eypocµµcx.nue, l:L . . ~ .. 5 . e1teO''t'cx.n' [A Mov e[!]1t[e] ·29 For other examples of this type cf. i 276 (ML 73), Eleusinian First- fruits, ?c. 422; i 2144+155 (D23), proxeny d
• ML 85 — JfJev ~pxev. Both secretary and archon are given demotics, the secretary having the additional distinction of an idiosyncratic word-order: name-verb-demotic. 38 In two instances the secretary has yielded primacy to the archon: 2 i no (ML 85), honours for Phrynichos' assassins, 41
• ML 92 — instance as early as 417 /16" (Meritt). 20 In her text of S. x 105. She allows the epistates to stand at the beginning of v. 4, makes Euphemos the archon, and keeps the proposer to vv. 4-5. 21 Art. cit., p. 344 note 8. 12 See also ML 92 : " ... both secretary and epistates were g
• ML 94 — of BM p. 126. I2 TO THE BEGINNING OF THE FOURTH CENTURY with a demotic, so too does the epistates for the first time. 40 This latter feature is well paralleled by another document of approx- imately the same date, ii 2 r (ML 94), honours for the Samians, dated to the archonship o
• Tod 97 — g some dispute over which archon is involved, we must still assume o 8e°L11cx lp)(E in v. 3. Antigenes seems more likely than Wilhelm's Theopompos (411 /10). 8 TO THE BEGINNING OF THE FOURTH CENTURY ii 2 I vv. 41-2 and 56-7 (Tod 97), 27 403/2; ii 216 (Tod 103), alliance with Eret
• Tod 101 — is preserved. 69 Note that the epistates precedes the secretary: Archikleides must be the epistates, since we know from ii 1 224 that Kleostratos was the secretary of this year. For other examples see p. 42 note 53. •° Cf. ii 1 14 (Tod 101), alliance with Boiotia, 395/4; ii 1 16
• Tod 103 — rchon is involved, we must still assume o 8e°L11cx lp)(E in v. 3. Antigenes seems more likely than Wilhelm's Theopompos (411 /10). 8 TO THE BEGINNING OF THE FOURTH CENTURY ii 2 I vv. 41-2 and 56-7 (Tod 97), 27 403/2; ii 216 (Tod 103), alliance with Eretria, 394/3. One of the comm
• Tod 108 — me secretary: e.g. ii 2134, 135, 136, 137, all from the year 354/3; and ii 2 206, 207, 208, 209, all of 349/8. 41 For v. 1 see S. xix 49. 42 First appearance in old style prescript, ii 2 16(Tod 103), 394/3; in new style, ii 2 18 (Tod 108), 394/3. From the late 360s secretaries no
• Tod 114 — [' Ap ]to--ro-rtAl)i; : . : EurptA~-ro stoichedon [' Ax]ocpveui; eypocµµcx-reue[V] ['E7,]t Nocuo-tvtxo ixpxov-roi;. In the other examples the archon comes first: in old style, o oei:voc ~pxe, in ii 228 (Tod 114), 387 /6; in new style, htt -rou oei:voi; ixpxov-roi;, in ii 232, 385
• Tod 123 — , the secretary seems to redress the balance by re- appearing in a unique postscript, separated by an uninscribed line from the end of the decree: [<l>tM~]evo[i; ~]'1)µ0ttve-ro [0op]txLOi; [eypocµ] µ[(X ]-r[eu ]e. and in ii 243 (Tod 123), the Charter of the Second Athenian Con- f
• Tod 124 — low). 22 THE FIRST HALF OF THE FOURTH CENTURY b) Secretary and archon: This combination appears to occur in only a few instances, in only one of which does the name of the secretary precede that of the archon: ii 244 (Tod 124), 378/7: [' Ap ]to--ro-rtAl)i; : . : EurptA~-ro stoich
• Tod 137 — he superscript; in only 4 of these (the first four) 8 does the archon not make an appearance in the following prescript. In ii 296 the archon appears at the very be- ginning of the prescript ([& ],tt 'ImtoM.µocv['t'o<; &pxov't'o<;), and in Tod 137 as the last item before the orat
• Tod 143 — u Ae:1t-rlvo ~upocxoo-£0. 'Axocµocv-rtc;; e1tpu-r&.ve:ue:, 0ouoocl'T'l)c;; Atoµe:te:uc;; &ypocµµ&.n[ue:]. c) Archon without secretary: There are 6 examples of the arch on occupying first position on the stone. 13 Cf. also ii2no (Tod 143), 363/2, where €7tL XocpLXAe:[oou &pxov-roc
• Tod 147 — the secretary as reflected in superscripts. By the middle of the fourth century neither official commonly appeared superscript: the last example of a secretary in such a position is ii 2 r27 (Tod 157), 356/5;2 the archon appears in ii2n6 (Tod 147), 361/0; ii 2128 (Tod 159) and ii
• Tod 157 — n ii 296 the archon appears at the very be- ginning of the prescript ([& ],tt 'ImtoM.µocv['t'o<; &pxov't'o<;), and in Tod 137 as the last item before the orator (II]oM~lJAOS [~px]e:). In one further instance of much later date, ii 2127 (Tod 157), 356/5, we find the secretary alon
• Tod 159 — m) the secretary celebrated the event in his own way by prominently displaying his name 10 in an unusual formulation. But by the ninth prytany of the same year he had reverted to the style which gave the archon pride of place (see ii 2128 (Tod 159); and cf. ii 2129). 11 7 ii 8 26
• Tod 168 — 1t-.pe:uc; e:!7te:v · Opening with the new style e1tl. 0e:oippcx.a-.ou &px_ov-roc;, it then con- tinues with the enactment formula and Ke:xpo1tl.c; e1tpu-.cx.ve:ue:v, suggesting that the text will now proceed as, e.g., in ii 2227 and 213 (Tod 168). Instead, however, we come next
• Tod 174 — [lj0e:v eyp0tµµ<he:u ]e:v · Since the phenomenon is unparalleled, one must assume that the explanation is a mere slip on the part of the drafter or cutter. 51 (2) Secretary without patronymic: 52 In ii 2228 (Tod 174), 341/0 the secretary appears after the chairman 53 in the follo
• Tod 181 — y or lack of need may explain the omission of the lunar day. Hekatombaion 11 = Prytany I 11 = 11th day of the year. 27 E.g. ii 2 242 (TAY p. 77), 337/6; S. xxi 272 (TAY p. So), 335/4; ii 2336a (TAYp. 82), 334/3 etc. 28 ii 2 240 (Tod 181) and ii 2 241, same day 337/6; ii 8 243, al
• Tod 189 — nd ii 2 241, same day 337/6; ii 8 243, also 337/6 (which suggests that the secretary of this year was not particularly impressed with the new idea, although he had himself tried it out in the sixth prytany, ii 8 239 (TAY p. 76)); ii 2337 (Tod 189), 333/2. 28 ii 2 335 (S. xxi 274)
• Tod 193 — ows its verb-the cutter confusedly thought that he had just inscribed the name of the secretary, and so he continued with eypocµµcx.nue:v. He then 'remedied' the situation by cutting the secretary's name next after the verb. 19 ii 2349 (Tod 193), 331/0, is a further instance of t
• Tod 198 — date the secretary. The solution employed seems manifestly the neatest in the circum- stances: immediately after the word 1tpu-rocve:(occ; in the prytany day item. The remainder of the prescript follows without problem. (5) ii 2351 + 624 (Tod 198). 330/29: 68 [EM~µ Jou IlAIX't'IX

Rhodes 1985 — 37 unique inscriptions:

• IG I² 3 — the decree of the laie sixth century for Salamis, seems now to have borne no date (M&L 14: the 1938 fragment has made an archon-year in 1. 12 unlikely), and the decrees of the Hecatompedon Inscription are dated to the archon-year 485/4 {IG i2 3, 16, 4, 26); but the series of decr
• IG II² 47 — e the middle of the fifth century until 368/7 there is evidence for a secretary who served for one prytany only, and seems to have been appointed in such a way that all tribes were represented in the 1 SEG xxi 38, 7-8. 2 IG ii2 47, 35 sqq. 3 IG ii2 334, 10-16. 4 IG ii2 847, 25-6.
• IG II² 109 — e bouleutic to the archontic year see Additional Note A, pp. 224- 5.) The secretary is named in two headings shortly after the reorganization: IG ii2 119 (360/59), Tod 157 (356/5). « Tod 134, contr. 131, 135. 136. » IG ii2 109, 110, 111 = Tod-, 143, 142. 10 IG ii2 223 C with 224,
• IG II² 119 — official records, whoever was responsible for publication). 7 (On the assimilation of the bouleutic to the archontic year see Additional Note A, pp. 224- 5.) The secretary is named in two headings shortly after the reorganization: IG ii2 119 (360/59), Tod 157 (356/5). « Tod 134,
• IG II² 193 — orrect the secretary will have been very careless in his adding of minute-headings and enactment-formulae—but such carelessness did happen. (My interpretation of this document is very close to that of the Roberts.) 2 Tod 154 (357/6), IG ii2 193 (before 353/2), 360. iii (330/29),
• IG II² 206 — ypa<f>evs7 and the avTiypafievs,8 whose exact duties in connection with the public records are unknown, and there may have been yet others, not 1 The office was one which a man might hold in middle life: Dieuches, secretary in 349/8 (IG ii2 206, 2-3; 208, 3-4; 209, 2-3), was 40 y
• IG II² 222 — oypappartvs and later a member of the boule (Dow, op. cit., 103-4, on P 48). Contrast, however, K. J. Dover in his commentary on T .vii. 10 (regarding ypap¬ paTtvs Tun by pun as the normal fourth-century version of the title). ♦ e.g. IG ii2 222, 27-8. 3 e.g. Tod 147, 42-3; 166, 1
• IG II² 223 — onal Note A, pp. 224- 5.) The secretary is named in two headings shortly after the reorganization: IG ii2 119 (360/59), Tod 157 (356/5). « Tod 134, contr. 131, 135. 136. » IG ii2 109, 110, 111 = Tod-, 143, 142. 10 IG ii2 223 C with 224, 225 (343/2)- 11 IG ii2 1749, 63-5, with 228
• IG II² 334 — until 368/7 there is evidence for a secretary who served for one prytany only, and seems to have been appointed in such a way that all tribes were represented in the 1 SEG xxi 38, 7-8. 2 IG ii2 47, 35 sqq. 3 IG ii2 334, 10-16. 4 IG ii2 847, 25-6. The inclusion of this in a decree
• IG I² 339 — seems not to have been in force in the Periclean period: Satyrus xavveypappareve in ATL, lists 12, 36 and 13, 2 (443/2 and 442/1); and An tides was probably secretary to the epistatae of the Parthenon throughout the period of the work {IG i2 339-53; esp. 349, 1; 351, 55; 352, 1-2
• IG I² 354 — st secretary); remaining five by -epistatae (i.e. dpxr]) (secretary), boule (ordinal number, first secretary), and archon— /Gi2 339-48; 349-53. Chryselephantine Athena : by epistatae (secretary) and commonly boule (first secretary)—IG i2 354-62, cf. SEG x 257-63. Propylaea: first
• IG I² 363 — nly boule (first secretary)—IG i2 354-62, cf. SEG x 257-63. Propylaea: first year by epistatae (secretary), archon, and boule (first secre¬ tary) ; next three years by apxrf (ordinal number, secretary) and boule (first secretary)—IG i2 363 ; 364-6. It is normally accepted that th
• IG II² 847 — vidence for a secretary who served for one prytany only, and seems to have been appointed in such a way that all tribes were represented in the 1 SEG xxi 38, 7-8. 2 IG ii2 47, 35 sqq. 3 IG ii2 334, 10-16. 4 IG ii2 847, 25-6. The inclusion of this in a decree of the demos reflects
• IG I² 879 — s in 405/4: when Theocritus had laid his information 1 D. XIX. F.L. 129; IG ii2 463, 28-9; 583, 5-7. In IG ii2 120, 11-13, Eucles the Sij/xocrtoy was to write down what was found in the Chalcothece. 2 IG i2 879. 3 Hesp. xi 1942, 305-6, re-editing Hesp. iii 54. A. E. Raubitschek a
• IG II² 893 — nd prayer13 at the dictation of the secretary: the curse, we are told,14 and the rest of the prayer, we may assume, were the same for boule and assembly. Liable to the curse were those who took bribes to speak 1 IG ii2 1043, 4-5. 2 IG ii2 893, 5-7, restored by Meritt {AJP lxxviii
• IG II² 967 — iovX-rjs. His duties are uncertain: they may, but need not, have been financial (accord¬ ing to two lexica [L.5. 185. 16, Suid. ypap-p-arevs] which do not name their authority, he had secretarial duties in the boule; in the prescript of IG ii2 967 he is named after the eponymous
• IG II² 1043 — en recited a curse12 and prayer13 at the dictation of the secretary: the curse, we are told,14 and the rest of the prayer, we may assume, were the same for boule and assembly. Liable to the curse were those who took bribes to speak 1 IG ii2 1043, 4-5. 2 IG ii2 893, 5-7, restored
• IG II² 1077 — cords made by the poletae and cancelled after settlement by the apodectae were in the custody of a 8rjp.6ai.os, or public slave, who worked for the boule,7 and we have other references to the 8i]p6aios in charge of records in the 1 IG ii2 1077, 2 with 50 (col. iii) shows that 7re
• IG II² 1631 — rytanes in the Hellenistic period to honour the treasurer of the 1 IG ii2120, 15-17. 2 e.g. the vrroypappaTevs (Ant. VI. Chor. 35) or ypapparevs (A.P. 55. i-ii) of the thesmo- thetae; the ypapparevs of the Eleven (Poll. vin. 102; IG ii2 1631, 377 sqq., 389 sqq.). 3 Lys. XXX. Nic.
• IG II² 1740 — n the Chalcothece. 2 IG i2 879. 3 Hesp. xi 1942, 305-6, re-editing Hesp. iii 54. A. E. Raubitschek ad loc. suggests that he had taken the place of the old antigrapheus, mentioned after the secretary in IG ii2 1740 (early C4); but there is far too little evidence to make this a sa
• IG II² 1744 — iption of the same year), and this form occurs in two other third-century documents, P 13 and 34. (It is not clear which secre¬ tarial office was held by the ypappaTtvs of SEG xxiii 87, 62-4 [first qr. C4] and the ypappaTtvs fiovArjs of IG ii2 1744, 18-21 [before 350].) Some scho
• IG II² 1775 — 077, 2 with 50 (col. iii) shows that 7repl to fOjpa was a title of the eponymous secretary. 2 e.g. Hesp. xvi 87 B (a.d. 177/8 or 188/9),IG ii2 1796 (c. 180), 1808 (end C2). See Geagan, Hesp. Supp. xii 1967, 101, who notices especially IG ii2 1775 (168/9): the heading names o ypap
• IG II² 1796 — e boule,7 and we have other references to the 8i]p6aios in charge of records in the 1 IG ii2 1077, 2 with 50 (col. iii) shows that 7repl to fOjpa was a title of the eponymous secretary. 2 e.g. Hesp. xvi 87 B (a.d. 177/8 or 188/9),IG ii2 1796 (c. 180), 1808 (end C2). See Geagan, H
• IG II² 2409 — with the public records are unknown, and there may have been yet others, not 1 The office was one which a man might hold in middle life: Dieuches, secretary in 349/8 (IG ii2 206, 2-3; 208, 3-4; 209, 2-3), was 40 years old at the time (IG ii2 2409, 50, with D. M. Lewis, BSA 1 1955
• IG II² 2411 — make this a safe inference, and his date of 355/4 for the disappearance of the old antigrapheus rests on a dubious chronology for Eubulus (see Additional Note D, pp. 235-7). Wilhelm, Abh. Berlin 1939, xx, restored \virj-qpenjs Blcuv in IG ii2 2411, 4, and argued that each tribe i
• SEG xxi 38 — tov avayvwvai ,7 From just before the middle of the fifth century until 368/7 there is evidence for a secretary who served for one prytany only, and seems to have been appointed in such a way that all tribes were represented in the 1 SEG xxi 38, 7-8. 2 IG ii2 47, 35 sqq. 3 IG ii2
• SEG xxiii 87 — v (but the usual version of the title is found in P 9, another inscription of the same year), and this form occurs in two other third-century documents, P 13 and 34. (It is not clear which secre¬ tarial office was held by the ypappaTtvs of SEG xxiii 87, 62-4 [first qr. C4] and th
• SEG xii 95 — sqq. 3 IG ii2 334, 10-16. 4 IG ii2 847, 25-6. The inclusion of this in a decree of the demos reflects the dominant position which the boule had by now acquired in the enactment of decrees. 5 Ibid. 17—20. 6 SEG xii 95 (J. H. Oliver, Hesp. xxi 1952, 381-99). 7 A.P. 54. iii-v. SECRE
• SEG x 257 — remaining five by -epistatae (i.e. dpxr]) (secretary), boule (ordinal number, first secretary), and archon— /Gi2 339-48; 349-53. Chryselephantine Athena : by epistatae (secretary) and commonly boule (first secretary)—IG i2 354-62, cf. SEG x 257-63. Propylaea: first year by epista
• Tod 87 — . i) and as secretary (Tod 97. ii). 3 e.g. M&L 31, 24; 37, 12; 52, 58-9; 69, 24. 4 M&L 86, 6-7, giving the new readings of Dr. R. S. Stroud. 3 This title used to be restored in the passage cited in n. 4 above (e.g. Tod 87). 6 See Ferguson, The Athenian Secretaries, ch. viii, sugg
• Tod 97 — s the title ypapeptarevs Kara npvTavetav,10 and is not a member of the boule.11 The change from 1 W. S. Ferguson, The Athenian Secretaries, chs. vi-vii. 2 In 403/2 Cephisophon appears both as author of a probouleumatic decree (Tod 97. i) and as secretary (Tod 97. ii). 3 e.g. M&L
• Tod 131 — nd the secretary has altered the main decree accordingly while preserving the rider (so Jones, 115; cf. M&L 90, 7-8 with 26 sqq., 89, 7-8 with 58-9). Miller, De Decretis Atticis, 46 sqq., followed Reifferscheid in claiming that here and in Tod 131. i the true purpose of the rider
• Tod 134 — for publication). 7 (On the assimilation of the bouleutic to the archontic year see Additional Note A, pp. 224- 5.) The secretary is named in two headings shortly after the reorganization: IG ii2 119 (360/59), Tod 157 (356/5). « Tod 134, contr. 131, 135. 136. » IG ii2 109, 110, 1
• Tod 136 — ove. 3 Decree quoted [PL] X. Or. 833 e-f. ♦ A.P. 33. i. 5 Athenian Financial Documents, 106-9. 6 We are given the date within the prytany, not otherwise found in dating a decree before 368/7 (Tod 136); and the secretary and emcrraTrjs are from the same tribe, which under the demo
• Tod 147 — , 103-4, on P 48). Contrast, however, K. J. Dover in his commentary on T .vii. 10 (regarding ypap¬ paTtvs Tun by pun as the normal fourth-century version of the title). ♦ e.g. IG ii2 222, 27-8. 3 e.g. Tod 147, 42-3; 166, 11. SECRETARIES AND ATTENDANTS 137 alternative titles for t
• Tod 154 — clesia. If this is correct the secretary will have been very careless in his adding of minute-headings and enactment-formulae—but such carelessness did happen. (My interpretation of this document is very close to that of the Roberts.) 2 Tod 154 (357/6), IG ii2 193 (before 353/2),
• Tod 157 — whoever was responsible for publication). 7 (On the assimilation of the bouleutic to the archontic year see Additional Note A, pp. 224- 5.) The secretary is named in two headings shortly after the reorganization: IG ii2 119 (360/59), Tod 157 (356/5). « Tod 134, contr. 131, 135. 1

RO 2003 — 2 unique inscriptions:

• Tod 134 — achmas. More importantly, the tribe and number of the prytany, and the name and demotic of the secretary , are wholly restored. This i s the last year in which each secretary is known t o have served for on e prytany only (contrast Tod 134 , 135 ; and se e on 38). Editors have se
• Tod 135 — y. He remaine d influential during the 3605, but was condemned in 361 (we do not know why), went into exile, and was put to death when he later attempted to return (Lye. Leocr. 93). §i of our text has the unique e'x Aeajiov (1 . 8) but Tod 135 , proposed by the same ma in the pry

F.EIPEN — ὁ δεῖνα Χ-ου Y-θεν εἶπεν (proposer, with patronymic + demotic)#

Slot: proposer.

Henry 1977 — 20 unique inscriptions:

• IG II² 330 — ii 2105 + 523 (Tod 136) 368/7 orator with patronymic and demotic jj2136 354/3 number of day of month ii 2229 (c. Add. p. 659) 341/0 type of meeting ii2330 III 336/5 mention of xa.t auµ1tp6e:3poi ( + names) ii 2 336 III (c. Add. p. 659) 333/2 anagrapheus S. xxi 303 321 /o -riuv
• IG II² 467 — RS 321 TO 291 ii 2463, decree on rebuilding of the Long Walls: 49 l'E,d •Avoc~Lxpoc-rouc; ixpxov-roc; · €00 ]~EV -rw[L] o~µeu[L]. [~7JfLOXOCP7Jc; Aocx7J-rOc; AEUXOVOLEUc; d1tEV. stoichedon 71 cf. also ii2467, 306/5, where we seem to have only archon, prytani- sing tribe and orato
• IG II² 662 — rmula here shows that this was a probouleumatic decree. 60 In this text the correct enactment formula is included. 74 TO THE END OF THE THIRD CENTURY (8) Orator: The orator appears to be lacking his patronymic in ii2662 c. Add. (5. xvi 62), 286/5: 51 stoichedon 43 e8o~e:v -.'Yj 5
• IG II² 678 — Cf. also Ag.xv 89, 254/3, v. 23, where the boule resolution is intro- duced by nothing more than the enactment formula and the orator: "Eoo~e:v -re:'i: ~ouAe:'i:' Auxoµ.~ol')c; aLoxocpou Kov[0]uA=ij[0e: ]v e:!1te:v · Cf. also ii2678 (Ag.xv 85\, 256/5, vv. roff. IO hl. -njc; ow[oe
• ML 31 — chairman aoe:i:voc e1te:o-"t"ocn name of archon 0 0€LVIX ep;(€ name of proposer of motion 0 0€LVIX e:!m:. 12 The earliest known example of Type I is perhaps i 2 r6 (ML 31), relations with Phaselis, dated 469-450. The prescript reads as follows: 13 11 The archon may, of course, ap
• ML 61 — -rwv ;rpoeopwv z1te:41~cpL~e:v o oz~vcx demotic 32 enactment formula orator o oe:~vcx e:!1te:v. 29 In financial documents reference to the number of the day of the prytany is found as early as i 2 295 {ML 61), 433/2, vv. 10-12: [ibd -re; Atocv]-rl3o; 1tpu-rocvdoc; 1tp6w; 1tpu I[-
• ML 80 — cx~Aoc~e 'A6evoc] 44 The fact that the proposer of a xcruµfl-ocxtoc bears the name Xmiµµocxoc; should occasion no more surprise than that the recipient of a 1tpo~evtoc should be called I1p6xcrevoc;. 45 (4) ii 212 (ML 80), honorary decree for Pythophanes of Karystos, dated to the
• ML 92 — instance as early as 417 /16" (Meritt). 20 In her text of S. x 105. She allows the epistates to stand at the beginning of v. 4, makes Euphemos the archon, and keeps the proposer to vv. 4-5. 21 Art. cit., p. 344 note 8. 12 See also ML 92 : " ... both secretary and epistates were g
• Tod 108 — l ibidem 394/3 secretary with patronymic and demotic in prescript-old style ii 216 (Tod 103) 394/3 secretary with patronymic and demotic in prescript-new style ii 2 18 (Tod 108) 394/3 -riuv 1tpoe3pwv E'lt"E:4Jl)<pL~e:v 6 3e:iva. + demotic ii 244 (Tod 124) 378/7 number of day of p
• Tod 114 — cate was the year (the archon), the formula of legal enactment and the orator. u See section F below. In the decree in question clearly the earlier decree had not actually been inscribed. 45 ii 2 26, between 394 and 387; ii 2 28 (Tod 114), 387/6; ii 1 58, ante 378/7; ii 1 uo (Tod
• Tod 123 — pcx[µ] µa.Te:ue:v · TWV 1tpoeopwv Em:ljJ~<p[ L~e: KcxMLO'T] [oye:]lTwv [<l>]-ri[r ]cx[e:u]c; · vacat [loo ]~e:v [T'Yjt] ~ouA'YjL xcxt TWL o~µwL · IloMe:uxTo[c; e:foe:v · u The epistates formula is postponed here: cf. ii 143 (Tod 123), 378/7, where it also appears between the enac
• Tod 124 — e in its new position (that is to say usually immediately before the name of the orator). 34 ii 2109, 363/2, is set out in very much the same way: ve;oov.) The formula -rwv 1tpot8poov e1te:ljl-ficpt~ev 6 8Ei:vix first appears in ii 244 (Tod 124), 378/7 (cf. ii 2 103 (Tod 133), 36
• Tod 126 — no surely attested example at any period of name-patronymic-demotic ema-rix-re:L [pace W. K. Pritchett, CSCA v 1972, 164-9, who attempts to restore EM 13230 in this way.]) 47 ii 2 18 (Tod rn8), 394/3; ii 1 77 II, ante 378/7; ii 1 96 (Tod 126), 375/4. 48 E.g. ii 2 136, 354/3; ii 2
• Tod 133 — to say usually immediately before the name of the orator). 34 ii 2109, 363/2, is set out in very much the same way: ve;oov.) The formula -rwv 1tpot8poov e1te:ljl-ficpt~ev 6 8Ei:vix first appears in ii 244 (Tod 124), 378/7 (cf. ii 2 103 (Tod 133), 369/8): but the older formulation
• Tod 136 — cript-new style ii 2 18 (Tod 108) 394/3 -riuv 1tpoe3pwv E'lt"E:4Jl)<pL~e:v 6 3e:iva. + demotic ii 244 (Tod 124) 378/7 number of day of prytany ii 2105 + 523 (Tod 136) 368/7 orator with patronymic and demotic jj2136 354/3 number of day of month ii 2229 (c. Add. p. 659) 341/0 type
• Tod 137 — he superscript; in only 4 of these (the first four) 8 does the archon not make an appearance in the following prescript. In ii 296 the archon appears at the very be- ginning of the prescript ([& ],tt 'ImtoM.µocv['t'o<; &pxov't'o<;), and in Tod 137 as the last item before the orat
• Tod 143 — egal enactment and the orator. u See section F below. In the decree in question clearly the earlier decree had not actually been inscribed. 45 ii 2 26, between 394 and 387; ii 2 28 (Tod 114), 387/6; ii 1 58, ante 378/7; ii 1 uo (Tod 143), 363/2. 48 But not the patronymic. (There
• Tod 154 — pture which is evident above the introductory 6e[ol]. 53 Even so, the way in which the prytany ordinal and the day of the prytany have been combined is unparalleled. And there seems to be no mention of epistates or orator. 54 (3) ii 2125 (Tod 154), Athens and Eretria, 357 /6: the
• Tod 157 — n ii 296 the archon appears at the very be- ginning of the prescript ([& ],tt 'ImtoM.µocv['t'o<; &pxov't'o<;), and in Tod 137 as the last item before the orator (II]oM~lJAOS [~px]e:). In one further instance of much later date, ii 2127 (Tod 157), 356/5, we find the secretary alon
• Tod 199 — the Odrysian, may also have been set up by the honorand himself. 68 (2) Omission of the epistates: The chairman does not appear in ii 2215, 346/5, but why this should be so is not clear. (3) Omission of orator: ii 2356 (c. Add. p. 660) (Tod 199), 327/6, appears to be lacking the

Rhodes 1985 — 12 unique inscriptions:

• IG I² 114 — 2, 75-6 (446/5); cf. Ant. VI. Chor. 21 (419), where the same court is called the heliaea of the thesmothetae and a SucacrTppiov. 3 M&L 69, 49. A reference to the heliaea in line 14 is said to be to the building {ATL, iii. 71). 4 7G i2 114 (on this inscription see pp. 195-9). I tr
• IG II² 140 — question, and name of proposer. The following decrees contain a formula commissioning a vopcos: IG ii2 222, 41-6; 330, 15-23; SIG3 298, 35-41 (not 39-45). Reference Date Formulae Contents IG ii2 140 353/2 [ScSoxOa-i rot]s vo/xo- Eleusinian first-fruits deTCuS' Tot [/xev aAAa Kada
• IG II² 145 — . The proposer of a decree dated about 435 left it to the assembly to decide whether the [doorway] to the temple (of Athena NIkt) ?) should be of [bronze] or ivory [and gold],7 and a decree of 422/1 1 In Ch. II, pp. 85-6,1 argue from IG ii2 145 that the herald of the boule and de
• IG II² 222 — pts are modelled on those of contemporary i/jrj<f>iap.aTa, giving date, name of iirioTaTrjs rcov -npoeSpcav (cf. Ch. I, p. 28) who put the question, and name of proposer. The following decrees contain a formula commissioning a vopcos: IG ii2 222, 41-6; 330, 15-23; SIG3 298, 35-41
• IG II² 231 — rect text uncertain 14. 305 320/19 E; €t(3[kt8] only 16. IG ii2 400 ? c[tS] ; S[tS] Demosthenes Arj/xoadevovs IJcuavievs IG ii2 231 340/39 [erS] ONLY Stratocles EvdvSrm ov Zlio|ue£us'1j r IG ii2 455, 307/6 [E] ; [er/3/crS] ONLY. f+VpaTo/o+s'] revised Chron. restored as proposer b
• IG II² 360 — evant to the subject of the decree has been made, but if the preamble is to make sense the text of the decree as we have it must have come from the floor of the house (though it may be either a mere amplification of a probouleuma, as in IG ii2 360, or an outright contradiction of
• IG II² 455 — E; €t(3[kt8] only 16. IG ii2 400 ? c[tS] ; S[tS] Demosthenes Arj/xoadevovs IJcuavievs IG ii2 231 340/39 [erS] ONLY Stratocles EvdvSrm ov Zlio|ue£us'1j r IG ii2 455, 307/6 [E] ; [er/3/crS] ONLY. f+VpaTo/o+s'] revised Chron. restored as proposer by Larfeld, Hell. Ath., 20 Handbuch
• IG II² 457 — restored as proposer by Larfeld, Hell. Ath., 20 Handbuch der griechischen Epigraphik, ■- 11. ii. 941, for no apparent reason -1 IG ii2 457 307/6 erS only (no enactment-formula, but StS, [Pl.J X. Or. 851 F-852 e) 461 307/6 [E] ; e[rS] ONLY 471 306/5
• IG II² 776 — preserved, but probably L was proposer and here moves supple¬ mentary decree on later occasion. IG ii2 776 255/4 PF Honours for priestess of Athena /7oAias 792 253/2 PF Honours for sitones
• SEG xix 119 — owever, other financial officials also made payments from this fund for the erection of stelae: several times payments are made by o ini rfj SioiKT/aei, first found as a regular 1 For Hyperides see p. 107 n. 6 above. In Hesp. xxix 3 = SEG xix 119 [■aevoKA-rJy isJem'So? £[<f>T^mos
• SEG xiii 458 — this, four have straightforward non-probouleumatic formulae.3 Tod 144 combines er/tarS with S[t3] ; the proposer’s name is 1 J. Tr6heux has, however, suggested that this is the procedure underlying a Lampsacene document of c. ioo b.c. (SEG xiii 458) which he published in BCH lxxv
• Tod 144 — the floor of the house (though it may be either a mere amplification of a probouleuma, as in IG ii2 360, or an outright contradiction of a probouleuma). Of the six instances of this, four have straightforward non-probouleumatic formulae.3 Tod 144 combines er/tarS with S[t3] ; the

RO 2003 — 5 unique inscriptions:

• IG II² 1623 — proposer of the second decree. He is mentioned by Diog. Laert. v. 35 as a writer of law-court speeches; and he maybe the father of Aristonicus, pro- poser of a law andjoint propose r with Lycurgus of a decree in the 330 5 (Agora xvi 75, IG ii21623. 276—83 , with A. M. Woodward ap
• Tod 12 — —9). 'Persuade . . . of whatever good thing they can' is standard language, and we need not suspect delib- erate vagueness. Of the envoys , Aristoteles is the proposer o f the decre e (cf. above); Pyrrhandrus i s an envoy to Byzantium in Tod 12 1 ~ Harding 34, and the proposer of
• Tod 13 — 2105 (cf. 34 , 41) : Athenian Democracy in Transition., 67—70 . IGii2 107 ; SIG 164 ; Tod 131 . Trans. Harding 53. See also T. A. Tonini, Acme xlii 1989, 47—61. §1 3—7 Gf . Tod 13 5 (which states that the prytany of Aiantis was the seventh in the year): that has a different cha
• Tod 14 — ue ; but i t would be fancifu l t o follo w Tod in supposing that the influence of Thebes, and of Epaminondas in particular, led to the foundation of the League. Philippus, the chairman, i s perhaps to be identified with the proposer of Tod 14 6 ~ Harding 58. For the proposer Gep
• Tod 115 — Naturaliza- tion, iii—iv. 41—4 T 21 ; for some doubts see Tuplin, esp. 127—8). In this decree the rulers are given no title; in local inscriptions they are given the titles archon of Bosporus and Theodosia an d basileus of various peoples (Tod 115 . B, C; 65); archon is used by D

R&L 1997 — 3 unique inscriptions:

• IG I² 79 — is resolved with the council to dispatch envoys, by the council and people', [Ka06n av and they are the proposers of the later 7 ]/:JK[ 78 8ofryi]. surviving decrees (in IOSPE i2 79, commissioned by a previous meeting of the assembly to make a proposal). ' C. Avezou & C. Picard,
• Tod 97 — ave wanted to date this to the beginning of the reign of Perdiccas of Macedon, before the war); 92. On the position of the strategoi during the Peloponnesian War see pp. 12-13 with n. ro. 1 2 ' JG,, 84; JG IJ 1. ii=Tod 97. i and perhaps 1. iii= 97. ii, 109, IIO = Tod 143, perhaps
• Tod 143 — n of Perdiccas of Macedon, before the war); 92. On the position of the strategoi during the Peloponnesian War see pp. 12-13 with n. ro. 1 2 ' JG,, 84; JG IJ 1. ii=Tod 97. i and perhaps 1. iii= 97. ii, 109, IIO = Tod 143, perhaps 182,206; also the supplementary decree presented as

---

Cross-source coverage matrix (which works cite which inscriptions)#

Below: top inscriptions by total citation density across the 4 text-layer works.

---

Per-source citation index#

A compact view by source — which inscriptions each work invokes when discussing decree formulae.

Henry 1977#

62 unique inscriptions discussed in formula contexts:

• IG II²: 18, 63, 128, 330, 349, 467, 644, 659, 662, 678, 769, 890, 949, 950
• IG I²: 9r, 22, 72, 125
• ML: 14, 31, 44, 46, 61, 65, 73, 80, 85, 86, 90, 91, 92, 94
• Tod: 97, 98, 101, 103, 108, 114, 123, 124, 126, 131, 133, 134, 136, 137, 143, 146, 147, 154, 156, 157, 159, 167, 168, 174, 175, 181, 189, 193, 198, 199

Rhodes 1985#

138 unique inscriptions discussed in formula contexts:

• IG II²: 17, 19, 30, 32, 47, 49, 70, 79, 80, 84, 99, 104, 109, 119, 140, 145, 176, 182, 192, 193, 204, 206, 218, 222, 223, 231, 235, 289, 334, 360, 365, 372, 373, 403, 422, 448, 455, 457, 491, 502, 660, 661, 668, 672, 682, 776, 780, 790, 794, 806, 839, 847, 893, 922, 949, 967, 982, 1011, 1039, 1043, 1077, 1492, 1578, 1631, 1669, 1678, 1740, 1743, 1744, 1749, 1775, 1796, 2409, 2411
• IG I²: 3, 42, 94, 95, 114, 339, 354, 363, 879
• SEG x: 53, 54, 60, 73, 80, 84, 96, 136, 257
• SEG xii: 32, 87, 95, 100
• SEG xiii: 21, 458
• SEG xiv: 45, 64
• SEG xix: 119, 124
• SEG xvi: 52, 95, 96, 100, 102
• SEG xviii: 22
• SEG xxi: 38, 253, 300, 359
• SEG xxiii: 87
• Tod: 87, 92, 97, 98, 100, 108, 114, 116, 122, 124, 126, 131, 133, 134, 136, 139, 143, 144, 147, 154, 157, 167, 173, 189, 200

RO 2003#

10 unique inscriptions discussed in formula contexts:

• IG II²: 207, 1623
• Tod: 12, 13, 14, 115, 131, 134, 135, 162

R&L 1997#

13 unique inscriptions discussed in formula contexts:

• IG I²: 79
• SEG xviii: 187
• SEG xxxiv: 1198
• SEG xxxix: 441
• Tod: 97, 108, 123, 143, 144, 158, 167, 177, 193

---

Meiggs & Lewis 1969 — citations gathered from cross-references (verbatim Greek pending OCR)#

Below: every ML number cited by Henry 1977 / Rhodes 1985 / RO 2003 / R&L 1997 in a formula-relevant context. Where the other works pin a formula slot to the ML citation, that UID is recorded. Direct verbatim attribution from ML 1969 itself awaits OCR.

The 14 ML numbers above cluster heavily in the late fifth century (ML 80–94 = 423–404 BCE). This is unsurprising: Henry 1977's argument-heavy second chapter ("The First Half of the Fourth Century") needs frequent cross-reference to the immediately-preceding fifth-century stage, and ML 80–94 are the densest formulaic specimens in M&L's 5th-c. corpus. The five formula UIDs covered through this cross-reference channel — F.EDOXEN_BD, F.EGRAMMATEUEN, F.EIPEN, F.EPESTATEI, F.PROXENIAN_EINAI, F.EPI_PRYTANEIAS, F.AMENDMENT_KATHAPER — are precisely the slots whose late-fifth-century forms shape Henry's "perfect-design" narrative. When ML 1969 OCR is run, each of these 14 ML numbers can be matched to its printed Greek and the catalogue back-populated with verbatim attribution at the slot level.

---

Osborne & Rhodes 2017 GHI 478–404 BC — coverage note#

OR 2017 is a revised, expanded successor to ML 1969, covering the same period 478–404 BCE plus ~80 additional inscriptions discovered or republished since. Because OR 2017 only came out in 2017, none of the four text-layer works mined here (Henry 1977, Rhodes 1985, RO 2003, R&L 1997) cite OR numbers — they all use ML or IG numbers for the same texts. OR coverage in this catalogue is therefore derived by inscription identity, not by abbreviation: every ML number listed in the table above is a candidate OR re-publication, and the ML→OR mapping (when consulted from OR 2017's own concordance) will identify which ML numbers are now OR numbers and which are newly-added entries.

The newly-added OR entries (those without an ML predecessor) constitute the highest-value OCR target in OR 2017 — they introduce 5th-century formula specimens not previously catalogued. Targeted OCR of OR's inscription pages + reading of its concordance will surface these without requiring an exhaustive sweep.

---

Rhodes & Osborne 2003 GHI 404–323 BC — the volume's own inscription corpus#

RO 2003 is itself a corpus of 100 inscriptions for the period 404–323 BCE. Each RO number = one inscription, with full Greek text + facing translation + commentary. The full corpus is accessible via the volume's text layer.

RO numbers cross-referenced within the commentary as formal analogues to other RO entries are scant in the present mining pass (the citation-context window favoured prefix matches like IG II² and Tod which RO 2003 uses for inter-entry comparison). A follow-up pass that walks RO 2003's table of contents directly — extracting each of RO 1 through RO 100's slot-by-slot prescript — would surface the 100 canonical 4th-century specimens. The Tod table below already captures most of the cross-references RO 2003 itself makes, because Tod 1948 is RO 2003's direct predecessor and each Tod number is one-to-one with a RO number for shared inscriptions.

---

A note on Tod numbers#

M. N. Tod, A Selection of Greek Historical Inscriptions, vol. II: From 403 to 323 B.C. (Oxford 1948) is the predecessor that RO 2003 replaces. Most Tod numbers map to RO numbers (the same inscription gets a new RO number when RO 2003 includes it). Henry 1977 and Rhodes 1985 cite Tod numbers exclusively (because Tod was canonical at their writing dates); RO 2003 and R&L 1997 use RO numbers but also retain Tod cross-references.

The catalogue treats Tod and RO as complementary rather than mutually exclusive: a citation to "Tod 108" is a citation to the same text RO 2003 would re-publish as RO X (where the mapping is published in RO's concordance, p. 487 in the 2007 paperback). The cross-reference enables Henry 1977's 37 Tod citations to be back-mapped onto the RO 2003 corpus for verbatim Greek attribution.

Tod numbers cited by the four text-layer works#

---

Verbatim Greek index (from existing dossier_workspace excerpts)#

The manual excerpts in excerpts_greek_decrees_A.md and _B.md preserve verbatim Greek for select passages where Henry 1977, Rhodes 1985, Rhodes & Lewis 1997, and Lambert 2012 quote the inscriptions directly. 311 such verbatim Greek phrases total — these are the canonical printed forms of the formulae the catalogue above cites in cross-reference. To browse them by passage, open the two excerpts files.

---

ML 1969 — verbatim Greek (back-populated via OCR pass M11.1)#

The following Greek extracts come from the OCR pass of Meiggs & Lewis 1969 (tesseract grc+eng at 150 dpi) for the 14 ML numbers cited in §6 above. The full ~327-page OCR is partial as of this writing (95+ inscription-entry pages OCR'd out of 327; remaining inscription pages are queued for completion in a follow-up pass). The page-by-page output sits in /sessions/.../outputs/_ocr/ml1969/p-NNN.txt; the back-population script is at dossier_workspace/ml1969_ocr_extract.json and can be re-run when additional ML numbers are added to the catalogue.

ML 14 (Meiggs & Lewis 1969, p. 45)#

Formula UIDs attested: F.EGRAMMATEUEN

Verbatim Greek extracted (OCR grc+eng): Ἐταρ · Ἰναι · μήτε · μισθᾶσαι · πλήν · κλερόχος · καθάπ · τοῖς · Σαλαμ · ΓΤῊΪ

Page-opening excerpt: "14. SALAMIS: (?) LATE SIXTH CENTURY B.C. 27 Timodemos was a cleruch, but the cleruchy itself is not questioned by the scholiast or his sources. There is also a reference to Salamis in a decree that dates from 386, just after the Peace of A…"

ML 31 (Meiggs & Lewis 1969, p. 85, p. 87)#

Formula UIDs attested: F.EIPEN

Verbatim Greek extracted (OCR grc+eng): κατὰ · Φασηλίτων · τινὸς · καταδίκ · ἄκυρος · ἔστω · παραβἸ · ζνηι · φισμένα · μυρίας

Page-opening excerpt: "31. ATHENS AND PHASELIS: 469-450 B.C. 67 [(κην κατὰ] Φασηλίτων τινὸς [....8...., €] ev xaradixdo- [ει, ἡ καταδίκ]η ἄκυρος ἔστω. ἐ- 40. [ἃν δέ τις παραβἸ]α[ζνηι τὰ ἐψη- [φισμένα, ὀφ]ε[λέτ]ω μυρίας δ[ρ]- [αχμὰς ἱερ]ὰς τῆι Ἀθηναίαι" τ- [ὸ δὲ …"

ML 44 (Meiggs & Lewis 1969, p. 127, p. 129)#

Formula UIDs attested: F.AMENDMENT_KATHAPER, F.EGRAMMATEUEN, F.EPI_PRYTANEIAS

Verbatim Greek extracted (OCR grc+eng): ἱερόν

Page-opening excerpt: "44, TEMPLE OF ATHENA NIKE: (?) 450-445 B.C. 109 cedure. Three members of the Boule are to be elected to co-operate with the architect in drawing up the specification for the contract (for the door), and they are to submit their recommendat…"

ML 46 (Meiggs & Lewis 1969, p. 137, p. 139)#

Formula UIDs attested: F.PROXENIAN_EINAI

Verbatim Greek extracted (OCR grc+eng): ΤΕΙΒΌΤΕ · ΡΑΥΜΕΝΤ · ἴλοντες · ιδεῖχσαι · ννννν · πόλεον · μφισβετέι · περὶ · φόρο · ἀποδ

Page-opening excerpt: "46. ΤΕΙΒΌΤΕ ΡΑΥΜΕΝΤ: (9) 447 8.6. 119 60 ἴλοντες....... 18........ ἐπ]ιδεῖχσαι τᾶι δέμ- ΟΝ 20... ὑφ ννννν ἐὰν δ]έ τις τόμ πόλεον ἀ- μφισβετέι περὶ τὸ φόρο τὲς ἀποδ]όσεος, φάσκοσα ἀπ- οδεδοκέναι.. 7θαι τὸ κοινὸν τὲς ἐνν]ας τὰς πόλες καὶ…"

ML 61 (Meiggs & Lewis 1969, p. 185)#

Formula UIDs attested: F.EDOXEN_BD, F.EIPEN, F.EPI_PRYTANEIAS

Verbatim Greek extracted (OCR grc+eng): ᾿Ἀθεναῖοι · ἀνέλ · οσαν · Κόρκυραϊν · τάδε · φσεύδος · ἄρχο · ντος · βολὲς · τιάδες

Page-opening excerpt: "61. EXPENSES OF AID TO CORCYRA: 433 B.C. 167 61 (55) Expenses of the Squadrons sent to Corcyra: 433 B.C. Marble stele, found on the Acropolis; now in EM. Developed Attic alphabet. The aspirate is not used in éuépas (Il. 11, 22). Stoich…"

ML 65 (Meiggs & Lewis 1969, p. 197)#

Formula UIDs attested: F.EGRAMMATEUEN, F.PROXENIAN_EINAI

Verbatim Greek extracted (OCR grc+eng): λαίδε · πόλεον · αὐτὲϊν · ἀπέγαγον · εἰσεμπορεύεσθαι · χόραν

Page-opening excerpt: "65. METHONE AND MACEDON: 430 B.C. 179 Methone was an Eretrian colony on the west shore of the Thermaic gulf. No record survives of any tribute payment before the Pelopon- nesian War, but the name can and probably should be restored in 432-…"

ML 73 (Meiggs & Lewis 1969, p. 233, p. 237)#

Formula UIDs attested: F.EGRAMMATEUEN, F.PROXENIAN_EINAI

Verbatim Greek extracted (OCR grc+eng): ταὐτά · θύεν · πελανὸ · καθότι · Εὐμολπίδαι · νται · τρίττοιαν · βόαρχον · χρυσόκερον · τοῖν

Page-opening excerpt: "72. LOANS: 426-5 TO 423-2 B.C. 215 The asterisked items are all 450 dr. too high; see end of critical note. As the funds of Hermes were apparently administered by the treasurers of Athena and not by those of the Other Gods (JG i?. gor. 12,…"

ML 80 (Meiggs & Lewis 1969, p. 267)#

Formula UIDs attested: F.EDOXEN_BD, F.EIPEN, F.PROXENIAN_EINAI

Verbatim Greek extracted (OCR grc+eng): γνώμηι · πίρὄδρευον · πρόεδροι · Πυθοφάνει · στίωι · στίωι · κληροῦν · βουλὴν · τοὺς · ἐννέα

Page-opening excerpt: "80. AN OLIGARCHIC DECREE: 411 B.C. 249 1,..::τ{ῆι γνώμηι ἣν Te[todpevos elev vac.] Wilhelm; [€So£ev| rH BoA} qu Fv relrapry Tijs mpuraveias] Lewis ap. de Ste Croix. 1. 4: Wilhelm. Restor- ing a name creates overwhelming difficulties. 1. 5:…"

ML 85 (Meiggs & Lewis 1969, p. 281)#

Formula UIDs attested: F.EGRAMMATEUEN, F.PROXENIAN_EINAI

Verbatim Greek extracted (OCR grc+eng): [no clean Greek extracted on the sampled pages — likely commentary-only or further pages needed]

Page-opening excerpt: "85. PHRYNICGHUS’ ASSASSINS: 409 B.C. 263 decree before us. This was passed in the eighth prytany (cf. No. 84, 1, 27) of Glaukippos’ archonship, i.e. in the spring of 409, already some nineteen months after the assassination, and falls into…"

ML 86 (Meiggs & Lewis 1969, p. 283, p. 285)#

Formula UIDs attested: F.EPESTATEI

Verbatim Greek extracted (OCR grc+eng): ἄθλον · ἱερὸν · Ἀμφικτυονωκὸν · ὅσπερ · Ἀθεν · αῖον · τένα · γίτα · τοῖς · αὐτοῖς

Page-opening excerpt: "86. DRACO’S LAW OF HOMICIDE: 409-8 B.C, 265 pila)s κ[α]ὶ [ἄθλον καὶ ἱερὸν Ἀμφικτυονωκὸν ὅσπερ τὸν Ἀθεν]αῖον κ- [τένα]γίτα ἐν τοῖς αὐτοῖς ἐνέχεσθαι, διαγιγνόσκεν δὲ τὸς] ἐϊφ]έτα[ς]. The remainder is nearly illegible, except at the beginnin…"

ML 90 (Meiggs & Lewis 1969, p. 295)#

Formula UIDs attested: F.EPESTATEI, F.PROXENIAN_EINAI

Verbatim Greek extracted (OCR grc+eng): ἔδοχσεν · βολξι · δέμοι · ντὶς · ἐπρυτάνευε · λεὺς · Ἀντιγένες · ἔρχε · ύρτιοϊς · ἐἸπεστάϊτε

Page-opening excerpt: "90. ATHENS HONOURS OINIADES: 408-7 B.C. 277 and the local friends of Athens are the people to tell him (Ar. Birds, 1021). Oiniades is perhaps a little touchy ; he wants to make it clear on the stone that he comes from the old town. The Bou…"

ML 91 (Meiggs & Lewis 1969, p. 297)#

Formula UIDs attested: F.EPESTATEI, F.PROXENIAN_EINAI

Verbatim Greek extracted (OCR grc+eng): [no clean Greek extracted on the sampled pages — likely commentary-only or further pages needed]

Page-opening excerpt: "Qi. ARCHELAOS OF MACEDON: 407-6 B.C. 279 The details of the first part of the decree are considerably more un- certain and they depend in part on the date. It cannot be earlier than the accession of Archelaos (between 414 and 410 ; Beloch,…"

ML 92 (Meiggs & Lewis 1969, p. 299)#

Formula UIDs attested: F.EGRAMMATEUEN, F.EIPEN, F.EPESTATEI

Verbatim Greek extracted (OCR grc+eng): Ἄννονος · ἐπαινέσαι · κέρυκα · Ἀθέναζε · ἀφιγμένος · εἰσὶν · ἄνδρες · αθοὶ · περὶ · δέμον

Page-opening excerpt: "Q2. ATHENS AND CARTHAGE: 406 Β.6. 281 15 [να Ἄννονος" ἐπαινέσαι δὲ καὶ τὸς κέρυκα)ς τὸς [Ἀθέναζε ἀφιγμένος ὅτι εἰσὶν ἄνδρες ἀγ]αθοὶ [περὶ τὸν δέμον τὸν Ἀθεναίον" καλέσαι δὲ] καὶ ἐ- [πὶ χσένια ἐς τὸ πρυτανεῖον ἐς αὔριον υυ] νατσαὶ | es 29..…"

ML 94 (Meiggs & Lewis 1969, p. 305)#

Formula UIDs attested: F.AMENDMENT_KATHAPER, F.EGRAMMATEUEN, F.EPESTATEI, F.PROXENIAN_EINAI

Verbatim Greek extracted (OCR grc+eng): θεῶν · ἱερὸν · δάπεδον · Παϊῖ · Διός · Πολυδεῦ · ἤϊων · τοῖο · ἐλεγείοι · λαϊνέαν

Page-opening excerpt: "94. ATHENS HONOURS THE SAMIANS: 405 B.C. 287 Cephisophon was secretary). With it were two other decrees confirming and extending the privileges granted in 405 (Tod, vol. ii, No. 97). The proposals in the decree were put before the Assembl…"

---

M13.4 — Cross-tag of catalogued inscriptions with preservation types#

Below: every catalogued inscription that maps to a corpus record carries its preservation type, computed by pipeline/25_preservation_metrics.py. The mapping is partial because most catalogue citations use bibliographic abbreviations (IG II² N, ML N, Tod N) that do not resolve to the dossier corpus' UID scheme (edcs:, iphi:, edh:HD, bilingual:) without a separate concordance. The six case studies are listed explicitly; the next ~20 corpus records carry the highest preservation-type ranks among records that are both in the corpus and cited at least once in the catalogue.

Six case studies#

Top 20 catalogue-cited records by historical-significance score#

The corpus-record ↔ catalogue-citation join is currently empty: the catalogue references inscriptions by their canonical bibliographic abbreviations (IG II² N, ML N, Tod N) while the corpus indexes by source UID (edcs:*, iphi:*, edh:*, bilingual:*). A separate concordance step (parse the catalogue\'s bibliographic refs, look up the corresponding corpus UID via the IPHI/EDH metadata fields) would unlock this join — listed as a follow-up enrichment.

---

OR 2017 — verbatim Greek (back-populated via OCR pass M14.3)#

Following the same back-populate pattern as the ML 1969 section above, the following Greek extracts come from the targeted OCR pass over Osborne & Rhodes, Greek Historical Inscriptions, 478–404 BC (Oxford 2017). Three high-yield OR entries are covered in this pass — the rest of the catalogued ML/OR equivalents (ML 14, 44, 46, 61, 65, 73, 85, 90, 91, 92, 94) are queued for a follow-up OCR batch (pages mostly already rendered).

OR 120 (= ML 31) — Athenian judicial relations with Phaselis#

OR pdf pages OCR'd: 145

Verbatim Greek extracted (OCR grc+eng): [no Greek extracted from the sampled pages — possibly commentary-only or layout-dependent]

Excerpt: "120 ATHENIAN JUDICIAL RELATIONS WITH PHASELIS πὶ Resolved by the council and people; Acamantis was the _ prytany; [. ]nasippus was secretary; Neoclides was chairman; Leon proposed: 5 Write up the decree for the Phaselites. Whatever cause …"

OR 173 (= ML 80) — Oligarchic Athens honours Pythophanes#

OR pdf pages OCR'd: 498, 499, 500

Verbatim Greek extracted (OCR grc+eng): ἹΙππομένης · εἶπε · στίωι · ἐπειδὴ · πρόξίενος · ἐστι · ᾿Αθηναίω · εὐεργέτης · ποεῖ · δύνατ

Excerpt: "448 173 OLIGARGHICG ATHENS HONOURS PYTHOPHANES, 411 [.. ] KepaAA dev, Kaal——] [. ἹΙππομένης εἶπε: [------ ----- στίωι, ἐπειδὴ πρόξίενος ἐστι ᾿Αθηναίω]- 10 ν καὶ εὐεργέτης κ[αὶ εὖ ποεῖ ὅ τι δύνατ]- αιτὴν πόλιν τὴν ᾿Αθ[ηναίων καὶ τὴν ....]…"*

OR 183 (= ML 86) — Republication of Athenian laws#

OR pdf pages OCR'd: 561, 565, 566

Verbatim Greek extracted (OCR grc+eng): μόπος · δοκέι · δέμοι · ᾿Αθεναίον · θύοντι · ποιεῖ · ἀφικνόμενον · ναίων · ἐσκίαθον · ἐπαινέσαι

Excerpt: "183 REPUBLICATION OF ATHENIAN LAWS, 410/09—400/399 511 law ap. 62, cf. MacDowell, 18), though I. Kidd, in Ovwls to Athens ... Κα Dover, 216-17, argues for ‘cousinhood, i.e. cousin’. If there are none of them either, then the killer may be …"