172 PROCEEDINGS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY. 



In expressing the relation of antecedence, if a verb of extensive action 

 be used in the temporal clause it is evident that, as far as the form of the 

 verb is concerned, there is opportunity for at least partial coincidence in 

 time. Cf. Her. 9, 117 (quoted above, p. 171). Hence, for the definite and 

 unequivocal expression of pure antecedence, the aoristic aspect is to be 

 expected in the temporal clause. It should be well noted, however, that 

 this need is not absolute, even theoretically, since there is nothing in 

 either the present or the imperfect tense that expresses absolute duration 



of time. Cf. Her. 7, 188 : 6 8e fir) vavriKos arparos entire 6pprj8e\s orA«e 

 . . .. nl pev fir] npaiTui tu>v veu>v oppeou npbs yfi, /c.r.X., where the idea of over- 

 lapping action is wholly excluded. 



In clauses of contemporaneity two relations are possible, coincidence 

 and insertion ; in other words, one action may be coextensive with 

 another, or may be inserted in it. In the relation of coincidence both 

 actions may be viewed as extensive or as aoristic* Again a clause of 

 contemporaneity may coincide in time with the action of the main clause 

 and at the same time mark its limits. 



In cases where the action of one clause is inserted in that of another, 

 the action of one clause is generally viewed as extensive, while that of 

 the other may be either extensive or aoristic. "Warren, t speaking of 

 these clauses, says, '-In the relation of insertion one action must be 

 viewed as extensive," etc. But if our reasoning above was correct, the 

 action into which the other is inserted may be in the aorist, if that aorist 

 has complexive force. 



In clauses of subsequence also, if the main verb is of extensive aspect, 

 the main action may overlap that of the subordinate clause, as in Thuc, 

 1, 118, 2 : ol fie Xaicefiaipovioi, alcrOopevoi ovre enuikvov, el pi) enl fipaxv, r)av)(a^uv 

 re to n\eov tov xP ovov < ... to fie ti Kai noXepois oliceiois e^etpyopevoi, Tcp\v 8>) i) 

 fivvapis Tcov , Adr]vaicL>v cja(f)a>s j'jpero Kai rrjs o-vppa^ins avrcov fjnTOVTO. Hence to 



express pure subsequence a verb of aoristic action is to be expected in the 

 main clause. The subordinate verb may be either extensive or aoristic. 



* Warren (op. sup. cit., p. 5) quotes II , A, 671-2: 



dis oirdr' HAeloicrt Kai T}p~iv ve?Kos eriixOv 



ap(pl fioriKaaiy, or' iyw ktclvov iTvpovria, k.t.K., 



as an example of aoristic coincidence. But it can hardly be supposed that the 

 action described by the words ve~iKos ervx^r] continued no longer than the action of 

 kt6.vov. On the contrary ervx6rj here is the constative or complexive aorist. The 

 action of ktAvov is only a part of the whole vtMos and the relation is that of inser- 

 tion. 



t Op. sup. cit., p. 6. 



