184 PROCEEDINGS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY. 



In pure relative clauses av is omitted with the subjunctive in all MSS. 

 of Herodotus in four places: 1, 216 ; 2, 85 ; 4, 46, 66 ; but in 4, 66, av 

 is doubtless to be read, with Sehweighauser, and in 2, 85, av can easily 

 be supplied from the preceding clause, thus leaving two places where 

 av seems to have been wholly omitted. In view of these facts, although 

 (if 8, 22, be excepted) these are the only cases (excepting the " until " 

 clauses) where Herodotus omits av with the subjunctive in a temporal 

 clause, there does not seem to be sufficient evidence to warrant the 

 insertion of av in these passages. Possibly the omission in these cases 

 is due in part to the relative origin of o>?, and also to the fact that it is 

 less sharp and distinct in its meaning than the other conjunctions of 

 antecedence. 



A very remarkable usage of av, if the text be correct, is found in 1, 



196: a>s av at Trapdevoi yivolaro (Aldine ed. yevolaro) ydpu>v copaiai, ravras 

 OKtos avvaydyoiev ndo-as, is ev %(oplov eo~dyeo~Kov AXtas, k.t.X. ws av IS given 



in all MSS., and is read by Kallenberg, Holder, Stein, Abicht, Bahr ; 

 Kniger brackets av ; Stein proposed oo-ai aid napSevoi yivoiaro, and this 

 is adopted by van Herwerden. Bahr (note ad loc.) attempts to de- 

 feud us av, but the passages which he cites are by no means parallel 

 to our passage. Kiihner (Gr. Gram. 2 , II, 2, 567, 7) gives two passages 

 where the optative with av in temporal clauses has the same meaning 

 as in independent sentences (Xen., Oec, 11, 14; Dem., 4, 31), but 

 neither of them is analogous to the passage from Herodotus.* The soli- 

 tary other example of such a usage is that cited by Thomas f and 

 Goodwin,! II., 9, 525 : 



ovtco Kcii rcov rrpoadev (TT(v66pe6a Kkea dvbpwv 

 i)pa>a>v, ore n'ev rw (7ri£d(pf\os )(6\os ikoi. 



But here there is a special reason for the addition of Ktv. First there 

 is a certain degree of contingency about the action of ikoi x°^°s, i. e., 

 whenever, as it chanced, any one became angry. Furthermore, Monro § 

 shows that in conditional temporal clauses with ore, expressing generic 



* Richard Ilorton-Smith (Cond. Sent, in Greek and Latin, 1894, p. 438, cites 

 our passage as a case where the optative with &v "represents after a historic 

 or quasi-historic tense what would after a present tense have been a present sub- 

 junctive similarly placed," i. e., with &v. But surely it cannot be said that in our 

 passage the optative with &v represents anything but the original idea as it first 

 occurred to Herodotus 



t Am. Jour. Phil., 7 (1886), p. 543. 



% Moods and Tenses, 542. 



§ Horn. Gram., 308, 1, d. 



