18 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CANADIAN INSTITUTE. 



missioners. "They agreed to return as taxable 500 drachmse (or 

 five minpe) for every twenty-five minpe" : ^. e., they agreed to return 

 the property as taxable upon one-fifth of its amount, i. e., as belong- 

 ing to the first class. 



The five hundred drachmse therefore is not the amount paid, but 

 the amount returned as taxable out of every twenty-five minse : the 

 amount actually paid out of every twenty-five minse would be, of 

 course, a fraction much smaller than this one-fifth : (probably not 

 more, as a general thing, than five per cent, on this fifth, or one per 

 cent, on the whole. See Kennedy's Demosthenes, "Vol. I., Appen- 

 dix i, p. 309, note). 



These passages are fully explained by Boeckh (Piiblic Economy of 

 Athens, Yol. II., pp. 285-288, and again 316). Schaefer, howevei", 

 reduces them to nonsense by taking zlrrcipsv^ in its ordinary sense, 

 of paying a property tax. Kennedy, of course, translates correctly ; 

 but he does not notice the difficulty. The school edition of Penrose 

 is correct, and gives the refei'ence to Boeckh ; but, unless its readers 

 turn up Boeckh for themselves, they will not find that the force 

 which Demosthenes attaches to tlsipiptiy and zlatpopa here is merely 

 anomalous, and due apparently to carelessness and the desire for 

 brevity. Liddell and Scott (the last edition included) have missed 

 these passages, and recognize the two words only in their ordinary 

 sense. 



Plato, Republic IX., chap. 9, 583 B. 



" Tobra fiEV roivw dvTut 6v' fOt^W ^v eirj Kal SIq vevtKrjKug 6 diKaiog rov adiKOu- 

 TO 6e TpiTov b?.v/j.TriKG)g ru) aurfjpi. re Kal tu 'O'/.viitt'm Ad adpei 'on koI k.t./.." 



The common explanation of this passage in Stallbaum and Bekker 

 is satisfactory enough. The first libation at the Greek banquet was 

 to Olympian Zeus ; the second to the heroes or to Earth ; the third 

 to Zeus the Saviour. But the champion at Olympia would naturally 

 couple with his last libation the double title of Zeus — the Olympian 

 no less than the Saviour — for the omen's sake. 



In the same way for Plato's just man, who is compared to an 

 athlete of Olympia contending in three contests against hi« rival, 

 the third libation poured by his friends is poured to Olympian Zeus. 



To the references given in Stallbaum and Bekker it is worth 

 while to add a very close parallel which they have overlooked. In 



