{"1": {"fulltext": "DF\\n277\\nB32\\nII\\nil", "height": "4484", "width": "2619", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0001.jp2"}, "2": {"fulltext": "", "height": "4218", "width": "2582", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0002.jp2"}, "3": {"fulltext": "y c*\\ny^\\nA*^\\nV", "height": "4218", "width": "2582", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0003.jp2"}, "4": {"fulltext": "", "height": "4185", "width": "2309", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0004.jp2"}, "5": {"fulltext": "", "height": "4243", "width": "2392", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0005.jp2"}, "6": {"fulltext": "", "height": "4226", "width": "2417", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0006.jp2"}, "7": {"fulltext": "THE\\nFIVE POST-KLEISTHENEAN TRIBES\\nBY\\nFRED ORLANDO BATES\\nFELLOW OF CORNELL* UNIVERSITY\\nTHESIS PRESENTED TO THE FACULTY OF CORNELL UNIVERSITY\\nFOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY\\nJUNE, 1898.\\nITHACA, N. Y.\\nANDRUS CHURCH\\n1808", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0007.jp2"}, "8": {"fulltext": "Copyright, 1898,\\nBy CORNEU, UNIVERSITY\\nALL RIGHTS RESERVED\\niOQ^ M) ITHACA, N. Y\\n*I^^ PRESS OF ANDRUS C", "height": "4267", "width": "2450", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0008.jp2"}, "9": {"fulltext": "PREFACE.\\nThe subject of the post-Kleisthenean tribes is one which, so\\nfar as I know, has never been treated as a whole. It is only\\nwithin recent years that sufficient material has been brought to-\\ngether to enable one to determine much that is certain in regard\\nto them. This is especially true of Antigonis and Demetrias\\nwhich were in existence such a short period a little over a cent-\\nury that a very limited number of monuments throwing light on\\ntheir history has been preserved to us. Though there is no\\ntreatise covering all five tribes, a few articles dealing with special\\nphases of this question are to be found in various periodicals. A\\nbrief review of the most recent and important of these will give\\nsome idea of what has already been accomplished in this field.\\nDittenberger 1 investigated the question of Ptolemais, Attalis,\\nand Hadrianis, with special reference to the demes constituting\\nthem and the method pursued in re-allotting demes to form the\\nnew tribes. He noticed that in the case of Hadrianis, eleven of\\nits old demes were taken one each from the first eleven of the\\ntwelve tribes already in existence. He conjectured that the\\ntwelfth one, Oinoe, was taken from Attalis, formerly the twelfth\\ntribe. Starting with this clue he found that the same principle\\ncould be applied in a general way to the other two tribes, Ptole-\\nmais and Attalis. He therefore concluded that each of the old\\ntribes contributed a given quota, usually one deme, towards the\\nformation of the new one. When Dittenberger wrote this article\\nit was universally believed that Ptolemais was created in honor of\\nPtolemy Philadelphus, as stated by Pausanias, and hence prior to\\n247 B. C. Historical evidence pointed to a date not later than\\n265 B.C.\\nBeloch 2 was the first to formally discredit this general belief in\\nregard to the date of Ptolemais. He held that Ptolemais was\\ncreated in honor of Ptolemy Euergetes (247-222 B.C.). On\\n1 Hermes IX. (1875) p. 385 ff.\\n2 Neue Jahrbiicher 129 (1884), p. 481 ff.", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0009.jp2"}, "10": {"fulltext": "iv Preface.\\nhistorical grounds he determined that the exact date was some-\\nwhere between 229 and 222 B.C. In this article he apparently\\nassumes that after Ptolemais was created, the two tribes, Antigonis\\nand Demetrias, were merged in one, for in the archon lists for the\\n8th and nth years, according to. his arrangement of them, he\\nclasses Atene under Antigonis.\\nThe latest view in regard to the date of Ptolemais is that ex-\\npressed by Kohler in the Supplement to Vol. II of the Corpus In-\\nscriptionum Atticarum. 1 He maintains that the tribe was created\\nafter 222 B.C. during the reign of Ptolemy Philopator (222-205\\nB.C.).\\nNeither Dittenberger nor Beloch devoted any special attention\\nto Antigonis and Demetrias. This study was reserved for Kirch-\\nner 2 who tried to determine what demes were allotted to the two\\ntribes. The article is remarkable for the number of demes which\\nthe author apparently discovers as belonging to Antigonis and\\nDemetrias, ten to the former and nine to the latter. In some cases,\\nhowever, the evidence adduced is far from conclusive. Kirchner\\nfurthermore proceeds upon the theory that a deme may belong to\\nmore than one tribe at the same time. Such an order of things is\\nprima facie unnatural and, I believe, not in accord with the facts.\\nThus it will be seen that there is still room for investigation in\\nthis field. It is the purpose of this treatise to collect and interpret\\nthe evidence which bears on this question. Because of the unre-\\nliability of much of the testimony of ancient writers on this sub-\\nject, the bulk of the material has been taken from inscriptions.\\nOnly when these fail have the statements of the writers been\\ntaken as a guide, and then with some reservation. It is not ex-\\npected that all the difficulties will be satisfactorily removed, but\\nit is hoped that the investigation may contribute to a more accurate\\nknowledge of the subject. Whether that object has been attained\\nmust be left to the reader to decide.\\nAccompanying the special discussion of each deme a table is\\nadded containing a chronological arrangement of the inscriptions\\nin which the deme is mentioned in such a connection that its tribe\\nis indicated or determinable from the context. These inscriptions\\n1 See his note to No. 385 c.\\n2 Rheinisches Museum 47 (1892), p. 550 ff.", "height": "4226", "width": "2417", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0010.jp2"}, "11": {"fulltext": "Preface. v\\nare generally taken from the Corpus Inscriptionum Atticarum\\nand in view of their number the usual abbreviation, C. I. A., has\\ngenerally been omitted wherever there is occasion for citing this\\nwork. All citations, then, not self-explanatory must be under-\\nstood as referring to this publication. In cases where the reference\\nis duplicated, either in the same inscription or in another, only\\none citation is made. The statements in regard to the topography\\nof each deme are, for the most part, necessarily dependent on\\nthe investigations of scholars in this particular field, most promi-\\nnent among whom are Milchhofer and L,6per.\\nIn the matter of dating the inscriptions, I have relied on the\\nlist of archons given by Mr. W. S. Ferguson (The Athenian\\nSecretaries, Cornell Studies, Vol. VII., pp. 50-58) for the period\\n307/6-96/5 B.C. inclusive. For other periods I have followed\\nSchoffer s list of archons in his article Archontes in Pauly-Wissowa\\nReal-Encyclopadie, Vol. II. (1896), p. 565 ff. Whereno archon s\\nname or other indication of the exact year is given in the inscrip-\\ntion, I have accepted in general the judgment of the editors of\\nthe Corpus Inscriptionum Atticarum.\\nFor handy reference Appendixes are added showing the official\\norder of tribes at different periods and their constituent demes,\\ntogether with their demotika. The redistribution of demes is\\nalso indicated.\\nTo Professor B.I. Wheeler, of Cornell University, for guidance\\nand suggestions during this investigation, and for kindly criticism\\nboth of manuscript and proof, I wish here to recognize my obli-\\ngation. I am especially indebted to Mr. W. S. Ferguson, Fellow\\nof Cornell University, for valuable counsel and assistance. I\\nwould also thank Professor G. P. Bristol, of Cornell University,\\nfor his aid in reading the manuscript and proof.\\nIthaca, N. Y., June 27, 1898. F. O. B.", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0011.jp2"}, "12": {"fulltext": "", "height": "4226", "width": "2417", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0012.jp2"}, "13": {"fulltext": "TABLE OF CONTENTS.\\nPAGE\\nChapter I. Antigonis and Demetrias i\\nI. History and Chronology I\\n2. Demes of Antigonis 6\\n3. Denies of Demetrias 18\\nChapter II. Ptolemais 27\\n1. Evidence for the Existence of Thirteen Tribes 27\\ng 2. Evidence for Dating the Creation of Ptolemais 28\\n3. Tribal Order of Ptolemais 32\\n4. Demes of Ptolemais 32\\nChapter III.\u00e2\u0080\u0094 Attalis 46\\nI 1. History and Chronology 46\\n2. Demes of Attalis 46\\nChapter IV. Hadrianis 54\\nI 1. History and Chronology 54\\n2. Demes of Hadrianis 54\\nAppendix A. Official Order of Tribes 63\\nAppendix B. Lists of the Demes of Each Tribe 64\\nAppendix C. Bibliography 69", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0013.jp2"}, "14": {"fulltext": "", "height": "4226", "width": "2417", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0014.jp2"}, "15": {"fulltext": "CHAPTER I.\\nANTIGONIS AND DEMETRIAS.\\ni. History and Chronology.\\nPrior to the reforms of Kleisthenes, about 508 B. C, the citizens\\nof Attica were divided into four tribes called reAewres, ^O^A^tcs,\\nApyaSeis, and AiyiKopets 1 from the sons of Ion. 2 One of the most im-\\nportant of Kleisthenes changes in the Athenian constitution\\nwas to increase the number of the tribes from four to ten. 3 These\\nten tribes had their names from the legendary personages of early\\nAthenian history, viz. Erechtheus, Aigeus, Pandion, Leos,\\nAkamas, Oineus, Kekrops, Hippothoon, Aias, and Antiochos.\\nThe tribes existed for two centuries until Demetrios Poliorketes in\\n307 B. C. liberated Athens from Macedonian rule. In honor of\\ntheir deliverer and his father, Antigonos, the Athenians added two\\nnew tribes, Antigonis and Demetrias, which, in this order, were,\\nplaced at the head of the list of tribes. That they were instituted\\nbefore the Athenian official year 307/6 B. C. 4 is proved by the rela-\\ntion of month and prytany shown in IV. 2, 240 b. The date of this\\npsephisma is Maimakterion (the fifth month of the Athenian calen-\\ndar) 307/6 B. C. It was passed in the fifth prytany not earlier than\\nthe 21st day. With ten tribes the 21st of the fifth prytany would\\nregularly come on the 18th of Poseideon (the sixth month of the\\nAthenian calendar), whereas with twelve tribes the date of any\\ngiven prytany regularly agrees with the date of the month which\\ncorresponds numerically. Unfortunately the date of the month is\\nlost, but the agreement of month and prytany is sufficient to show\\nthat we are now under the system of twelve tribes. Furthermore,\\nAntigonis held the seventh prytany in this year. 5\\nPollux VIII. 109. 2 Herod. V. 66. 3 Arist., Ath. Pol., Chap. 21.\\n^he date 306/5 B.C. given in Hermann-Thumser, Lehrbuch der griechischen\\nStaatsaltertiimer, 135, is based on a wrong identification of the archon s name\\nin II. 238.\\n5 Cf. II. Add. Nov. 320 b. the date of which should be 307/6 B.C. instead of\\n279/8 B.C. {cf. note to IV. 2, 240 b).", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0015.jp2"}, "16": {"fulltext": "The Five Post-Kleisthenean Tribes.\\nThese facts indicate that the official recognition of the two new\\ntribes preceded the triumphal entry of Demetrios into the city in\\nSeptember of this year. 1\\nInasmuch as various archon lists serve to indicate the demes be-\\nlonging to Antigonis and Demetrias, and to show the chronology not\\nonly of those tribes but also of Ptolemais, it will be convenient for the\\nreader to have them before him at the outset. They will, therefore,\\nbe given at this point. In these lists I have chosen to give the\\nname of the deme rather than the demotikon, though the latter would\\nappear in the inscriptions. The tribe to which each derne belongs\\nand its official order are added opposite the name of the deme. Be-\\nsides this, the year in which each board officiated is indicated.\\nArchon Lists.\\nIn CIA. II 859.\\n(1). 237/6 B.C. 2\\n(2). 236/5 B.C.\\nAio/xcta, Aigeis IV.\\nA^a/avai, Oineis VIII.\\nUp6(nra\\\\ra, Akamantis VII.\\nTlaWrjvri, Antiochis XII.\\nIlatavta, Pandionis V.\\n\u00c2\u00aev\\\\rj, Oineis VIII.\\nKoAwvos, Aigeis IV.\\nILuavta, Pandionis V.\\nAtvKovorj, Leontis VI.\\nAxepSovs, Hippothontis X.\\nPafxvovs, Aiantis XI.\\n\\\\AAa 7r\u00c2\u00a3/aj, Antiochis XII.\\nKvSaOrjvaLov, Antigonis I.\\n^rjyaia, Aigeis IV.\\nKikvvvol, Akamantis VII.\\n\u00c2\u00a3Ava, Kekropis IX.\\nAvaKata, Hippothontis X.\\nd\\\\r)pov, Aiantis XI.\\n(3). 235/4 B.C.\\nOtovj Hippothontis X.\\n*A \u00c2\u00a3iSi/a, Aiantis XI.\\n\u00c2\u00aepTa, Oineis VIII.\\n(4). 234/3 B.C.\\n^cf r]TT6 s, Akamantis VII.\\nKtjttos, Leontis VI,\\nKo0co/a8ai, Demetrias II.\\nAafX7TTpai, Erechtheis III.\\nILuavta, Pandionis V.\\nILuonSai, I^eontis VI.\\n\\\\vd, Kekropis IX.\\n*Afx iTpoTrrj, Antiochis XII.\\nAaparTpaL, Antigonis I.\\n\u00c2\u00aeopai, Demetrias II.\\nIIa/xy8a)Ta8at, Erechtheis III.\\n\u00c2\u00ae\\\\va, Kekropis IX.\\nKoV/oos, Hippothontis X.\\nPa/xvoijs, Aiantis XI.\\n1 See Holm, History of Greece, Kng. Trans. Vol. IV. p. 44.\\n2 In each list the demes of the six thesmothetai are separated from the demes\\nof the other archons by a dotted line.", "height": "4226", "width": "2417", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0016.jp2"}, "17": {"fulltext": "Antigonis and Demetrias.\\n(5). 233/2 B.C.\\n^,Kafx(3oivt8aL, Leontis VI.\\nKetptaSat, Hippothontis X.\\nAafnrTpai, Antig. or Erech. I or III.\\n\u00c2\u00a9opou, Demetrias II.\\nnXuOeta, Aigeis IV.\\nKt/cvvva, Akamantis VII.\\nA^apvat, Oineis VIII.\\n\u00c2\u00ae\\\\vd, Kekropis IX.\\nAAtoTre/o; Alltiocllis XII.\\n(7). 230/29 B.C.\\nAW, Aigeis IV.\\nnreAea, Oineis VIII.\\nAfxaiavreta, Hippothontis X.\\nOlvor}, Aiantis XI.\\n(9). 228/7 B.C.\\nAAwTre/oj, Antiochis XIII.\\nKoXAvtos, Aigeis IV.\\nPafivovs, Aiantis XII.\\nAeipaStojTat, Antigonis I.\\n(11). 224/3 B.C.\\nEpx\u00c2\u00ab* Aigeis IV.\\nKzcfxiXij, Akamantis VIII.\\nILuovi u, Leontis VI.\\nAr-qvri, Demetrias II.\\n^vfSptSai, Erechtheis III.\\nKyyeKrj, Pandionis V.\\nA fu8va, Ptolemais VII.\\nIlt^os, Kekropis X.\\n$d\\\\r)pov, Aiantis XII.\\n(6). 232/1 B.C.\\nv A \u00c2\u00a3iSm, Aiantis XI.\\ne l7T7rorop:a8at, Demetrias II.\\nEn-ea, Antiochis XII.\\nTapyr)TTo Antigonis I.\\nIlepyao-^ Erechtheis III.\\nAOfxovov, Kekropis IX.\\nKarros, L,eontis VI.\\nn\\n(8). 229/8 B.C.\\nOr}, Oineis IX.\\n2,v7ra\\\\r)TTo s, Kekropis X.\\nArrji/77, Demetrias II.\\nAWaXtSai, Antigonis I.\\nAva/cata, Hippothontis XI.\\n$tW u, Aigeis IV.\\nKt]tt6 s, I^eontis VI.\\nAtytXta, Ptolemais VII.\\nTpiKopwQos, Aiantis XII.\\n(10). 225/4 B.C.\\na\\\\r)pov\\nAiantis XII.\\nAvd f)\\\\.varTo Antiochis XIII.\\n(12). 223/2 B.C.\\nKvSaOyjvaiov, Antigonis I.\\nMvppivovTTa, Aigeis IV.\\nBepeviKiSou, Ptolemais VII,\\n\u00c2\u00aeopLKos, Akamantis VIII.\\nAa/aa8ai, Oineis IX.\\n^v7raX.r]TT6 s, Kekropis X.\\nILaWrjvr), Antiochis XIII.", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0017.jp2"}, "18": {"fulltext": "The Five Post-Kleisthenean Tribes.\\n(13). 222/1 B.C.\\nUpof3d\\\\iv6o s, Pandionis V.\\nA^a^avraa, Hippothontis XI.\\nAxapvai, Oineis IX.\\nKvSa^vatov, Antigonis I.\\nKafXTTTpai, Krechtheis III.\\nBepeviKiSaL, Ptolemais VII.\\nAi^vrj, Kekropis X.\\nQak-qpov, Aiantis XII.\\nUaWrjvr) Antiochis XIII.\\nIn C.I.A. II. 983.\\n(15). 183/2 B.C.\\nILuavta, Pan d ion is III.\\n^Ka/x^cuvtSat, Eeontis IV.\\n^yjttos, Akamantis VI.\\nE7ri\u00e2\u0082\u00aci/aScu, Kekropis VIII.\\nFafxvovs, Aiantis X.\\nAvd t \\\\vo-To i, Antiochis XI.\\nIn C.I.A. II. 985.\\n(17). 102/1 B.C.\\nMapa6u)v, Aiantis X.\\nEAevo-ts, Hippothontis IX.\\nEpx Aigeis II.\\nA^api/at, Oineis VII.\\nIIoTa/xos, Leontis IV.\\nBepevua u, Ptolemais V.\\nKe f a\\\\r), Akamantis VI.\\n(19). 100/99 B.C.\\nAaKidScu, Oineis VII.\\nAevKovorj, Eeontis IV.\\nEAatovs, Hippothontis IX.\\nK^itrta, Erechtheis I.\\nMvppLvovTTa, Aigeis II.\\n(14). 221/0 B.C.\\nAOfxovov, Kekropis X.\\nKo-\\n^4 r)TTos, Akamantis VIII.\\nn\\nAju, [4 iTpoirrj] Antiochis XIII.\\nIn C.I.A. II. 863.\\n(16). First half of first century B.C.\\nA^iSva, Ptolemais V.\\n%ovvlov, Attalis XII.\\n$iAat u, Aigeis II.\\n\\\\vd, Ptolemais V.\\nlieptOolhai, Oineis VII.\\nAl\u00c2\u00a3(Dvrj, Kekropis VIII.\\nd\\\\r)pov, Aiantis X.\\nAvdcfrXvcrros, Antiochis XI.\\n(18). 101/0 B.C.\\nIletpatevs, Hippothontis IX.\\nlipoPciXLvOos, Attalis XII.\\nI KvSa\\n~Evo)Wfxov, Erechtheis I.\\nBepeviKiSai, Ptolemais V.\\nKtKvwa, Akamantis VI.\\nAa.KLa.8ai, Oineis VII.\\ne AAat, Kekropis VIII.\\nWanting.\\n(20). 98/7 B.C.\\nTpLKopwOos, Aiantis X.\\nKepafxeLKos, Akamantis VI.\\nMeAtVr;, Kekropis VIII.\\nKvOrjpos, Pandionis III.\\nAcf L8va, Ptolemais V.", "height": "4226", "width": "2417", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0018.jp2"}, "19": {"fulltext": "Antigonis and Demetrias.\\nILuavta, Pandionis III.\\n\\\\vd, Ptolemais V.\\nPafxvovs, Aiantis X.\\nSowiov, Attalis XII.\\n(21). 96/5 B.C.\\nj 7)tt6s, Akamantis VI.\\nTapyrjTTos, Aigeis II.\\n^TTiK-q^ia-ia, Oineis VII.\\nKrjSoi, Erechtlieis I.\\nKv8a.Q7jva.L0v, Pandionis III.\\nHaiovlSai, Iyeontis IV.\\n#Ava, Ptolemais V.\\nMapaOwv, Aiantis X.\\nAr-rjvrj, Antiochis XI.\\nIn C.I. A. III. 1008.\\n(23). Tiberius reign,\\n\u00c2\u00a3Ava, Ptolemais V.\\n^cjurjrTos, Akamantis VI.\\nA^via, Hippothontis IX.\\nMapaOoiv, Aiantis X.\\nMapaOoiv, Aiantis X.\\nHaWrjvr), Antiochis XI.\\nUrckm, Oineis VII.\\nEAeuo-t?, Hippothontis IX.\\nUakXrjvr), Antiochis XI.\\niKapia, Aigeis II.\\nIn C.I. A. III. 1005.\\n(22). 5/4 B.C.\\n\\\\vd, Ptolemais V.\\nS \u00c2\u00a3r?TTos, Akamantis VI.\\nHepiOolSai, Oineis VII.\\nKr]cf Lcrid, Krechtheis I.\\nMvppivovTTa, Aigeis II.\\nKvSaOrjvaiov, Pandionis III.\\nAeipaSicorai, Leoiltis IV.\\nQpeappot, Iyeontis IV.\\n\u00c2\u00a9/ota, Oineis VII.\\nIn CIA. III. 1012.\\n(24). Late Roman times.\\nA^apvat, Oineis VII or VIII.\\ndraped, Pandionis III.\\nILaiavLa, Pandionis III.\\n\\\\vd, Ptolemais V.\\n\u00c2\u00aed\\\\r)pov, Aiantis X or XI.\\nm$os, Kekropis VIII or IX.\\nAlthough some irregularities are noticeable in these lists, enough\\nuniformity prevails to disclose the fact that Antigonis and Demetrias\\nwere in existence as late as 222/1 B.C., some years after Ptole-\\nmais was created But on other grounds it can be demonstrated that\\nthey existed long after this date. From the list of secretaries of this\\nperiod it is evident that they continued to exist until 206/5 B.C., at\\nleast. 1 The tribes Antigonis and Demetrias were probably dis-\\ncontinued in the year 200 B.C. when Attalis was created. They\\nSee Ferguson, W. S., The Athenian Secretaries, Cornell Studies in Clas-\\nsical Philology, Vol. VII. pp. 50-58.", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0019.jp2"}, "20": {"fulltext": "6 The Five Post-Kleisthenean Tribes.\\ncould scarcely have survived the hostile demonstration against\\nthe Macedonians which broke out in Athens in that year. 1\\nThis hostility, together with the inconvenience of fourteen tribes r\\nwould have been sufficient to induce the Athenians to abandon\\nAntigonis and Demetrias. We may, therefore, with a consider-\\nable degree of confidence, fix the period of their existence as\\n307-200 B.C.\\nThe two tribes are so intimately connected that, in their histori-\\ncal relation, it is necessary to treat them together, but in dealing\\nwith the individual denies of each tribe, it will be more convenient\\nto speak of them separately. Accordingly, we take up Antigonis\\nfirst.\\n2. Dkmks of Antigonis.\\n1. Agryle. This formerly belonged to Erechtheis and was di-\\nvided into two parts an upper, KaOv-n-epOev, and a lower, v-rrevepOev. 2\\nThe location of the deme is fairly well attested by Harpo-\\nkration ApS^TTos* tottos AOyvrjaL xnrkp to o~tol8lov to TravaO-qvaiKov 7rpo?\\nrw Brjfjuo T(p V7r\u00e2\u0082\u00acvep6ev AypvXeW). Agryle KaOv-rrepOev as its name in-\\ndicates, was situated farther up the slope. It is probably this part\\nwhich is referred to in III. 61, ii. 21-23, where we are told of a\\nlot situated AvkvA^o-i kcu AypvXrjarc 7r/oos tu Y/x^ttw. During the\\nexistence of Antigonis, the deme belonged also to Erechtheis, as is\\nshown by the accompanying table. As the deme was divided into\\ntwo parts, it is probable that one part only went to Antigonis.\\nThe inscriptions in which the tribe of Agryle is indicated are\\nA. Erechtheis.\\nIV. 2, 71, 458/7 B.C. II. 338, 273/2 B.C.\\nI. 338, 408/7 B.C. II. 1038,\\nII. 698, 351/0 B.C. II. 991, ca. 200 B.C.\\nIV. 2, 1233 b, Latter half of 4th II. 469, 107/6 B.C.\\nCent. B.C. III. 1076, 22/3 A.D.\\nIV. 2, 251 b, 306/5 B.C. III. 1113, 143/4 A.D.\\nIII. 1 1 13 a, 143/4 A.D.\\nLivy, XXXI. 44. \u00c2\u00bbI. 338.", "height": "4226", "width": "2417", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0020.jp2"}, "21": {"fulltext": "Antigonis and Demetrias. 7\\nB. A?itigonis.\\nIV. 2, 385 b, 237/6 B.C.\\nC. Attalis.\\nII. 470, 1 19/8 B.C.\\nD. Aigeis.\\nII. 467, 102/1 B.C. 1\\n2. Lamptrai. This deme has been perpetuated in the modern\\nvillage Lambrika. Aside from the resemblance of name we\\nhave Strabo s testimony regarding its general location. 2 Also\\na decree of the deme found a short distance east of Vari\\npoints to the vicinity of Lambrika for the site of Lamptrai. 5\\nAs further proof, we may cite the discovery at Lambrika of\\nthree sepulchral steles 4 and a dedication to Apollo by Lamptraeans 5\\nLike Agryle it was divided into two parts, Lamptrai KaOv-rrepOev, and\\nLamptraivTrevep^ev. 6 From II. 960, where we find AafjarTprjs KaOv-rrepOev\\nand AafjLTTTpfjs irapaXoi, a clear indication is given of the relative\\nlocation of the two parts Lower Lamptrai was situated on the\\ncoast, while Upper Lamptrai was nearer Hymettos, doubtless\\noccupying the exact site of the modern Lambrika.\\nFrom 307 B.C. to the time when Antigonis was discontinued,\\nLamptrai belonged to both Brechtheis and Antigonis. It is proba-\\nble that only one part left its former tribe. The tribal connection\\nof the deme is shown in the following table\\nA. Erechtheis.\\nI. 338, 408/7 B.C. II. 557, ca. 350 B.C.\\nII. 857, 4th Cent. B.C. II. 564, Latter half of 4th Cent.\\nIV. 2, 645 b, 399/8 B.C. B.C.\\nII. 960, 375-350 B.C. IV. 2, 1233 b, Latter half of 4th\\nII. 803 c, 356/5 B.C. Cent. B.C.\\nIV. 2, 245 c, Mid. 4th Cent. B.C. II. 803 c, 346/5 B.C.\\n1 AypvXijdev by error, I think, for Ay Kv\\\\r)dev. 2 Strab. IX. p. 398.\\n3 II. 582. *II. 2272, 2286, and IV. 2, 2280 b. 5 IV. 2, 1220 b.\\n6 I. 338, II. 991, and IV. 2, 908 b.", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0021.jp2"}, "22": {"fulltext": "8\\nThe Five Post-Kleisthenean Tribes.\\nII. 1239, 346/5 B.C.\\nII. 701, 345/4 B.C.\\nII. 172, ca. 336 B.C.\\nIV. 2,767 b, 332/1 B.C.\\nII. 943, 325/4 B.C.\\nII. 324, 275/4 B.C.\\nII. 1038,\\nII. 371, 243/2 B.C.\\nII. 859, 235/4 B.C.\\nII. 859, 222/1 B.C.\\nII. 991, ca. 200 B.C.\\nBulletin 17, p. 146, 133/2 B.C.\\nII. 408, 133/2 B.C.\\nII. 471, 123/2 B.C.\\nII. 470, 1 19/8 B.C.\\nII. 461, 109/8 B.C.\\nIV. 2, 477 d, 108/7 B.C.\\nII. 465, 105/4 B.C.\\nII. 467, 102/1 B.C.\\nIII. 101 9, Latter half of istCent. Ill\\nB.\\nB.C.\\nII.\\n481, 45/4 B.C.\\nII.\\n482, 38/7 B.C.\\nII.\\n324, 275/4 B.C.\\nII.\\n335. 269-262 B.C\\nIII.\\n1276,\\n23/2 B.C.\\nIII.\\n1076,\\n22/3 A.D.\\nIII.\\n1091,\\n85/6 A.D.\\nIII.\\n1020,\\n93/4 A.D.\\nIII.\\n1093,\\n103/4 A.D.\\nIII.\\n1092,\\n105/6 A.D.\\nIII.\\n1113,\\n143/4 A.D.\\nIII.\\n1114,\\n146/7 A.D.\\nIII.\\n1121,\\n155/6 A.D.\\nIII.\\n1123,\\nca. 156 A.D.\\nIII.\\n1128,\\n164/5 A.D.\\nIII.\\n1132,\\n166/7 A.D.\\nIII.\\nH33,\\n1 70/ 1 A.D.\\nIII.\\nH37\\nca. 172-177 A.D\\nIII.\\n1138,\\n174/5 A.D.\\nIII.\\nH47\\n190/1 A.D.\\nIII.\\n1 160,\\n192/3 A.D.\\nIII.\\n1163,\\n201/2 A.D.\\nIII.\\n1171.\\n205/6 A.D.\\nIII.\\nii97,\\n240/1 A.D.\\nIII.\\n1202,\\n262/3 A.D.\\nIII.\\n3896,\\nntigonis.\\nII. 859, 2\\n34/3 B.C.\\n3. Gargettos. 1 The name of this deme also has been preserved\\nin Garito, the name of a small village to the northeast of Athens.\\nIf much importance is to be attached to the provenience of in-\\nscriptions of a local character the exact site of Gargettos is to be\\nsought, not at Garito, but rather farther south, at or near Ieraka. 2\\n1 For an exhaustive discussion of this deme see Young, C. H., Gargettus\\nan Attic Deme, Classical Studies in Honour of Henry Drisler.\\n2 Cf. IV. 2, 1967 d, 1972, 1976 b also II. 1968 found at Charvati.", "height": "4226", "width": "2417", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0022.jp2"}, "23": {"fulltext": "Antigonis and Demetrias. 9\\nThe record of a dowry security 1 to Xenariste, daughter of Pytho-\\ndoros of Gargettos, found at Spata, points to this general quarter.\\nGargettos was not a double deme like Agryle, Lamptrai, etc., so it\\nwent over to Antigonis entire. The tribal relation is shown\\nby the following table\\nA. Aegeis.\\nII. 789 a, 373/2 B.C. III. 1091, 85/6 A.D.\\nII. 677, 367/6 B.C. III. 1093, 103/4 A.D.\\nII. 870, Mid. of 4th Cent. B.C. III. 1092, 105/6 A.D.\\nII. 1010, Mid. of 4th Cent. B.C. III. 1023, 139/40 A.D.\\nII. 872, 341/0 B.C. III. 1 1 13 a, 143/4 A.D.\\nII. 172, ca. 336 B.C. III. 1 1 14, 146/7 A.D.\\nII. 943, 325/4 B.C. III. 1 120, 150/1 A.D.\\nIV. 2, 184 b, Before 322/1 B.C. III. 1121, 155/6 A.D.\\nIV. 2, 1025 b, Before 307/6 B.C. III. 1128, 164/5 A.D.\\nII. 991, ca. 200 B.C. III. 1132, 166/7 A.D.\\nII. 470, 119/8 B.C. III. 1138, 174/5 A.D.\\nIV. 2, 477 d, 108/7 B.C. III. 1 160, 192/3 A.D.\\nII. 469, 107/6 B.C. III. 1 163, 201/2 A.D.\\nII. 465, 105/4 B.C. III. 1171, 205/6 A.D.\\nII. 481, 45/4 B.C. III. 1202, 262/3 A.D.\\nII. 1258, 1st Cent. B.C. III. 3896,\\nIII. 1076, 22/3 A.D.\\nB. Antigonis.\\nIV. 2, 251 b, 306/5 B.C. II. 324, 275/4 B.C.\\nII. 255, 304/3 B.C. II. 859, 232/1 B.C.\\n4. Ikaria. The location of this deme at Dionyso has been\\ndefinitely determined by the excavations conducted by the Amer-\\nican School at that place in 1888. 2 In none of our inscriptions is\\nIkaria found under Antigonis, but there are some facts which prove\\nquite conclusively that it belonged to that tribe. 3 In II. 329, ca.\\n273/2B. C. a list of prytanes of Aigeis is given. Of the twenty demes\\nknown to have belonged to Aigeis, four are unrepresented here\\nII. 1137.\\n2 Cf. Papers of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens,\\nVol. V.\\n3 Cf. Kirchner, Rhein. Mns. 47, p. 550 ff.", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0023.jp2"}, "24": {"fulltext": "io The Five Post-Kleisthenean Tribes.\\nGargettos, Ikaria, Bate, and Diomeia. On the other hand, the\\nlist contains the names of only forty- five prytanes instead of the\\nregular number, fifty. Inasmuch as Gargettos belonged to An-\\ntigonis at this time, the five prytanes wanting must be assigned to\\nIkaria, Bate, and Diomeia, or to some of them. In II. 872, 341/0\\nB.C., Bate and Diomeia had one representative each, while Ikaria\\nhad five. It would have been impossible to include all three in\\nthe list of II. 329, even if no allowance were to be made for an in-\\ncreased representation, necessitated by the withdrawal of Gargettos\\nfrom the tribe of Aigeis. The absence of a deme so large as\\nIkaria in the list of prytanes could hardly be explained as due to\\noversight. It is, therefore, probable, as Kirchner assumes, that\\nIkaria did not belong to Aigeis at this date, but to Antigonis.\\nNor is this the only evidence. In II. 338 there is given a list of\\nephebes for the year 273/2 B.C. and under Antigonis there are\\nthree names Xaipi-y ivrjs Kt^ctikA\u00e2\u0080\u0094 Tl/jlok [p] drr] s Ti/xoKpa [rovs]\\nand HapdfjivOos A^o^a^o v As we learn from a sepulchral\\ninscription 1 one Chairigenes, of Ikaria, son of Agasias, was klerou-\\nchos of the island of Imbros. The inscription may be of either the\\nfourth or third century B.C. Inasmuch as the name Chairigenes\\nis not frequent in Attic inscriptions, there is a probability that the\\ntwo men are of the same family. Secondly, in the inscription\\nmentioned above 2 there is a prytanis of Ikaria named Timokritos,\\nson of Timokrates: likewise in II. 803 a, 1. 43, ca. 342/1 B.C.,\\none Timokrates of Ikaria is mentioned as having paid 87 dr.\\n2 ob. towards the trireme Aglaia. These three facts make it\\nextremely probable that Ikaria belonged to Antigonis.\\nThe tribal relation of the deme, as shown by the inscriptions,\\nis as follows\\nA. Aigeis.\\nII. 652, 398/7 B.C. IV. 2, 767 b, 332/1 B.C.\\nH- 799 c 369/8 B.C. II. 1020, ca 330 B.C.\\nII. 1010, Middle of 4th Cent. II. 943, 325/4 B.C.\\nB.C. IV. 2, 1025 b, Before 307/6 B.C.\\nII. 872, 341/0 B.C.\\n1 Conze, Reise auf den Inseln des Thrakischen Meeres, p. 85.\\n\u00c2\u00bbII. 872, 341/0 B.C.", "height": "4226", "width": "2417", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0024.jp2"}, "25": {"fulltext": "Antigonis and Demetrias. n\\nB. Ptolemais.\\nII. 1041, End of 2nd Cent. B.C. III. 1142, ca. 180 A.D.\\nIn the archon list for 98/7 B.C., (see above p. 5 the sixth\\nthesmothetes is from Ikaria. Kirchner takes this as an indication\\nthat Ikaria belonged to Attalis. As the deme belonged to Ptolemais\\nat this time, it is more likely that we have here merely another\\ndeviation from the usual order observed in those lists.\\n5. Kydathenaion. This aristocratic deme is generally located\\nin the region immediately south of the Acropolis. It belonged\\nearlier to Pandionis and gave its name to the city trittys of that\\ntribe. 2 Its tribal relation is as follows\\nA. Pandionis.\\nI. 299, 444-435 B.C. II. 465, 105/4 B -C\\nII. 553, ca. 400 B.C. II. 985, 96/5 B.C.\\nII. 558, 4th Cent. B.C. III. 1005, 5/4 B.C.\\nII. 865, 4th Cent. B.C. III. 1076, 22/3 A.D.\\nIV. 2, 245 c, 4th Cent. B.C. III. 1091, 85/6 A.D.\\nII. 559, First half of 4th Cent. III. 1092, 105/6 A.D.\\nB.C. III. 11 13, 143/4 A.D.\\nII. 1255, III. 1 1 14, 146/7 A.D.\\nII. 998, III. 1125, ca. 160 A.D.\\nIV. 2, 871b, Latter half of 4th III. 1128, 164/5 A.D.\\nCent. B.C. III. 1029, 167/8 A.D.\\nII. 1014, 343/2 or 336/5 B.C. III. 1032, 170/1 A.D.\\nII. 1020, ca. 330 B.C. III. 1133, 170/1 A.D.\\nIV. 2, 563 c, 326/5 B.C. III. 1142, ca. 180 A.D.\\nIV. 2, 184 b, Shortly before III. 1160, 192/3 A.D.\\n322/1 B.C. III. 1163, 201/2 A.D.\\nII. 230 b, ca. 320 B.C. III. 10, 209/10 A.D.\\nII. 1176, Before 307/6 B.C. III. 1056, 214/5 A.D.\\nII. 471, 123/2 B.C. III. 1186, ca. 225 A.D.\\nII. 470, 1 1 9/8 B.C. III. 1231,\\nII. 469, 107/6 B.C.\\n1 Kastromenos locates it northeast of the Acropolis.\\n2 Cf. II. 871.", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0025.jp2"}, "26": {"fulltext": "12 The Five Post-Kleisthenean Tribes.\\nB. Antigonis.\\nII. 316, 283/2 B.C. II. 859, 222/1 B.C.\\nII. 859, 236/5 B.C. II. 431, 220/19 B.C.\\n6. Paiania. This deuie, the home of Demosthenes and\\nDemades, was doubtless situated on the site of the modern village,\\nLiopesi, for, of Paianian inscriptions there have been found here\\nfive sepulchral steles, 1 and at Spata, a short distance east, one stele\\nand one mortgage record 2 near Karela, just south of L,iopesi, one\\nsepulchral stele, 3 and at Peristeri one. 4 Iyike Agryle and Iyamp-\\ntrai noticed above, Paiania was divided into an upper and a lower\\npart. In this case it is quite evident that lower Paiania was much\\nthe larger of the two. 5 Paiania was the largest deme of Pan-\\ndionis and gave its name to the inland trittys. As we saw\\nabove, Kydathenaion, the second largest deme of Pandionis, went\\nover to Antigonis entire. It is, therefore, to be expected that\\nPaiania would not, and that, if either part was transferred, it would\\nbe upper Paiania, the smaller part and from what we may legiti-\\nmately conclude from the references to the deme during the ex-\\nistence of Antigonis, that is exactly what happened for Paiania\\nis found ten times under Pandionis and only twice under Antigo-\\nnis from 307/6 to 200 B.C. The following table will show its tri-\\nbal relation\\nA Pandionis.\\nI. 260, 421/0 B.C. IV. 2, 1209 b, First half of 4th\\nII. 553, ca. 400 B.C. Cent. B.C.\\nII. 558, 4th Cent. B.C. II. 652, 398/7 B.C.\\nII. 1251, 4th Cent. B.C. II. 677, 367/6 B.C.\\nII. 857, 4th Cent. B.C. IV. 2, 871 b, ca. Mid. of 4th\\nII. 865, 4th Cent. B.C. Cent. B.C.\\nII. 1256, 4th Cent. B.C. II. 871, 348/7 B.C.\\n1 II. 2401, 2416, 2423, IV. 2, 2409 b, and III. 3603.\\n2 II. 2403 and IV. 2, 1 150 b. 3 II. 2420.\\n*IV. 2, 2406 b. 5 Cf. II. 865 and 871.", "height": "4226", "width": "2417", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0026.jp2"}, "27": {"fulltext": "Antigonis and Demetrias. 13\\nII. 172, 340-336 B.C. II. 467, 102/1 B.C.\\nII. 804A, 333/2 B.C. II. 482, 38/7 B.C.\\nII. 1020, ca. 330 B.C. III. 1076, 22/3 A.D.\\nII. 941, 330 29 B.C. III. 1091, 85/6 A.D.\\nII. 176, 330/29 B.C. III. 1093, 103/4 A.D.\\nII. 943, 325/4 B.C. III. 1092, 105/6 A.D.\\nIV. 2, 251 b, 306/5 B.C. III. 1024, ca. 140 A.D.\\nIV. 2, 565 b, ca. 302/1 B.C. III. 1 1 13, 143/4 A.D.\\nII. 873 3rd Cent. B.C. III. 1114, 146/7 A.D.\\nII. 330, 291 o B.C. III. 1124, 148/9 A.D.\\nII. 311, 289/8 B.C. III. 1120, 150/1 A.D.\\nII. 316, 283/2 B.C. III. 1121, 155/6 A.D.\\nII. 338, 273/2 B.C. III. 1128, 164/5 A.D.\\nH- 335. 269-262 B.C. III. 1029, 167/8 A.D.\\nII. 859, 237/6 B.C. III. 1133, 170/1 A.D.\\nII. 859, 235/4 B.C. III. 1032, 170/1 A.D.\\nBulletin 17, p. 146, 131/0 B.C. III. 1138, 174/5 A.D.\\nII. 471, 123/2 B.C. III. 1142, ca. 180 A.D.\\nBulletin 17, p. 147, 119/8 B.C. III. 1163, 201/2 A.D.\\nII. 470, 119/8 B.C. III. 1171, 205/6 A.D.\\nII. 470, 1 19/8 B.C. III. 10, 209/10 A.D.\\nII. 469, 107/6 B.C. III. 1056, 214/5 A.D.\\nII. 465, 105/4 B.C. HI. 1231,\\nB. Antigo?iis.\\nIV. 2, 251 b, 306/5 B.C. II. 403, 207/6 B.C.\\n7. Aithalidai. The exact location of this deme is not yet de-\\ntermined. Both Milchhofer 1 and Loper 2 agree in assigning it to\\nthe inland trittys of Leontis, the chief deme of which is Acharnai.\\nMilchhofer identifies it with Chasia, to the northwest of\\nAcharnai, while Loper locates it southeast, on the Kephissos\\nriver. The tribal relation is indicated in the following table\\n1 Untersuchungen iiber die Demenordnung des Kleisthenes, Berlin (1892).\\n2 Die Trittyen und Demen Attikas, Mitth. d. d. Arch. Inst., Vol. XVII.\\np. 319 ff.", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0027.jp2"}, "28": {"fulltext": "14 The Five Post-Kleisthenean Tribes.\\nA. Leontis.\\nII. 864, First half 4th Cent. B.C. II. 470, 118/7 B.C.\\nII. 652, 397/6 B.C. II. 1049, Mid. of 1st Cent. B.C.\\nII. 960, Before the mid. of 4th III. n 14, 146/7 A.D.\\nCent. B.C. III. 1124, 148/9 A.D.\\nII. 1020, ca. 330 B.C. III. 1 133, 170/1 A.D.\\nII. 446, 155/4 B.C. III. 1066,\\nII. 470, 1 19/8 B.C.\\nB. Antigonis.\\nII. 316, 283/2 B.C. II. 336, 252/1 B.C.\\nIV. 2, 331 b, 281/0 B.C. II. 859, 229/8 B.C.\\nBesides these inscriptions in which the tribe of Aithalidai is in-\\ndicated, there is one other case that requires some comment. I\\nrefer to II. 1291, 282/1 B.C. Kirchner, in the index to C. I. A,\\nII., classes the reference to this deme under Leontis, but I believe\\nit can be shown that its tribe here is not necessarily Leontis.\\nDuring at least the first half of the third century, the 7/A0?\\nassumed the office of chorege and equipped the chorus. The\\nagonothetes was an annual officer chosen, not by his tribe, as the\\nchorege formerly was, but by the people as a whole, and had\\nsupervision of the musical contests not only at the Dionysia but\\nalso at other festivals. Thus the correspondence in tribe of the\\nagonothetes and the victorious chorus would be merely accidental. 1\\nIn further substantiation of this we can cite two inscriptions, II.\\n1290, 307/6 B.C., in which the agonothetes was Xenokles, son of\\nXenias, of Sphettos which is a deme of Akamantis, while the tribe\\nof the victorious chorus was either Antigonis or Demetrias as\\nshown by the fact that the name of the tribe has been intentionally\\nchiseled out and II. 1293, 271/0 B.C., in which the agonothetes\\nis from Hippothontis, while the victorious chorus is from\\nPandionis.\\n*For a fuller discussion of the agonothetes, see Kohler Mitth. d. d. Arch.\\nInst. III. p. 229 ff.", "height": "4226", "width": "2417", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0028.jp2"}, "29": {"fulltext": "Antigo?iis and Demetrias. 15\\n8. Deiradiotai. This was located near Potamos in the southeast-\\nern part of Attica, as we learn from the name IIoTa/uoi AeipaSiwTai 1 as\\nwell as from the provenience of inscriptions of a local character 2\\nThe evidence on which Deiradiotai is assigned to Antigonis,\\nthough not conclusive, has much weight. In the list of thesmo-\\nthetai for 228/7 B.C. the first one is from Deiradiotai. Inasmuch\\nas Ptolemais was in existence at this time, as will be shown later,\\nwe could assign Deiradiotai to L,eontis, its old tribe, and complete\\nthe list with the following tribes Ptolemais, Akamantis, Oineis,\\nKekropis, Hippothontis. But it must be noted that in none of the\\nother lists of thesmothetai do we observe such a consecutive suc-\\ncession of tribes. As will be shown by the accompanying table,\\nthere is no evidence against the assumption that Dieradiotai be-\\nlonged to Antigonis from 307 to 200 B.C.\\nA. Leontis.\\nII. 864, First half 4th Cent. B.C. II. 469, 107/6 B.C.\\nII. 1306, 339/8 B.C. II. 467, 102/1 B.C.\\nII. 804 A, 333/2 B.C. Ii: 1049, Mid. of 1st Cent. B.C.\\nII. 1020, ca. 330 B.C. III. 1091, 85/6 A.D.\\nII. 943, 325/4 B.C.\\nB. A?itigonis.\\nII. 859, 228/7 B.C.\\n9. Kitea. The location of this deme is entirely unknown. Be-\\nfore 307/6 B.C., both Antiochis and Akamantis could lay claim to\\nan Eitea. Likewise from 200 B.C., until the creation of Hadrianis,\\nAntiochis and Akamantis counted it among their demes. After\\nthe creation of Hadrianis, demes of this name are found under\\nAntiochis and Hadrianis. From these facts it is evident that there\\nwere two demes of this name, one belonging to Antiochis at all\\nperiods, the other not so constant in its tribal attachment. This\\n1 Mitth. d. d. Arch. Inst. X. p. 105 ff. Cf. also II. 864.\\n2 II. 1 981, a sepulchral stele found at Keratea, and IV. 2, 1141 c, a mortgage\\nstone recording a mortgage to Kallias of Deiradiotai, from the same place.", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0029.jp2"}, "30": {"fulltext": "1 6 The Five Post-Kleisthenean Tribes.\\nview is made extremely probable by the meaning of the name.\\nEitea, or as often spelled, Itea, means willow It is easily\\nconceivable that there were numerous places in Attica to which\\nthis designation would be applicable. Furthermore, there were\\nseveral doublets whose names were taken from some natural topo-\\ngraphical characteristics, asHalai, Oion, Kolonos, Potamos, Oinoe,\\nand possibly Elaious. Similarly we find Oa and Oe (often writ-\\nten Oie) Why then could not the same be true of Eitea I be-\\nlieve it was. Granting there were two demes called Eitea it seems\\nmore likely that the Eitea which was reallotted to Antigonis was\\nthe one formerly belonging to Akamantis. The table showing\\nthe tribal relation of Eitea is as follows\\nA. Akamantis.\\nIT. 121, 338/7 B.C. 1 II. 956, Last quarter of 2nd\\nIV. 2, 767 b, 336-332 B.C. Cent. B.C.\\nII. 991, ca. 200 B.C. II. 470, 1 19/8 B.C.\\nII. 957, Last quarter of 2nd II. 481, 45/4 B.C.\\nCent. B.C.\\nB. Antiochis.\\nII. 869, Mid. of 4th Cent. B.C. II. 467, 102/1 B.C.\\nII. 944, ca. 325/4 B.C. III. 1093, 103/4 A.D.\\nII. 465, 105/4 B.C. HI- n6o, 192/3 A.D.\\nC. Antigonis.\\nII. 316, 283/2 B.C.\\nD. Hadrianis.\\nIII. 1 1 13 a, 143/4 A.D. HI- 1 163, 201/2 A.D.\\nIII. 1 128, 164/5 A.D. III. 1281 a, After 212/3 A.D.\\nIII. 1039, 165-185 A.D. III. 1180, After 212/3 A. D.\\nKirchner in his discussion of the two tribes, Antigonis and\\nDemetrias, 2 has endeavored to show that Amphitrope belonged to\\na See W. S. Ferguson s work, p. 33, cited at page 5.\\n2 Rhein. Mus. 47, p. 550 ff.", "height": "4226", "width": "2417", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0030.jp2"}, "31": {"fulltext": "Antigonis and Demetrias. ij\\nAntigonis during this period. He used as an argument II. 737 B,\\n306 5 B.C., 1 in which the iinc-TaTr]*; TrpvTaveoiv of some prytany prior\\nto the tenth is from Amphitrope, whereas Antiochis held the\\ntwelfth prytany for this year. He therefore assumes that Am-\\nphitrope passed over to Antigonis or Demetrias and, as Deme-\\ntrias held the seventh prytany of the year 306/5 B.C., 2 he thinks\\nit went rather to Antigonis and that the prytany whose record\\nis posted was either the eighth or the ninth. In view of the fact\\nthat Amphitrope belonged to Anticchis during the existence of\\nAntigonis, 3 I should explain the first record posted in II. 737 with\\nthe name of the E7rto-TaT^s TrpvTaveuv from Amphitrope attached, as\\nthat of Antiochis for the preceding year 307/6 B.C., unless we\\nassume with Kohler that the e7rto-Tarrys 7rpvTaveo)v of this inscription\\nis different from the presiding officer of the prytany.\\nThe complexion, therefore, of the tribe Antigonis, so far as at\\npresent determinable, is as follows\\nOriginal\\nDeme. Tribe.\\nOriginal\\nDeme. Tribe.\\nI.\\n2.\\nAgryle 1 Erechtheis\\nLamptrai j\\n5-\\n6.\\nKydathenaion j p andionis\\nPaiania j\\n3-\\n4-\\n?S t0S }^ei,\\n7-\\n8.\\nAithalidai }j\\nDeiradiotai j\\n9. Kitea Akamantis.\\nThe conclusions to be drawn from the foregoing discussion are\\nFirst, that Antigonis was composed of demes transferred\\nfrom the first five of the original ten tribes, two from each\\nexcept Akamantis. Secondly, that, Kirchner to the con-\\ntrary, no undivided deme of Antigonis belonged to its\\nformer tribe from 307 to 200 B.C. With Agryle, Lamptrai, and\\nPaiania, the case is quite different. Thirdly, that of these nine\\ndemes all, except Agryle and Ikaria, returned to their earlier\\ntribes when Antigonis was discontinued in 200 B.C.\\n*Cf. also Kohler, Mitth. d. d. Arch. Inst., V. p. 268 ff. f and Dittenberger,\\nSyll. 130.\\n2 II. 246.\\n3 Cf. archon lists for 235/4, and 221/0 B.C. where the sixth thesmothetes is\\nfrom a deme the first two letters of which are AM probably for Amphitrope.", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0031.jp2"}, "32": {"fulltext": "1 8 The Five Post-Kleisthenean Tribes.\\n3. Demes of Demetrias.\\n1. Hippotornadai. The location is unknown. Milchhofer\\nthinks that it was situated near Kothokidai, from the fact that\\nboth were transferred to Demetrias from the same tribe/ Oineis.\\nThe latter deme was located somewhere in the Thriasian plain.\\nIts tribal connection is shown by the following table\\nA Oineis.\\nII. 868, 360/59 B.C. III. 1042, ca. 185 A.D.\\nIII. 1 124, 148/9 A.D. III. 1037, ca 200 A.D.\\nB. Demetrias.\\nII. 324, 275/4 B.C. II. 330, 256/5 B.C.\\n2. Kothokidai. The exact location is not determined. I\\nprobably belonged to the coast trittys of Oineis. Its tribal rela-\\ntion is indicated by the following table\\nA Oineis.\\nII. 667, 384/3 B.C. IV. 2, 477, 103/2 B.C.\\nII. 803 d, 375/4 B.C. II. 467, 102/1 B.C.\\nII. 868, 360/59 B.C. III. 1 1 14, 146/7 A.D.\\nII. 469, 107/6 B.C. III. 1278, End of 2nd Cent. A.D.\\nB. Demetrias.\\nII. 324, 275/4 B.C. II. 859, 235/4 B.C.\\n3. Melite. This deme was situated inside the city limits be-\\ntween the Nymphs Hill and the Pnyx. It was the home of a\\nlarge metic population, as attested by numerous inscriptions.\\nAccording to the scholiast on Arist. Frogs, 501, a temple of\\nHerakles was situated in this deme. From two passages in\\nGreek literature we know that it was near the market place and\\nabove it. 1 It was also the home of Themistokles who built here a\\nDemos. LIV. 7, p. 1258, and Plat. Parmen. p. 126 C.", "height": "4226", "width": "2417", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0032.jp2"}, "33": {"fulltext": "Antigonis and Demetrias. 19\\ntemple to Artemis under the special title of Artemis Aristoboule\\nto commemorate the good counsel which he claimed was his\\nservice to the Athenians. 1 Phokion, too, had a residence here. 2\\nFrom a statement in Strabo 3 one would judge that it and Kollytos\\nwere contiguous demes. Its tribal relation was as follows\\nA. Kekropis.\\nII. 971 d, First half of 4th Cent. III. 1092, 105/6 A.D.\\nB.C. III. 1 1 13, 143/4 A.D.\\nII. 555, 376/5 B.C. III. 1113 a, 143/4 A.D.\\nII. 799 c, 369/8 B.C. III. 1 1 14, 146/7 A.D.\\nII. 803 d, 366/5 B.C. III. 1 124, 148/9 A.D.\\nII. 1 177, ca. Mid. of 4th Cent. III. 1120, 150/1 A.D.\\nB.C. III. 1121, 155/6 A.D.\\nII. 943, 325/4 B.C. III. 1 128, 164/5 A.D.\\nII. 944, ca. 325/4 B.C. III. 1 133, 170/1 A.D.\\nII. 236, 313/2 B.C. III. 1138, 174/5 A.D.\\nII. 2338, III. 1035, ca. 180 A.D.\\nBulletin 17, p. 147, 126/5 B.C. III. 1281,\\nII. 471, 123/2 B.C. III. 1046, 182/3 A.D.\\nII. 470, 119/8 B.C. III. 1160, 192/3 A.D.\\nBulletin 17, p. 147, 114/3 B.C. III. 1163, 201/2 A.D.\\nII. 469, 107/6 B.C. III. 1171, 205/6 A.D.\\nII. 465, 105/4 B.C. III. 1 188, After 217/8 A.D.\\nII. 481, 45/4 B.C. III. 1177, 219/20 A.D.\\nII. 482. 38/7 B.C. III. 1202, 262/3 A.D.\\nIII. 1276, 23/2 B.C. III. 1230,\\nB. Demetrias.\\nII. 316, 283/2 B.C. IV. 2, 331 c, 268/7 B.C.\\nII. 335, 269/262 B.C.\\n1 Plut. Them., ch. XXII. 2 Plut. Phok., ch. XVIII.\\n3 Strab. I. pp. 65, 66.", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0033.jp2"}, "34": {"fulltext": "20 The Five Post-Kleisthenian Tribes.\\n4. Xypete. According to Milchhofer and Loper this deme was\\nlocated within the city limits on the road from Athens to Peirai-\\neus. Its tribal relation is as follows\\nA. Kekropis.\\nIV. 2, 128 c, 336/5 B.C. II. 1246, 320/19 B.C.\\nIV. 2, 563 b, 334/3 B.C. II. 470, 119/8 B.C.\\nII. 943, 325/4 B.C. II. 469, 107/6 B.C.\\nII. 944, ca. 325/4 B.C. II. 467, 102/1 B.C.\\nIV. 2, 184 b, Before 322/1 B.C.\\nB. Demetrias.\\nIV. 2, 251 b, 306/5 B.C. II. 324, 275/4 B.C.\\n5. Koile. This, too, was one of the urban denies, situated\\nprobably in the hollow between the Pnyx and Museion hills. It\\nwas in this deme near the Melitean gate that Kimon l Herodotus,\\nand Thucydides 2 were buried. Like Melite, it embraced a large\\nmetic population. Its tribal connection is indicated by the follow-\\ning table\\nA. Hippothontis\\nII. 971 e, First half of 4th Cent. II. 467, 102/1 B.C.\\nB.C. III. 1092, 105/6 A.D.\\nII. 1013, III. 1133, 170/1 A.D.\\nIV. 2, 767 b, 336-332 B.C. III. 1 142, ca. 180 A.D.\\nIV. 2, 245 b, Before 307/6 B.C. III. 1160, 192/3 A.D.\\nII. 470, 1 19/8 B.C. III. 1052, ca. Beg. of 3rd Cent.\\nII. 469, 107/6 B.C. A.D.\\nII. 465, 105/4 B.C.\\nB. Demetrias.\\nII. 316, 283/2 B.C. II. 324, 275/4 B.C.\\n6. Atene. The exact site of this deme has not yet been deter-\\nmined with certainty. However, there can be little doubt in re-\\n1 Herod. VI. 103. 2 Markellin. B/os Qovkv8L8ov 17.", "height": "4226", "width": "2417", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0034.jp2"}, "35": {"fulltext": "Antigonis and Demetrias. 2i\\ngard to its general location. As Milchhofer points out, in II.\\n869 and 944, it is mentioned in close connection with the other\\ndenies of the coast trittys of Antiochis. This would indicate that\\nit was to be sought in the southwestern part of Attica, near\\nAnaphlystos. I believe Lbper is correct in assuming that Ar^ms\\nand not A^viet? is to be read in Strabo IX. 398, where the MSS.\\nread A^vels which necessitates some change. If this is corrected\\nto A^viels. we have one deme of Hippothontis widely separated\\nfrom the rest of that tribe, and are compelled to assume a fourfold\\ndivision of Hippothontis, whereas by correcting to Kr-qveU we have\\na deme of Antiochis, the coast trittys of which was situated in\\nthis region. l Its tribal connection is shown bj^ the following\\ntable\\nA. Antiochis.\\nII. 869, Mid. of 4th Cent. B.C. II. 944, ca. 325/4 B.C.\\nII. 701, 345/4B.C.\\nB. Demetrias.\\nIV. 2, 269b, 302/1 B.C. 2 II. 859, 224/3 B -C.\\nC. Attalis.\\nII. 444, 161/0 B.C. II. 465, 105/4 B.C.\\nII. 470, 119/8 B.C.\\n7. Thorai. The location of Thorai is fairly well established.\\nStrabo 3 enumerates the coast demes of Attica, beginning with the\\nPeiraieus. The mention of Thorai in connection with Iyamptrai\\nshows its general situation. The order of enumeration is the re-\\nverse of what the trittys arrangement requires. L,6per 4 explains\\nx Cf. Loper, Die Trittyen und Demen Attikas, Mitth. d. d. Arch. Inst.\\nXVII. p. 335 and Note.\\n2 Wrongly transliterated as A\u00c2\u00a3r)v[Lefc~\\\\. Another error in the same inscrip-\\ntion is [$777a]i(etfs) for the eleventh proedros. All that is left on the stone\\nis the i. Restore [OtW]r(os), if the person s name is Theodorus, for Oinoe\\nwas a deme of Aiantis, and the eleventh proedros should be from that tribe.\\n3 Strabo IX. p. 398.\\n4 Mitth. d. d. Arch. Inst. XVII. p. 327 ff.", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0035.jp2"}, "36": {"fulltext": "22 The Five Post-Kleisthenean Tribes.\\nthis irregularity as due to the fact that Lamptrai is situated farther\\ninland and that for this reason Strabo, after giving those demes\\non the immediate coast, retraces his steps to record the demes\\nfarther inland. Such a deviation is not uncommon with Strabo,\\nThe tribal relation of Thorai is shown in the following table of in-\\nscriptions\\nA. Antiochis.\\nII. 803 d, 363/2 B.C. II. 469, 107/6 B.C.\\nII. 869, Mid. of 4th Cent. B.C. II. 481, 45/4 B.C.\\nII. 803 c, 342/1 B.C. III. 1120, 150/1 A.D.\\nII. 944, ca. 325/4 B.C. III. 1 163, 201/2 A.D.\\nII. 470, 1 19/8 B.C.\\nB. Demetrias.\\nIV. 2, 385 b, 237/6 B.C. II. 859, 233/2 B.C.\\nII. 859, 234/3 B.C.\\nThe question as to whether Agnous and Anakaia belonged to\\nDemetrias calls for some remarks at this point. Kirchner, in the\\narticle cited above, p. 9, assigns the deme Agnous to Demetrias.\\nAs stated elsewhere in this discussion, his authority is Stephanos\\nof Byzantion who says AyvoOs StJ/jlos iv rrj Atti/o? rrjs A^/z^T/oiaSos\\nj v\\\\rjs Ttves Se rrjs AKa/rnvrtSos 77 ws 3 jowi;(os, rfjs ArraXtSo?. This\\nis the only evidence that can be adduced at present to prove that\\nAgnous did belong to Demetrias. And while Stephanos assertion\\nis so straightforward, there are some peculiarities about it which\\nlead one to suspect its accuracy. In the first place Agnous is the\\nonly deme that Stephanos anywhere assigns either to Antigonis\\nor to Demetrias. Secondly, it betrays an apparent uncertainty in\\nregard to the tribe of Agnous during other periods than that in\\nwhich Demetrias was in existence. And yet there is abundant\\ninscriptional evidence that it belonged to Akamantis before 307\\nB.C., and to Attalis after 200 B.C. In his argument for the view\\ntaken, Kirchner says Da die Angaben des Stephanos uber die\\nattischen Demen sich als zuverlassig erwiesen haben, ist kein\\nGrund zum Zweifel vorhanden, dass Hagnous zwischen 307/6-200", "height": "4226", "width": "2417", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0036.jp2"}, "37": {"fulltext": "Antigonis and Demetrias. 23\\nder Demetrias angehort hat. Anyone who has made a careful\\nstudy of the denies of Attica must allow that Stephanos is gener-\\nally reliable in his assertions on that subject. But he is not infal-\\nlible. I may cite a few instances. He tells us that Melite be-\\nlonged to Oineis, Marathon to L,eontis, Aphidna to Iyeontis, and\\nBoutadai to Aigeis. These statements are not borne out by the\\ninscriptional evidence which, in the case of the denies mentioned, is\\nvery complete. Because of these reasons and the fact that the in-\\nscriptions, the only thoroughly reliable source of information on\\nthe subject, fail us for the period 307-200 B.C., the safest course\\nis to wait for inscriptional evidence. I shall not, therefore, follow\\nKirchner in assigning Agnous to Demetrias.\\nKirchner classes Anakaia also among the denies of Demetrias\\non the slight evidence of II. 859, (see above p. 3), where the\\nsecond thesmothetes in the list for 229/8 B.C. is from Anakaia\\nand immediately follows the one from Antigonis. This order\\nseems to indicate that Anakaia belonged to Demetrias, and in the\\nabsence of evidence to the contrary such an assumption would\\npass unchallenged, but in this case there is evidence against this\\nview. In the same archon list the polemarch is from Demetrias.\\nThis would necessitate the supposition that one tribe could be\\ndoubly represented on the board of archons. And while such an\\nassumption is substantiated by a few instances, mostly in late\\ntimes, the Athenians seem to have studiously avoided such a\\ndouble representation. Again, in the same inscription among the\\nthesmothetai for 236/5 B.C., the fifth is from Anakaia, where the\\norder requires Hippothontis, and that Anakaia did belong to\\nHippothontis at this time, is shown by the list of proedroi in II.\\n371, the date of which is about the middle of the third century,\\nat the time of twelve tribes. Here the tenth proedros is from\\nAnakaia and consequently from Hippothontis. These facts make\\nit improbable that Anakaia belonged to Demetrias. Further-\\nmore, the order in the archon lists does not conform so strictly to\\nthe tribal order as to necessitate such an assumption as Kirchner s.\\nFor, if so, it would be necessary to assign Eleusis to some other\\ntribe than Hippothontis, since it heads the list of Thesmothetai", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0037.jp2"}, "38": {"fulltext": "24 The Five Post-Kleisthenean Tribes.\\nfor 1 02/ 1 B.C. There are other irregularities in these lists which\\nare apparent to one on examination. Anakaia is also assigned to\\nHippothontis in IV. 2, 251 b, frg. 1. according to the restoration,\\nwhich here must be incorrect. The two partially destroyed\\ndeme names are restored as AvaKoueZs, and EAmovo-101 or\\nAxe/oSoixriot. This restoration necessitates an unparalleled dis-\\nsymmetry, in that the initial letter of AvaKaids would stand three\\nletter-spaces farther to the right than the corresponding letter of\\nEiXollovo-lol, and four farther than that of A^epSouo-tot. It is more\\nlikely that, if we restore EA.axovo-101 or A^epSovo-tot, the vAI of 1. 3\\nis part of some person s name.\\nIt may be urged that the Anakaia assigned by Kirchuer to De-\\nmetrias was not the deme of that name belonging to Hippothontis,\\nbut the one which in II. 996 is given under Akamantis according\\nto Kohler s restoration. 1 But I think it can be shown that his\\nrestoration of the inscription in general is incorrect. It is cer-\\ntainly so if the author has given us a faithful transcription. We\\nhave here an inscription of the stoichedon arrangement. In 1. 10,\\nthe letter which Kohler transfers to minuscules as T has the right\\nportion of the horizontal too long for a T. Furthermore, the per-\\npendicular is too far to the left for T. Not having the stone be-\\nfore me I cannot determine accurately the reading, but I should\\njudge that E was to be read here instead of T. We can then restore\\nKEIPIA] AAIin 1. 6 in place of Kohler s E I P E 2 I] AAI;\\nK O n P] E I O I in 1. 10 instead of l$HT]TIOI; and\\nA N A] K A I H 2 in 1. 14 the same as he suggests. We then have\\nthree demes all from the same tribe, Hippothontis and possibly\\nfour. Nor is this the strongest evidence. In II. 672, 376/5 B.C.\\nwe find that obios, .son of Smikythos of Keiriadai was\\nra/u as twv aXXwv 6eu v as our inscription falls in the first half of\\nthe fourth century B.C., I should identify Smikythos in II. 672\\nwith the one mentioned 1. 7 of II. 996. Again, in 1.8 there is\\ngiven T/DarogNt/coo-rpaT. In II. 2 1 26 we read NiKoo-rparos\\n1 He says Anakaia or Erikeia but the demotikon of Erikeia would be\\nEpiKeiijs here. Hence only Anakaia is possible.", "height": "4226", "width": "2417", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0038.jp2"}, "39": {"fulltext": "Antigonis and Demetrias. 25\\nNtKoo-rparo Kei/naS?7s which, as shown by the genitive ending-o for\\nlater-ov, falls in the same period as our inscription, for there we\\nfind the same writing. Likewise in II. 944, ca. 325/4 B.C. Niko-\\nteles, son of Xenotimos, of Kopros was diaitetes. The Xenotimos\\nis probably to be identified with the one in 1. 13 of II. 996. Lastly\\nin 1. 3 we have left 9 *Avtlk\\\\\u00e2\u0082\u00acov s. In II. 1006 we read\\nAntikles, son of Antiphanes, among the Dekeleians. The date of\\nthe inscription is about the middle of the fourth century. We\\nmay identify the two men with the name Antikles and restore in II.\\n996 [^AvTL f dvr]] which exactly fills the vacant space. We may\\nthen restore in 1. 2 AtKeXerjs and thus have four denies of Hippo-\\nthontis. In conclusion, not one of the names which Kohler\\nwould bring under Kiresidai and Sphettos occurs in those demes in\\nother inscriptions, while according to my restitution there are\\nfour such examples of coincidence. 1 From these facts it is clear\\nthat Anakaia belonged to Hippothontis alone down to 307/6 B.C.\\nand probable that it was not transferred to Demetrias during the\\nexistence of that tribe. The complexion of Demetrias, according\\nto the present known facts, is then as follows\\nDeme.\\nOriginal Tribe\\nI.\\n2.\\nHippotomadai\\nKothokidai\\nOineis.\\n3-\\n4-\\nMelite\\nXypete\\n1\\nj\\nKekropis.\\n5-\\nKoile\\nHippothontis.\\n6.\\n7-\\nAtene\\nThorai\\n1\\nAntiochis.\\nThis discussion of Demetrias shows that there are seven\\ndemes known to have belonged to it, all of which were taken\\nfrom the latter half of the list of the original ten tribes, two\\neach from Oineis, Kekropis, and Antiochis, and one from\\nthrough the kindness of Dr. A. Wilhelm, I have received, since writing\\nthe above, an impression of this inscription, which shows an E complete\\nexcept that the central horizontal is wanting. This makes my restoration\\ncertain.", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0039.jp2"}, "40": {"fulltext": "26 The Five Post-Kleisthenean Tribes.\\nHippothontis also that no one of these seven denies be-\\nlonged to its former tribe from 307-200 B.C.\\nFrom a survey of the source of the demes constituting the two\\ntribes, Antigonis and Demetrias, it becomes apparent that the\\nAthenians followed a definite scheme in assigning demes to them.\\nInasmuch as seven of the original tribes furnished two demes\\neach, it might properly be inferred that the plan was to take two\\ndemes from each tribe, and furthermore to draw upon the first five\\nfor Antigonis, and upon the last five for Demetrias. Such a\\nscheme would be natural in view of the fact that both tribes were\\ncreated at the same time and given the relative order corresponding\\nrespectively to father and son. This arrangement is thoroughly\\nin accord with the inscriptional evidence which we now possess.", "height": "4226", "width": "2417", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0040.jp2"}, "41": {"fulltext": "CHAPTER II.\\nPTOLEMAIS.\\ni. Evidence for the Existence of Thirteen Tribes.\\nUntil recent years, it had generally been supposed that after\\nPtolemais was created there were only eleven tribes at Athens, or\\nat most, twelve. This view has been disproved by the discovery\\nof an important inscription published by D. Philios in the\\nEc^/xepts Apx uo\\\\oyLKrj for 1 887. It is now certain that in the\\nlatter part of the third century B.C. the Athenians had thirteen\\ntribes. The evidence for this view is complete.\\n(1) In IV. 2, 385 d, 223/2 B.C., the date of the decree is the\\n3rd of Skirophorion, the last month of the Athenian year, coin-\\nciding with the 3rd of the thirteenth prytany. The mention of a\\nthirteenth prytany would of itself show that there were thirteen\\ntribes to prytanize, for each tribe held one and only one prytany\\nduring the same year. Furthermore, in the same inscription\\nthere is additional testimony. The boule, as stated here, con-\\nsisted of 650 members, and as each tribe furnished 50 members\\nthere must have been thirteen tribes.\\n(2) In IV. 2, 385 f, 226/5 or 2I 3/ 2 B.C. the date of the decree\\nis the 10th of Thargelion, the eleventh month, coinciding with\\nthe 6th of the twelfth prytany. This again indicates thirteen\\nprytanies, hence thirteen tribes.\\n(3) In II. 431, 220/19 B.C. we have the record of two decrees,\\nthe former falling in Boedromion and the 20+th of the third\\nprytany, the latter in the same month, either the 27th or 28th,\\nbut on the third of the fourth prytany. This could occur only\\nwhen there were thirteen tribes. For then in a common year, of\\nthe prytanies, three had twenty-eight days and the remaining ten\\ntwenty-seven each.\\n(4) In II. 392 1. 8 (last quarter of the third century B.C.) 1\\n*Cf. IV. 2, 385 c.", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0041.jp2"}, "42": {"fulltext": "28 The Five Post-Kleisthenean Tribes.\\nthe month is Skirophorion the prytany, as restored, is the\\ntwelfth. A more accurate restoration is, after 8, 9, 10, or 11\\nletters for the tribe, rpLTrjs kcu SeKarrjs irpvr. For by filling in the\\ninscription entirely on one side we can obtain the approximate\\nlength of each full line. This proves to be 50 letter spaces. It\\nis evident that after rrjs 1. 8 a whole line, minus the amount left\\nin 1. 9, must be restored. There are 19 letters left in 1. 9. Sub-\\ntracting 19 from 50 we get 31, the approximate number of letters\\nto be restored after rrjs. The maximum number of letters in the\\nname of the tribe is 11 (Hippothontis, the longest tribe name,\\nwas represented among the proedroi and consequently could not\\nhave been the prytauizing tribe). Trying SwSeKarr/s we get\\n11+9 4=24 for the number of letters, whereas we should have\\nabout 31 with TptV^s kcu SeKdrrjs we have 11 16 4=31 the re-\\nquired number. We may then confidently restore Tpir-qs kcu\\neKaTr] s as the number of the prytany.\\n(5) As accumulative evidence we may cite the archon lists\\n(p. 2 ff.). In list 4 f 234/3 B.C.) the occurrence together of\\nthesmothetai No. 1 of Iyamptrai and No. 2 of Thorai, shows that\\nAutigonis and Demetrias were both in existence at this time. In\\nlist 8 (229/8 B.C.) the presence of thesmothetai No. 1 of Aitha-\\nlidai and No. 5 of Aigilia proves the co-existence of Antigonis\\nand Ptolemais and the fact that the fiamXevs is from Atene tends\\nto prove that the two tribes, Antigonis and Demetrias, were not\\nmerged in one. In list 11 (224/3 B.C.) the presence of thesmo-\\nthetai No. 1 from Atene and No. 4 from Aphidna proves again\\nthe co-existence of Demetrias and Ptolemais. So in list 13\\n(222/1 B.C.) among the thesmothetai are representatives from\\nboth Antigonis and Ptolemais. These facts can leave no doubt\\nthat the three tribes, Antigonis, Demetrias, and Ptolemais, ex-\\nisted side by side during the last quarter of the third century\\nB.C.\\n2. Evidence for Dating the Creation of Ptolemais.\\na. Paus. I. 5, 5. OtSe fxev elcriv A^i/aiois \u00e2\u0082\u00ac7rwvv/xot rwv dp^atwv.\\nvcrrepov Se kcu oltto ru v8e f v\\\\a s e)(ovcnv, AttciXov tov M.vcrov kcu YlroXe-\\npuaiov tov PuyvTTTtov kcu kclt \u00e2\u0082\u00acyu,\u00e2\u0082\u00ac yjht) /?acriAe D5 ASpiavov k. t. A.", "height": "4226", "width": "2417", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0042.jp2"}, "43": {"fulltext": "Ptolemais. 29\\nPans. I. 6, 8. Tavrrjs ty}s ywaiKos (Berenike) epaaOeU (Ptolemy\\nSoter) 7raiSas e\u00c2\u00a3 avr^s iiroiyaaTO koI a)? rjv 01 ttXyjctiov Yf TeXevrrj, UroXe-\\npxxiov Ptolemy PhiladelpllUS d7re A.i7r\u00c2\u00a3v Alyvirrov (3a nXeveLV, d ov\\n/cat AOrjvatoLS iarlv rj f vXr}, yeyovoYa i HepevcKrjs, aXX* ovk Ik rrj s\\nAvTiTrdrpov Ovyarpos (Kurydike).\\nPans. I. 8, 6. twv Se aAAcov 6 yaei/ $tXa8eA os etrriv ov Kat irporepov\\npvrjp.r)V iv rols itraivvpLOis liroL-qa-dp.-qv\\nFrom this testimony it is evident that Pansanias regarded\\nPtolemy Philadelphus as the eponymos of Ptolemais. And if he\\nwere correct, it would necessitate the assumption that the tribe\\nwas created not later than 247 B.C., the date of Ptolemy\\nPhiladelphus death. From evidence which will be adduced\\nlater, it will be proved that Ptolemais was not created so early,\\nand therefore Pausanias statement must be attributed to his inac-\\ncurate historical knowledge betrayed in many other instances.\\nAnother piece of evidence which caused this early date to seem\\nthe probable one, is that furnished by an epigram of Kallimachos, 1\\nwhose death occurred about 240 B.C. This runs\\n*Hv Si\u00c2\u00a3?7 Ttpxip^ov iv*A i,$o s, 6 j pa TcvBr\\\\ai\\nyj tl Trepl ^/vyrj^j rj iraXi 7ro ecrecu,\\nSi\u00c2\u00a3e x#ai (pvXrjs IlToA.\u00e2\u0082\u00ac//.aiSos, vlea 7raTp6?\\nUavaavtov S^eis 8 avrov iv evaefiiwv.\\nBeloch dismisses this evidence with the remark that either\\nKallimachos is not the author or he lived much later than is\\ngenerall}^ supposed. There is a more plausible explanation.\\nThere was a tribe called Ptolemais at Alexandria, as shown by\\nthe following taken from Westermann s fiioypa j oi p. 50. AttoAAwvios\\n6 twv ApywvavTLKwv 7rotr)T7] s to fxkv yevos AXe^avSpevs uios Se ^lAAeoos, us\\nSi nve? IAAews, f vXrjs Ilr oXe/xat 80s That Timarchos was from this\\nPtolemais is rendered probable from two considerations. First,\\nan Athenian citizen was generally mentioned not as a resident of\\nthis or that tribe but of a certain deme. Secondly, the associa-\\ntion of Timarchos with Apollonios and others at the court of\\n1 Anthol. Graec. VII. 520", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0043.jp2"}, "44": {"fulltext": "30 The Five Post-Kleisthenean Tribes.\\nPtolemy Buergetes cf Suiads AttoWuvlos AXe^avSpevs iiruv\\n7rocrjTrj Btarpiif/as iv PoSa vlbs 2tAA.ea fxa0r}T7] KaAAt /xd^ov, avy^povos\\nJijpaTOcrOevovs Kat Etic^oyotWo? /cat Tifxap^pv^ iirX IlToAe/xatov tov evepyirov\\ni7TLKXr)0evTO s, Kat StaSo^os EpaTcxr^evous yevo/xevos iv ry irpovTao-ia ty}s\\niv AXe^avSpeta (3tf3Xto0yKrf^.\\nb. Having thus explained the two passages above which indi-\\ncate an early date, let us see what proof may be advanced for another\\ndating. Under Attalis and Hadrianis which were later created there\\nappear two new denies, Apollonieis and Antinoeis. These were\\nnamed in honor of persons intimately associated with the epony-\\nmoi of their respective tribes the former from Apollonis, the\\nwife of Attalos, the latter from Antinoos, the favorite of Hadrian.\\nIn like manner, there appears a new deme under Ptolemais,\\nnamely, Berenikidai. The name itself suggests Berenike as the\\nperson after whom the deme was named. We are naturally led\\nto expect that this Berenike stood in some close relation to the\\nPtolemy who was eponymos of the new tribe. The only persons\\nnamed Berenike who stood in such a relation to any of the Ptole-\\nmies are, first, Berenike, the second wife of Ptolemy Lagus, and\\nmother of Ptolemy Philadelphia secondly, Berenike, the daughter\\nof Ptolemy Philadelphia, who was married to Antiochos Theos,\\nking of Syria, and put to death by her rival Eaodike about 247\\nB.C. thirdly, Berenike, queen of Cyrene, and afterwards wife of\\nPtolemy Euergetes 247-222 B.C. That the deme was named\\nafter this last Berenike is expressly stated by Stephanos of Byzan-\\ntioil, who says BepeviKtSat, r}p,os rrjs IlToAcfta tSo? f)vXr}s. SeKa yap\\nf vXas ZxpvTes AO-qvaloi 7rpoa-i0ecrav 8vo, AvrtyovtSa /cat Arj/nrfTptdSa\\nKaXovvTts, varepov Se ArraAtSa Kat IlToAe//,atSa, Sta rwv iTroivvpuov\\nevepyeryjOevTes /JacrtAeW. arro Se /SepevLKrjs t^s Maya Ovyarpos,\\nyvvaiKo? Se UroXep,aLOv, oyvopidcrOrjcrav /3epevLKL8ai ol SrjfxoTat.\\nThus we determine that it was Berenike, queen of Cyrene, after\\nwhom the deme was named. But there may still be some ques-\\ntion as to whether the eponymos of the tribe was her husband,\\nPtolemy Euergetes, or her son, Ptolemy Philopator. It can\\nscarcely be the latter, for the relation existing between Ptolemy\\nPhilopator and his mother was not such asto admit this possibility.", "height": "4226", "width": "2417", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0044.jp2"}, "45": {"fulltext": "Ptolemais. 3 1\\nAs is well known, soon after succeeding to the throne in 222 B.C.\\nhe consented to the assassination of his mother. 1 We must there-\\nfore assume that the tribe was created in honor of Ptolemy Euer-\\ngetes and hence not later than 222 B.C., the date of his death.\\nLet us now seek to define more closely the date of its creation.\\nFor this purpose our archon lists furnish the desired evidence. In\\n236/5 B.C. Phlya which was reallotted to Ptolemais is still under\\nits old tribe, Kekropis. The same is true for 233/2 B.C. Ptole-\\nmais, therefore, was not yet created. But in 229/8 B.C. we find\\nPtolemais represented on the board of thesmothetai, and so in\\nnearly every year after this for which we have such lists. The\\nlimits thus obtained are 233/2 229/8 B.C. On historical evidence\\nit can be shown that the latter date is probably the exact year in\\nwhich the tribe was instituted. It was not till this date that\\nAthens was freed from Macedonia, and as this country was hostile\\nto Ptolemy it is inconceivable that the Athenians could have cre-\\nated a tribe in his honor while they were still under Macedonian\\ndomination.\\nAs seen in the case of Antigonis and Demetrias, the tribes were\\ninstituted in honor of the eponymos in return for some service on\\nhis part. The same is true for Attalis and Hadrianis, as will be\\nseen later. We should therefore expect to find that Ptolemy had\\nshown himself the benefactor of the Athenians thereby receiving\\nthis extraordinary honor. We are not left entirely without evi-\\ndence of his benefaction. In 229 B.C., occurred the death of De-\\nmetrios II. of Macedonia, and the accession to the throne of An-\\ntigonos Doson. It was at this time that Diogenes, the Macedo-\\nnian general in command of the garrison in Athens, was induced\\nby Aratos to deliver the city to the Athenians on payment of 150\\ntalents. This sum was advanced to the Athenians, nominally, by\\nAratos, but in reality by Ptolemy who required that the city should\\nremain independent. 2 It is therefore highly probable that it was\\nin recognition of this favor that the Athenians created the tribe\\n^olyb. XV. 25 and V. 36-39.\\n2 Holm Hist, of Greece, IV. p. 228 ff. English translation.", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0045.jp2"}, "46": {"fulltext": "32 The Five Post-Kleisthenean Tribes.\\nPtolemais. The Athenians most prominent in this transaction\\nwere the two brothers Mikion and Eurykleides 1 who showed a de-\\ncided leaning toward the Ptolemies. 2 We can even imagine that\\nit was at their instigation that the tribe was instituted.\\nKohler s assumption that the tribe was created during the reign\\nof Ptolemy Philopator 3 rests upon a wrong interpretation of IV. 2,\\n385 c, the date of which is 237/6 B.C. and is not to be con-\\nnected with the particular state of affairs in Crete recorded by\\nPolybios IV. 53-55 and VII. 12.\\n3. Tribal Order of Ptolemais.\\nWhen Ptolemais was created there were already twelve tribes in\\nexistence. Ptolemais was given the seventh place. Again,\\nwhen Hadrianis was created later, there was the same number and\\nHadrianis on this occasion was given the seventh place. This is a\\nstriking coincidence and probably has a natural cause. It does\\nnot seem likely that the Athenians assigned them the seventh\\nplace in the official tribal order merely to make an equal division\\nof the preexisting twelve, for if so we might reasonably expect\\na similar procedure in the case of Antigonis and Demetrias. I be-\\nlieve there is a more satisfactory explanation. It will be observed\\nthat this position in the tribal order is exactly analogous to that of\\nthe intercalary month in the Athenian calendar. This fact sug-\\ngests the possibility that Ptolemais and Hadrianis were given the\\nseventh position to bring them into some relation with that month.\\nThis view finds some confirmation in the fact that, after the crea-\\ntion of Hadrianis, the intercalary month was called Hadrianion. 4\\n4. DEMES OF PTOLEMAIS.\\n1. Themakos. This deme was situated close to the city as in-\\ndicated by Andoc. De Mysteriis 17. From the topographical\\nreferences in this speech one would naturally infer that Themakos\\nT II. 379; Plut. Arat. 34 and 41 Kohler, Hermes VII. p. 3ff.\\n2 Polyb. V. 106. 3 See his note to IV. 2, 385 c.\\n4 III. 1121, 1124, 1138, 1188, and 1217.", "height": "4226", "width": "2417", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0046.jp2"}, "47": {"fulltext": "Ptolemais. 33\\nwas to be located southeast of the city. Its tribal relation is in-\\ndicated by the following table\\nA. Erechtheis.\\nII. 995, 4th Cent. B.C.\\nB. Ptolemais.\\nII. 471, 123/2 B.C. II. 469, 107/6 B.C.\\nII. 470, 1 19/8 B.C. II. 465, 105/4 B.C.\\n2. Ikaria. (See under Antigonis. p. 9 if.).\\n3. Kydantidai. Its location is unknown. There is no inscrip-\\ntional evidence to prove that this deme was transferred to\\nPtolemais. The only authority for such a transference is the\\ntestimony of Phrynichos in Stephanos of Byzantion. His state-\\nments in regard to the demes are invariably reliable. In the\\nabsence of any evidence to the contrary, we may safely class it\\namong the demes of Ptolemais. It occurs in inscriptions only\\nonce after 229 B.C. It is not impossible that its name was\\nchanged and that it is to be identified with some of the new\\ndemes found under Ptolemais. Its tribal relations is\\nA. Aigeis.\\nIV. 2, 995 b, First half of 4th II. 1020, ca. 330 B.C.\\nCent. B.C. II. 943, 325/4 B.C.\\nII. 870, Mid. of 4th Cent. B.C. II. 329, ca. 273/2 B.C.\\nII. 872, 341/0 B C. IV. 2, 385 b, 237/6 B.C.\\nII. 172, 340-336 B.C.\\n4. Konthyle. The exact situation is not known, but it is gen-\\nerally assigned to the inland trittys of Pandionis, the chief deme of\\nwhich is Paiania. That it belonged to both tribes is also stated\\nby the scholiast on Aristoph. Wasps, 233. The inscriptions show-\\ning its tribe are", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0047.jp2"}, "48": {"fulltext": "34\\n7*he Five Post-Kleisthenean Tribes.\\nA. Pandionis.\\nII. 865, 4th Cent. B. C. II. 873, ca. End of 4th Cent.\\nII. 698, 351/0 B. C. B. C.\\nIV. 2, 871 b, ca. Mid. of 4th IV. 2, 565 b, 303/2 B. C.\\nCent. B. C.\\nB. Ptolemais.\\nIV. 2, 477 d, 108/7 B.C. III. 1 163, 201/2 A. D.\\n5. Hekale. The deme is to be sought in the inland trittys of\\nLeontis. The legend which states that Theseus was entertained\\nhere by Hekale on his way to Marathon to slay the Marathonian\\nbull, indicates that it was on the route to Marathon. Its tribal re-\\nlation is indicated as follows\\nA. Leontis.\\nII. 864, 4th Cent. B. C. II. 942, 329/8 B. C.\\nII. 1237, 364/3 B. C. II. 1040, Mid. of 3rd Cent. B. C.\\nB. Ptolemais.\\nIV. 2, 477 c, 153/2 B. C. IV. 2, 477 d, 108/7 B. C.\\nII. 956, Latter half of 2nd Cent. II. 469, 107/6 B. C.\\nB. C. III. 1153, ca. 190 A. D.\\n6. Prospalta. The site of this deme was at or near the modern\\nvillage, Kalybia, in the Mesogeion. This is shown by the\\nsepulchral steles 1 found here, and this general locality for it is\\nindicated by the mortgage record found at Porto Raphti. 2 In the\\ndeme there was a temple of Demeter and Kore. 3 Its tribal con-\\nnection is indicated in the following table\\nA. Akamantis.\\nII. 660, 389/8 B. C. II. 943, 325/4 B. C.\\nII. 1017, 350-250 B. C. II. Add. 252 b, 305/4 B. C.(?)\\nII. 1020, ca. 330 B. C. IV. 2, 385 b, 237/6 B. C.\\nII. 942, 329/8 B. C.\\nII. 2512 and 2515. 2 IV. 2, 1142 c 3 Paus. I. 31, 1.", "height": "4226", "width": "2417", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0048.jp2"}, "49": {"fulltext": "Ptolemais. 35\\nB. Ptolemais.\\nII. 470, 119/8 B. C. III. 1 138, 174/5 A. D.\\nII. 469, 107/6 B. C. III. 1 163, 201/2 A. D.\\nII. 482, 38/7 B. C.\\n7. Boutadai. Boutadai probata was situated in the city trittys\\nof Oineis, the chief deme of which was Lakiadai. 4 Stephanos of\\nByzantion says that it was a deme of Aigeis. This statement is\\nnot borne out h\\\\ inscriptional evidence. The evidence for its\\ntribal relation is as follows\\nA. Oineis.\\nII. 803d, 378/7 B.C. IV. 2, 868 b, Latter half of 4th\\nII. 868, 360/59 B.C. Cent. B.C.\\nB. Ptolemais.\\nII. 421, 141/0 B.C. III. 1121, 155/6 A.D.\\nII. 470, 1 1 9/8 B.C. III. 1153, ca. 190 A.D.\\nIII. 1277, 23/2 B.C. III. 1176, ca. 219/20 A.D.\\n8. Phlya. Harpokration says that Euripides was from this deme.\\nThe literary evidence as to its tribe is the testimony of Hesychios\\nand the scholium to Aristoph. Wasps, 234. In both of these\\nit is said to be a deme of Ptolemais. Its location is well indicated\\nby the fact that it and Athmonou were contiguous. In III. 61\\nA col. II. 1. 13, a piece of property is mentioned as situated in\\nboth Phlya and Athmonon. As the identification of Athmonon\\nwith the modern Marousi is certain, we may locate Phlya at Cha-\\nlandri close to Marousi. This site is indicated farther by a sepul-\\nchral stele found here 2 and by a mortgage record 3 found at So-\\ncharia near Marousi, which stated that the value of a piece of land\\nover and above one talent reserved as securhy for a wife s dowry,\\nx See Milchhofer, Untersuch. iiber d. Demenordnung d. Kleisthenes,\\np. 27.\\n*1I. 2646. 3 II. 1 1 13.", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0049.jp2"}, "50": {"fulltext": "36 The Five Post-Kleisthenean Tribes.\\nguaranteed a loan made by the Phlyans, the L,ycomidai, and the\\nKekropidai. Its tribal relation is indicated by numerous inscrip-\\ntions, as\\nA. Kekropis.\\nII. 1 176, Beg. of 4th Cent. B.C. II. 701, 345/4 B.C.\\nII. 644, 399/8 B.C. II. 562, 339/8 B.C.\\nII. 652, 398/7 B.C. IV. 2, 767 b, 332/1 B.C.\\nII. 670, 377/6 B.C. II. 943. 325/4 B.C.\\nII. 803 d, 360/59 B.C. II. 944, ca. 325/4 B.C.\\nII. 866, ca. 360 B.C. II. 245, Before 307/6 B.C.\\nIV. 2, 556 b, 352/1 B.C. II. 316, 283/2 B.C.\\nII. 698, 351/0 B.C. II. 859, 236/5 B.C.\\nII. 75, 346/5 B.C. II.859, 233/2 B.C.\\nB. Ptolemais.\\nII.\\n956,\\nLatter half of 2nd Cent.\\nIII.\\n1092,\\n105/6 A.D.\\nB.C\\nk\\nIII.\\n1113,\\n143/4 A.D.\\nBulletin\\n17, p. 146,\\n129/8 B.C.\\nIII.\\n1113a, 143/4 A.D\\nII.\\n47i,\\n123/2 B.C.\\nIII.\\n1114,\\n146/7 A.D.\\nII.\\n47o,\\n1 1 9/8 B.C.\\nIII.\\n1124,\\n148/9 A.D.\\nBulletin, 17, p. 147, 117/6 B.C. III. 1119, ca. 150 A.D.\\nIV. 2, 477 d, 108/7 B.C. III. 1121, 155/6 A.D.\\nII. 469, 107/6 B.C. III. 1 128, 164/5 A D\\nII. 465, 105/4 B.C. HI. 1133. 170/1 A.D.\\nII. 467, 102/1 B.C. III. 1 138, 174/5 A.D.\\nII. 863, First half of 1st Cent. III. 1142, ca. 180 A.D.\\nB.C. III. 1 147. 190/1 A.D.\\nII. 482, 38/7 B.C. III. 1 160, 192/3 A.D.\\nIII. 1277, 23/2 B.C. III. 1163, 201/2 A.D.\\nIII. 1008, 14-37 A. D. III. 1171, 205/6 A.D.\\nIII. 1076, 22/3 A.D. III. 1176, ca. 219/20 A.D.\\nIII. 1091, 85/6 A.D. III. 1186, ca. 225 A.D.\\nIII. 1093, 103/4A.D.\\n9. Oinoe. According to Harpokration this deme was located\\nnear Eleutherai. His assertion is substantiated by the evidence", "height": "4226", "width": "2417", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0050.jp2"}, "51": {"fulltext": "Ptolemais. 37\\nof other writers There was another deme called Oinoe which\\nwill be mentioned under Attalis. The tribal relation of the former\\nis indicated as follows\\nA. Hippothontis\\nII. 804 A, 333/2 B.C. II. 944, ca. 325/4 B.C.\\nII. 943, 325/4 B.C. II. 1013,\\nB. Ptolemais.\\nII. 956, Latter half of 2nd Cent. II. 469, 107/6 B.C.\\nB.C.\\n10. Aphidna. Nikandros of Thyateira (before 350 A. D. is\\nauthority for the statement that Aphidna, Perrhidai, Titakidai,\\nand Thyrgonidai were transferred from Aiantis 2 and so far as\\nthere is any inscriptional evidence at hand it is in accord with this\\ntestimony. The provenience of only two sepulchral steles can be\\ncited to show the location these are from Patissia 3 and Menidi\\nbut the evidence afforded by the decree in Dem. XVIII. 38, forces\\nus to look for the deme at a greater distance from Athens and\\nnearer the frontier. The order in which the places, where arti-\\ncles were to be collected, are mentioned, is extremely significant\\nit is Eleusis,Phyle, Aphidna, Rhamnous, and Sounion. Although\\nthe decree is probably spurious the facts presented in it are of\\nvalue in locating the deme Aphidna. They indicate that it was\\nnear the northern frontier of Attica, between Phyle and Rham-\\nnous. Milchhofer identifies it with the modern Kotroni, on the\\nleft bank of the Charadra, some distance above Marathon. 5 Its\\ntribal connection is shown in the following table\\n1 Her. V. 74 Thuc. II. 18, VIII. 98 Diod. Sic. IV. 60 Plin. IV. 7, n.\\n2 Cf. Harpokration s. v. Qvpywvidai\\n3 II. 1911. 4 IV. 2, 1893 b.\\n5 Cf also S. Wide, Aphidna in Nordattika, Mitth. d. d. Arch. Inst. XXI.\\nP- 385 A-", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0051.jp2"}, "52": {"fulltext": "38 The Five Post-Kleisthenean Tribes.\\nA. Aiantis.\\nI. 299, ca. 444 B. C. II. 803 b, 342/1 B. C.\\nIV. 2, Add. 556 d, First half of II. 943, 325/4 B. C.\\n4th Cent. B. C. II. 944, ca. 325/4 B. C.\\nII. 652, 398/7 B. C. IV. 2, 184 b, Before 322/1 B. C.\\nII. 696, ca. Mid. of 4th Cent. II. 324, 275/4 B. C.\\nB. C. IV. 2, 381 b, 235/4 B. C.\\nB. Ptolemais.\\nII. 859, 224/3 B. C. II. 467, 102/1 B. C.\\nII. 471, 123/2 B. C. II. 985, 98/7 B. C.\\nII. 470, 1 19/8 B. C. II. 482, 38/7 B. C.\\nII. 469, 107/6 B. C. III. 1076, 22/3 A. D.\\nII. 465, 105/4 B. C.\\nC. Hadrianis.\\nIII. 1 1 13 a, 143/4 A. D. III. 1 160, 192/3 A. D.\\n11. Titakidai. For the location see under Perrhidai. Its\\nearlier tribal relation is vouched for by Nikandros who says it was\\na deme of Aiantis. 1 Stephanos of Byzantion says it belonged to\\nAntiochis. I should prefer the testimony of Nikandros. The\\ndeme was named in honor of Titakos who betrayed Aphidna to\\nthe Dioskouroi. The inscriptions which show its tribe are\\nA. Ptolemais.\\nIII. 1124, 148/9 A. D. III. 1121, 155/6 A.D.\\n12. Thyrgonidai. For location see under Perrhidai. There is\\nno positive inscriptional evidence of its tribal relation, but in II.\\n991 there is left on the stone \u00c2\u00a9Y-, the initial letters of some deme\\nname belonging to Ptolemais. In the light of Nikandros statement\\nnoted at p. 37, and the testimony of Demetrios of Skepsis (before\\n350 A. D. to the same effect, it is safe to assume that \u00c2\u00a9vpywviSai\\nshould be restored in this inscription.\\n1 See under Aphidna.", "height": "4226", "width": "2450", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0052.jp2"}, "53": {"fulltext": "Ptolemais. 39\\n13. Perrhidai. The general location of this deme can be in-\\nferred with considerable certainty from the testimony of Hesychios,\\nwho says it was a deme of Attica in Aphidna. From this state-\\nment and that of Nikandros, it is indicated that Titakidai, Thyr-\\ngonidai, and Perrhidai bore some close relation to Aphidna. This\\nis further corroborated by the fact that all four were transferred\\nto Ptolemais. They may have formed a tetrapolis as in the case\\nof Marathon, Oinoe, Trikorynthos, and Probalinthos. What-\\never the close connection may have been, it shows that the three\\nmust be sought for in the neighborhood of Aphidna. In II. 991,\\nIIE-, the initial letters of some deme of Ptolemais are left on the\\nstone these may be for IleppiSai. Aside from this, there is no\\ninscriptional evidence for its tribal relation. Here too, Stephanos\\nof Byzantion is probably in error in assigning Perrhidai to\\nAntiochis.\\n14. Aigilia. The site of this deme is identified with the modern\\nvillage Olympos. This general locality is indicated by Strabo 1\\nThe deme was famed for its dried figs. 2 The inscriptions\\nwhich indicate its tribal connection are\\nA. Antiochis.\\nII. 644, 399/8 B. C. II. 943, 325/4 B. C.\\nII. 869, ca. Mid. of 4th Cent. II. 944, ca. 325/4 B. C.\\nB. C. IV. 2, 269 b, 302/1 B. C.\\nII. 114 C, 343/2 B. C.\\nB. Ptolemais.\\nII. 859, 229/8 B. C. II. 469, 107/6 B. C.\\nIV. 2, 407 k, 189/8 B. C. II. 467, 102/1 B. C.\\nII. 956, Latter half 2d Cent. B.C.\\n15. Melainai. There is no inscriptional evidence of its tribe\\nprior to the time of Ptolemais. Stephanos of Byzantion states\\nthat it belonged to Antiochis. His testimony is questioned by\\nLoper. 3 According to Polyainos I. 19, it was a fortified place on\\nStrab. IX. 398.\\n2 Cf Philemon in Athen. XIV. 652 e. and Theocr. I. 147.\\n3 Mitth. d. d. arch. Inst. XVII. p. 426 N. 1.", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0053.jp2"}, "54": {"fulltext": "40 The Five Post-Kleisthenean Tribes.\\nthe confines of Attica and Boeotia. Here, according to the legend,\\nMelanthos, the Athenian general, gained a victory over Xanthios,\\nthe Boeotian, by a strategem, in commemoration of which\\nan annual festival, called the Apatouria, as if from avarr), was\\ninstituted. Reasoning from the fact that the Apatouria was cele-\\nbrated in Panaktou, Milchhofer concludes that Melainai was situ-\\nated near this place, which was in the plain now called Skurta,\\nabove the modern village of Kuvasala. As shown by II. 991., it\\nbelonged to Ptolemais in the early history of that tribe. It is men-\\ntioned only once more in connection with any tribe, viz. III.\\n1 1 47, 1 90/ 1 A. D. where it is under Ptolemais.\\n16. Pentele. This was located in the vicinity of the marble\\nquarries, probably on the site of the modern convent Mendeli. It\\ngave its name to the celebrated Pentelic marble and furnished a\\nnew name to the mountains, formerly called Brilessos. Here\\nagain, we have no inscriptional data to determine its tribe prior to\\nthe time of Ptolemais. Stephanos of Byzantion states that it be-\\nlonged to Antiochis. Since the inland trittys of Antiochis in-\\ncluded this section of Attica, we may accept his testimony. The\\ndeme is mentioned as early as the fifth century B. C. Its later\\ntribal relation is shown by one inscription\\nA. Ptolemais.\\nIII. 1133, 170/1 A.D.\\n17. Kolone The site of this Kolone is not known. The in-\\nscriptional evidence for its tribe is as follows\\nA. Aigeis.\\nII. 643, 400/399 B.C. II. 324, 275/4 B.C.\\nII. 660, 390/89 B.C. II. 338, 273/2 B.C.\\nII. 870, Mid. of 4th Cent. B.C. II. 329, 272/1 B.C.\\nII. 872, 341/0 B.C. II. 859, 237/6 B.C.\\nIV. 2, 1025 b, Before 307/6 B.C. II. 471, 123/2 B.C.\\nII. 1023, ca. End of 4th Cent.* II. 469, 107/6 B.C.\\nB.C. II. 465, 105/4 B.C.", "height": "4226", "width": "2450", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0054.jp2"}, "55": {"fulltext": "Ptolemais. 41\\nIn all but two of these references 1 the demesman is cited as\\n\u00e2\u0082\u00acK KoAtoVOV.\\nB. Leontis.\\nII. 864, 4th Cent. B.C. Bulletin 17, p. 147, 118/7 B.C.\\nII. 799 c, 369/8 B.C. III. 1076, 22/3 A.D.\\nII. 991, ca. 200 B.C. III. 1091, 85/6 A.D.\\nII. 470, 119/8 B.C. III. 1128, 164/5 A.D.\\nIn every case under Leontis the citation has KoXuvfjOtv or\\nI\u00c2\u00a3.o\\\\a)vr}\\nC. Antiochis.\\nII. 869, Mid. of 4th Cent. B.C. II. 944, ca. 325/4 B.C.\\nIn both cases the plural form Ko\\\\(Dw} s(-eLs) is given which\\npoints to a singular KoAwveus for which KoXoyvrjOev would probably\\nhave been written just as under Leontis. Compare Ay KvXrjs (-els)\\nbut singular AyKvXyjOev.\\nD. Ptolanais.\\nII. 471, 123/2 B.C. III. 1128, 164/5 A.D.\\nIII. 1093, 103/4 A.D. III. 1 138, 174/5 A.D.\\nIII. 1120, 1 50/ 1 A.D. III. 1153, ca. 190 A.D.\\nHere we find only KoAwvi^ev.\\nAs KoAwvos would not yield KoXuvrjOev nor KoAwv^s for the\\ndemotikon, it is apparent that there were two different names,\\nKoAwvos and KoAwv^. The deme of the former name belonged\\nonly to Aigeis. There were two demes of the latter name, as\\nshown by the fact that it is found belonging to two different\\ntribes at one and the same period. This is not infrequently the\\ncase with demes which owe their names to some local characteris-\\ntic as Kolone does. 2 Inasmuch as the Kolone of Leontis re-\\nmained in this tribe throughout Roman times, and that of Antio-\\n1 II. 643 and II. 1023.\\n2 Cf Halai, Oinoe, Oion, Potamos, Eitea, etc.", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0055.jp2"}, "56": {"fulltext": "42 The Five Post-Kleisthenean Tribes.\\nchis did not, it is doubtless the latter one that is found under\\nPtolemais.\\n1 8. Semachidai. This deme together with Ikaria and Plotheia\\nformed the Bpakria, 1 and inasmuch as the exact site of the last\\ntwo demes is known, the general location of Semachidai is also\\ndeterminable. Semachidai is found under Antiochis and Ptole-\\nmais at the same time. Dittenberger 2 expresses the opinion that\\nwe have here a confusion with Themakos. This involves the\\nchange of a single letter, for in late times, the demotikon was gen-\\nerally abbreviated. Accordingly we find H M A and 2HMA\\nregularly for Themakos and Semachidai. His explanation, how-\\never, seems extremely fanciful and is disproved by the facts.\\n2HMA surely stands for Semachidai, for the same name men-\\ntioned in III. 1 1 28 with the demotikon SHMA recurs in III.\\n1 1 29 with the demotikon 3HMAX which can stand only for\\nSemachidai. I think a more likely explanation is that Sema-\\nchidai was a double deme like Agryle, L,amptrai, Paiania,\\nPergase, Potamos, etc. I suspect there are many more such\\ndouble demes. Indeed it is only recently that an inscription was\\nfound proving this to be the case with Potamos. The inscrip-\\ntions showing the tribe of Semachidai are\\nA. Antiochis.\\nII. 869, Mid. of 4th Cent, II. 467, 102/1 B. C.\\nB. C. II. 481, 45/4 B. C.\\nII. 943, 325/4 B. C. III. 1 138, 174/5 A. D.\\nII. 471, 123/2 B. C. III. 1036, ca. 200 A. D.\\nII. 470, 1 19/8 B. C. III. 1 163, 201/2 A. D.\\nII. 465, 107/6 B. C. III. 1171, 205/6 A. D.\\nB. Ptolemais.\\nIII. 1128, 164/5 A. D. III. 1171, 205/6 A. D.\\nPerhaps Semachidai is the deme name in II. 991 which Kohler\\ndoubtfully transcribes by [SA The reading must have\\na Cf. Papers of the American School, V. p. 47 ff.\\nHermes IX. p. 385 ff.", "height": "4226", "width": "2450", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0056.jp2"}, "57": {"fulltext": "Ptolemais. 43\\nbeen indistinct when he examined the stone, for even earlier\\neditors did not succeed in deciphering anything.\\n19. Berenikidai. As mentioned previously in this paper, Bere-\\nnikidai was named in honor of Berenike, queen of Cyrene. Prob-\\nably this should be interpreted as meaning that some preexisting\\ndeme was re-named, for it seems hardly reasonable to suppose that\\na new deme was created outright. Inasmuch as it naturally occurs\\nunder Ptolemais only it is unnecessary to give the inscriptions\\nin which its tribe is indicated. The references are very numerous.\\n20. Hyporeia. The only indication of the site of this deme is\\nthe name, which means sub monte. It may have been situated\\non the slope of Mt. Kithairon. The evidence for its tribal rela-\\ntion is II. 991 where it is among the demes of Ptolemais. It\\noccurs again in III. 1122, 156/7 A. D. with no indication of its\\ntribe.\\n21. Petaliai. At the entrance to the Buripos, close to the\\nsouthern extremity of Euboia, there are four small islands called\\nPetaliai. I think it is not over bold to assume that these islands\\ncame to be represented in the Athenian government at some\\nperiod, possibly not until Roman times. The name occurs only\\nonce (III. 1 124, 148/9 A. D.) and there under Ptolemais.\\n22. Akyaieis. Nothing is known in regard to this deme except\\nits existence as a deme of Ptolemais. It is possibly a late addition.\\nThe inscriptions in which its tribe is given are\\nA. Ptolemais.\\nIII. 1113 a, 143/4 A. D. III. 1121, 155/6 A.D.\\n23. Bunostidai. Nothing is known about the location and\\nearlier tribal relation of Bunostidai. It is enumerated among the\\ndemes of Ptolemais in II. 991. This attests its existence as early\\nas 200 B. C. The inscriptions which show its tribal connection are\\nA. Ptolemais.\\nII. 991, ca. 200 B.C. III. 1138, 174/5 A.D.\\nIII. 1121, 155/6 A.D.", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0057.jp2"}, "58": {"fulltext": "44\\nThe Five Post-Kleisthenean Tribes.\\n24. Klopidai. This deme appears to have existed before the\\ntime of Ptolemais. 1 In II. 991 K A O should perhaps be read\\ninstead of Kohler s EAfl 2 the initial letters of some deme\\nof Ptolemais. Aristophanes Knights, 79 uses iv KAoo7riS(oi/,\\nwhich is commonly interpreted as a play on Kropidai. Since his\\npurpose was to use some word which would suggest thievishness\\nand such a word was at hand in Klopidai, I see no reason to sup-\\npose that he used Klopidai for Kropidai. In III. 1121, 155/6\\nA. D. it occurs under Ptolemais.\\nThe following list of denies with their original tribes will reveal\\nthe composition of Ptolemais\\nDeme.\\n1. Themakos\\n2. Ikaria\\n3. Kydantidai\\n4. Konthyle\\n5. Hekale,\\n6. Prospalta\\n7. Boutadai\\n8. Phlya\\n9. Oinoe\\n10. Aphidna\\n11. Perrhidai\\n12. Ttryrgonidai\\n13. Titakidai\\n14. Aigilia\\n15. Kolone\\n16. Melainai\\n17. Pentele\\n18. Semachidai J\\n19. Akyaieis\\n20. Berenikidai\\n21. Eunostidai I\\n22. Hyporeia\\n23. Klopidai\\n24. Petaliai\\nOriginal tribe.\\nErechtheis.\\nAigeis.\\nPandionis.\\nL,eontis.\\nAkamantis.\\nOineis.\\nKekropis.\\nHippothontis.\\nAiantis.\\nAntiochis.\\nFormer tribe not determin-\\nable.\\nFrom this examination of the demes of Ptolemais, the following\\nfacts are ascertained. First, that of the twenty-four demes be-\\nll. 788 A. 2 No such deme is known.", "height": "4226", "width": "2450", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0058.jp2"}, "59": {"fulltext": "Ptolemais. 45\\nlonging here, twenty-two, according to the evidence presented, ex-\\nisted as early as 200 B.C. The other two, Petaliai and Akyaieis,\\nmay have existed as early. For, though there is no inscriptional\\nevidence for their existence before the middle of the second century\\nA.D., there is no reason to suppose that they may not have been\\ngiven in II. 991, ca. 200 B. C, the same as Eunostidai and Hy-\\nporeia, which, though fortunately preserved in this inscription,\\nare not mentioued again until the middle of the second century\\nA.D. Secondly, nineteen demes, at least, were taken from\\nthe original tribes each of which contributed its share.\\nAiantis, though furnishing four demes, was probably not taxed\\nmore heavily than the rest, for three of them were very unim-\\nportant ones. So, of the five demes of Antiochis, only one,\\nAigilia, was of an} 7 considerable size. Thirdly, of this whole\\nnumber, only one, Semachidai, is found under its old tribe\\nafter Ptolemais was created. An explanation of this apparent\\nirregularity was offered at p. 42.", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0059.jp2"}, "60": {"fulltext": "CHAPTER III.\\nATTAUS.\\ni History and Chronology.\\nAttalis was created in honor of Attalos I, king of Pergamon,\\non the occasion of his visit to Athens in 200 B.C. This event is\\nrelated in full by Polybios 1 and L,ivy. 2 There can be no doubt\\nabout the correctness of the date, for in chapter 5 of the same\\nbook, Iyivy says that the consuls for this year were P. Sulpicius\\nGalba and C. Aurelius, stating at the same time that the year was\\n552 A.u.c. i.e., 202 B.C. From the Fasti Hellenici, however, we\\nlearn that these consuls officiated for the year 200 B.C. Attalis\\nremained in the Athenian tribal system as long as that system\\ncontinued. Its order in the official list was number twelve until\\n125 A.D., when the introduction of Hadrianis pushed it forward\\nto the thirteenth position.\\n2. Dkmks of Attalis.\\n1. Agryle. (For discussion and table see under Antigonis,\\np. 6 f Besides the inscriptional evidence, we have the testimony\\nof Hesychios, who states that Agryle belonged both to Erechtheis\\nand Attalis.\\n2. Ankyle. This deme was located on the slope of Mt.\\nHymettos as indicated by III. 61, spoken of under Agryle at\\np. 6. It was a double deme as shown by II. 991. As it occurs\\nunder Aigeis after the creation of Attalis, it is probable that only\\none part was transferred to Attalis. The inscriptions in which\\nits tribe is indicated are as follows\\n1 Polyb. XVI. 25. 2 Uv. XXXI. 15.", "height": "4226", "width": "2450", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0060.jp2"}, "61": {"fulltext": "Attalis. 47\\nA. Aigeis.\\nIV. 2, 995 b, 4th Cent. B.C. II. 329, 272/1 B.C.\\nII. 870, Mid of 4th Cent. B.C. II. 991, ca. 200 B.C.\\nII. 872, 341/0 B. C. II. 471, 123/2 B.C.\\nIV. 2, 1025 b, Before 307/6 B.C. II. 470, 1 19/8 B.C.\\nII. 1 176, Before 307/6 B.C. IV. 2, 477 d, 108/7 B.C.\\nII. 1023, ca. End of 4th Cent. II. 465, 105/4 B.C.\\nB.C. III. 1092, 105/6 A.D.\\nB. Attalis.\\nII. 469, 107/6 B.C.\\n3. Probalinthos. This deme was early a member of the Te-\\ntrapolis, which included besides this, Marathon, Oinoe, and\\nTrikorynthos. 1 This fact in itself indicates the general quarter\\nin which the deme was situated. Its proximity to Marathon is\\nfurther attested by the discovery of Probalinthian monuments in\\nthe plain of Marathon. 2 Again,. Strabo s enumeration of the\\ndemes on the east coast of Attica in which Probalinthos is given\\nafter Brauron, Halai Araphenides, and Myrrhinous possibly\\nMyrrhinoutta), and before Marathon, indicates that it was imme-\\ndiately south of Marathon, probably on the southern edge of the\\nplain. Considering that this locality is so well attested, I cannot\\nfollow Loper in putting Probalinthos so far to the south as he does\\nin order to bring it into connection with the coast trittys of\\nPandionis. Its tribal relation is illustrated by the accompanying\\ntable\\nA. Pandionis.\\nI. 140, 407/6 B.C. II. 942, 329/8 B.C.\\nII. 865, 4th Cent. B.C. II. 943, 325/4 B.C.\\nIV. 2, 871 b, ca. Mid. of 4th IV. 2, 271 b, 301/0 B.C.\\nCent. B.C. II. 991, ca. 200 B.C.\\nII. 1020, ca. 330 B.C.\\n1 See Strabo VIII. 383.\\n2 II. 1135, 1324, 2507.", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0061.jp2"}, "62": {"fulltext": "48 The Five Post-Kleisthenean Tribes.\\nB. Attalis.\\nII. 432, 182/1 B.C. II. 426, 1st Cent. B.C.\\nII. 470, 1 19/8 B.C. III. 1040, 183/4 A.D.\\nII. 469, 107/6 B.C. III. 1058, 216/7 A.D.\\nII. 465, 105/4 B.C.\\n4. Sounion. The location of this deme is so well known that\\nit needs little comment. It is the site of the far-famed temple of\\nAthena. The inscriptions which indicate its tribe are\\nA. Leontis.\\nII. 864, 4th Cent. B.C. II. 943, 325/4 B.C.\\nII. 1177, ca. Mid. of 4th Cent. IV. 2, 245 b, Before 307/6 B.C.\\nB.C. II. 316, 283/2 B.C.\\nII. 698, 349/8 B.C. II. 1040, Mid. of 3rd Cent. B.C.\\nII. 172, ca. 336 B.C. II. 431, 220/19 B C.\\nB. Attalis.\\nBulletin 17, p. 146, 134/3 B.C. III. 1120, 150/1 A.D.\\nII. 470, 119/8 B.C. III. 1121, 155/6 A.D.\\nII. 469, 107/6 B.C. III. 1128, 164/5 A.D.\\nII. 467, 102/1 B.C. III. 1 138, 174/5 A.D.\\nII. 481, 45/4 B.C. III. 1040, 183/4 A.D.\\nIII. 1276, 23/2 B.C. III. 1 147, 190/1 A.D.\\nIII. 1091, 85/6 A.D. III. 1 160, 192/3 A.D.\\nIII. 1113, 143/4 A.D. III. 122,\\n5. Agnous. 1 The site of Agnous is now marked by the modern\\nvillage Markopoulo, as is evidenced by the numerous inscriptions\\nfound at this place. 2 The inscriptional evidence for its tribe is as\\nfollows\\n1 1 prefer this spelling to Hagnous from the probable derivation of the\\nword from ypos a kind of willow. Compare Myrrhinous, Elaious, Phe-\\ngous, etc. The form Hagnous later supplanted Agnous probably from\\nassociation with dyvos\\n2 Mitth. d. d. Arch. Inst. XII. p. 278, Nos. 161-165 also No. 1 11 p. 99 (found\\nat Koropi near Markopoulo).", "height": "4226", "width": "2450", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0062.jp2"}, "63": {"fulltext": "Attalis. 49\\nA. Akamantis.\\nII. 867, 378/7 B.C. II. 942, 329/8 B.C.\\nII. 789 a, 373/2 B.C. II. 943, 325/4 B.C.\\nII. 1020, ca. 330 B.C.\\nB. Attalis.\\nII. 446, 155/4 B.C. HI. 1040, 183/4 A.D.\\nIII. 1092, 105/6 A.D. III. 1147, 190/1 A.D.\\nIII. 1113, 143/4 A.D. HI. 1160, 192/3 A.D.\\nIII. 1120, 150/1 A.D. III. 1163, 201/2 A.D.\\nIII. 1128, 164/5 A.D. III. 1171, 205/6 A.D.\\nIII. 1133, 170/1 A.D. III. 1058, 216/7 A.D.\\nIII. 1 138, 174/5 A.D.\\n6. Turmeidai. L,6per assigns this deme to the city trittys of\\nOineis. The sole evidence for this is the fact that in IV. 2, 868 b,\\nit is enumerated in connection with other denies of Oineis in or\\nabout the city. The tribal relation of Turmeidai is illustrated by\\nthe following table\\nA Oineis.\\nIV. 2, 868 b, ca. Mid. of 4th Cent. B.C.\\nB. Attalis.\\nBulletin 17, p. 147, 122/1 B.C. III. 1138, 174/5 A.D.\\nII. 467, 102/1 B.C. III. 1040, 183/4 A.D.\\nIII. 1128, 164/5 A.D.\\n7. Athmonon. The location of Athmonon was on the site of\\nthe modern Marousi, a name derived from the cult of Artemis, 1\\nwho was worshiped here under the name Artemis Amarysia. 2\\nThis site is further attested by the discovery of three sepulchral\\nsteles found at or near Marousi. 3 Most important of all is the\\nshort inscription *Opo s Apre/xtSo? re/xevovs A^apvo-tas/ found at\\nMarousi. The scholiast on Aristoph. Peace, 190 states that the\\ndeme belonged to Kekropis and Attalis. This assertion is cor-\\nroborated by the inscriptional evidence which is as follows\\n1 Compare Dionyso, for the ancient Ikaria, from the worship of Dionysos.\\n2 Paus. I. 31, 3. 3 II. 1722, 1723, 1724. *I. 526.", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0063.jp2"}, "64": {"fulltext": "5\u00c2\u00b0\\nThe Five Post-Kleisthenean Tribes.\\nIV. 2, i b, 405/4 B.C.\\nII. 803 d, 367/6 B.C,\\nII. 172, ca. 336 B.C.\\nII. 804 A, 334/3 B.C.\\nIV. 2, 563 b, 334/3 B.C.\\nA. Kekropis.\\nII.943, 325/4 B.C.\\nIV. 2, 269 b, 302/1 B.C.\\nII. 330, 291/0 B.C.\\nII. 338, 273/2 B.C.\\nII. 859, 232/1 B.C.\\nB. Attalis.\\nII. 470, 1 19/8 B.C.\\nII. 469, 107/6 B.C.\\nII. 465, 105/4 B.C.\\nII. 467, 102/1 B.C.\\nIII. 1276, 23/2 B.C.\\nIII. 1092, 105/6 A.D.\\nIII. 1120, 150/1 A.D.\\nIII. 1121, 155/6 A.D.\\nIII. 1133, 170/1 A.D.\\nIII. 1 138, 174/5 A.D.\\nIII. 1040, 183/4 A.D.\\nIII. 1163, 201/2 A.D.\\nIII. 1171, 205/6 A.D.\\nIII. 1058, 216/7 A D\\n8. Oion (Dekeleikon). Besides inscriptional evidence, we have\\nthe testimony of Harpokration to the effect that there were two\\ndemes of this name, the one, Oion Kerameikon, of Leontis, the\\nother, Oion Dekeleikon, of Hippothontis. His statement is based\\non the authority of Diodoros (Periegetes). As shown by the\\nfollowing table of inscriptions, the one which went over to Attalis\\nwas that belonging formerly to Hippothontis. It was located\\nnear Dekeleia, as shown by the testimony of Harpokration.\\nMilchhofer would locate it southeast of Tatoi either at Bafn or\\nat Keramidi.\\nA. Leontis.\\nII. 864,4th Cent. B.C.\\nII. 960, ca. Mid. of 4th Cent.\\nB.C.\\nII. 1020, ca. 330 B.C.\\nII. 1049, Latter half of 1st Cent.\\nB.C.\\nIII. 1076, 22/3 A.D.\\nIII. 1280, 45/6 A.D.\\nI. 1093, io 3/4 A.D.\\n1092, 105/6 A.D.\\n1113, 143/4 A.D.\\n1 1 14, 146/7 A.D.\\n1 124, 148/9 A.D.\\n1 120, 150/1 A.D.\\n1121, 155/6 A.D.\\n1 132, 166/7 A D", "height": "4226", "width": "2450", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0064.jp2"}, "65": {"fulltext": "At talis. 51\\nIII. 1133, 170/1 A.D. III. 1176, ca. 219/20 A. D.\\nIII. 1138, 174/5 A.D. III. 1177, 219/20 A.D.\\nIII. 1142, ca. 180 A.D. III. 1231,\\nIII. 1 160, 192/3 A.D.\\nB. Hippothontis\\nIV. 2, in b, 345/4 B.C. II. 944, ca. 325/4 B.C.\\nII. 943, 325/4 B.C.\\nC. At tat is.\\nIII. 1128, 164/5 A.D. III. 1054, 213/4 A.D.\\nIII. 1138, 174/5 A.D. III. 1177, 219/20 A.D.\\n9. Korydallos. The location of this deme in close proximity\\nto the Korydallos mountain is shown by a passage in Strabo, 1\\nwhich states that above Cape Amphiale is a mountain called\\nKorydallos, and the deme of the KopvSaXXets 2 Its tribal relation,\\nas shown by inscriptions, is\\nA. Hippothontis.\\nII. 944, ca. 325/4 B.C.\\nB. Attalis.\\nII. 467, 102/1 B.C. III. 1138, 174/5 A.D.\\nIII. 1121, 155/6 A.D. III. 1040, 183/4 A.D.\\n10. Oinoe. According to Harpokration, Oinoe was located\\nnear Marathon. It was one of the four demes forming the\\nTetrapolis. Milchhofer identifies it with the modern village,\\nNinoi, a short distance above Marathon, on the Charadra. The\\ninscriptions which indicate its tribal relation are\\nA. Aiantis.\\nII. 943, 325/4 B.C. II. 1013,\\nII. 944, ca. 325/4 B.C. II. 859, 230/29 B.C.\\nII. 236, 313/2 B.C.\\n1 Strabo IX. 395. 2 Cf. Ath. IX. 390 a.", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0065.jp2"}, "66": {"fulltext": "52 The Five Post-Kleisthenean Tribes.\\nB. Attalis. 1\\nII. 471, 122/1 B.C. Bulletin 17, p. 147, 110/9 B.C.\\nC. Hadrianis.\\nIII. 1113 a, 143/4 A.D. III. 1153, ca. 190 A. D.\\nIII. 1120, 150/1 A.D. III. 1163, 201/2 A.D.\\nn. Atene. (See under Demetrias). Stephanos of Byzantion\\nquotes Phrynichos as stating that the deme belonged to Attalis.\\n12. Apollonieis. According to Stephanos of Byzantion this\\nwas a new deme added to Attalis. This is also shown by the in-\\nscriptional evidence. It was named in honor of Apollonis, the\\nwife of Attalos I, after whom the tribe was named. As it seems\\nimprobable that the Athenians really created a new deme, I think\\nwe have here simply an old deme re-named. Nothing is known in\\nregard to its location. As it naturally occurs only under Attalis,\\nthe references will be omitted.\\nBesides these twelve demes there are two more which require\\nsome notice namely, Trinemeia and Cholargos. These are\\nmentioned once each under Attalis. 2 Inasmuch as they are\\nfound in their old tribes Kekropis and Akamantis throughout\\nRoman times, I should treat these cases as merely sporadic and\\nnot indicative of tribal relation. An explanation may be found\\nin the fact, that, in each instance, the name closes a long list of\\nephebes it may have been omitted under the proper tribe and\\nadded here.\\n1 For these two references I am indebted to Mr. W. S. Ferguson. See his\\nwork entitled, The Athenian Secretaries, Cornell Studies, Vol. VII. pp. 57\\nand 47.\\n2 II. 467, io2|i B. C. and III. 1177, 219I20 A. D.", "height": "4226", "width": "2450", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0066.jp2"}, "67": {"fulltext": "Attalis. 53\\nThe composition of Attalis will then be as follows\\nDente.\\nOriginal tribe.\\nI.\\nAgryle\\nErechtheis.\\n2.\\nAnkyle\\nAigeis.\\n3-\\nProbalinthos\\nPandionis.\\n4-\\nSounion\\nL,eontis.\\n5-\\nAgnous\\nAkamantis.\\n6.\\nIVrmeidai\\nOineis.\\n7-\\nAthmonon\\nKekropis.\\n8.\\n9-\\nOion (Dekeleikon)\\nKorydallos\\nj- Hippothontis.\\no.\\nOinoe\\nAiantis.\\ni.\\nAteue\\nAntiochis.\\n2.\\nApollonieis.\\nFrom the foregoing discussion of the demes of Attalis, it is\\nseen that to form the new tribe, demes were taken from\\neach of the earlier tribes with the exception of Ptolemais,\\nand even here, the exception may be only apparent. For\\nhad it furnished a deme, that deme would have been under\\nPtolemais only from 229 to 20a B.C., so that it is easily con-\\nceivable that no visible evidence to that effect might have been\\npreserved. It is noteworthy that only three of the twenty-four\\ndemes of Ptolemais are mentioned with that tribe in these twenty-\\nnine years. Secondly, that not one of the eleven old demes\\nis ever found in its original tribe, unless it was a double\\ndeme, as is the case with Ankyle.", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0067.jp2"}, "68": {"fulltext": "CHAPTER IV.\\nHADRIANIS.\\ni History and Chronology.\\nIn the autumn of 125 A.D. the Athenians were honored with a\\nvisit from the Emperor Hadrian. On this occasion they hailed\\nhim as their savior and founder, and bestowed upon him bound-\\nless honor. The city with its art and culture had an irresistible\\nattraction for him hence his visit was prolonged till the following-\\nspring. It is due to the lavishness of this emperor, on this and\\nlater occasions, that some of the most interesting buildings of\\nAthens were brought into being. Doubtless it was in recognition\\nof these services, and at this particular time, that the new tribe\\nwas created and named in his honor. 1 They inaugurated the\\ncustom of reckoning the year from the first visit of Hadrian, as\\nwell as by the archon. It is from inscriptions thus doubly dated\\nthat we fix the year of that visit. Some of the most important\\nare III. 735, 127/8 A.D., III. 1107, 128/9 A.D., and III. 1023,\\n139/40 A.D., 3rd, 4th, and 15th years respectively after Hadrian s\\nfirst visit to Athens. The tribe was given the seventh position in\\nthe tribal order. An explanation of this was offered under\\nPtolemais (see p. 32).\\n2. Demes of Hadrianis.\\n1. Pambotadai. The exact site of this deme has not been\\ndetermined. It is generally assigned to the coast trittys of\\nErechtheis and must be sought in the neighborhood of Iyamptrai.\\nThe inscriptions which indicate its tribe are\\nSee Gregorovius, Der Kaiser Hadrian, for a fuller account of this event.\\nCompare also Dittenberger, Kaiser Hadrians Erste Anwesenheit in A then,\\nHermes VII. (1873), p. 213 ff.", "height": "4226", "width": "2450", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0068.jp2"}, "69": {"fulltext": "Hadrianis. 55\\nA, Erechtheis.\\nII. 338, 273/2 B.C. II. 481, 45/4 B.C.\\nII. 991, ca. 200 B.C. II. 482, 38/7 B.C.\\nII. 1038, 2nd Cent. B.C. III. 1019, 1st Cent. A.D.\\nII. 470, 1 19/8 B.C. III. 1091, 85/6 A.D.\\nII. 467, 102/1 B.C.\\nB. Hadrianis.\\nIII. 1114, 146/7 A.D. III. 1163, 201/2 A.D.\\nIII. 1121, 155/6 A.D. III. 1281 a, ca. 212/3 A.D.\\nIII. 1137, 172-177 A.D. III. 1063, 218/9 A.D.\\n2. Phegaia. The inscriptions which indicate the tribal relation\\nof this deme are\\nA. Aigeis.\\nIV. 2, 995 b, 4th Cent. B.C. II. 329, ca. 273/2 B.C.\\nII. 870, Mid. of 4th Cent. B.C. II. 471, 123/2 B.C.\\nII. 872, 341/0 B.C. II., 470, 119/8B.C.\\nII. 804 A, 334/3 B.C. IV. 2, 477 d, 108/7 B.C.\\nIV. 2, 245 c, Before 307/6 B.C. II. 469, 107/6 B.C.\\nIV. 2, 1025 b, Before 307/6 B.C. II. 465, 105/4 B.C.\\nII. 567, 289/8 B.C. III. 1076, 22/3 A.D.\\nII. 338, 273/2 B.C.\\nB. Pandionis.\\nIV. 2, 251 b, 306/5 B.C. II. 991, ca. 200 B.C.\\nC. Hadrianis.\\nIII. 1 1 14, 146/7 A.D. III. 1 153, ca. 190 A.D.\\nIII. 1137, 172-177 A.D. III. 1160, 192/3 A.D.\\nIII. 1142, ca. 180 A.D. III. 1163, 201/2 A.D.\\nAs the table indicates, the Phegaia which belonged to Hadrianis\\ncould well have been from either Aigeis or Pandionis, but as Oa\\nwas taken from Pandionis and there is no other deme in Hadrianis\\nfrom Aigeis, we may safely assume that the Phegaia in question", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0069.jp2"}, "70": {"fulltext": "56 The Five Post-Kleisthenean Tribes.\\nwas from Aigeis. This one was located on the east coast of\\nAttica, in the general region of Marathon. 1 There is an irregu-\\nlarity in reference to this deme which deserves some notice in\\nIII. 1 1 14, one of the ephebes of Hadrianis is called a ^yovcrio?,\\nwhich should mean that he was a citizen of Phegous, a deme of\\nBrechtheis. There is probably a confusion here between S^yaietfc\\nand \u00c2\u00aerjyov(nos, for in the same inscription an ephebe of Erechtheis\\nis listed as ^ycuevs where we should expect ^hpyowrcos.\\n3. Oa. The location is still a matter of dispute. Milchhofer\\nthinks it occupied the site of the present Mercuri, but the\\nprovenience of sepulchral steles points rather to Velanideza,\\nnortheast of Spata. 2 The inscriptions which indicate its tribe\\nA. Pandionis.\\nII. 873, 4th Cent. B.C. II. 871, 348/7 B.C.\\nII. 865, First half of 4th Cent. IV. 2, 871 b, Mid. of 4th Cent.\\nB.C. B.C.\\nII. 998, First half of 4th Cent. IV. 2, 269 b, 302/1 B.C.\\nB.C. II. 316, 283/2 B.C.\\nIV. 2, 645 b, 399/8 B.C. II. 991, ca. 200 B.C.\\nB. Hadrianis.\\nIII. 1 1 14, 146/7 A.D. III. 1153, ca. 190 A.D.\\nIII. 1128, 164/5 A.D. III. 1 160, 192/3 A.D.\\nIII. 1041, ca. 180 A.D.\\n4. Skambonidai. This was in or near the city as proved by\\nthe large metic population, attested by numerous inscriptions.\\nFurthermore, from the mention of an agora in the deme 3 we\\nshould infer an urban or suburban site. Milchhofer locates it be-\\ntween Karameikos and Melite including the so-called Theseion.\\nIt was Alkibiades native deme. Its tribal relation is shown in\\nthe following table of inscriptions\\n1 Steph. Byz. s. v. f A\\\\al.\\n2 II. 2678, 2679, and 2682.\\nare:\\n3 1. 2, and IV. I. p. 4, N. 2.", "height": "4226", "width": "2450", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0070.jp2"}, "71": {"fulltext": "Hadrianis. 57\\nA. Leontis.\\nII. 864, 4th Cent. B.C. II. 983, 183/2 B.C.\\nII. iooi, 4th Cent. B.C. II. 470, 119/8 B.C.\\nII. 960, ca. Mid. of 4th Cent. II. 469, 107/6 B.C.\\nB.C. II. 469, 106/5 B.C.\\nII. 1020, ca. 330 B.C. II. 467, 102/1 B.C.\\nII. 942, 329/8 B.C, II. 482, 38/7 B.C.\\nII. 943, 325/4 B.C. III. 1091, 85/6 A.D.\\nII. 991, ca. 200 B.C. III. 1092, 105/6 A.D.\\nB. Hadrianis.\\nIII. 1128, 164/5 A.D. III. 1163, 201/2 A.D.\\nIII. 1 133, 170/1 A.D.\\n5. Aphidna. See under Ptolemais\\n6. Eitea. See under Antigonis\\n7. Thria. As the name indicates, this deme is associated with\\nthe Thriasian plain. The exact site is now occupied by the vil-\\nlage Kalybia tes Chasias to the northeast of Eleusis. This is in-\\ndicated by the sepulchral steles found at this place. x Its tribal re-\\nlation is shown by the following table\\nA Oineis.\\nII. 997, 4th Cent. B.C. II. 470, 119/8 B.C.\\nII. 677, 367/6 B.C. II. 467, 102/1 B.C.\\nII. 868, 360/59 B.C. III. 1276, 23/2 B.C.\\nII. 698, 350/49 B.C. III. 1005, 5/4 B.C.\\nII. 701, 345/4 B.C. III. 1280, 45/6 A.D.\\nII. 956, Latter half of 2nd Cent. III. 78, 93/4 A.D.\\nB.C.\\nB. Hadrianis.\\nIII. 1128, 164/5 A.D. III. 1133, 170/1 A.D.\\n1 Kumanudes 561, 571, and 572.", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0071.jp2"}, "72": {"fulltext": "58 The Five Post-Kleisthenean Tribes.\\n8. Daidalidai. According to Milchhofer, the site of Daidalidai\\nis to be sought in the large industrial center of antiquity to the\\nnortheast of Athens, near Marousi. He would identify it with\\neither Brahami or Kalogresa more likely the latter, for it could\\nthen be brought into close relation with Phlya and Athmonon,\\ndenies of the same tribe and trittys. The name Daidalidai points\\nto an artisan population. The inscriptional evidence of its tribe\\nis\\nA. Kekropis.\\nII. 660, 389/8 B.C. IV. 2, 563 b, 334/3 B.C.\\nII. 1007, ca Mid of 4th Cent. II. 943, 325/4 B.C.\\nB.C.\\nB. Hadrianis.\\nIII. 1121, 155/6 A.D.\\nIII. 1133, 170/1 A.D.\\nIII. 1128, 164/5 A.D.\\nIII. 1163, 201/2 A.D.\\n9. Blaious. Much uncertainty prevails in regard to the site of\\nKlaious. Milchhofer, from the fact that in lists it is enumerated\\nin close connection with Dekeleia, would place it near the site of\\nTatoi, ancient Dekeleia. Leake, from the similarity between\\nElaious and L,iossia, would identify them. Kastromenos thinks\\nthat it was north of Phaleron in the Athenian plain. The in-\\nscriptional evidence for its tribal relation is\\nA. Hippothoyitis\\nII. 1006, ca. Mid. of 4th Cent. II. 944, ca. 325/4 B.C.\\nB.C. II. 471, 123/2 B.C.\\nII. 803 d, 374/3 B.C. II. 470, 1 19/8 B.C.\\nII. 803 a, 342/1 B.C. II. 467, 102/1 B.C.\\nB. Hadrianis.\\nIII. 1120, 150/1 A.D. III. 1041, ca. 180 A.D.\\nIII. 1039, 165-185 A.D. III. 1 172, 205/6 A.D.\\nIII. 1133, 170/1 A.D.\\n1 Erlautender Text to Curtius und Kaupert s Karten von Attika II. p. 39.", "height": "4226", "width": "2450", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0072.jp2"}, "73": {"fulltext": "Hadrianis. 59\\nIn III. 1280, 45/6 A.D., Elaious is classed under Leontis. Dit-\\ntenberger indicates that the restoration EA [e] o [wiot] here is un-\\ncertain.\\n10. Trikorynthos. The site of Trikorynthos was at Kato-Souli,\\nas indicated by the following facts First, it formed a part of\\nthe Tetrapolis. Secondly, in his enumeration of the denies on the\\neast coast of Attica, Strabo mentions Trikorynthos next after\\nMarathon. 1 Thirdly, the legendary history indicates this general\\nquarter of Attica. 2 lastly, there have been found at this place\\ntwo sepulchral steles 3 relating to Trikorynthos. The inscriptions\\nwhich indicate its tribe are\\nA. Aiantis.\\nII. 1013, Latter half of 4th Cent. II. 859, 229/8 B.C.\\nB.C. Bulletin 17, p. 146, 136/5 B.C.\\nIV. 2, 767 b, 336/5- 333/2 B.C. II. 465, 105/4 B.C.\\nII. 943, 325/4 B.C. II. 467, 102/1 B.C.\\nII. 944, ca. 325/4 B.C. II. 481, 45/4 B.C.\\nII. 315, 283/2 B.C. II. 482, 38/7 B.C.\\nIV. 2, 385 b, 237/6 B.C.\\nB. Hadrianis.\\nIII. 1114, 146/7 A.D. III. 1039, 165-185 A.D.\\nIII. 1121, 155/6 A.D. III. 1142, ca. 180 A.D.\\nIII. 1133, 170/1 A.D.\\n11. Besa. The location of Besa is quite accurately indicated by\\na passage in Xenophon, 4 which informs us that it was situated on\\nan eminence between Anaphlystos and Thorikos. Fortunately\\nthe site of these two demes is known, for we thus have a sure\\nguide for locating Besa. Its site is probably now marked by the\\nmountain Kamaresa and the village below of the same name.\\nHere in ancient times was a mining center, as is shown by re-\\nmains discovered in this immediate vicinity. This agrees with\\n^trab. IX. 399. 2 Strab. VIII. 377. 3 II. 2592 and 2601.\\n4 de vectigal. IV. 43.", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0073.jp2"}, "74": {"fulltext": "60 The Five Post-Kleisthenean Tribes.\\nthe evidence afforded by II. 782 where a mine is mentioned as\\nsituated in Besa. Its tribal relation as shown by inscriptions is\\nas follows\\nA. Antiochis.\\nII. 677, 367/6 B.C. II. 698, 350/49 B.C.\\nII. 869, ca. Mid. of 4th Cent. II. 944, ca. 325/4 B.C.\\nB.C. III. 1092, 105/6 A.D.\\nB. Hadrianis.\\nIII. 1113, 143/4 A.D. HI. 1039, 165-185 A.D.\\nIII. 1113 a, 143/4 A.D. HI- I:[ 53 ca 190 A.D.\\nIII. 1 1 14, 146/7 A.D. III. 1 160, 192/3 A.D.\\nIII. 1 124, 148/9 A.D. III. 1 180, ca. 212/3 A.D.\\nIII. 1121, 155/6 A.D. III. 1177, 219/20 A.D.\\nIII. 1128, 164/5 A D HI- H97 240/1 A.D.\\n12. Oinoe. (See under Attalis).\\n13. Antinoeis. This deme, in name at least, dates only from\\nthe creation of Hadrianis. It was named in honor of Antinoeis,\\nthe favorite of Hadrian. Milchhofer infers from the numerous\\noccurrences of Antinoeis in late Athenian inscriptions, and the\\nabsence of Aigilia, that it represented simply the latter re-named\\nor the union of several denies. As it naturally is found only\\nunder Hadrianis, it is unnecessary to give the inscriptional\\nevidence.\\nThe demes of Hadrianis may be thus tabulated\\nDeme.\\nOriginal tribe.\\nI.\\nPambotadai\\nErechtheis.\\n2.\\nPhegaia\\nAigeis.\\n3-\\nOa\\nPandionis.\\n4-\\nSkambonidai\\nEeontis.\\n5-\\nAphidna\\nPtolemais.\\n6.\\nEitea\\nAkamantis.\\n7-\\nThria\\nOineis.\\n8.\\nDaidalidai\\nKekropis.\\n9-\\nElaious\\nHippothontis.\\n10.\\nTrikorynthos\\nAiantis.\\n11.\\nBesa\\nAntiochis.\\n12.\\nOinoe\\nAttalis.\\n13-\\nAntinoeis.", "height": "4226", "width": "2450", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0074.jp2"}, "75": {"fulltext": "Hadi ianis. 61\\nFrom this examination of the demes of Hadrianis it is apparent\\nthat, to form the new tribe, the Athenians took one deme\\nfrom each of the preexisting tribes, not excepting Ptole-\\nmais and Attalis. The regularity is here more striking than\\nthat observed in the case of the other new tribes. Secondly,\\nthat not one of these twelve demes occurs under its old\\ntribe after Hadrianis came into existence in 125/6 A.D.\\nTo summarize the conclusions reached in the preceding pages\\nwe find\\n(1) Antigonis and Demetrias were created in the official year\\n308/7 B.C., probably w T ell towards its close. The date usually\\ngiven for their first representation in the prytany and on other\\nboards is 306/5 B.C. It has been, I think, conclusively shown\\nthat they were so represented in 307/6 B.C.\\n(2) The creation of Ptolemais occurred in 229 B.C., and is\\nthus closely associated with the intervention of Ptolemy Euergetes\\nin favor of the Athenians which took place in that year. The\\nmotive for its institution is accordingly analogous to that which\\nbrought Antigonis and Demetrias, Attalis, and Hadrianis into\\nexistence.\\n(3) None but divided demes belonged to more than one tribe\\nat the same time for, out of sixty-five demes which are classed\\nunder the five new tribes, only five, Agryle, Ankyle, Lamptrai,\\nPaiania, and Semachidai, are found belonging to their earlier\\ntribes after the institution of the new ones to which they were\\nseverally transferred. Of these five, four, Agryle, Ankyle,\\nLamptrai, and Paiania, are recorded in inscriptions as being\\ndouble demes. There were doubtless several others divided in\\nsimilar manner, of which division, however, we have no record.\\nIt has, therefore, seemed to me that in Semachidai also we have\\nsuch a divided deme. The question of Trinemeia and Cholargos\\nhas been discussed at p. 52.\\n(4) In the redistribution of the demes to give Ptolemais,\\nAttalis, and Hadrianis each its requisite number, the plan was", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0075.jp2"}, "76": {"fulltext": "62 The Five Post-Kleisthenean Tribes.\\napparently to take one deme from each of the original tribes. In\\na few instances, (and here the exception may have a natural ex-\\nplanation) mentioned in their proper place, this plan was deviated\\nfrom in that more than one deme was taken from the same tribe,\\nor a post-Kleisthenean tribe did not furnish its complement to a\\ntribe created subsequently. This fact, however, does not\\nmaterially affect the deduction.\\nThe denies utilized in the formation of Antigonis and Demetrias\\nwere drawn from the first half of the list of tribes, for the former,\\nand from the latter half, for the latter. The scheme followed,\\nthough not now revealed in full, was seemingly to transfer two\\ndemes from each of the earlier ten tribes.\\n(5) In both instances where a thirteenth tribe was added to\\nthe list, the official order of that tribe was number seven. This\\nposition corresponds to that of the additional month in the inter-\\ncalary years. What the real significance of this fact is I am un-\\ncertain. I suspect, however, that it is nothing more than this\\nprior to the addition of a thirteenth tribe there had been an exact\\ncorrespondence in number of tribes, prytanies, and months as\\nthe continuity in the list of months was broken every intercalary\\nyear by the insertion of a month in the seventh place, so the idea\\nwould naturally suggest itself of breaking the preexisting con-\\ntinuity in the list of tribes by the insertion of the new one in the\\nsame place.\\n(6) There were thirteen tribes during the period 229-200 B.C.,\\nAntigonis and Demetrias being continued after Ptolemais was\\nadded.", "height": "4226", "width": "2450", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0076.jp2"}, "77": {"fulltext": "APPENDIX A.\\nOfficial Order of Tribes.\\nThe official order of the Attic tribes with the changes produced\\nby the introduction of new tribes is shown by the following tabu-\\nlation.\\ntribes\\nd\\nw\\nM\\nt^-M VO\\nCO\\nt^\\nC)\\no\\nlO\\nCO\\nt^ ON\\nO CS\\nCO CS\\nI.\\nII.\\nIII.\\nIV.\\nAntigonis,\\nDemetrias,\\nKrechtheis,\\nAigeis,\\nPandionis,\\nLeontis,\\nPtolemais,\\nAkamantis,\\nHadrianis,\\nOineis,\\nKekropis,\\nHippothontis, VIII.\\nAiantis, j IX.\\nAntiochis, X.\\nAttalis i\\nV.\\nI.\\nII.\\nIII.\\nIV.\\nV.\\nVI.\\na\\nPQ\\na\\nO)\\nVII.\\nI.\\nII.\\nIII.\\nIV.\\nV.\\nVI.\\nVII.\\nVIII.\\nVI.\\nVII.\\nI VIII.\\nIX.\\nX.\\nXI.\\nXII.\\nIX.\\nX.\\nXI.\\nXII.\\nXIII.\\nI.\\nII.\\nIII.\\nIV.\\nV.\\nVI.\\nVII.\\nVIII.\\nIX.\\nX.\\nXI.\\nXII.\\n2\\nTo\\nCN O\\nI.\\nII.\\nIII.\\nIV.\\nV.\\nVI.\\nVII.\\nVIII.\\nIX.\\nX.\\nXI.\\nXII.\\nXIII.", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0077.jp2"}, "78": {"fulltext": "APPENDIX B.\\nIylSTS OF THE DKMES OF EACH TrIBK.\\nIn the following lists the denies of each tribe and their demotika\\nare given as far as at present determinable. From the evidence\\nof II. 991 we may infer that they are approximately all that were\\nin existence. The explanation of the signs is as follows is\\nused to indicate that the deme was transferred to Antigonis f to\\nDemetrias J to Ptolemais to Attalis to Hadrianis. In\\nthe case of a double deme the sign is added to the first one when\\nit can not be determined which part was transferred.\\nErkchthfis.\\nDemotika. Demes. Demotika.\\nAypvXyjOev. 8. Aap,7rrpai (kolO. Aapjrr pevs\\nAypvXr}6ev. 9. AapurTpat (inrev. Aapurr pevs\\nAvayvpdo-Los.IO. IIa/x/3 oTaSai 1 1 Hap,/3oiTa.8rj s.\\nEvwvu/xevs. II. Hepyaarj (kolO. HepyacrfjOev\\n\u00c2\u00a9rjpaKevs. 12. Hepyaa-t] (weV. ILepyacrfjOev.\\nDemes.\\nI. AypvX-i] (ko.^.)*^\\nAy pvXrj (v7T\u00e2\u0082\u00acv.^)\\nAvayvpovs\\nEvwvv/xov\\n\u00c2\u00aer)p,aKos\\nK^Sot\\nl\u00c2\u00a3r) f L(Tid\\nK^icnevs.\\n13. 2v/?pi8ai\\n14. Qrjyovs\\n2,vj3pL? r)s.\\nY)y ova los.\\nAlGElS.\\nAy KvXrj (kolO.\\nAyKvXi] (vtt\u00c2\u00a3v.^)\\nAXai (jApacprjV. AXatev s.\\nI.\\n2.\\n3- t\\n4. Apa f rjv\\n5. Barrj\\n6. TapyrjTTos\\ny Aidp,eia\\n8 EpiKaa\\nAy kvXy)6\u00e2\u0082\u00ac.v.\\nAyKvXrjOev.\\n1 2 iwviSai\\n13. KoAAvtos\\n14. KoA. ovos\\n15. KvSaj/rtSai I\\n1 6 M.vppwovTT x\\n9-\\nIO.\\nII.\\nEp^ta\\nEorrtata\\nI/capia\\nApac^vios.\\nBarrel/.\\nTa/oy^rTto?.\\nAiop,eevs, 1 7 Orpvvrj\\nAto/xetevs. 1 18. IlXw^aa.\\nEpiK\u00e2\u0082\u00ac\u00e2\u0082\u00acVS,\\nEptKaevs. 2\\nEp^tevs. 19. Teiflpas\\nEo-rtatd^ev. 20. ^rjyaia\\niKaptevs. 21. ^tAatSat\\nKoAAvtcus.\\n\u00e2\u0082\u00acK KoAcOVOV. 3\\nKuSavr 1877s.\\n\u00e2\u0082\u00acK MvpptVOTJT-\\nT779.\\nOrpwevs.\\nIIAto^evs,\\nIIA O0\u00e2\u0082\u00aci\u00e2\u0082\u00acVS\\nIIAwfoevs. 4\\nTet^pao-ios.\\n^yatevs.\\ntAat 8r;s.\\n1 Also Aiofiaievs late.\\n3 Rarely KoXwi^tfei\\n2 Also E/\u00c2\u00bb/ccuetfs late.\\n4 nXwdiadev, Roman times.", "height": "4226", "width": "2450", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0078.jp2"}, "79": {"fulltext": "Lists of the Denies of Each Tribe.\\nPandionis.\\n65\\nDenies.\\nDemotika.\\nDenies.\\nDemotika.\\nI.\\nAyyeAr^\\nAyyeA^flev.\\n8.\\nTLauxvLa (kci0. Ilatavteus.\\n2.\\nTparjs\\nTpaevs. 1\\n9-\\nIlaiavia (t 7reV.\\nIlatavtevs.\\n3-\\nKaAeVea\\nKaAcTeevs.\\n]0.\\nIlpao-iai\\nIlpacrteijs.\\n4-\\nKov^vAi; J\\nKov^uAr^ev,\\nII.\\nUpo/3d\\\\iv0os\\nIIpo/?aAtcrtos.\\nKov jAtSr/s.\\n12.\\nSretpta\\nSretpteus.\\n5-\\nKvSa#)?vatov\\nKuSa^vaievs\\n\u00e2\u0080\u00a213-\\n$r^yata\\n^rryaievs.\\n6.\\nKvOrjpos\\nKv^pptos,\\nKv^pio?. 2\\n14.\\n*Oa, *Oa\\nv Oa0ev, Oatfev,\\nOia0ev, Oaiev?, 3\\n7-\\nM.vppLvovs\\nMuppivovo-ios\\nOae^s. 3\\n1 Hypothetical. 2\\nMostly Roman\\n3\\nAt the time of Cockney Greek.\\nIyEONTlS.\\n1.\\nAWaXihaL\\nAlBoXihy)^.\\n12.\\nTLrj\\\\rjKe s\\niljx^. 1\\n2.\\nAAip-ovs\\nAAip.07XTlOS.\\n13.\\nIIorap,os (kclO.]\\nIIoTapios.\\n3-\\nAeipaSiwTcu\\nAeipaSiooT^s.\\n14.\\nIIoTap,os {yirev.\\nUordpaos.\\n4-\\nEkoA J\\nEKaA^ev.\\n15-\\nIIorap,os\\nHoTOLfJLLOS\\n5-\\nEu7ruptSat\\nlEiVTrvptSr)^.\\n(AapaSiwT^s).\\n6.\\nKarros\\nKryrrto?.\\n16.\\n%Kap,(3(DVL$(U\\n%Kap,/3oiViBri^\\n7-\\nKoAwvr;\\nKoAo i^^\u00e2\u0082\u00acv.\\n17-\\n^Sowiov\\n^owieus.\\n8.\\nKpCD7TtSai\\nKpa)7rt8^5.\\n18.\\nY/3aSai\\n\u00e2\u0080\u00a2Y/Sa ys.\\n9-\\nAevKovor)\\nAeuKOvoevs.\\n19.\\nQpeappoi\\npeappios.\\n0.\\nOlov (Kepap,eiKov^\\ne\u00c2\u00a3 Oiau.\\n20.\\nXoAAetSat\\nXoAAeiSr??. 2\\n1.\\nIlaioviSai\\nrEatovtS^s.\\n1 Rarely e/c n^X-^/cwj/.\\nRarely XoXX^S^s or XoXX^Stjs.\\nI.\\nAyvovs\\nAyvovcrtos.\\n8.\\nKe^ aA^\\nKe^aA^ev.\\n2.\\nEtpeortScu\\nEtpecrtSr;?,\\n9-\\nKtKwva\\nKtKwvevs.\\nEpeo-iS?;?. 1\\nIO.\\nKvpret8at\\nKl pT\u00c2\u00a3tS?7S.\\n3-\\nEirea\\nEiTeatos. 2\\nII.\\nIIopos\\nIldptos.\\n4-\\nEppo?\\nEpp-eios.\\n12.\\nIIpdcr7raATa J\\nnpo(T7raArt05\\n5-\\n\u00c2\u00a9OpiKOS\\n\u00c2\u00a9opc xios.\\n13.\\nZS^TTOS\\n-^TTt05.\\n6.\\nIcfjiaTidSaL\\ni^tcrTtaSry?. 3\\n14.\\nXoAapyds\\nXoAapyevs.\\n7-\\nKepapetKos\\n\u00e2\u0082\u00acK Kepap,eW\\n1 H^eo-tS^s in Roman times. 2 Also\\nalso H0i(TTtd\u00c2\u00a77js and 13.(paicrTLd8Tjs.\\nIreaios in Roman times.\\nWritten\\nNote. Horafibs is mentioned once (II. 469) under Akamantis.", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0079.jp2"}, "80": {"fulltext": "66\\nThe Five Post-Kleisthenean Tribes.\\nOlNKIS.\\nD ernes.\\nDemotika. Demes.\\nDemotika.\\nI.\\n2.\\n3-\\n4-\\n5-\\n6.\\n7-\\n8.\\nAxapvac\\nBouraSai\\nJ?nrLKr) f i ria\\n\u00c2\u00a9pla\\nl7T7roro/ iaSat j\\nKo^toKtSat j\\nAa/aaSai\\nAovatd\\nA^apvev s 9. Or;\\nBouraS^s.\\nETTtK^^lVtOS.\\n\u00c2\u00aePLol tlos. IO. IIepi#oiSai\\niTnroTOfJLdSrjs 1 1 IlreXca\\nKo oKufys. 12. TvpfxuSat\\nAa/aaS^s 13. I uA.^\\nAovcrievs.\\n1 Rarely iK AaKia8Qp.\\nKekropis.\\nOt^ev.\\nIlepidoiS^s.\\nIlTeXeacrtos.\\nTvpfJietBrjs.\\nv\\\\daLOs.\\ni.\\n2.\\n3-\\n4-\\n5-\\n6.\\nAOfJLOVOV\\nAi\u00c2\u00a3a v 7\\nAAa/ (Ai^toi/iKai\\nAaiSaAiScu\\nE7rtetKt8at\\nMeAiVr? f\\nAO/xovevs. 8. TLiOos\\nAt^wvev?. 9. ^v7raX yrTos\\nAAaievs.\\nAaiSaAiS^s. IO. Tpivifxaa\\nE^iei/a S^s. 1\\nMeAireus. II. \u00c2\u00a3Ava\\nttiOevs. 2\\n^v/SaXrJTTios*\\nTpivepieevs,\\nT/oive/Aeievs. 4\\nI Avevs.\\n7. avTrerrj f Bwrercuajv.\\n1 Also E7rei/c/5T7s and EiriKeidris in Roman times. 2 Also IIiT0etfs and Ili0eei/s\\nin Roman times. 3 Rare. 4 Rarely Tpiveixaieijs and T/cuvo^cuei/s.\\nNote. In II. 944, ca. 325/4 B.C. KUvwa is mentioned under Kekropis.\\nHlPPOTHONTlS.\\nI.\\nAtyvia\\nA^vtevs. 11.\\n\u00c2\u00a9up,aiTa8ai\\n\u00c2\u00a9vp-atraS^s.\\n2.\\nc Afjia\u00c2\u00a3dvTeia\\nA/xa^-avrevs, 1 2\\nKeipiaSai\\nKetptaS^s.\\ne A//,a\u00c2\u00a3avT\u00e2\u0082\u00ac6\u00e2\u0082\u00acvs. 13.\\nK01A77 j\\nck KotA^s,\\n3-\\nAfjLVfxu)vrj\\nAfxvfJLCDveevs,\\nKotAevs. 1\\nA/xv/xovatevs. 14.\\nKo7rpos\\nKo7rpetos,\\n4.\\nAvaicaia\\nAvaKatevSj\\nKo7rptos. a\\nAva/caevs. 15.\\nKopuSaAAos\\nKopvSaAAevs.\\n5-\\nAvpiSai\\nAvpiSrjs. 16.\\nO11/077\\nOivatos.\\n6.\\nAxepSovs\\nA^epSovcrtos. 17.\\nOlov (AcKeAetKov\\nOlov.\\n7.\\nAcKcAeia\\nAe/ceAeevs, 18.\\nAeKeAeievs.\\nIletpateu?\\nILapaievs\\nIletptevs, 3\\n8.\\nEAcuoi)?\\nEAaiovoaos,\\nIleipcvs. 3\\nEAeovoros. 19.\\nnoA\\n9-\\nEAevtris\\nEAewivios. 20.\\n2 cfiev$aXrj\\nXcfrevSaXrjOev\\n10.\\nEpoiaSai\\nEpoiaS^s.\\n1 Rare.\\n2 Roman.\\n3 Roman and\\nrare.", "height": "4226", "width": "2450", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0080.jp2"}, "81": {"fulltext": "Lists of the Denies of Each Tribe.\\n6 7\\nAlANTlS.\\nDenies.\\nDemotika.\\nDenies.\\nDemotika.\\nI.\\nv A \u00c2\u00a3i8va\\nA \u00c2\u00a3iratos.\\n6.\\nUepptSat\\nUeppiSr}?.\\n2.\\n\u00c2\u00a9upyam Sai J\\n\u00c2\u00aevpyu)vi8r}\\n7-\\nPa/zvovs\\nPap-vovonos.\\n3-\\nKt /caAa\\nKvKaXevs.\\n8.\\nTira/a Sat\\nTiTa/a S^s.\\n4-\\nMapa#tov\\nMapa#a)vios\\n9-\\nTpiKopvv#os\\nTpi/copwios.\\n5-\\nO1V077\\nOtvatos.\\n10.\\n^a f t s\\n^a f tBr]S\\nAntiochis.\\n1.\\nAiyiAia\\nAiyiAieus.\\n11.\\nKoAwvry J\\nKoAwv^ev. 3\\n2.\\nA\\\\(D7T\u00e2\u0082\u00acKrj\\nAAco7reK^ev,\\n12.\\nKpiwa\\nKpiooevg.\\nAAa)7reKeievs.\\nx i3-\\nAeKKOv\\n3-\\nA/JLcftLTpOTTiq\\nAp,c\u00c2\u00a3 trpoirrj Oev\\n.14.\\nAevKoirvpa\\nAevK07rvp\\n4-\\nAvd f \\\\v(TTOS\\nAvacfiXvcrTLOs.\\n15-\\nMeAatvai\\nMeAatvevs.\\n5-\\nArrjvr) f\u00c2\u00a7\\nArrjvevs.\\n16.\\nIlaAA^vr;\\nIlaAATyvevs.\\n6.\\nB^o-a\\n^Brjcratevs\\n17.\\nIlevTeAr; J\\nIlevTeA^ev.\\n7-\\nEtTea\\nEtreato?. 2\\n18.\\n2i7/Aa^t8at (/ca0.\\nt 2r//xa X i8r7S.\\nS.\\nEpyaSets\\nEpya8ei;s.\\n19.\\nSiy/xa^tSat (yirev,\\n^rjfxaxtSr)^.\\n9-\\nEpoiaSai\\nEpoiaS^s.\\n20.\\n3 uppiv?70-iot\\nQvppLvrjcrios,\\n0.\\n\u00c2\u00a9opat J\\n\u00c2\u00a9opcueus.\\n$?vpvrj(TLO s.\\n1 Uncommon. 2 Also Irecuos in Roman times. 3 Not found in the singular.\\nNOTE. In III. 1138, 174/5 A.D., under Antiochis there are left the first two\\nletters of a deme name, as, Ae Furthermore, in III. 11 47, 190/1 A.D.,\\nwe read under Antiochis Aeu/co and in III. 1163, 201/2 A.D. Aeu/c. So in III.\\n1034, ca. 170 A.D., there is left Aev- with the remainder of the word indis-\\ntinct. Dittenberger evidently thinks that these are for I,eukonoe. It seems\\nto me that they might well stand for Leukopyra.\\nAntigonis.\\nI.\\n2.\\nAypvXrj\\nAi0aAiScu\\nAy pvXrjOev. 6. I/capia\\nAWa\\\\i$r} 7. KuSa^vaiov\\nI/capievs.\\n3-\\n4-\\n5-\\nTapyrjTTos\\nAeipaSicoTai\\nEirea\\nTapyrJTTLOS. 8. AaparTpai\\nAeipaStwr^s. 9. TLaiavia (kolO.\\nEtreatos.\\nDemetrias.\\nAapV7rrpevs\\nIlaiai/ievs.\\n1.\\n2.\\n3-\\n4-\\nArrjvri\\n\u00c2\u00a9opai\\nl7r7TOTop.a8at\\nKo#coKi8ai\\nArrjvevs. 5. Kot Ary\\n\u00c2\u00a9opatevs. 6. MeXtTY)\\nl7T7roTop,a87y5. 7. avirir-q\\neK K01A77S.\\nMeAtTev?.\\nSv7reratwv.\\nNote. Possibly Ayvovs should be put here.", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0081.jp2"}, "82": {"fulltext": "68\\nThe Five Post-Kleisthenean Tribes.\\nPTOI.KMAIS.\\nDenies.\\nDemotika.\\nDemes.\\nDemotika.\\nI.\\nAiyiXia\\nAiyiXievs.\\n13-\\nKovOvXrj\\nK.ov6vXr}6ev,\\n2.\\nAKvatets\\nA/aiaievs.\\nKov^vXtS^s.\\n3-\\n*A \u00c2\u00a3i8va\\nA \u00c2\u00a3i8vaios.\\n14.\\nKv8avTi8at\\nKuSavT 1877s.\\n4-\\nBepevi/aSai\\nBepeviK 1877s.\\n15.\\nMeXaivai\\nMeXaiveus.\\n5-\\nBoura8ai\\nBovraS^s.\\n16.\\nOlvor}\\nOivaios.\\n6.\\nE/caX?7\\nJZiKaXfjOev.\\n17-\\nTLevreXr)\\nIlevTeX^ev.\\n7-\\nEwoo-ri8ai\\nEtjvoctt 1877s.\\n18.\\nHeppiScu\\nHeppiSrjs\\n8.\\n\u00c2\u00a977jU-aKOS\\n7/xa/ \u00e2\u0082\u00ac^s.\\n19.\\nTLeraXiaL\\nIleTaXtevs.\\n9-\\n\u00c2\u00aevpy(i)vtSaL\\n\u00c2\u00a9vpywvutys.\\n20.\\nYlpoarraXTa\\nIIpocr7raXTto$.\\nIO.\\niKapta\\niKaptevs\\n21.\\n%rjpxi.-)(ihai\\n^/xa^a^s.\\nii.\\nKXa [7rt8atJ\\nKXco [77-18775]\\n22.\\nTira/a Sai\\nTtraKt8^s.\\n12.\\nKoXtov^\\nKoXtoVT^ey.\\n23.\\ne Y7roj/3eta\\ne Y7T(opeta^\u00e2\u0082\u00aci/.\\n24.\\nXvd\\nI Xv\u00c2\u00a3VS.\\nAttains.\\nI.\\nAyKvXrj\\nAyKvXrjOev.\\n7-\\nJLopvSaXXos\\nKopvSaXXevs.\\n2.\\nAyi/ovs\\nAyvovmos\\n8.\\nOlvor)\\nOiraios.\\n3-\\nAypvX^\\nAypvXrjOev.\\n9-\\nOlov Ae/ceXeiKoj/\\ne\u00c2\u00a3 Olov.\\n4-\\n*A#/xoi/ov\\nAO/aovcvs.\\n10.\\nII/3o/3aXiv0os\\nIIpo/3a.Xio-ios.\\n5-\\nA7ToXX(Jl)Vt\u00e2\u0082\u00ac6S\\nATToXXitiVLtW\\nMI.\\n^owtov\\nSowievs.\\n6.\\nArrjvr)\\nArrjvevs.\\n12.\\nTvpp.ciSaL\\nTvp/xetS^s.\\nHadrianis.\\nlm\\nAvTLvoels\\nAvTuvoevs.\\n8.\\nOlvor]\\nOivaios\\n2.\\nAcf i8va\\nA \u00c2\u00a3i8vchos.\\n9-\\nHap,/3o)TdSat\\nIIa/x/3a Ta877S.\\n3-\\nB^cra\\nBrycratevs.\\n10.\\n^Kap./3o)Vib\\\\x,L\\n%Kap,fia)VL$r)\\n4-\\nAaiSaXi8ai\\nAaiSaXufys\\n11.\\nTpLKopvvOos\\nTptKopvo-tos.\\n5-\\nEirea\\nEtTeatos,\\n12.\\n^rjyata\\n^ycuevs.\\nIrecuos.\\n13-\\nv Oa, Oa\\nv Oa0ev,\\n6.\\nEXaiovs\\nEXaioixrios.\\n*Oa0ev.\\n7-\\n\u00c2\u00a9pia\\n\u00c2\u00a9piacrios.", "height": "4226", "width": "2450", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0082.jp2"}, "83": {"fulltext": "APPENDIX C.\\nBibliography.\\nBeloch, Julius. Die Errichtung der Phyle Ptolemais. Neue\\nJahrbiicher fur classische Philologie 129 (1884), p. 481 ff.\\nBuck, Carl D. Discoveries in the Attic Deme of Ikaria.\\nPapers of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, V.\\n(1892), pp. 43-134-\\nCurtius, E. und Kaupert, J. A. Karten von Attika. Berlin\\n(1894).\\nDittenberger, Wilhelm. Untersuchungen iiber die uach\\nKleisthenes neu errichteten attischen Phylen. Hermes IX.\\n(1875), p. 385 ff.\\nDittenberger, Wilhelm. Kaiser Hadrians erste Anwesenheit\\nin Athen. Hermes VII. (1873), p. 213 ff.\\nFerguson, W. S. The Athenian Secretaries. Cornell Studies\\nin Classical Philology No. VII. (1898).\\nGardner, P. and Jevons, F. B. A Manual of Greek An-\\ntiquities (1895), pp. 449 ff. and 458 ff.\\nGilbert, Gustav. Handbuch der griechischen Staatsalter-\\nthiimer. Zvveite Auflage (1893), P- 222 ff-\\nGilbert, Gustav. Zur Geschichte der Zwolfzahl der attischen\\nPlrylen. Philologus 39 (1880), p. 373 ff.\\nGow, James. A Companion to School Classics (1888), pp.\\n91, 92, 97, 98, and 106-8.\\nGregorovius, Ferdinand. Der Kaiser Hadrian. Stuttgart\\n(1884), Ch. 12.\\nHanriot, C. Recherches sur la Topographie des Denies de\\nl Attique. Paris (1853).\\nHaussoulier, B. Ea Vie municipale en Attique. Paris (1883).", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0083.jp2"}, "84": {"fulltext": "yo The Five Post-Kleisthenean Tribes.\\nHermann, K. F. Lehrbuch der griechischen Staatsalter-\\ntiimer, sechste Auflage von Victor Thumser (1889), 71 [in]\\nand 135 [175].\\nHitzig, Hermann and Bliimner, Hugo. Des Pausanias\\nBeschreibung von Griechenland. Berlin (1896). Especially\\nnotes to I. 5, 5 and I. 6, 8.\\nKastromenos, P. Die Demen von Attika. Leipzig (1888).\\nKirchner, J. E. Die Zusamniensetzung der Phylen Antigonis\\nund Demetrias. Rheinisches Museum 47 (1892), p. 550 ff.\\nKohler, Ulrich. Ein Verschollener. Hermes VII. (1873),\\np. 1 ff.\\nLeake, W. M. Die Demen von Attika (German Translation\\nby A. Westermann). Braunschweig (1840).\\nLolling, H. G. Neuer Grenzstein der Artemis Amarysia.\\nMitth. d. d. Arch. Inst, in Athen 5 (1880), p. 289 ff.\\nLoper, R. Die Trittyen und Demen Attikas. Mitth. d. d.\\nArch. Inst, in Athen 17 (1892), p. 319 ff.\\nMahaffy, J. P. The Empire of the Ptolemies. London (1895).\\nMilchhofer, A. Untersuchungen iiber die Demenordnung des\\nKleisthenes. Berlin (1892).\\nMilchhofer, A. Antikenbericht aus Attika. Mitth. d. d.\\nArch. Inst, in Athen 12 (1887), p. 81 ff. and p. 277 ff. 13\\n(1888), p. 337 ff.\\nMilchhofer, A. Erlautender Text to Cnrtius und Kaupert s\\nKarten von Attika. Berlin (1 881-1895).\\nMilchhofer, A. Articles Agryle, Aigilia, Aithalidai, Aky-\\naieis, Ankyle, Antinoeis, Aphidna, Apollonieis, Atene, Athmo-\\nnon, and Attika, in Pauly-Wissowa Real-Encyclopadie, Vols. I.\\n(1894) and II. (1896).\\nRoss, Ludwig. Die Demen von Attika. Halle (1846).\\nSandys, J. E. Aristotle s Constitution of Athens. London\\n(1894), Ch. 21 and Notes.\\nSauppe, H. De demis urbauis Athenarum. Lipsiae\\n(1846).\\nSchafer, C. Die attische Trittyeneiutheilung. Mitth. d. d.\\nArch. Inst, in Athen 5 (1880), p. 85 ff.", "height": "4226", "width": "2450", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0084.jp2"}, "85": {"fulltext": "Bibliography. 7 I\\nScherling, Carolus. Quibus rebus singulorum Atticae pago-\\nrum incolae operam dederint. Leipziger Studien XVIII. (1897),\\nP iff.\\nSchoffer, V. von. Article Archontes, in Pauly-Wissowa\\nReal-Encyclopadie 11.(1896), p. 565 ff.\\nSeyffert, Oskar. Articles Phyle and Demos, in Dictionary of\\nClassical Antiquities. English Translation (1891).\\nSzanto, Emil. Die Kleisthenischen Trittyen. Hermes\\nXXVII. (1892), p. 312 ff.\\nTopffer, J. Articles Antigonis and Attalis, in Pauly-Wissowa\\nReal-Encyclopadie I. (1894), p. 2405 and II. (1896), p. 2156 f.\\nUnger, Georg Fr. Griechische Zeitrechung. Handbuch der\\nclassischen Alterthumswissenschaft, herausgegeben von Iwan\\nMiiller. Zweite Auflage Vol. I. (1892), p. 715 ff.\\nUsener, H. Chronologische Beitrage. Rheinisches Museum\\n34(1879), p. 388 ff.\\nWachsmuth, Curt. Die Stadt Athen im Alterthum.\\nZweiter Band, erste Abtheilung (1890), p. 231 ff.\\nWide, S. Aphidna in Nordattika. Mitth. d. d. Arch. Inst,\\nin Athen 21 (1896), p. 385 ff.\\nYoung, C. H. Erchia, a deme of Attica. Columbia College\\ndissertation New York 1 89 1\\nYoung, C. H. Gargettus, an Attic Deme. Classical Studies\\nin Honour of Henry Drisler (1894), P- 2 75 ff-", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0085.jp2"}, "86": {"fulltext": "^D -1,0. 3", "height": "4226", "width": "2450", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0086.jp2"}, "87": {"fulltext": "", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0087.jp2"}, "88": {"fulltext": "", "height": "4275", "width": "2376", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0088.jp2"}, "89": {"fulltext": "", "height": "4251", "width": "2225", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0089.jp2"}, "90": {"fulltext": "f A\\nJ\\n0\u00c2\u00b0\\no\\n7\\n4 V \u00e2\u0080\u00a2V *^f S", "height": "4226", "width": "2450", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0090.jp2"}, "91": {"fulltext": "i o Tp*\\nV\\nx/ :m w\\n^CV\\niT o,\\n^cv\\n-^r X\\nr oK\\ns v ^LVL aP *L v s\\n*e^\u00e2\u0080\u009e\u00c2\u00ab\\ny wVj^^ 13 V **L1% T y V S VL\\nV", "height": "4317", "width": "2441", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0091.jp2"}, "92": {"fulltext": "", "height": "4226", "width": "2450", "jp2-path": "fivepostkleisthe00bate_0092.jp2"}}