No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Archaisms in the Troizen Decree
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 February 2009
Extract
The decree of Themistocles, discovered by M. H. Jameson and first published by him in 1960 has given rise to an intense debate centring on the question of the decree's authenticity. This debate has focused to an important extent on supposed archaisms or anachronisms in the text. If a word appears to be used in an ‘archaic’ manner, i.e., in this instance, one peculiar to the early fifth century, it may be an indication of the inscription's authenticity. Conversely, a word employed in a manner proper to a later time may be an indication of the decree's actual period of origination. Thus an early and influential commentator, D. M. Lewis, argued for the decree's authenticity asserting: ‘I see no reason to suspect a forgery. There are too many traces of official and archaic language.’.
- Type
- Shorter Notes
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Classical Association 1990
References
1 Hesperia 29 (1960), 198–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar. A summary of the early stages of the debate is provided by Chambers, M. H. in Philologus 111 (1967), 166–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
2 CQn.s. 11 (1961), 61–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
3 Meiggs, R. and Lewis, D. M., Greek Historical Inscriptions (Oxford, 1969), p. 52Google Scholar.
4 Op. cit., p. 62.
5 Termini for the speech are provided by a reference to the battle of Chaeronea in 338 (26.11) and by Dinarchus' knowledge of the trial of Aristogeiton in a speech of 324 B.C. (2.13).
6 The decree's first appearance is at Dem. 19.303.
7 Lewis, , op. cit., p. 62Google Scholar.
8 Harrison, A. R. W., The Law of Athens (Oxford, 1968), p. 188Google Scholar.
9 Lectures in Memory of Louise Taft Semple, 1st Series (Princeton, 1967), pp. 119–32Google Scholar.