-i&f^MM^f^". >ll.\ 
 
-nl+ 
 
 ^k 
 
 THE LIMITATIONS 
 
 OF THE 
 
 PREDICATIVE POSITION IN GREEK 
 
 A DISSERTATION 
 
 PRESENTED TO THE BOARD OF UNIVERSITY STUDIES OF 
 
 THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY FOR THE 
 
 DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY 
 
 BY 
 
 ALFRJED WILLIAM MILDEN 
 
 SOMETIME FELLOW OF THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY 
 
 BALTI MORE 
 
 JOHN MURPHY COMPANY 
 I 900 
 
THE LIMITATIONS 
 
 OF THE 
 
 PREDICATIVE POSITION IN GREEK 
 
 A DISSERTATION 
 
 PRESENTED TO THE BOARD OF UNIVERSITY STUDIES OF 
 
 THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY FOR THE 
 
 DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY 
 
 BY 
 
 ALFEED WILLIAM MILDEN 
 
 SOMETIME FELLOW OF THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY 
 
 B ALTI MORE 
 
 JOHN MURPHY COMPANY 
 I 900 
 

 TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 Pagk. 
 The Greek Article, 7 
 
 Oblique Predication, 10 
 
 The Predicative Participle as the Equivalent op an Abstract 
 Noun, 15 
 
 The Origin op the Adverbial-Dative Type op Predication, - 18 
 
 The Adverbial-Dative Type op Predication in (a) Classical Greek, 22 
 
 The Adverbial-Dative Type op Predication in (6) Post-Classical 
 Greek, '_ 26 
 
 The Prepositional Type op Predication in (a) Classical Greek, - 29 
 
 The Prepositional Type op Predication in (b) Post-Classical Greek, 39 
 
 Conclusion, -43 
 
 254829 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHY. 
 
 Bernhardt, G. 
 Blass, F. 
 Classen, J. 
 
 Donaldson, J. W. 
 Jebb, R. C. 
 
 Kruger, K. W. 
 
 Kruger-Pokel. 
 
 Kuhner-Gerth. 
 
 Madvig, J. N. 
 Middleton, T. F. 
 mommsen, t. 
 
 Monro, D. B. 
 Paul, H. 
 
 SCHMID, W. 
 
 schoemann, g. f. 
 Steinthal, H. 
 
 VOGRINZ, G. 
 
 GENERAL WORKS. 
 
 Wissenschaftliche Syntax. Berlin, 1829. 
 
 Die attische Beredsamkeit. Leipzig, 1887. 
 
 Beobachtungen iiber den horn. Sprg. 
 
 Frankfurt A. M., 1867. 
 New Cratylus. London, 1850. 
 
 The Attic Orators from Antiphon to Isaeus. 
 
 London, 1876. 
 Historisch-philologische Studien, Vol. II. Berlin, 1851. 
 Griechische Sprachlehre. Leipzig, 1891. 
 
 Ausfiihrliehe Grammatik der griechischen Sprache, Part 
 II. (Satzlehre). Leipzig, 1898. 
 
 Syntax of the Greek Language. London, 1873. 
 
 The Doctrine of the Greek Article, etc. London, 1841. 
 Beitrage zu der Lehre von den griechischen Prapo- 
 
 Berlin, 1895. 
 Oxford, 1891. 
 
 sitionen. 
 Homeric Grammar. 
 
 Principles of the History of Ljlnguage. New York, 1889. 
 Der Atticismus, Vol. III. Stuttgart, 1893. 
 
 Die Lehre von den Redetheilen. Berlin, 1862. 
 
 Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaft bei den Griechen 
 und Romern. Berlin, 1863. 
 
 Grammatik des homerischen Dialektes. 
 
 Paderborn, 1889. 
 
 SPECIAL WORKS. 
 
 CcrcUEL, Ch. Essai sur la langue et le style de I'orateur Antiphon. 
 
 Berlin, 1882. 
 Dornseiffen, I. De articulo apud Graecos eiusque usu in praedicato. 
 
 Amsterdam, 1856. 
 
 Egger, E. Apollonius Dyscole, essai sur I'histoire des theories 
 
 grammaticales dans 1' antiquity. Paris, 1854. 
 
 EiCHHORST, 0. Die Lehre des Apollonius Dyscolus vom Artikel. Phi- 
 
 lol. 38, pp. 399-422. 
 Elias, S. Quaestiones Lycurgeae. Halis Saxonum, 1870. 
 
 Fuller, A. L. De articuli in antiquis Graecis comoediis usu. 
 
 Leipzig, 1888. 
 
 5 
 
6 /-v:^'</;-'.^ ■ 
 
 GiLDERSLEEVE, B. L. 
 GUTTENTAG, I. 
 
 Helbing, R. 
 holzweissig, f. 
 Kallenberg, H. 
 Mayer, H. 
 Procksch, a. 
 Spieker, E. H. 
 Stolz, Fr. 
 
 r , r , ^ Bibliography, 
 
 Amer. Journ. of Philol. 2, 83 ff., 8, 218 ff., 9, 137 ff., 17, 
 
 319. 
 De Bubdito qui inter Lucianeos legi solet dialogo Tox- 
 
 aride. Berlin, 1860. 
 
 Ueber den Gebrauch des echten und sociativen Dativs 
 
 bei Herodot. Karlsruhe, 1898. 
 
 Ueber den sociativ-instrumentalen Gebrauch des griech. 
 
 Dativ bei Homer. Burg, 1885. 
 
 Commentatio critica in Herodotum. Berlin, 1884. 
 
 Jahresber. des philol. Vereins zu Berlin, 1897. 
 Observationes in Lycurgi oratoris usum dicendi. 
 
 Freiburg, 1889. 
 Ueber den Gebrauch des Artikels, insbesondere beim 
 
 Pradicat, Philol. 40, pp. 1-47. 
 Genitive Absolute in the Attic Orators, Amer. Journ. of 
 
 Philol. 6,310 ff. 
 Der attributive Gebrauch von avr6s beim sociativen 
 
 Dativ, Wiener Studien, vol. 20, p. 244 ff. 
 
THE LIMITATIONS OF THE PREDICATIVE 
 POSITION IN GREEK. 
 
 A study of the limitations of the predicative position in Greek 
 calls for a brief treatment of the origin and historical development 
 of the Greek article. 
 
 Aristotle (Poetics, c. 21) is the first writer by whom the pro- 
 noun is referred to as a separate part of speech. He expressly 
 makes mention of the ovoaa, the prjaa, 
 the avvBea/jLOi;, and the apOpov, though 
 elsewhere he includes the last two under 
 o-vvSecr/jLO^. We do not know when the name avrwvvfjLia was 
 introduced. Schoemann's assumption, Die Lehre von den Rede- 
 theilen, p. 117, that it originated with the Alexandrian gram- 
 marians is not improbable. He is probably right, too, in assuming 
 that the separation of the pronoun from the article did not take 
 place later than the time of Aristarchus, the grammarian. It is 
 important to remember, however, that this separation was not 
 countenanced by the Stoics, who did not fail to perceive that the 
 article was in reality a degraded pronoun. Under the general 
 name of pronoun, they comprehended both pronoun and article. 
 The Stoic view of the nature of the article — that it is a degraded 
 pronoun — has won general acceptation. 
 
 In Homer 6 rj to is the commonest of the demonstrative pro- 
 nouns. It is a matter of great interest to the student of language 
 to observe the traces of the gradual weakening of the pronominal 
 force of 77 TO. Accompanying this loss is the growing use of 
 0VT09, oBe, and €Kelvo<^. The gradual weakening of the pronomi- 
 nal 6 7) TO is, however, only another way of characterising the 
 transition from pronoun to article. Vogrinz, Grammatik des 
 homerischen Dialektes, p. 197, points out one step in the devel- 
 opment of the article where the pronominal form and the noun to 
 
 7 
 
8 The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek. 
 
 which it relates are separated merely by light particles. Cf., e. g., 
 7] 8e vv fi'qrrjp (X 405), ol Si vv \aoi (A 382j, to, S^ . . . KrjXa 
 (A 383), ol Bk deoi (A 1), o 7 ^p«9 (E 308), rob U ol Saae, r^ 
 Be ol oofjLot) (saepe). The following statistics for the pronominal and 
 articular use of 0, rj, to are quoted by Vogrinz (1. c.) from Stum- 
 mer (Ueber den Artikel bei Homer, Progr., Miinnerstadt, 1886, 
 p. 56). In the Iliad 0, 77, to is used as a pronoun 3,000 times, as 
 an article 218 times, i. e., in the ratio of 14:1; in the Odyssey it 
 is found as a pronoun 2,178 times, as an article 171 times, i. e., in 
 the ratio of 13:1. These statistics, as Vogrinz observes, hardly 
 justify us in claiming an advance in the use of the article. That 
 it began to be used with a greater degree of frequency in Homer 
 can be seen by an examination of the later portions of the Odyssey, 
 and in parts of other books. Vogrinz, p. 198, on the basis of 
 Stummer's investigation, illustrates freely the Homeric uses of the 
 article. Some of these may fitly be noted here. (1) With particu- 
 lar words : tolo uvukto^ (A 322, 7 388, cf) 62), rj ttXtjOv^ (B 278, 
 
 305), Tov 'r]VLO')(pv (^ 465), tov oXtjttjv {a- 333), tov /jlvOov (B 16, 
 
 1 55, 309, T 185), t^v yaaTepa {o- 380), ra Bcopa {X 339); (2) with 
 particular classes of words, as (a) cardinal numbers : t»}9 fjL€v Itj^ 
 (TTixo'^ (n 173), Tr)v jjuev lav (f 435), ol Tpel^ (f 26), ol Be Bvco ctko- 
 TreXot (fi 73), rot? TrevTe vea<; (7 299) ; substantivised participles : 
 TOV ayovTa (^ 262), rw irpoij^ovTa ("^ 325); substantivised adjec- 
 tives : TO Kprj<yvov (A 106), tov Bvo-ttjvov {v 224), tov apiaTOv 
 (f 19), TO fiekav Bpv6<; (^ 12); ordinals: to TrpcjTov, to BevTepov, 
 etc. Cf. also to irdpo<^, to irpiv, to irpoaOev, to irdpoiOev. 
 
 Quintilian (Inst. Or. 1, 4, 19) says of the Latin language : Noster 
 sermo articulos non desiderat. With this stage corresponds, in the 
 main. Epic Greek which, as a rule, dispenses with the use of the 
 article. Epic use diverges from Attic at several points. We are 
 familiar with the classification of the article in Attic Greek as 
 particular and generic. Homeric usage is almost wholly confined 
 to the former. Vogrinz (p. 198) gives but two indisputable cases 
 of the latter, viz., tov ojulolov (H 53, p 218). Kriiger, Dial. 50, 4, 
 1 and 2, gives other cases which may be considered generic. The 
 use of the article with possessive significance — a not uncommon 
 phenomenon in Attic — is rarely, if at all, found. The substantive 
 generally suffices ; occasionally it is strengthened by the possessive 
 
The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek. 9 
 
 pronoun. The three or four cases that may be cited are incon- 
 clusive. Cf. Kriiger, Dial. 50, 3, 6. There are a few examples 
 of the adjective in the predicative position relatively to the article. 
 The cases employed are the nominative and the accusative. The 
 commonest expression of this class is irolov rbv fjuvdov which occurs 
 seven times, all in the Iliad. Cf., further, Kriiger Dial. 50, 10, 1. 
 
 In passing to the function of the article in Attic Greek, the 
 writer would acknowledge his especial obligations to Kriiger among 
 the grammarians who have treated of this subject. In this depart- 
 ment of his work, Kiihner was in no small measure dependent on 
 Kriiger. Worthy of mention, too, is the excellent treatise of Dorn- 
 seiifen, De Articulo, etc., to which Kriiger was indebted for some 
 of his remarks on this subject. Viewed logically, the function of 
 the Attic article is to mark the object with which it is used as 
 definite and well-known. The cases, not a few, where no article 
 is used, are best explained as survivals of that earlier stage of the 
 language when the article had not yet come to maturity. Such are 
 €t? d(TTv, and the like. By reason of this definiteness of import, 
 it is naturally used with the subject, but omitted with the predicate. 
 It is found, however, in the predicate (1) in the case of certain 
 words with which the article fuses, e. g., Plato, Apol. 40 c: hvolv 
 'yap Odrepov ecrriv to reOvdvai and (2) where the two parts of the 
 sentence are logically convertible, e. g., Plato, Theaet. 145 D \ apov 
 TO fiavOdveiv iarlv to crocfxoTepov ry[yv6(r6ac irepl o fjuavOdvei Tt<; ; 
 (cf. Otto Eichhorst, Die Lehre des Apollonius Dysoolus vom Arti- 
 kel, Philol., vol. 38, p. 399 ff.). The salient uses of the article were 
 clearly understood by Apollonius Dyscolus. His classification was as 
 follows : — (1) KaT €^o)(^r]v, par excellence, e. g., o 7rot7]Trj<; = Homer; 
 (2) Kara fjuovaBiKrjv ktyjctlv, e. g., o ffaa-iX€v<^ crvv to5 crTpaTevfiaTL 
 — our possessive use ; (3) KaT avTo fiovov aTrXrjv dva(l>opdv. The 
 last is the commonest of all, and in it, as Apollonius saw, is to be found 
 the essential characteristic of the Greek article, viz., dva(l>opd. The 
 generic article was characterised by him by the word dopi(rTcoSco<i, 
 inasmuch as it was not limited, or defined, like the others. 
 
 Viewed rhetorically, the article distinguishes, the subject from 
 the predicate in accordance with the principle which has been 
 stated. While it may be true that it is not indispensable to a 
 language, as, e. g., Latin, it is invaluable as a means of gaining 
 
10 The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek. 
 
 precision, e. g., ^eo? ^v 6 X0709 or vv^ t] rj/nepa iyevero. This is 
 clearly set forth by the Greek rhetorician, Theon, in his Progy- 
 mnasmata (Spengel, Rhetores Graeci, vol. II., p. 83). There he 
 says : TrpoaOeaei apOpwv ovKerc afi^l^oXo^ ylverau rj Xe^i^;. 
 
 The various positions which the adjective may assume relatively 
 to the article in Attic call for brief remark. The adjective may be 
 used either attributively or predicatively. The attributive position 
 is a threefold one : (1) r} o-i) oiKia (2) 97 olKia rj o-rj (3) olKia r) cnfj. 
 Of these, the first is the simplest and most natural. The second 
 is called the "oratorical," and carries with it 6yKo<^ (Aristotle, 
 Rhetoric 1407 b, 35-37). The third is not specifically referred 
 to by Aristotle. In the Orators it is the least frequent of the three, 
 and has been characterized by Prof Gildersleeve as the "slip-shod" 
 or "negligent" position. It "afiects to be easy and familiar." 
 (See his Justin Martyr A, 6, 7, and review of Merriam's Herodotus 
 in A. J. P., 6, 262, and A. J. P., 17, 518.) An investigation 
 of the relative frequency of the three positions in the Orators and 
 the Speeches of Thucydides, so iar as the category of the possessive 
 pronouns is concerned, enables the writer to make the following 
 statement. In Thucydides the first position is the normal one, the 
 second is exceptional (three times), the third is found eleven times. 
 In the Orators, the first position has, as a rule, the preference. 
 The second occurs about half as often. The third, however, is 
 very rare, there being but ten occurrences in the course of above 
 2,000 Teubner pages. The predicative position is ^ twofold one, 
 the adjective being found before or after both article and noun. It 
 is by no means restricted to the nominative or casus rectus ; for we 
 frequently find the genitive, dative, and accusative cases similarly 
 used, giving rise to what may be termed " oblique predication." 
 
 In studying oblique predication, it was found necessary for a 
 
 clear appreciation of the grammatical phenomena to take account 
 
 of the participle as well as the adjective, 
 
 ^^xi^^x^^xT to the latter of which Donaldson, in his 
 
 PREDICATION. . -a ^' ^ a- ^ • 
 
 classitication 01 predicates as primary, 
 
 secondary, and tertiary, confined his view ; for the participle by 
 reason of its verbal force readily lends itself to the expression of 
 predication in the oblique cases, and the adjective has in this par- 
 ticular assumed the function of the participle. Boiling, The Epic 
 
The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek. 11 
 
 and Attic Use of the Circumstantial Participle (Johns Hopkins 
 University Circulars, December, 1897), has well set forth the affin- 
 ity between the two in these words : " The adjective represents a 
 quality at rest, the participle represents a quality in motion, and 
 the difference between the two is a difference in the degree of 
 mobility.'' Not only, however, does the adjective assume the 
 function of the participle, but the participle in attribution sinks 
 to the level of the adjective. This degradation of the participle 
 is sufficiently familiar to students of English in such words, e. g., 
 as *^ interesting,'' " charming," and the like, which are ordinarily 
 felt as adjectives. 
 
 The field of personal observation in this study of oblique predi- 
 cation has been limited to the Orators and Thucydides. Two 
 types in particular have formed the basis of this investigation. 
 They have been denominated " Adverbial-Dative Type of Predi- 
 cation " and " Prepositional Type of Predication." 
 
 The first explicit reference to the subject of oblique predication, 
 which has come under the writer's observation, appears in a disser- 
 tation written by S. Elias, Quaestiones Lycurgeae, Halis Saxonum, 
 1870. On p. 17 he has something to say of the predicative use of 
 the adjective in connection with an oblique case of the substantive. 
 He observes that the construction is found in all the Orators, but 
 that it is used oftener by some than by others. It is found, e. g., 
 four times in Andocides — the fourth oration is included — three times 
 in Antiphon, four times in Hyperides, nine times in Dinarchus. 
 For the rest of the Orators, he contents himself with general state- 
 ments. He remarks that it occurs often in Demosthenes, oftenest 
 in Isocratrs, whose example is followed by Lycurgus. 
 
 The next reference to the same subject is made by H. Mayer, 
 Observationes in Lycurgi Oratoris Usum Dicendi, Friburgi, 1889. 
 On p. 33 ff., Mayer notes the marked fondness of Lycurgus for the 
 predicative position, as it is called, of the adjective. " Si enim, 
 quomodo collocata sint adiectiva, quaerimus, oratorem in praedi- 
 cativa quae dicitur collocatione adhibenda quasi exultare intellegi- 
 mus." He cites a number of examples from Lycurgus, and quotes 
 the figures for other Orators given by Elias in the dissertation 
 mentioned. There is added a remark on the stylistic effect of the 
 construction : " etiam tali adiectivorum collocatione plus ponderis 
 
1 2 The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek. 
 
 orationem nancisci manifestum est." With this judgment, the 
 present writer is in accord. 
 
 It is quite evident from the figures given by Elias that he has 
 examined somewhat carefully the usage of certain of the Orators. 
 If one has regard merely to the number of occurrences, the state- 
 ment with respect to Demosthenes, Isocrates, and Lycurgus is cor- 
 rect as far as it goes; but looked at in relation to the bulk of Greek 
 which each Orator represents, the statement is far from correct. 
 
 A table of the usage of the Orators and Thucydides, in which 
 the speeches of Thucydides are separated from the narrative, is 
 subjoined, giving the number of predicative adjectives or parti- 
 ciples used by each writer. Only those orations generally con- 
 sidered genuine are included. In the case of Demosthenes, the 
 division of Blass (Dindorf's edition, revised by Blass, vol. i, pp. 
 45-6) has been followed. 
 
 Range of Oblique Predication. 
 
 Pred. Adjs. 
 and Pics. Teuhner pages. Percentage. 
 
 Lycurgus 33 45 .73 
 
 Thucydides (Speeches)... 70 125 .56 
 
 " (Narrative). 81 473 .17 
 
 Isocrates 189 508 .37 
 
 Dinarchus 11 54 .20 
 
 Lysias 28 200 .14 
 
 Pseudo-Lysias 19 17 1.12 
 
 Isaeus 16 138 ,12 
 
 Antiphon 11 99 .11 
 
 Demosthenes 73 737 .10 
 
 Pseudo-Demosthenes.... 45 521 .09 
 
 Hyperides 4 44 .09 
 
 Aeschines 17 188 .09 
 
 Andocides 3 67 .04 
 
 Pseudo-Andocides 2 12 .17 
 
 An examination of this table yields the following results : — 
 Pseudo-Lysias, Lycurgus, Thucydides (Speeches), Isocrates, and 
 Dinarchus stand out from the rest in the preference they give to 
 this construction. At the opposite pole stands Andocides, to whom 
 
The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek. 13 
 
 the construction was in no wise congenial. Of the remaining Ora- 
 tors, we may say generally that they pursued a middle course. A 
 sharp difiPerence is noticeable between the usage of Thucydides in 
 his speeches and in his narrative. Especially striking is the large 
 use in the Epitaphios of Pseudo-Lysias. 
 
 The foregoing results warrant the conclusion that the true home 
 of oblique predication is not in simple narrative which keeps close 
 to the language of everyday life ; on the contrary, it is quite with- 
 drawn from that sphere, and is found in language which aims to 
 be elevated, weighty, impressive, and, in a word, strives after 
 effect. Hence the marked preference for it in that much-discussed 
 specimen of epideictic oratory, the Epitaphios. Hence the favor 
 it finds with Thucydides, when he is striving to be impressive. 
 Hence, too, the fondness for it shown by Lycurgus, and, in a less 
 pronounced manner, by Isocrates and Dinarchus. Hence, on the 
 other hand, the marked avoidance of it by Andocides, who was not 
 swayed by the schools of rhetoric, and was, perhaps, the least artistic 
 of the Orators. 
 
 The following is the tabular statement of the results reached in 
 an examination of the range of the adverbial-dative and the prepo- 
 sitional type of predication. 
 
 Adverbial-Dative Type. 
 
 Pred. Adjs. 
 and Pics. Teubner pages. Percentage. 
 
 Thucydides (Speeches)... 5 125 .04 
 
 " (Narrative)., 12 473 .025 
 
 Lycurgus 1 45 .022 
 
 Isocrates 6 508 .012 
 
 Aeschines 2 188 .010 
 
 Isaeus 1 138 .007 
 
 Demosthenes 2 737 .0027 
 
 Pseudo-Demosthenes 1 521 .002 
 
 Pseudo-Lysias 1 17 .06 
 
 Lucian 76 1268 .06 
 
 Dion Chrysostomus 12 708 .017 
 
 Dion Cassius 10 658 .015 
 
 Diod. Siculus 6 444 .013 
 
14 
 
 The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek. 
 
 Prepositional Type. 
 
 Thucydides (Speeches)... 
 " (Narrative). 
 
 Dinarchus 
 
 Demosthenes 
 
 Pseudo-Demosthenes 
 
 Aesehines 
 
 Andocides 
 
 Isocrates 
 
 Antiphon 
 
 Lysias 
 
 Pseudo-Ly sias 
 
 Lucian 
 
 Dion Cassius 
 
 Dion Chrysostomus 
 
 Diod. Siculus. 
 
 Pred. Adjs. 
 and Ptcs. 
 
 Teubner pages. 
 
 Percentage. 
 
 7 
 
 125 
 
 .056 
 
 3 
 
 473 
 
 .006 
 
 2 
 
 54 
 
 .037 
 
 16 
 
 737 
 
 .022 
 
 2 
 
 521 
 
 .004 
 
 4 
 
 188 
 
 .021 
 
 1 
 
 67 
 
 .015 
 
 7 
 
 508 
 
 .014 
 
 1 
 
 99 
 
 .010 
 
 1 
 
 200 
 
 .005 
 
 1 
 
 17 
 
 .06 
 
 94 
 
 1268 
 
 .074 
 
 15 
 
 658 
 
 .023 
 
 11 
 
 708 
 
 .016 
 
 2 
 
 444 
 
 .005 
 
 These tables yield the following results : — 
 
 Half of the Orators are not represented at all in the adverbial- 
 dative type. Thucydides shows the same decided preference for 
 these constructions in his speeches as compared with his narrative. 
 Especially is this to be seen in the prepositional type, where the 
 proportion is above 9:1. Lycurgus is the foremost of the Orators 
 in his use of the adv.-dative type. Except in one possible instance, 
 he seems to have avoided the prepositional type. This may be due 
 to the small amount of his writing which has come down to our 
 time. Four of the six examples of the adv.-dat. type in Isocrates 
 are found in one particular section. Aesehines, while using both 
 types with comparative frequency, prefers the prepositional type. 
 Especially marked, so far as variety of usage goes, is the prefer- 
 ence of Demosthenes for the prepositional type. Its ratio to the 
 adv.-dat. is about 7:1. With respect to the usage of Demosthenes, 
 it may be remarked that he uses the prep, type eleven times in his 
 public orations (ten of them being in Forensic speeches), four times 
 in his private orations. Taking bulk into consideration, the public 
 
The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek. 1 5 
 
 and private orations cannot be differentiated on this score. The 
 plain style of Lysias avoids the dat. type altogether and uses the 
 prep, type once only, but that in an effective passage, in the 12th 
 oration, where Lysias himself is the speaker. The Epitaphios 
 stands out from all the rest. 
 
 It is interesting to compare the usage of post-classic Greek as 
 seen in the writings of Lucian. In the dat. type Lucian outdoes 
 all except Pseudo-Lysias, while in the prep, type even Pseudo- 
 Lysias is not to be excepted. This excessive use of oblique predi- 
 cation is the result of a desire on the part of that writer to impart 
 elegance to his style. Cf. Prof. Gildersleeve in A. J. P. 17, 518. 
 Dion Cassius and Dion Chrysostomus, as compared with Lucian, 
 are very much nearer the norm. 
 
 As to the true sphere of the adv. -dat. and the prep, type, the 
 writer believes that he is justified in affirming that, of the two, the 
 second strikes a decidedly higher note. The first undoubtedly 
 takes its rise in the language of everyday life. Demosthenes em- 
 ploys it when characterising his opponents, and only in a contempt- 
 uous sense. Thucydides, it is true, gives it a higher tone than it 
 usually has by withdrawing it from its ordinary associations and 
 transferring it, as a rule, to the naval sphere. The second, on the 
 other hand, is distinctly elevated in tone, though it draws near, in 
 the hands of certain writers, to the language of ordinary discourse. 
 Demosthenes makes use of it with telling effect in passages intended 
 to be impressive. Lucian does not seem to have appreciated this 
 difference of tone between the two types. They are almost alike 
 to him. Thucydides, by his marked preference for the construction 
 in his speeches, and his corresponding avoidance of it in his narra- 
 tive, shows that he regarded it as more elegant. 
 
 A class of participles, having the value in translation of an 
 
 abstract noun, call for separate treat- 
 
 of A^sStToun. --t '-- These form but a small 
 
 group in the Orators. 
 Antiphon, 5, 35: hi avrov rov o-cDfiaro^ airoWv jjuevov. 
 Andocides, 3, 27 : €k yap rov TroXe/jLOv ')(^pov taO evro^. 
 Lysias, 4, 10: eK ttj^ avOpMirov ^acravi^o/jbev7j<;. 
 Lycurgus, 30 : eV roU AecoKpdrov^; olKeiai^ koX OepairaCvai^ 
 ^aaav taOelac. 
 
16 The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek, 
 
 Demosthenes, 18, 57: airo tovtoov i^era^o fxevcov, 
 
 '^ 47,47: Ik ttj^; dvdpcoTrov (3 aa av i^o jxevr]^. 
 
 " 24, 98: 776/31 \rjfyovT a rov eviavTOV. 
 
 This use of the participle is by no means restricted to the oblique 
 cases. For the nominative, cf. 
 
 Isocrates, 14, 49: o r^ap kolvo^; ^lo^ aTroXwXo)? tSta? ra? 
 
 eXTTtSa? eKaarov tj/jlwv 6')(eiv 7r€7roL7}K€v. 
 Demosthenes, 54, 12: vvv Be tovt eacoae to alfju a'jro')(^cop7jo-av. 
 This construction goes back to Homer. Cf. 
 
 N 37—8 : 6(j)p^ ejjLTreBov avOt jjuevoiev \ voa-Tr^aavra ava/cTa. 
 One type of this construction, viz., the predic. ptc. in the sociative 
 dative with a/jua and the like, runs through Greek literature from 
 the very first. Tycho Momrasen, Beitrage zu der Lehre von den 
 griechischen Prapositionen, Berlin, 1895, p. 65, notes that Homer 
 uses it in three expressions only, of the break of day and of the 
 setting of the sun. 
 
 cifjL rjol ^aivo fjbevri(f>Lv 8 407, f 266, o 396, etc. 
 ail r)€\i(p aViOVT i /j, 429, ifr 362, X 136. 
 dfjba 8' rjekim KaraBvvTi ir 366, A 592, S 210. 
 Herodotus goes beyond Epic usage, and uses afxa quite generally 
 for " with." See Mommsen, p. 360. 
 
 Hdt. 2, 44: afxa ^vp(p oIkl^o jjuevrj. 
 
 " 3, 86 : afjua rw liTTrcp tovto TrotijaavTo. 
 " 1, 8 : dfjLa Be klOcjvi e kBvo fxevcp. 
 With these participles, Helbing, Ueber den Gebrauch des echten 
 und sociativen Dativs bei Herodot, Karlsruhe, 1898, p. 80, rightly 
 compares 
 
 Hdt. 3, 134: av^o/Mevay yap rm o-cofjuari crvvav^ovTai etc. 
 Thucydides uses a//,a with the dative much in the same way as 
 Xenophon does later. 42 out of 53 exx. are time-limitations. See 
 Mommsen, p. 383. e. g., 
 
 Thuc. 2, 2 : dfia rjpL ap^o fJiev(d. 
 
 " 2, 6: dfjua yap ry ecroBq) y cyvo jxevT). 
 ^' 3, 1 : dfjua toS aLTq> aKfid^ovTL. 
 Cf. Aristophanes, Eq. 520 : dfjua ral<; TroXtalf; Kar toixrai,^. 
 In Xenophon, besides the Epic usage, we find kindred expres- 
 sions : 
 
 Xen. Anab. 7, 7, 39 : avv tol<; 6eoh elBocr l. 
 
The lAmitations of the Predicative Position in Greek, 17 
 
 Xen. Cyropaedia 8, 7, 6 : crvv roS ^poz^o) irpolovn, 
 Cf. Mommsen, p. 364.^ 
 
 In addition to the examples of the particular type just noticed, 
 the following may be cited as illustrative : 
 
 Hdt. 1, 34: yLtera he X6\(ova ol'x^o fievov, 
 
 " 2, 22 : dirb tt) fc o fiivr] <; '^tovo^. 
 
 " '^ eVl Xiovi IT ecr V arj. 
 
 Thuc. 1 , 100 : TO 'x^copiov at 'Ez^i/ea ohol kt t ^6 fievov. 
 
 " 2, 49 : /jL€ra ravra XaxpTjaavra. 
 
 " 6, 3 : fjuera XvpaK0vo-a<; o I k i a 6 € l (ra<^. 
 
 " 7,42: Bta Tr}v AeKeXecav r e L')(^i^o fjuevTjv. 
 Xen. An. 7, 7, 12 : 97 %«/)<x iro p 6 ov fjuevrj eKvirei avrov. 
 Lucian, Vera Hist. 2, 43 : e/c roO vSaT0<; h tecrrwr o<^, 
 
 *' " " 2, 5 : airo tmv KXahcov k cv o v fju ev cov. 
 
 Dion Cassius, 58, 27, 2 : Sia rov SpdorvWov (To^corara rov 
 
 To^eptov /juera'x^eLpco-d/juevov. 
 
 J. E. Sandys in a note to Dem. 21, 49, where he says that iravr^ 
 i^rjTao-jjLev^ is equivalent to iravTcnv e^€Ta(Tc<; and ravr d/jbeXovfiev^ 
 to Tovrcov djueXeiaj remarks that it is characteristic of Greek and 
 Latin to prefer to use a passive participle in agreement with a sub- 
 stantive, instead of using the corresponding noun followed by the 
 genitive. Marchant, in a note to Thuc. vii. 28, says that the idiom 
 is less common in Greek than in Latin. This statement in regard 
 to Latin requires severe modification. Its beginnings in Latin are 
 very modest, and certainly in no wise prophetic of its development. 
 Rhetoric became its foster-parent, and Livy and Tacitus evinced a 
 predilection for it. See Schmalz, Lateinische Syntax, 2d ed., p. 
 439. For the Greek side, see Gildersleeve in A. J. P., 13, 258 ff., 
 19, 463, if., and 20, 352, ff., and Stahl in Rh. M. 54, 1 and 3. 
 
 In a number of cases which might be cited in this connection, 
 the plasticity of the participle admits of varied conception. These 
 consequently have not been considered. 
 
 ^ The usage of a/xa in the Orators is very restricted. See a Programm by L. 
 Lutz, Die Casus-Adverbien bei den attischen Eednern, Wiirzburg, 1891, p. 33. 
 No case occurs where the predicative participle is expressed. Five out of sixteen 
 cases are found in Antiphon, a representative of the older Attic. 
 
18 The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek. 
 
 The Greek dative, unlike the Latin dative, which is purely per- 
 sonal and is not governed by a preposition, is <a mixed or syncre- 
 
 tistic case. The elements which have 
 
 TYPE OF PREDICATION, ^^^^v regarded as three in number. 
 
 They are the true dative^ such as we 
 find in Latin, the locative^ and the instrumental. These three have 
 become fused in such a way as to make it very difficult at times to 
 determine which conception was present, or, at least, uppermost in 
 the mind of the Greek. The situation, however, is made less com- 
 plicated, and greater unity is seen to prevail amid seeming diversity, 
 if what is generally conceived as instrumental is conceived as soci- 
 ative or comitative. The idea that means is only a species of 
 accompaniment is presented in a convincing manner by Professor 
 Gildersleeve (yLtera and crvv in A. J. P. 8, 218 ff.), who, in speaking 
 of the language of Homer, says : " There was no difference in con- 
 ception between avv Tev^^^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^oS. The distinction is 
 purely modern. What we regard as subordinate, as a mere append- 
 age, was not such to the primitive man. The man's weapons, 
 horses, chariot, were an extension of his individuality, and the 
 feeling is by no means dead, as is attested by the proper names 
 given to arms, to coaches, to vessels, and by the affectionate femi- 
 nine pronoun so often employed in familiar English of utensils of 
 all kinds.'' 
 
 The sociative dative begins very simply in Homer, and at the 
 same time quite naturally. The writer is in accord with the view 
 of the genesis of this dative which was presented recently by Fr. 
 Stolz, Der attributive Gebrauch von avTo^ beim sociativen Dativ, 
 Wiener Studien, 20, p. 244 ff. Stolz appears to have overlooked 
 the fact that meritorious work had already been done in this field 
 by Holzweissig, Ueber den sociativ-instrumentalen Gebrauch des 
 griechischen Dativ bei Homer, Burg, 1885. The dative in Homer, 
 in and by itself, sufficed to express accompaniment. Holzweissig 
 and Stolz give examples of this. We may cite : 
 
 cl>a(rrydvq> dt^a<; (E 81, K 456, 6 88). 
 
 dta-o-cov S €7%et (A 484). 
 
 XiriTOLf; dtacrwv (P 460). 
 
 TolaLV eir€LT rjiacrov (S 506). 
 
The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek. 19 
 
 The sociative sense of the simple dative survives in the subse- 
 quent literature. As Holzweissig points out, it appears most un- 
 mistakably in prose when the dative is used with the names of 
 persons in military expressions, e. g. : 
 
 Hdt. 5, 99: ol 'Adyvacoi diriKearo etKOo-i vr^vai. 
 
 Thuc. 8, 38 : ol KeK rrjf; Aeafiov ^AOrjvaloi, ijBrj Sca^effrjfco- 
 
 T€<; €<; Tr]v Xtoi^ rfj (tt par ta. 
 Ps.-Lys. 2, 32 : elSore^i 8' ore . . . iirtirXevo-avTe^^ ;^tXta^9 
 vavcrlv ep7]fjL7]v rrjv iroXiv XrjyjrovraL. 
 
 Cf. Helbing, p. 84 ff., for a list of similar expressions in Herodotus. 
 
 In considering the sociative sense of the simple dative, it will 
 be helpful to notice in this connection one of the most interesting 
 and striking phenomena of Greek with which, moreover, we are, 
 in a measure, familiar. It is the use of the dative with avro^ to 
 express accompaniment. Monro, Homeric Grammar, p. 138, note, 
 remarks that in such a phrase as avrolf; o^eXolac (f 77), which he 
 explains " with the meat sticking to the spits as before," the soci- 
 ative sense is emphasised by the addition of avToi<;, and adds that, 
 without such an addition, there would generally be nothing to 
 decide between the diiferent possible meanings of the dative, and 
 consequently a preposition {avv or afjua) would be needed. But, 
 after all, if avT6<; is dropped, all that is lost is the emphasis which 
 it imparted to the expression. This has been made sufficiently 
 clear by Stolz (1. c). A further cause for misconception has been 
 the occasional use o^ crvv along with avroq in the same construction. 
 This has led Kriiger, Dial. 48, 15, 16, and other scholars to the 
 wrong conclusion that we have an ellipsis of avv in those cases 
 where it does not occur. Holzweissig (1. c.) remarks that the mere 
 proportion of occurrences, in Homer, of avT6<; with the dative, and 
 of (Tvv followed by avT6<; with the dative, shows that the form with- 
 out the preposition is the original one. The reason why avv is 
 found along with the dative, he observes, is that the dative has 
 assumed the functions of the dativus comitativus. Had he gone 
 further and considered this as applicable to the dative unaccom- 
 panied by avTOf;, he would have anticipated Stolz at this point. 
 
 The usage of avro^; in this idiom for different authors is given 
 by Mommsen, Beitrage, p. 62. It occurs in Homer thirteen times, 
 
20 The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek. 
 
 (jvv being added in three instances. Mommsen's theory, which 
 the writer is unable to accept, is that avrt^^ like gvv^ serves to raise 
 the weak instrumental to a sociative. The usie of avTo^ with the 
 singular is peculiar to comedy and Homer. The tragic use is con- 
 fined to the plural, and, as a general rule, is concerned with things. 
 In Aristophanes (Mommsen, p. 649), it is used only of things, but 
 in both singular and plural, and with or without the article. The 
 use of the article is restricted to comedy and prose. For comedy, cf. 
 Aristophanes, Yespae, 170 : avrolai roh Kavdr)\iOL<;. 
 
 " " 1449: avTolarc rol^ KavddpoL<;. 
 
 " Equites, 849 : avTolai toI<; iropira^iv. 
 
 " Nubes, 1 302 : avTol<; rpo')(ol<; toI<; aolaL koX 
 
 ^vvcopLaiV. 
 
 " Ranae, 560 : avroU roU TaXdpoi<;. 
 
 Eupolis, Arj/jbOL 37 : avralo-t Tai<^ KvrjfxaLaiV. 
 For this last example, cf. Meineke, ii, p. 475 if., Kock, Frag. 
 Com. Gr. i, p. 284, and Henri Weil in the Eevue Critique, vol. 
 12, (N. S.), 1881, p. 293 ff. Weil, in brief, makes this expression 
 equivalent to avTalai rai^; pl^aiatv. . 
 
 Turning to prose, note 
 Herodotus, 6, 32: koI rd*; 7r6\ca<i iveTrl/jLTrpao-av avTolcri toI<; 
 IpolcTL. 
 Bekker struck out the article here, and was followed by Kriiger. 
 In a number of passages from Herodotus, the MSS vary as to the 
 use or omission of the article. Kallenberg, Commentatio critica 
 in Herodotum, Berlin, 1884, p. 15 (cf Helbing, p. 86), after an 
 examination of the passages in question, arrives at the conclusion 
 that Herodotus was not uniform in his usage, but sometimes ad- 
 mitted, sometimes omitted, the article. The principle that Kallen- 
 berg has laid down (Jahresber. des philol. Yereins zu Berlin, 1897, 
 p. 204 ff.), in the course of an excellent contribution on the article 
 with 7ra9, ovto<;, eKelvo^, and oSe in Herodotus, that the article is 
 used because of the noun with which it is associated and not because- 
 of the pronoun, is applicable also to avro^;. The omission of the 
 article in prose can be explained, as has already been indicated, by 
 Epic survival, e. g., avrolai dvBpdo-i,, which, as Kallenberg remarks, 
 seems to be a crystallized expression used first by Herodotus, then 
 
The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek. 21 
 
 hy Thucydides and Xenophon. Only one instance of auro? with the 
 sociative dative was observed in the Orators, viz., in Demosthenes, 
 22, 68 : avTat<; 7reSat9. 
 
 But words may occupy the predicative position so-called, with- 
 out at the same time conveying a predicative signification. Such 
 the writer believes to be the case with avrof; and certain other 
 words, as aKpo<;, jjLeao^, etc. They are simply appositive. Of 
 datives which undoubtedly carry a predicative signification, the 
 following may be cited by way of illustration : 
 
 Hdt. 6, 8 : TreTrXrjpco/jLevyai, rfja-t vrjvorl Traprjcrav ol "lojz^e?. 
 Thuc. 1, 6 : avetfievy rfj BcaiTr}. 
 Aristoph. Eq. 280 : /cevrj rfj Koikia. 
 Plato, Legg. 880 A : 's^rtkal^ ral^; x^patv. 
 Xen. Anab. 1, 8, 1 : IBpovvrc to5 'ittitw. 
 " Hell. 3, 4, 11 : (jyacBp^ rco TrpoacoTrq). 
 
 The sociative, rather than the instrumental, sense of such datives 
 as the foregoing is now recognized by Kiihner-Gerth, Ausfuhrliche 
 Grammatik der griech. Sprache, §425, 5, as a comparison with the 
 preceding edition will readily show. "Attendant Circumstances," 
 " Manner,'^ and the like, are simply special manifestations of the 
 same dative. 
 
 It may be remarked at this point that the participle employed is 
 generally the perfect, occasionally the present. The reason for the 
 predominance of these particular tenses is, in the writer's opinion, 
 that given by Boiling (The Participle in Hesiod — Oath. Univ. 
 Bull., vol. III., p. 466, Washington, 1897) for the Homeric use of 
 participles in direct attribution. " The reason for the predominance 
 of these tenses (i. e., the present and the perfect) is that lasting 
 actions are the ones that lend themselves most readily to attribu- 
 tion, and these are to be found either in the continued action of 
 the present or in the perfect as denoting attitude and resulting con- 
 dition." The relation of the participle to the adjective, so far as 
 numbers go, is in the Orators 1:12, in Lucian 1 : 6. 
 
 A widely different view of these datives is that of Classen who, 
 in the course of his remarks on the expression areXel rfj viKrj 
 {Thuc. 8, 27, 6), notes that we have here a '^ Dative Absolute," of 
 which he has given several examples from Homer, Beobachtungen 
 
22 The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek, 
 
 tiber den hom. Sprg., p. 155. Compare, further, his notes on? 
 Thucydides, 1, 6, 3 and 2, 100, 6, which bear in the same direc- 
 tion. Monro, Homeric Grammar, p. 213, recognizes in a number 
 of these examples from Homer an approach to a " Dative Abso- 
 lute.^' He characterizes them as extensions or free applications by 
 the help of the participle of the true dative {dat. eth.). ClassenV 
 use of the term '^Dative Absolute '^ has received merited strictures 
 from Spieker, Genitive Absolute in the Attic Orators, A. J. P., 6, 
 p. 315. The proper point of view, in the writer's judgment, from 
 which to regard these datives is given by Kiihner-Gerth, vol. ri. 
 §423, 18, e, f, and g. See also W5lfflin's Archiv, vol. 8, p. 48 ff. 
 
 Having treated of the origin of the adverbial-dative type of 
 predication, the writer proposes to set forth here the usage of the 
 
 classical period, with the historians, 
 
 ADV.-DAT. TYPE. especially Thucydides, and the Orators 
 
 (a) Classical Greek. ^ -^ . / . , -p ^ 
 
 as the basis or this study. By way of 
 
 comparison and contrast, the usage of post-classical Greek will be 
 noted, with Lucian as the model for this period, and an endeavor will 
 be made to indicate any deviations from the norm of classical usage. 
 
 The sociative, or comitative, dative may conveniently be subdi- 
 vided into (1) dative of military accompaniment, (2) dative of 
 attendant circumstances, (3) dative of means and instrument. Some 
 of the examples considered under one of these heads might very 
 well be considered under another. 
 
 (1) Dative of Military Accompaniment: — 
 
 Hdt. 6, 8, 1 : TreTrXr] pco/jbivrjo-i Trjac vrjvcrl iraprjaav 
 
 ol "1 0)1/69. 
 
 Thuc. 4, 55, 1 : aOpoa fxev ovSa/juov ry Bvudfjuet avrerd- 
 
 ^avTo. 
 lb. 6, 34, 5: roS Ta')(^vvavTovvTi dO po(OTep(p kov(J)l~ 
 
 aavTe<; Trpoa^aXotev. 
 lb. 6, 37, 1: fjueya <ydp to koI avratf; Tat<; vaval kov- 
 
 (j)ac(; ToaovTov ifkovv Bevpo KOficaOrjvai,. 
 lb. 6, 43, 1 : (roo-fjBe ijSr) rjj Trapaa Kevfj ^KOtjvolol 
 
 dpavT6<;). 
 lb, 8, 80, 1: dO p6ai<i ral^ vavalv . . . ov/c dvravijyovTO^ 
 lb. 8, 104, 5: do-Oeviai koI Steariraa/juivacfi rai^;^ 
 vaval Kadia-TavTO . 
 
The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek, 23 
 
 The foregoing examples exhaust the list of datives of military 
 accompaniment of this type. None were found in the Orators, 
 where their occurrence would only be incidental. Although Herod- 
 otus frequently uses the sociative dative, the example cited above 
 is the only one of this type. Helbing, p. 84 ff., has overlooked it. 
 
 Similar datives from Xenophon may be noticed here: 
 
 Anab. 1, 7, 14 : a-vvTeTay/jbiva) rcS (TTparevfiarL. 
 
 lb. 4, 2, 1 1 : opOiOLf; tol^ X6')(^oc<;. 
 
 Hell. 1, 5, 14 : Bc€(T7rapfjL€vac<; Tal<; vavaL 
 
 In comedy may be noted : 
 
 Aristophanes, Acharu., 686 : crTpoyyv\oi,<; roU prj^aai. 
 " Ranae, 903 : avTOTrpifjuvoc^i TOi<; Xoyoto-iv. 
 
 " Equites, 205 : dyKvXai'; Tal<; ')(6pa-iv. 
 
 (2) Dative of Attendant Circumstances : — 
 
 Thuc. 1, 6, 3: koL avet/juevrj ry hiairr) 69 to Tpv(f>6p(0' 
 
 repov fierecrryaav. 
 lb. 1, 120, 5: ivdv/juelraL jap ovSel<; o/jboia rj) Trlo-rei, 
 
 Kol epyo) e'Tr6^ep')(erai. 
 lb. 2, 38, 2: /jujSev olKeiorepa rfj airoXavaeu ra avrov 
 
 ayaOa yiyvoybeva KapirovaOai. 
 lb. 2, 100, 2: Kol rfj ctWrj irapacr /cevfj KpeiaaovL. 
 lb. 3, 38, 1 : yap iraOoov roS Bpdaavrc d^^Xvrepa ttj 
 
 opyfi iire^epx^Tac. 
 lb. 6, 55, 3: ttoWq) to5 irep lovt l rod da(f}a\ov<; Kare- 
 /cpdrrjae. 
 
 Classen sees in the first and last examples an equivalent for the 
 genitive absolute construction. The dative point of view, as has 
 already been remarked, forbids such a comparison. In the second 
 example, the MSS read o/juota, which some editors adopt. The edi- 
 tors are warranted in making the slight change of accent. In the 
 last case, we have a favorite Thucydidean use of the neuter parti- 
 ciple. It is equivalent to ttoXXtj rrj Trepcovcrla. 
 
 The usage of the Orators is as follows : 
 
 Pseudo-Lysias 2, 18 : eXevdepat^ ral^ i/rup^a?? iiroXt- 
 TevovTO. 
 
24 The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek. 
 
 Isocrates 15, 126 : avaireTTTaixevaLfs avrov ehe')(pvTo Tal^ 
 
 7ruXat9. ♦ 
 
 Isaeus 6, 59: XoLhoprjo-eraL fjbeydXrj rfj (jycovfj. 
 Lycurgus 145 : 6 ^rfKo^orov rrjv 'Attlktjv elvau (f>avepa 
 
 rfj -x^r ?7 <5f) ft) KaTa'\jr7)<l)L(Td/jb€vo<;. 
 Demosthenes 19, 199: ipet Xafjuir pa rfj (l)cov7J. 
 lb. 57, 11 : il3\a(r(f)r)/jLet Kari/jLOv ra')(v koX iroWa koX 
 
 fJUerydXr) T7J (j)C0V7J. 
 
 lb. 43, 82 : ^avepa rfj -x^t^c^oj €'\jr'r}(j>[(TaTO. 
 
 Aeschines 1, 19 : 09 ovBe KaOapw ScaXeyerac to3 o-ay/jbar l. 
 
 lb. 2, 7: dXX' tcrrj ry evvoia dKOvovTa<^. 
 
 The position of dvaireTrraixevai^, in the second example, is due 
 to Isocrates' avoidance of hiatus. The contemptuous use of (f)(ovr} 
 by Isaeus and Demosthenes is noteworthy. In the case of Pseudo- 
 Demosthenes 43, 82, Blass revises Dindorf's text by striking out 
 the article. He has MS warrant (S F Q). The reason he assigns 
 ^^At metaphorice hie usurpatur i/r^Jc^o?/' does not, in the writer's 
 opinion, carry any weight. In Aeschines 1, 19, for o-dofiarL there 
 is a V. 1. (TTOfjuaTc. There is no doubt, however, of the oblique 
 predication. With io-y rfj evvoLa of Aeschines 2, 7, may be com- 
 pared ofjboia rfi iricTTei of Thucydides 1, 120. 
 
 Especially to be noted are the substantives in the foregoing list. 
 They are such words as -yjrvxv* <t>(ovi], '\lrrj(f)0(}, crcofia, evvoia. The 
 list is important for this reason, that it gives us the key to the 
 true home of the construction we are studying. Further verifica- 
 tion will be found in the pages following. The adverbial-dative 
 type of predication centres round the body and its parts. The 
 principle of analogy gives the construction a wider range. 
 
 The article in each of the examples just cited may be considered 
 as a weakened or fainter possessive. (Cf. Kriiger, Sprachlehre 50^ 
 2, 3). The Attic Greek was wont to use the article in character- 
 ising various objects with which he stood in some personal relation, 
 where we generally prefer the possessive pronoun. Our English 
 idiom requires the omission of the possessive in a number of cases. 
 For instance, we should not say ' with his voice loud,' but ^ in a 
 loud voice.' We may say, however,— and this helps us to under- 
 stand the idiom — * with his eyes open,' ^ with his fists clenched,' etc. 
 
The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek, 25 
 
 (3) Dative of Means and Instrument : — 
 
 Thuc. 2, 49, 5: rfj BLyfrr) airavarw ^vveypfxevoL. 
 
 lb. 2, 76, 4: a^iecrav rrjv Sokov ')(^a'\apalf; Tal<; dXv- 
 
 crea L . . 
 lb. 7, 36, 3 : aTepicfyoc^ fcal Tra^ecr^, 7rp09 KOtXa koI 
 
 aaOevrj Trapep^oi^re?, rot? i fju^oXoLf; . 
 
 Of the Orators, Isocrates is the only one represented under this 
 head. 
 
 Isocr. 10, 23: av yap [xovov rolf; 6ir\oc<; i/coo-fi^o-avro 
 
 irapaTrXrjo- Loi,<; etc. 
 lb. 15, 47: Kal yap rfj Xe^et iroLrjTLKwrepa Kal 
 
 TTOiKcXcorepa ra? 7rpd^6t,<i BrjXovcrt .... 
 
 en Se ral<^ dWai,<; lBeai<; iin^ave - 
 
 arepat^ Kal TrXeioa- iv okov rov \6yov 
 
 BcocKova-LV. 
 
 In the first of these examples from Isocrates, the position of 
 TrapairXr^a-LOL^ is evidently due to the desire of avoiding hiatus. 
 The second shows a carefully studied and symmetrical arrangement 
 of the different parts of the sentence. 
 
 All the examples of the sociative dative in oblique predication 
 found in Herodotus, Thucydides and the Orators, have now been 
 considered. A few more datives involving the same principle, but 
 not sociative, may be noted at this point. 
 
 Thuc. 2, 100: avrov^ iroWa'TrXacrim roS ofjuiXcp e? 
 KLvBvvov KaOiaTaaav. 
 
 Some conceive this as dative of cause ; others as dative of the 
 indirect object. 
 
 Thuc. 1, 30: /^e^/o^ ov KopivOioi, irepnovTi rco Oepet 
 'n'6fi'^avT6<; vav^ Kal crTpartdv. 
 
 This is the dative of time. With it has been compared 
 
 Xen. Hell. 3, 2, 25 : irepuovTL tm iviavrS. 
 Jowett (Thuc. 1, 30, note) claims that the cases are not exactly 
 parallel. 
 
 Thuc. 1, 117, 1: dcfypaKTO) tS arrpaTOTreSo) iirLire- 
 
 a-OVTEfi. 
 
26 The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek. 
 
 lb. 2, 39, 3: aOpoa re ry Swdfjuei rjfjLcov ovSelf; ttg) 
 
 7ro\efito<; iverv')(e. 
 lb. 4, 122, 5 : T§ Kara yrjv AaKe^aifiovicov lcr')(^vi dvco^e- 
 
 Xel 'm(TT€vovT6<;. 
 lb. 7, 39, 2 : otto)? .... /cat BcoXljov av6i<; kol avOrj/juepov 
 air poaho KrjTOL<; toI<; ^A67}vaioi<; i'Tri')(€L- 
 paxro. 
 
 These are datives of the indirect object, with which the predica- 
 tive adjective stands in agreement, and are not to be confounded 
 with the sociative dative. It is not always easy to decide which 
 kind of dative we have, as, e. g., in the instance cited above under 
 dative of military accompaniment (Thuc. 4, 55, 1). If it refers to 
 the Peloponnesians, we have, undoubtedly, the dative of military- 
 accompaniment, in other words, the sociative dative. If the 
 Athenians are referred to, we have the dative of the indirect 
 object. Jowett prefers the former, Kriiger the latter, inter- 
 pretation. 
 
 The following datives in the Orators may be noted : 
 
 Antiphon 3^6: TroXeyu-twrcS tovtov ^iXec TrepcTrecrcov. 
 
 lb. 5, 12: dv(o fioT o i<; 7rc(TT6V(TavTa<; tol<; fxaprv povcr l. 
 
 Lysias 32, 14: eTnTv^ovra^i i K^effXr] fievo) rw ^l^Xlw. 
 
 Isocrates 8, 104: ofioiaL^; Tal<; av fi(j)opal^ irepLeireaov, 
 
 Aeschines 3, 146 : (j^epcov .... rbv klvBvvov aTrapacr K€v<p 
 rfj iroXei. 
 
 These are all, likewise, datives of the indirect object, with which 
 the predicative adjective or participle stands in agreement. 
 
 Lucian, who is generally conceded to be the best of the Atticists, 
 
 has been made the basis of this study, and his usage is instructive 
 
 ADV-DAT TYPE ^^^ *^® V^vioA. One cannot fail to 
 
 (6) Post-Classical Greek, ^o^i^^/ ^^ ^^^^ Lucianic usage of the 
 
 sociative-dative type, the salient fact, to 
 which attention has already been called, that it has, first and chiefly, 
 to do with the body and its parts. But, looking deeper than this 
 general resemblance, it will be seen that, while he observes the 
 letter of the law, he kills the spirit. The Attic Greek used it in 
 circumstances justifying its use. The Atticist paid no regard to 
 circumstances. With him, it is simply affectation. 
 
The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek. 27 
 
 In classifying the datives, it is found that, as in the Orators, so 
 in Lucian, the dative of mih'tary accompaniment finds no scope. 
 There remain, then, the dative of attendant circumstances and the 
 dative of means and instrument. Here, too, the classification, it 
 must be premised, is one of convenience, and is more or less 
 arbitrary. No attempt was made to discriminate the genuine 
 from the spurious dialogues. 
 
 (1) Dative of Attendant Circumstances : — 
 
 Lucian, Nigrinus 4 : arevel koL dvaireTrrafievr) rfj '^jrvxv* 
 
 " Timon 9 : fjueyaXy rfj (^(ovfj (saepe). 
 
 " lb. 41 : avaireirrafjievoL^^ rol^i KoXiroif;. 
 
 " Dial. Deor. 20, 6 : ro) Tpa^rjXw airea-TpajjL^evw. 
 
 " Dial. Mar. 4, 3 : ave(p<yiJbevoi(; roU ocftOdXfjboU. 
 
 " Dial. Mort. 21, 1 ; arpeirrw too TrpoaooTra). 
 
 " Menippus 9 : r/pefiata rfj (j^tcvfj. 
 
 " lb. 18 : rpa')(eia kol aTrrjvel rfj cficovfj. (Cf. Bis 
 Accus. 31, and De Morte Peregr. 3.) 
 
 " De Merc. Cond. 34 : XeTrrfj ry cj^oyvy. 
 
 " Hermotimus 1 : fjua/tpS roS %poz^«. 
 
 " Zeuxis 4 : vireaTokfievr) rfj oirXy. 
 
 " Quom. hist, conscr. 1 : XiirapeZ tg5 TrvperS. 
 
 " " 45 : icj^LTTTTOV 6xOVfJL€V7J TOT€ Tj) 
 
 ryVCO/JLTJ. 
 
 " Eunuchus 11 : '\jrvxp(p toS IBpcoTi,. 
 
 " Amores 1 3 : \LTTapol<i rol^ 'yeLXeaLv. 
 
 '* lb. 36 : VTrearaX/iiivq) rS Trj<; (fxovrjf; TOV(p. 
 
 " lb. 37 : ryv/jbVQ) To3 Xoyo). 
 
 " lb. 52 : IXapM to3 TrpoacoTra). 
 
 " Lucius 47 : eiravOova-rj rfj rpcx^L. 
 
 " Gallus 6 : dv6(py6(Ti toI<; 6(^6aXfiol<;. 
 
 ** Bis Accus. 10 : '\fnXS rLp.rj(TavTe(; ro5 Kpor(p. 
 
 " De Parasito 49 : <l>acBp(o rS Trpoa-coTrtp. (Cf. Cronos. 
 
 16.) W . , 
 " Philopseudes 24 : irivapa koX avxH^^f^V^ '^V ^^X^V- 
 " Cal. non tem. cred. 24: IXapm koX kco^ilk^ tS Trpo- 
 
 (TcoTrq). 
 *^ Navigium 16 : iroXXS to5 yeXcoTi. 
 
28 The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek. 
 
 Lucian, Dial. Meretr. 4, 5 : eTnrpo'Xfp Ty yXcoTrrj. 
 " De morte Peregr. 32 : fivpio) tc3 TrXrjdec. 
 " Fugitivi 10 : arevicn tol<; 6<f>6a\/iLOL^. 
 " lb. 33 : pVTTcoarj irpoaeTt koX jvvaiK6ia rjj irirTr]. 
 
 With a very few exceptions, the substantives in the foregoing 
 list belong to the class already described. fieydXr) rfi (f^covfj is 
 especially frequent. Demosthenes used Xafiirpa also in this con- 
 nection. Lucian seems to ring all the changes which the construc- 
 tion admits of. This is suggestive of Lucian's method. 
 (2) Dative of Means and Instrument : — 
 Lucian, Tinion 21 : iraXaia Tjj oBovrj. 
 
 " Dial. Mort. 17, 1 : Koikr) rfj %et/[)t. 
 
 " lb. 10, 12 : a0^oz/ot9 roc<; Xidot^. (Cf. Pise. 1.) 
 
 " Zeuxis 3: aKpo/Bet tjj ardd/Mr). (Cf. Imag. 17.) 
 
 " Quom. hist, conscr. 7 : ov crTcvcp tm lo-dfjuS. 
 
 " lb. 34 : TToWy ry dcTKrjaei koI crvve')(el tS ttovg) koI 
 
 ^rjXo). 
 " Vera Hist. 1, 6: ov rpa')(^el irepLijxov/^evTjv r^ 
 
 Kv/juarL. 
 " Phal. pr. 11 : dXijKTOif; ral^ 6BvvaL<;' 
 *' Amores 12 : rat? Ko/juacf; evdaXeanv. 
 '* Imagines 14: evKaipw rfj apaei koX deaei. 
 " Toxaris 20 : fMeydXo) to5 Trvevfiarc. 
 " lb. 60 : KapnrvXcp to3 f tc^et. 
 " Lucius 42 : dOpoa rfj %etpt. 
 " " 51 : TToXXoif; roi<; <^LXrjfi,a(TL. 
 
 " Bis Accus. 10 : djKvXo) rS BaKTvX(p. 
 " Anachar. 31 : ^aOeai, toI<; rpavfiacrcv. 
 " De Domo 18 : d6p6(p tm KoXXet,. 
 " De Dips. 11 ; ttoXXoS to5 av^p^f^' 
 Dial. Meretr. 13, 2 ; eVt^/Juo-ot? toi<; o7rXot9. 
 Conviv^ium 44 : ^/jt^o-to) p^dXa koL ^adel rep rpavfiari. 
 lb. 44 : opdS Tft) 8aKTvX(p. 
 Nero 9 : 6p6aU tol^ heXroi^;. 
 
 These examples abundantly illustrate Lucianic usage. The fol- 
 lowing examples from other authors may alyo be noted. The 
 influence of earlier writers is perceptible. 
 
The lAmitations of the Predicative Position in Greek 29 
 
 (1) Dative of Military Accompaniment : — 
 
 • Dion Cassius, 39, 58, 1 : irpolibv Se evrevOev Bi')(^a Sirfprj- 
 
 /jb€V(p tS <tt par q) . 
 lb. 50, 11, 6: aOpoa rfj irapaa Kevfj top ^Iovlov 
 
 lb. 50, 31, 4: irv Kval^ Tat<; vavalv oXlyov efo) tcjv 
 arevwv Trapara^a/jbevcov. 
 
 (2) Dative of Attendant Circumstances : — 
 
 Dion Cass. 43, 43, 2: rjj re ryap ia-Orjrt xO'VvoTepa iv 
 
 iracTLV ivTiPpvvero. 
 lb. 46, 22, 4 : ore yovv yv/jLVol<; tol(; ^i^eanv e? ttjv 
 
 ayopav iaeSpafiov. 
 lb. 49, 20, 2: iroppatOev yap a-(j)oBpaL<; ral<i 0oXa2<; 
 
 i^LKVov^evoi. 
 lb. 55, 15, 7: coare Kadapa koX ai^povriarfp Kal 
 
 avvTroTrrq) rfj -^/rup^^ irpoarofiCkelv. 
 Diod. Sic. 1, 70, 5 : pLeyaXy ry (jicovy. (Cf. 1, 83, 3.) 
 lb. 3, 27, 3: KaTaKKidel^ he adpocp to5 ^dpeo, 
 lb. 3, 29, 3: Trdvre^ 7rpoa(j)€pov(Tt ravrrjv d6p6oc^ rot^; 
 
 o-cDpot<i . 
 lb. 4, 48, 2 : iairacrp^evoi^ rocf; ^[(peai,. (Cf. 4, 52, 4.) 
 
 (3) Dative of Means and Instrument : — 
 
 Dion Cass. 40, 43, 3 : eKBtM^ai avTov<i ck t?}9 dyopd^ 
 
 irXayloi'i Kal irXarea-L to?9 
 ^[(j)€(Tv iraiovTa^ . 
 By " prepositional type " of oblique predication, is meant ob- 
 lique predication introduced by a preposition. The plan, pursued 
 
 in the previous chapter, of noting the 
 PKEPOSITIONAL TYPE, ^i^^^j^^j ^^ ^^^ ;„ j^^ i,;^^^^;. 
 
 (o) Classical Greek. i ^ i /» 
 
 ans and Orators, and oi comparing or 
 
 contrasting with it that of post-classical Greek, is also followed 
 
 here. 
 
 Herodotus : — 
 
 Hdt. 5, 92, 7 : on iirl ^/ru^^/ooi^ rov iirvov TiepLavhpo<i 
 
 T0V9 dpTov^ irre^aXe. 
 
 lb. 5, 29: o/CG)9 rtva cSotev iv dpea-TTj kvljj rfj x^PV 
 
 dypov ev i^epyaa-jxevov. 
 
30 The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek. 
 
 These are the only cases found in Hdt. There is a special reason 
 for the predicative position of the adjective sjrvxpov, ** Into the 
 cold oven " is an incorrect rendering. It might be rendered ^' into 
 the oven when it was cold/' But the brachylogy of the Greek 
 has disappeared. apea-TrjKVirj is best interpreted avaardrw yevo- 
 fievT) or avaaTdT(p iovarj. Stein aptly compares Xen. Cyrop. 1,3: 
 eV opeivrj ovcrr) rrj '^copa. 
 Thucydides : — 
 
 Thuc. Ij 19, 2: /lera dKpai,(j)VOv<i Trjq ^v/jb/jLa^taf; 
 
 7]vOr](7av. 
 Thuc. 2, 43,4: 7rpo9 dvev.Ovvov rrjv vfierepav aKpo- 
 
 aCTLV . 
 
 lb. 6, 66, 1 : OTL jxev koXcl ra Trpoeipyaajjiiva koI virep 
 
 Ka\ct)V TO)V fieWovTcov 6 dyobv earau. 
 lb. 6, 77, 1 : dWa A(optrj<; eKevOepoi dir^ avTovo /jlov T7J<i 
 
 Il€ko7rovvri(TOV. 
 lb. 6, 92, 5: Kal avTov<^ vvv vofjLi(TavTa<; irepl jxeyiaTCdv 
 
 Br) TO)v 8La<f>€p6vT(ov ^ovXeveaOai, 
 lb. 7, 84, 4: koX ev kolXo) ovtl to) TrorafjuS iv a(f)[(TLv 
 
 avTOL<; Tapa(r(To/jb€vov<;. 
 lb. 1, 36, 1 : TO Be Oapcrovv fir) Be^afxevov dadeve^ bv 7rpo<; 
 la')(^vovTa^ rov<; €')(^dpov<; dBeiarrepov iao- 
 fjLevov. 
 lb. 1,74, 3: vfiel<i fiev yap diro re oIkov fievoiv tmv 
 
 iToXewv . 
 lb. 1,84,4: del Be co? irpcx; ev ^ovXevo/juevovf; rov^ 
 
 evavT iovf; epycp TrapaaKeva^cofjueOa. 
 lb. 8, 38, 3: ol Be X^lol ev 7ro\Xat<; rai^ irplv fid)(^ai<i 
 7re7rXr)y/jbevoo, 
 This array of examples exhibits one of several points of differ- 
 ence between Thucydides and Herodotus. The compactness and 
 precision of this mode of expression certainly appealed to Thucy- 
 dides. The first example has the rare word dKpai<f)vov^y w^hich, 
 as Classen remarks, has the force of a time-limitation. The second 
 is a good example of Thucydides' preference of abstract to con- 
 crete expressions. Kriiger analyses the third example thus : KaXd 
 eo-TL rd fjueXXovra virep mv. Compactness of expression, of course, 
 is lost by such a resolution. Classen notes the use of the predica- 
 
The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek. 31 
 
 tive participle oIkov/jl€vcov in the eighth example to sharpen the 
 antithesis to what follows. In the next example, Widmann 
 (Boehme's Thukydides, revised by Widmann, Leipzig, 1894) says 
 that we have an abridged expression for irpcx; toj>? ivavTiov^; ob? 
 7r/j09 Gv l3ov\€vofievov<;, with which he compares Thuc. 4, 41, 2: 
 ft)9 €9 irarpiha Tavrrjv and 6, 50, 4 : a)9 irapa ^t'Xof 9 koX €vep<y6Ta<; 
 ^KOrjvaiov^. This method of conceiving such an expression — 
 others like it will be adduced later — seems clumsy and quite un- 
 necessary. ft)9 gives the subjective attitude. 0ov\6vo/j,evov(; is 
 predicative in the same way as olKovfievojVj to which reference has 
 been made. 
 
 Having concluded an examination of the usage of the historians, 
 the writer will now pass to a consideration of that of the Orators. 
 
 Antiphon : — 
 
 Ant. 5, 33 : €a><; /jl^v ovv jiera XP'^^'^V'^ ttj^; i\7riBo<; 
 ijLjvcoo-Ke fiov Karayjrevo-dfievo';, tovtco hiL<T')(y- 
 pi^€TO Ta> Xoyw. 
 
 MS N omits the article. MS A has it. Some of the editors 
 follow the one MS, some follow the other. Graffunder, De Cripp- 
 siano et Oxoniensi Antiphontis Dinarchi Lycurgi Codicibus, Berlin, 
 1882, p. 70 ff, remarks that this is one of those expressions which 
 the Greeks are wont to enrich with the article, whereas we are 
 wont to do without it. He compares Dinarchus 1, 67 : Tiva<; Ta9 
 iKTrtBaf; e^ofjuev ; 1, 77: ev tovtw Ta<; ekirihaf; €')(eiv ; 1, 102: 
 ev Tol(; €^(o ra<; iXiriBaf; e^ere. Bienwald, De Crippsiano et 
 Oxoniensi, etc., Gorlitz, 1889, p. 29, holds that the reading with, 
 or without, the article is correct, but, inasmuch as Antiphon uses 
 the article more frequently in the case of iXirL^, he would prefer 
 to insert it. Cucuel, Essai sur la langue et le style de Forateur 
 Antiphon, Paris, 1886, p. 60, under ^^Adjedif atfribut/^ notes that 
 Antiphon quite often puts an adjective ^' en relief/^ by detaching it 
 from the substantive to which it belongs, and makes it bear the 
 force of the thought. In this way the phrase acquires much vigor 
 and conciseness. He happily illustrates this conciseness of expres- 
 sion by contrasting the following expressions : 
 
 Ant. 6, 28 : ouk aXrjdrjf; rjv rj alria fjv alrcMVTat kot ifjLOv. 
 " 5, 38 : ovK oXtjOt] ttjv alrlav e'Tre4>epov fjv yTL&VTo. 
 
32 The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek. 
 
 The article should be retained, in the writer's judgment, not 
 because Antiphon uses it more often than he omits it in connection 
 with eXTTt? — for this has really little weight in settling the ques- 
 tion — but because the article is anaphoric, pointing back to § 31 
 rr]v fjuev iXevOepiav eXTT iaa<^ otaeaSaL, where the word eXiri'^ is 
 implied, and, at the same time, as Cucuel observes, the expression 
 thereby gains in vigor. For further examples of the predicative 
 position in connection with eXTrt?, cf., e. g., Thuc. 6, 68, 2 : 
 fji€yd\7)v TTjv iXTTiBa tyj^ vlk7]<; €')(ei,v. In late Greek, Luc. 
 Longaevi 9: ')(^p7](TT0Tepa<^ e^^Lv ra<; eXiriha^. Cf. Som- 
 nium 2, Zeuxis 8. 
 
 Andocides : — 
 
 Andoc. 1, 88: oirocrai iv Brj fjuo Kparov fievu rrj iroXet 
 iyevovTO. 
 
 Lipsius (Andocides, Leipzig, 1888) brackets tt). In this he 
 follows MS A (according to Dobson). There is no good reason 
 for omitting the article. The same expression is found in a law 
 in Demosthenes 24, 66, and is used by Demosthenes in 24, 76, 
 where Kennedy misses the point by rendering it " in a democratical 
 state." It is rightly interpreted by Hickie, ^^ when the city was 
 under democratic government," and by Marchant, " in the time 
 of the democracy." Dobree, Adversaria Critica, vol. 1, p. 325, 
 compares iv Srj/jLOKpaTov/jbevrj rfj iroXet of Dem. 24, 56 with Stj/jlo- 
 KpaTovfjL6V7)^ T^9 TToXeft)? of Dcm. 24, 58. This comparison seems 
 apt, for in the former passage iv STjfjuoKpaTov/jLevT) rrj irokei and iirl 
 TOiv rptaKovTa are contrasted expressions, while in the latter passage 
 we have Br)/jiOKpaTovijL6V7}<; t7]<; TroXeco^ and iirl tcjv TpcaKovra. In 
 other words — with no intention of applying mathematics to lan- 
 guage — iv Brj/uLOKparov/jievrj rrj iroXei, and Br]fjbOKpaTov/uu6vr)<:! rrj^; 
 TToXectx} are practically equivalent expressions. 
 
 Lysias : — 
 
 Lys.12,97: ol fiev iv TroXe/ubta rfj TrarptSi Tot'9 TralBa^ 
 
 KaraXiirovre^;. 
 Pseudo-Lys. 2, 49: r)ryov^6voL rj eZ? ep7]fjbov ttjv '^^copav 
 i/jL^aXelv. 
 The force of the predicative adjective TroXefMia, which is in keep- 
 ing with the vigorous utterance of Lysias at this point, is height- 
 
The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek. 33 
 
 ened by the contrast with the words iv ^evrj yfj which follow. The 
 word %co/9<x frequently has its adjective in the predicative position. 
 Cf., e.g., Xen. Anab, 1, 3, 14: &)9 Bca, c^iXias ttj^ ')(^a)pa<i 
 dTrd^et; also 4, 1, 8. Anab. 5, 4, 2: 009 BLd(f>cXiaf;r)<hq Bed 
 TToXe fiia<i iropevaovrat Trj<; '^copa<;. Arrian, Anab. 3, 3, 3 : 
 8i' iprjfiov, ov jxevToi St' dvvSpov rrj<; ^£wpa9. 
 
 Isocrates : — 
 
 Isocr. 1, 34: '^pco TOL<i \6<yoi<; ft>9 ire pi dWorpiov rev 
 
 Trpdyfxaro^; . 
 lb. 8, 12 : Mairep iv dWorpia rfj iroXei KLv8vv6vovr€<;. 
 lb. 14, 40: ef drecx^iaTOV jxev rrjf; 7roXea)9 6pfMr}devT6<;, 
 lb. 7, 17: Trap' ifcovrcov rwv ^^XXrjvcov rrjv rjyefjboviav 
 
 eXa^ov. (Cf. also 8, 30.) 
 lb. Ep. 6, 9: Ta9 irap^ eicovTcov r^L^yvofjievaf; rj rdf; irap^ 
 d/covToyv Tcbv iroXtrSyv . 
 
 In the first of these examples Schneider emends tov to tov on 
 the ground that tov 7rpdy/jLaTo<; is not in agreement with Trepl mv. 
 Benseler approves of this objection. Schneider admits, however, 
 that the forms of the indefinite pronoun, tov and ro), are used 
 elsewhere by Isocrates without a substantive. R. B. Ponickau, De 
 Isocratis Demonicea, Stendalis, 1889, p. 31, refers to the weakness 
 in Schneider's position admitted by himself, and replies to his 
 objection by denying that there is anything unusual in the circum- 
 stance that the singular Trpdyjia must be referred to the plural a)v, 
 inasmuch as the neuter plural of pronouns is frequently substituted 
 for one thing. That such a collocation is not at variance with 
 ,Isocratean usage, he rightly observes by referring to Isocr. 8, 12 
 (cited above). Blass does not depart from the received text. The 
 current conception of this construction is one which the writer has 
 already endeavored to combat and which he cannot accept here. 
 Schneider gives it as the usual explanation which he, otherwise, 
 would have accepted. It is this : 0)9 rrepl dXXoTpiov tov irpd- 
 y/juaT0<; = irepl tov irpdyfiaTOf;, 0)9 Trepl dXXoTpiov. He cites the 
 rule that in comparisons, when the object compared is placed first, 
 the preposition is regularly omitted (cf. Kriiger, Griech. Sprachl., 
 68, 8), as, e. g., Isocr. 8, 12: wairep iv dXXoTpia (sc. TroXet) tj 
 TToXec KcvBvvevovT€<:. So Ponickau, referring to Isocr. 8, 12, says 
 
34 The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek, 
 
 it is equivalent to ev rfj TroXec coairep iv aWorpia. To this method 
 of conceiviDg this construction, the writer has two objections to 
 offer : first, it is inapplicable in certain cases yet to be cited, second, 
 where applicable, it seems clumsy and unnatural. Analysis is not 
 at all necessary. The predicative adjective contains in both ex- 
 amples (1, 34 and 8, 12) the point of the passage. It is, moreover, 
 Isocrates' distinct purpose that the word aWorpiov shall stand out 
 prominently, and this effect is secured inimitably, so far as English 
 is concerned, by the predicative position. "With the third example, 
 cf. Diod. Sic. 13, 114, 1 : oi/ceti^ ev ar 61^(^1 arc l<; ral^; iroXeai, 
 cited by Green, in a Johns Hopkins dissertation, Diodorus and the 
 Peloponnesian War, Baltimore, 1899, p. 16. 
 
 A special class of the prepositional type is illustrated by such ex- 
 amples as Isocr. 7, 17: Trap' eKOvrcov TMv'FXkrjvcov. Abandoning 
 for the moment the plan of indicating consecutively the usage of 
 the individual Orators, the writer will attempt to give a general 
 view of this class. 
 
 With these examples from Isocrates, are to be compared : 
 
 Dem. 20, 16 : vtto tcov o^oicov eKovroiv. 
 lb. 38, 28 : irap eKovrayv eXafiov rcov iiTLTpOTrcov. 
 Aeschin. 3, 58 : wap' eKovrcov tcov 'EtWrjvcov aTroXa/Seiv. 
 Dinarch. 1, 37 : Trap" ckovtcov koI ^ovXo/jievcov tcov 'FiXXrjvcov, 
 
 They reappear in certain post-classical writers, e. g., 
 Strabo 5, 3, 2 : Trap' ckovtcov tcov vtttjkocov. 
 lb. 5, 2, 3 : Trap' ckovtcov eXajSov 'Vcofjuaucov. 
 Dion Chrysostomus 11, 60: Trap' ckovtcov tcov olKeicov. 
 Dion Cassius 37, 3, 6 : Trap' ekovtcov tcov eTrt%a)pt&)z^. 
 lb. 53, 2, 6 : Trap' ekovtcov tcov dvOpcoircov, 
 
 (Often with pronouns, e. g.,) 
 
 lb. 41, 35, 1 : Trap' ckovto^ fxov. 
 lb. 43, 34, 2 : hi skovtcov re avTcov. 
 lb. 46, 47, 1 : Trap' e/covTcov avTcov. 
 lb. 47, 29, 2 : Trap' 6k6vto<; avTov. 
 lb. 53, 17, 3 : Trap' eKovai crcfycatv. 
 
 These clearly form a group by themselves. The type became 
 crystallised. 
 
The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek. 35 
 
 To return to the usage of the individual Orators : 
 
 Lycurgus : — 
 
 Lye. 144: ovh^ iv iXevOepco iSd<p€L Tr]<^ 7raTp[So<; avToi<; 
 racjyrjvaL to kuO^ avrbv fiepof; irapehcoKev. 
 
 A departure from the received text was proposed by Dobree, 
 Adversaria Critica, Berlin, 1874, vol. 1, p. 325, viz., the insertion 
 of the article between iXevdepw and eSd(f>eo. Maetzner, Lycurgi 
 Oratio, etc., Berlin, 1836, p. 324, noted it, but did not adopt it. 
 Dobree compares for the article the use of ttJv in such an expres- 
 sion as evopKOTCLTT^v Tr)v -ylrijcjiov iv€yK€iv in Lye. 13, and often 
 elsewhere. Exactly similar, in his opinion, is Dem. 24, 56 : iv 
 Brj/noKpaTov/jLevy rfj iroXei. It is, however, not merely a question, 
 as Maetzner sees, as to whether the article is rightly used with 
 €8(X(^o9 or not — Maetzner cites Dem. 8, 39 : rw Trj<; iroXeo)^ idd^et ; 
 Aeschin. 3, 134 : irepl rod r?)? TrarplBofi 6Sd4>ov^ ; Dinarch. 1, 99 : 
 Trepl Tov eBd^ov<; rev rrjf; TroXeo)?, etc. — it is a question as to 
 whether there is any special point to be gained by the use of the 
 predicative position. H. Mayer, Observationes in Lycurgi ora- 
 toris usum dicendi, Freiburg, 1889, p. 19ff, treating of Lycurgus's 
 use of the article, says that he does not use it with the former of 
 two substantives, in proof of which he cites the passage under dis- 
 cussion and 149: /cal ra? 'yjrycj^ov^ (f>ep6(T6aL ra? fjiev virep dva- 
 (TTd(T6(o<i T7}<; irarpiBof; , etc. This cannot be urged as an 
 argument here. In favor of the predicative position it may be 
 said that the idea oi freedom is emphasised in this section. Cf. 
 144: T(av fiev virep Trj<; iXevdepia^; reXevTrjadvTwv. Cf., also, 
 for indisputable cases of the predicative position in post-classical 
 Greek, 
 
 Dion Chrysost. 7, 19 : rd yap tx^V 4>cii>€pcoT€pa, ct)9 dv iv 
 
 Vypcp T(p i8d(f)6l, (T7}/jLaLv6fjL€Va. 
 
 Lucian, Timon 57 : iv eXevOepa rfj iroXei, and elsewhere. 
 Demosthenes : — 
 
 Dem. 4, 55: vvv S' e7r' dhrjXoL^ ovo-c TOL<i dirb tovtcov 
 
 ifiavTM <y6vr)crojjL6Voi<i, 
 lb. 18, 298 : utt 6pdrj<; koI StKaia<; Kahia^Oopov Trj<i '\jrv')(fj'^* 
 lb. 21, 30 : iTrdBijXoLf; puev toI<; dScKTjaovo-tv, dSij- 
 
 XoL<i Se Tol<; dBtKT^ao fjuev oi<i. 
 
36 The Limitations of the Fredicative Position in Greek. 
 
 lb. 18, 258 : jiera iroWrj^ ttj^ evheia^ eTpdcf)?]^. 
 
 lb. 21, 8: Q)(} vTrep kolvov tov it pd<y jxaTOf; ovto<; Kal 
 
 7rpo(T6')(^odv aKOva-drco. 
 fib. 25, 99: ov <ydp Btjttov KaO' ev vpucdv e/cao-rof; o)<; eVt 
 
 KVpLOVf; TOL'9 vofxov^ iTopevaeTat. 
 fib. 35, 22 : i/cecvov re tov veaviaKov tov BavelcravTa i^rjird- 
 
 TTjaav ft)9 eirl eXevO epoLf; toI<; 'x^prj fxaaL 
 
 EaV6L^6fl6V0L. 
 
 lb. 36, 8 : aTTo kocvcov tcov ')(^prjixdT(ov. 
 
 lb. 36, 8 ; €K KOtVOiV tcov '^^^pT^fJudTOdV. 
 
 lb. 36, 39 : ck ko cvcov iXrjTovpyeL^ tmv ')(^ p t) fju d t co v . 
 
 lb. 18, 205: a? eV SovXevovay tj} TroXei cf^epetv dvdyKr}. 
 
 lb. 24, 76 : ev BrffMOKpaTovjuevrf Trj it6X€l. 
 
 lb. 19, 120: 7rpo9 [Sta] /jL€/jL€Tpr)fjLev7)v Tr)v r^ixepav. 
 
 lb. 20, 16 : viro tmv ofjuoicov ckovtcov. 
 
 lb. 38, 28: irap^ eKOVTcov eXa^ov tmv eTTLT poircDV. 
 The first and third of the examples cited above from Demos- 
 thenes bear a close resemblance to each other in their structure. 
 This use of the substantivised participle was already observed in 
 the usage of Thucydides. Cf., e. g., virep KaXwv tcov jjueXXovTcov, 
 irepl fieyiCTTcov Brj tcov hiac^epovTCDv, and Plato, Apol. 20 e : eU 
 d^LO'x^pecov TOV XeyovTa. Also in late Greek, as, e. g., Lucian and 
 Dion Cassius. In the fourth example the reading of Voemel is 
 followed. Noting that the article is generally omitted, he says : 
 '^ TTjv S, unde Scheibius, Obs. in Orr. Attic, p. 66 coniecit, ut habet 
 Laur. S, ttoXX?}? tt}? i. e. ttoXXtj yv rj evBeia fjueS' rj<; iTpd<j)7]<iy 
 Blass was doubtful, but read ttoXXt]^ ivBelafi. The fifth example 
 has occasioned difficulty among interpreters. Buttmann says that 
 the mind must conceive the construction as follows : aKovadTco 
 virep tov TrpdyfjuaTo^ co? kolvov 6vto(; = ^' Let him now give an 
 attentive hearing to this matter, as one of public interest." Fennell 
 renders it " considering that the issue is of public interest." The 
 literal sense, he says, is " considering that (he is giving ear and 
 voting) in behalf of the case (it) being of public interest." He 
 remarks that the difficulty has generally been passed over. The 
 principle referred to in the case of co? Trepl dXXoTplov tov irpd- 
 7yLtaT09 is inapplicable here, kolvov holding the predicative posi- 
 tion bears, as usual, the main emphasis. The copula oWo? which 
 
The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek, 37 
 
 is here expressed is more generally omitted. The seventh example 
 defies such analysis as was proposed in the case of Isocrates. In 
 the next example Dindorf read airo kocvcov tmv 'x^prj/jbdrcov ovtcov. 
 Blass omits the copula with MSS F and Q, and finds further sup- 
 port in the similar use of eV kolvS)v tmv ')(^pr]ixdTcov without ovtcov, 
 Sandys and Paley (Private Orations of Dem., Part II., Cambridge, 
 1886) follow Dindorf. On general grounds it is better to omit 
 the copula. In the case of iv BovXevovo-'p ry TroXei, the context 
 with its prominent ideas contained in the words SovXevecv and /ier' 
 iXevOepia^ ^tjv prepares us for the emphatic SovXevovo-y, The form 
 is not unlike that of the example iv SrjfjLOKpaTov/jLevr) rfj ttoXcc, 
 which has been noticed under Andocides. They are, however, 
 different in this respect, that in the former case iv has a local, in 
 the latter a temporal, signification. Drake has aptly compared 
 Hdt. 5, 29 : iv dvearTjKvlrj rfj x^PV^ which has already been noted. 
 Compare, also, in post-classical Greek, Lucian's Timon 57 : iv 
 eXevOepa rfj iroXet, The same expression is also found in Nigrinus 
 13 and Bis Accusatus 21 . The next example, irpo^ ScafjLefierpij/jLevrjv 
 Tfjv rjfjbepav, is a technical expression which is explained by Har- 
 pocration. The judicial day was divided into three parts, one 
 allotted to the plaintiff, another to the defendant, and the third to 
 the judges. Cf. also fDem. 53, 17 : Trpo? rjfiepav StafjLe/jLerprjfjLevrjVy 
 and Aeschin. 2, 126 : iv Bta/jL6jjL6Tpr]jji€vrj rrj rjfiepa Kplvofiai,. The 
 last two examples have already been noticed under the Isocratean 
 use of participles. 
 
 Aeschines : — 
 
 Aeschines 3, 255: fir) ovv o)? virep aXXorpiaq , dXX' 0)9 
 virep olK€La<; rrj^; TroXeco^i fiovXev- 
 eade, 
 lb. 3, 58 ; Trap eKovrcov tmv '^XX'^vayv. 
 lb. 3, 126 : iv BtafMefjLeTprjfMivr) rfj rj/juepa. 
 In the first case, MSS e h k 1 give irept for vTrip in both places. 
 Weidner adopts irept in the former place. The principle applied 
 to 0)9 Trepl dXXoTpiov rod 7rpdyfjLaT0<; is pointless here. The second 
 and third examples have already been noticed. 
 
 Dinarchus : — 
 
 Dinarchus 1, 37: Trap' ekovtcov kol ^ovXafxevtov tojv'EiXXtjvcov,, 
 
38 The Limitations of the Predicative Fositio7i in Greek. 
 
 This example has already found a place under the Isocratean 
 use of participles. 
 
 The survey of the usage of the historians and the Orators, so far 
 as the prepositional type of oblique predication is concerned, has 
 now been completed. In the course of the exhibit, special notice 
 was taken of one particular type which begins in the Orators and 
 survives in certain post-classical authors. The marks of its crys- 
 tallization were quite evident. No small number of the examples 
 which lie outside this province can be distinguished by the fact 
 that the substantive with which they are connected is frequently 
 %co/9(X, 7rarpi<;, ttoX^ 9. Notice was also taken of a small group with 
 the substantivised participle. Another small group may fitly be 
 noticed here. This type is preserved among certain of the post- 
 classical writers. 
 
 Ant. : /jL6Ta XPV^'^V'^ '^V'> e'XTrtSo?. 
 
 Dem. : cltt 6pdrj<i koI SiKata^ KaBca^dopov r-^}? '^VXH^' 
 
 Plato, Protag. 357 A : iv opdrj rfj alpeorec. 
 
 Dion Cass. 37, 11, 2: fiera aKepaiov rou (fipovij/jLaTO^. 
 
 lb. 38, 18, 2 : cltt 6p6rj<; koX ahiac^Oopov T7]<; >yv(t)[xr)<;. 
 
 lb. 38, 42, 4 : air^ opOrj^; koI a^okov t^9 yvcofjurj^;. 
 
 lb. 44, 23, 2 : dir' opdy)^ r^? huavoia^. 
 
 Luc. Hermot. 6 : ef aTeXov<i Trj<i eXTrtSo?. 
 
 Between these and certain examples of the adverbial-dative type, 
 such as e\ev6epai<^ rah yfrvx^at^, there seems to be a close affinity. 
 It will be noticed that the substantives are abstracts, having to do 
 with the inner life of the person. In addition to these groups, there 
 remain a comparatively small number of isolated cases, where a 
 special point is made by the use of the predicative position, and 
 which have, therefore, not been perpetuated as crystallized forms. 
 It has already been observed that Thucydides and Demosthenes 
 especially favor the prepositional type of predication in its different 
 manifestations. And, in the case of Thucydides, the important 
 difference between his speeches and his narrative was referred to, 
 viz., that he uses the prepositional type nine times as often in his 
 speeches as in his narrative. 
 
The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek, 39 
 
 With the limited usage of tlie classical period, as has been seen 
 in the tabulated statement and in the former part of this section, 
 
 stands in decided contrast the post- 
 PKEPOSITIONAL TYPE. , . , . -, . -, , 
 
 (6) Post-Classical Greek, classical period, as represented by cer- 
 tain of its writers, and, preeminently, 
 Lucian who, as in the adv.-dat. type, has been made the basis of 
 this study. This will, perhaps, appear more clearly if the ex- 
 amples are grouped as far as possible. 
 
 (1) It is Thucydides of the Attic writers who favored the prepo- 
 sition TT/oo? in connection with the type in question. There are 
 three examples, conveying the idea of opposition or contrast, viz. : 
 
 Thuc. 1, 36, 1 : Trpo? iGyyovra^; rovg i')(6pov^. 
 lb. 1, 84, 3 : TT/oo? €v ^ovXevofievov^ Tov<i e'^^pou?. 
 lb. 3, 43, 4 : Trpo? avevdvvov rrjv vfierepav aKpoaaiv. 
 
 There are, on the other hand, eleven examples in Lucian : 
 
 Lucian, Piscator 32 : tt/jo? dyvoovvTa<; rou? KufiaCovf;. 
 
 lb. Pro Imag. 16 : 7rpb<; ovrw acfyoSpap rrjv Karrfyoplav. 
 
 lb. Toxaris 29 : tt/oo? oijrco a-KKrjpav rrjv Siatrav. 
 
 lb. Gallus 29 : tt/^o? a/juavpav re kol hi'y^rcdcrav Tr)v OpvaXkiha. 
 
 lb. Bis Accus. 20 : Trpo? evirpoo-aiirov aoc rrjv dvrlSiKov, 
 
 lb. Rhet. Praec. 23 : 7rpb<; ovtw 7roX\ov<; Tov<i epa)ra<i. 
 
 lb. De Electro 3 : Trpo? ivavrlov to ijBcop. 
 
 lb. De Domo 29 : tt/oo? oijTco KaXd^; koI 7roLKika<^ rdf} viro- 
 
 lb. Navigium 9 : 7rpo<; dvTiov<i tov<; irrjcrLa^. 
 lb. Saturnalia 7 : 7rpo9 ovrco ttoWtjv rrjv dSiKiav. 
 lb. Demosth. Encom. 17 : tt^o? Xajjuirpav rrjv A7]/jbocrdevov<i 
 
 Bo^av. 
 
 Opposition, or contrast, is expressed here, too, except in the fourth 
 example where 7rpo9 indicates the direction. The bulk of Lucian, 
 it must not be forgotten, is more than twice that of Thucydides. 
 Still, every allowance made, one feels that there has been a wide 
 departure from Attic usage. Omit the article in a number of these 
 examples, and there is no real loss. This is not true of Thucy- 
 dides. 
 
40 The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek. 
 
 Cf. also Dion Chrysostomus 12, 4 : TTpoTrefjurmv akviro)^ avTov, 
 
 Q)(i eoLKe, 7rp0 9 aXvirov 
 Tov Bdvarov . 
 Plutarch, 1, 60 : Trpo? avriov ro irvevfia. 
 (2) Of the examples cited above from Lucian, it will be noticed 
 that two have the adjective ttoXu? in the predicative position. 
 There have been observed only two cases in the authors of the 
 classical period who have been examined, viz., 
 
 Thuc. 8, 38, 3 : iv iroWal^ tol^ irplv [Md')(^DLL<i. 
 
 Dem. 18, 258 : fjuera ttoXXt)? t?}9 eVSeta?. i 
 
 In the former case the article could not well be omitted, and, 
 with its retention, a different sense would be conveyed by the 
 attributive position. The second case, it will be remembered, is a 
 disputed one. Lucian has fifteen additional examples in which 
 iroXv^ holds the predicative position, e. g. : 
 
 Lucian, Timon 13 : iv ttoXXgS tco g-koto), 
 
 lb. Charon 11 : e/c ttoWov tov 0d6ov<;. 
 
 lb. Quom. hist, conscr. 1 : iv iroW^ rS (fyXoyfiS, 
 
 lb. Alexander 39 : iv iroWf} rfj aicoTrfj. 
 
 lb. " 44 : eVl ttoWwv tcov Trapovrav. 
 
 lb. De Saltatione 40 : i/c iroWcov tmv TrapaXeXec/jifievcov. 
 
 Cf. also Demonax 31, Gallus 19, Rhet. Praec. 3, Hippias 7, 
 Advers. Indoct. 19, 24, De Dipsad. 2, Dial. Meretr. 14, 2, De 
 Morte Peregr. 19. Similar are Gallus 15, Icaromenip. 17, and 
 Apologia 15. 
 
 So Lucian uses 0X^709, but not frequently. 
 
 Lucian, Anacharsis 11 : eV oXlycov tcov fiaprvpcov. 
 lb. Hermot. 58 : dir oXljov tov yevfjuaTog. 
 
 With the former of these examples, cf. Xen. Hell. 6, 4, 1 : iir" 
 oXiycDV fjioc SoKovcn fjuapTvpcov. The latter example is inter- 
 esting in another way, for, earlier in the same chapter, we have 
 the attributive position with the article : diro ye tov okiyov eKeivov 
 yevfjuaTOfij where the article is plainly anaphoric, strengthened, it is 
 true, by the demonstrative i/c62vo<;. But, in this example, the 
 article has no such justification. If it is omitted, the sense is con- 
 veyed equally as well. In other words, Lucian is here giving 
 
The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek, 41 
 
 predicative expression to what is really an attributive relation. 
 
 Post-classical examples to which no such objection can be made 
 
 are : 
 
 Dion Chrysostoraus 11, 1 : fjuavOdvova-i jnev fioyc'^ idv rt koX 
 
 fiddcocro, Trap* oXufycov to)v el- 
 BoTcov, i^airarSyvTai Se Td')(^tcrTa 
 
 VTTO TTOWCOV T (b V OVK €fc86- 
 TCOV . 
 
 Dion Cassius 56, 17, 2: ravra yap o-tto TroWcjv tmv 
 
 '^Ir 1] (f) I, (T 6 i V T (O V <T(^lO-LV 6 AvryOV- 
 
 aTo<; iSe^aTO. 
 
 fiaKpo^ is similarly used by Lucian. 
 
 Lucian Deor. Dial. 10, 2 : vtto fiaKpw tm ^6(l)(p. 
 lb. De Merc. Conduct. 37 : 8id fiaKpov rod xp^vov. 
 lb. Jupp. Confut. 7 : viro fiaKpS roS Xlvo). 
 lb. Navigium 44 : iv fjuaKpS tS /Slo). 
 
 With the foregoing examples may be compared the following 
 from Aelian, given by Schmid, Atticismus, vol. 3, p. 63. 
 
 Aelian N A 34, 6 : iv /juaKpS rS ^povco, 
 
 lb. ** 36, 3 : Kara ttoWtjv rrjv elpijvrjv, 
 
 lb. ** 47, 24 : ck itoWov roii aWepo^ /cal vy^rfKov. 
 
 lb. " 112,30: Kara TToWhv Tr]v (TTTOvhriv. 
 
 (3) Several of the examples with the predicative position in 
 Lucian are introduced by the preposition viro with the dat. Some 
 of these occur in the groups already given. The following may 
 also be noted : 
 
 Lucian, De Merc. Conduct. 23 : viro fxeya\o(f)(i)V(p tg5 ktjpvkl. 
 
 lb. Herodotus 6 : viro vv/j,^ajcoy(p ro) ^acriXel. 
 
 lb. Quom. hist, conscr. 2 : vtto fna rfj opfjuf} (cf. Anach. 26.) 
 
 lb. Phalaris post. 8 : viro yecopyS rS OeS. 
 
 lb. Philopseudes 32 : vtto TrvKvfj rfj ^do-et. 
 
 lb. Pseudolog. 17 : viro TrovijpM rS Trpcorq) Kal Svatp^/j,^ 
 K\rjSovL(r/jLarL. 
 
 lb. Navigium 11 : t'Tro Xafirrpa rfj SaBL 
 
 No instance of vtto with the dat. in this construction has been 
 found in the writers of the classical period. 
 
42 The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek, 
 
 (4) The preposition most commonly employed in this type, alike 
 in classical and post-classical Greek, is iv. In addition to the ex- 
 amples cited in other connections, may be noteS : 
 
 Lucian, Timon 13 : iv ')(^a\K(a r) crtSrjpM rS 9a\dfjb(p. 
 
 lb. De Merc. Cond. 22 : iv a/juvSpa) ray (^xori (cf. Alex. 17). 
 
 lb. Apologia 8 : iv ovro)<; a/bu^iXaipel ry vwodeaei, 
 
 lb. Quom. hist, conscr. 4 : iv ovro) TroXvcfxovq) too KacpS. 
 
 (5) The preposition eVt with the dat. is quite common. Demos- 
 thenes is the only classical author who makes use of it in prose. 
 
 Cf. Lucian, Hermot. 74 : iirl aa6pol<; tol(; Oefiekioifi tovtol<;. 
 lb. Quom. hist, conscr. 35 : icj)' ovtw fjueyaXw koI ^(^aXeirw to3 
 
 TTpdfyfJLaTL. 
 
 lb. Demonax 8 : iir oXcryo-y^poviOL^; to?? Bokov(tlv dyaOot*;. 
 lb. Toxaris 35: eTrl 7rpoSrj\(p to5 fiiKpov varepov XvOrj- 
 
 creadat. 
 lb. Toxaris 41 : eVl TV(f>\(p toS AavSdfiiBL. 
 lb. Jupp. Trag. 31 : 6</)' ovtco aa<^el koX TrpoBijXa) to3 ^p77cryLfca), 
 lb. Rhet. Praec. 24: eVl -^cXS tm Tpe(j)eo-6ac. 
 lb. Pseudolog. 26 : eVl ireTrpayfjuevo) tjBt) rtp epy(p. 
 lb. De Domo 1 : iwl irpoBrjXw rjj v6a(p. 
 lb. Epist. Saturn. 35 : eVl KareayoTi to3 djjb^opeL. 
 
 Especially to be noticed, in the foregoing list, are the two occur- 
 rences of the articular infinitive with the adjective in the predica- 
 tive position. There is no similar occurrence in classical Greek 
 within the range of authors examined. 
 
 (6) Finally may be noted a small prepositional group which is 
 closely related to the adverbial-dative group in the character of the 
 substantives which are used. 
 
 Lucian, Nigrinus 11 : diro yvjuuvov . . . rovfiov Trpoo-coTrov, 
 lb. Toxaris 19 : diro yjriXrj'; tt)^ icepaia^» 
 lb. Toxaris 60 : diro yvfivrj^ rrj^ fcecfyaXrj^, 
 
 The presence of the possessive is to be noticed in the first of 
 these examples. The construction is usually not so transparent as 
 it is here. 
 
 This concludes the survey of post-classical Greek, especially as 
 seen in the pages of Lucian, who fairly revels in this construction. 
 
The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek. 43 
 
 The words of I. Guttentag, De subdito qui inter Lucianeos legi 
 solet dialogo Toxaride, Berlin, 1860, p. 44, in this connection, are 
 substantially well-founded : " Proprium hoc quoque Luciani est, 
 quod multo frequentius quam alii scriptores articulum inter adiec- 
 tivum et substantivum ponit, et ita quidem, ut articulus nonnum- 
 quam adiectivum antecedere, multo saepius integra sententia omitti 
 possit. Oratio tamen elegantior interdum est, si articulus adiec- 
 tivum sequitur, quam si praeponitur, quaesita saepe magis videtur, 
 si articulus usurpatur, quam si omittitur.'' 
 
 After noting the views current in antiquity among the gram- 
 marians with reference to the nature of the Greek article, and 
 
 showing how the article gradually 
 CONCLUSION. developed from the demonstrative pro- 
 
 noun, the writer entered upon a con- 
 sideration of the subject of oblique predication, in which was 
 included the use of adjective and participle alike. The range of 
 this construction was given for the Attic Orators and Thucydides, 
 and a more especial study was made of two types which were 
 denominated the adverbial-dative and the prepositional. The lim- 
 itations in the use of these two types on the part of the classical 
 authors were observed, and by a comparison with post-classical 
 authors, more especially Lucian, the deviations from the norm of 
 Attic usage were indicated. The origin of the comitative, or soci- 
 ative, dative was briefly considered, and it was shown that the dat. 
 type is mainly concerned with the body and its parts, any expan- 
 sions being due to the workings of the principle of analogy. The 
 prepositional type was seen to possess a higher character than the 
 adv.-dat. type, and, as a consequence, was used, when impressive- 
 ness was sought, by Thucydides, in particular, of the historians, 
 with the important qualification that it is mainly restricted to his 
 speeches, and for this very reason, and by Demosthenes of the 
 Orators. Many of these expressions, as was shown, crystallised 
 and were imitated by certain post-classical writers. The home of 
 oblique predication in general, and of the prepositional type in 
 particular, was seen to be in oratory which seeks to be vigorous, 
 concise, and impressive — in fine, in Epideictic Oratory. 
 
LIFE. 
 
 Alfred William Milden was born in Whitevale, Ontario, on March 
 11, 1868. His preliminary education was received in the Public 
 School and the High School of Cornwall, Ontario. He matriculated 
 at the University of Toronto in the year 1884, and, four years later, 
 graduated with the degree of B. A. with classical honors. For a period 
 of nearly eight years, he was engaged in the teaching of classics, 
 mainly in the Collegiate Institute of Barrie, Ontario. In the fall of 
 1896 he entered the Johns Hopkins University as a post-graduate 
 student in Greek, Latin, and Sanskrit. At the end of his second 
 year he was appointed Fellow in Greek ; and at the end of his third 
 year, in June, 1899, he received the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. 
 During the year 1899-1900 he has been Fellow by Courtesy. He has 
 attended the lectures of Professors Gildersleeve, Warren, Bloomfield, 
 Smith, and Miller, to all of whom he is indebted. 
 
 He would especially mention Professor Gildersleeve and Professor 
 Miller, to the former of whom, in common with his many students, 
 he must express the strong sense of his indebtedness for inspiration, 
 guidance, and encouragement in the prosecution of his studies. 
 
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY 
 BERKELEY 
 
 Return to desk from which borrowed. \ 
 
 1 
 
 This book is DUE on the last date stamped below. 
 
 i5Aug'4g/^p 
 /^iarRETO 
 
 • 
 
 1 ; 
 
 : 
 ] 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 j^R32l955l8 
 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 EEC. cm. DEC 03 tt 
 
 
 i 
 
 HOV 1 ^^^ 
 
 AUTO. DISC. 
 
 
 \ 
 
 AUG Jl i^^^ 
 
 
 
 LDQiRcy^^id 
 
 1 
 
 3)476 
 
 
MAKERS 
 
 U.C. BERKELEY LIBRARIES 
 
 CQ2D1b327D 
 
«