Ebben a tanulmányban a γραψή παρανόμων perekben az esküdtbírósági tárgyalás halasztásának, illetve halogatásának jelenségét vizsgálom. A legismertebb klasszikus példa a koszorú-per, amelyet Aischinés Kr. e. 336-ben benyújtott vádirata után hat évvel, Kr. e. 330-ben tárgyaltak.1 Ugyanezt a jelenséget tapasztaljuk azonban a Hypereidést érintő Dióndas-perben is, ahol a vádirat benyújtása és a tárgyalás között négy év telt el.2
This paper presents the results of a reexamination of Column V verse 8 of the British Museum Papyrus 134 (Hypereides against Philippides). On the basis of the seemingly unquestioned previous readings (Kenyon, Blass, Jensen) there has developed a more than one-hundred-years-long debate on the dating of the speech in question. But the crucial word, the starting point of the different interpretations (ύπείληφας) cannot be read as it was. All we can see is: [[o]]†προσφας†. By considering some possible emendations any reconstructed verbum finitum is likely to be in the past tense, which determines the questioned date of origin, i.e. post mortem Philippi.
The paper presents possible explanations to issues raised by the newly discovered text of Hyperides that offers previously unknown data about the number of Athenian ships at Salamis, Artemision and the Athenian contingent in the Corinthian League. In the case of the ships the orator in all probability drew on Herodotus’ text, but also distorted it by emphasizing Athens’ involvement in the Persian wars. All this to present a historical parallel of the one sided alliance between Athens and Thebes in 338 BC and by doing so to defend it. Athenians in their glorious past never calculated their financial sacrifices and after the victory they were given the leadership by the Greeks voluntarily. Something similar could have happened after Chaeronea. Following the proposed reconstruction, the Athenians provided one tenth of the allied Greek-Macedonian army according to the Corinthian Treaty in all branches of warfare (cavalry, infantry and navy).
This paper reveals the vicissitudinous history of the Athenogenes-papyrus and its edition by Eugène Revillout and other scholars. By reconstructing the sequence of events between 1888 and 1893 one can get a convincing explanation of disturbing features in the frames containing the papyrus fragments. Slight misallocations and dislocations due to the rushed final fixing had far reaching consequences in later editions of the famous Hyperides text until now. One of the most important new readings of the Athenogenes-speech partly due to the investigation of the first editions is given in the Appendix (Hyp.
. col. XVI. line 1).
The finds and features of several archaeological periods were uncovered in 2009 during the salvage excavations preceding the construction of the Hévíz bypass of Road 76. Of these, roughly 110 features forming five distinct clusters were part of a Middle Iron Age open settlement. The two moulds made from local sandstone were used for casting bronze buttons or loop buttons and small bow brooches. One of the two bivalve moulds was strongly worn, while the other was semi-finished. The bronze workshop located in the middle of the settlement was made up of two buildings and their immediate vicinity. The bronze bars and rods were raw materials awaiting processing. The richly diverse material can be dated to the later 6th century BC (Ha D2): one portion is typical for the period’s assemblages from Transdanubia, another can be linked to the Scythians, while a few artefacts reflect contact with the south-eastern Alpine region. The open settlement investigated at Alsópáhok is part of the Keszthely micro-region, where other sites yielding relics of bronze metallurgy have been found (Keszthely-Apátdomb, Keszthely-Fenékpuszta).