ἐπήνεσα may appear as the apodosis of a future condition is clear from Eurip. Orest. 1670 sqq. :

ἀλλ ̓ εὖ τελεῖται, πείσομαι δὲ σοῖς λόγοις.
ἰδοῦ, μεθίημ ̓ Ἑρμιόνην ἀπὸ σφαγῆς,

καὶ λέκτρ ̓ ἐπῄνεσ', ἡνίκ ̓ ἂν διδῷ πατήρ·

i. e. "whenever her father shall give her to me in marriage, I at once accept her as my bride: you may suppose it done."

It is to be observed that even the periphrastic use of the aorist participle with exw is allowable in this idiom: thus we have (Eurip. Heracl. 435 sqq.) :

συγγνωστὰ γάρ τοι καὶ τὰ τοῦδ', εἰ μὴ θέλει

κτείνειν πολιτῶν παῖδας· αἰνέσας δ' ἔχω
καὶ τἀνθάδ'· εἰ θεοῖσι δὴ δοκεῖ τάδε

πράσσειν ἔμ', οὔτοι σοί γ ̓ ἀπόλλυται χάρις.

Here the transient satisfaction expressed by the aorist has superadded to it a signification of continuous approval. For Iolaus says: "allowance is to be made for Demophon, if he is unwilling to slay the daughters of his citizens; and I received with approval, indeed I still approve, of the proceedings of the Athenians. If the gods have decreed that I must meet with this fortune, my gratitude to thee, O king, is not nullified on that account."

Although veσa is the most common example of this usage of the aorist, especially in Euripides', other verbs are used precisely in the same manner; thus we have έδεξάμην (Soph. Electr. 668) : ἐδεξάμην τὸ ῥηθέν· εἰδέναι δέ σου

πρώτιστα χρήζω, τίς σ ̓ ἀπέστειλεν βροτῶν,

"your omen is accepted.

the proper acquiescence."

Suppose me to have received it with

ἥσθην (Aristoph. Aves, 570) :

ἥσθην σέρφῳ σφαγιαζομένῳ,

"I liked the idea of an ant being sacrificed-that was a capital

1 There is a large collection of examples, with an attempt to divide them into three classes, in a paper by E. Moller, Zeitschrift f. d. Alterthumswiss. 1846, pp. 1065 sqq.

"your hymns were excellent: so were your songs: and I admire your words."

So also the converse meaning expressed by aπéπтvσα, “I expressed my dislike by spitting" (Eurip. Iph. A. 874; Iph. T. 1161); μwğa, “I cried, Ah me!" (Med. 791); Katedákρvσa, “I wept" (Helen. 673); KaтÓKтEιρa, "I compassionated" (Iph. A. 469), &c.

The aorist elπov, in particular, as Matthiä says (Gr. Gr. § 506), expresses "an action completely finished, in which no alteration can be made, every doubt of its truth and unalterableness being removed, as in Latin hoc tibi dictum volo." Thus Eurip. Med. 273:

σὲ τὴν σκυθρωπὸν καὶ πόσει θυμουμένην
Μήδειαν εἶπον τῆσδε γῆς ἔξω περᾶν,

"I bad thee once for all to leave this land-my orders are final and determinate-there is nothing more to be said;" as the same speaker says afterwards (v. 322):

ἀλλ ̓ ἔξιθ ̓ ὡς τάχιστα, μὴ λόγους λέγε,

ὡς ταῦτ ̓ ἄραρε, κοὐκ ἔχεις τέχνην ὅπως
μενεῖς παρ' ἡμῖν.

And again (v. 355):

λέλεκται μῦθος ἀψευδὴς ὅδε.

To this class must be also referred the reply eμalov (Plat. Phileb. p. 26 D) or ovê éμalov (Soph. p. 228 A), used to signify "that was clear" or "that was not clear to me," i.e. when you spoke.

(ee) This idea of completeness conveyed by the aorist must be distinguished from that of a state consequent on an act, which is the meaning of the perfect. We find a special example of this in the opposition between euvoony, "I recollected and mentioned it at the time when it occurred to me," and μéμvnμai, “I have recalled it, and still remember it" (above, 349). We have occasional examples of the same distinction in such passages as the following (Demosth. Zenoth. 882, 3): Boúλoμaι πaρayeɣρaμμévos μὴ εἰσαγώγιμον εἶναι τὴν δίκην, περὶ τῶν νόμων πρῶτον εἰπεῖν καθ' oûs πaρeypaɣáμny, "I wish now that I have brought a crossaction to the effect that the original suit does not lie, to speak first concerning the laws according to which I brought this cross-action,"

i.e. "as I appear before you in the state consequent on that proceeding, I wish to explain the reasons why I took that line in the first instance." His filing the bill in the cross-action (mapayρapń) was a single and transient act, but it placed him in the position of plaintiff in that suit till the question was decided.

428 C, 2. The Pluperfect.

(aa) The pluperfect, as we have seen, expresses the completion of some act before a specified time; thus, őte éyeypáþeiv, TaρEYÉVETÓ TIS, "when I had done writing, some one came up; ὁ μὲν [Νικίας] ἐτεθνήκει, τοὺς δ ̓ ἐν ταῖς λίθοτομίαις οἱ Συρακόσιοι χαλεπῶς μετεχείρισαν, “ Nicias had been put to death, and the Syracusans roughly treated those who were set to work in the quarries," i.e. "after the death of Nicias, they subjected the other prisoners to this cruel treatment.”

(bb) Sometimes the meaning of the pluperfect is the establishment of a state or condition in past time; as ἐν τοῖς Δράκοντος νόμοις μία ἅπασιν ὥριστο τοῖς ἁμαρτάνουσιν ζημία, θάνατος, “ in the laws of Draco one punishment, death, remained fixed for all offenders."

(cc) As the aorist follows the pluperfect in its ordinary predication of an event completed before some specified time (above, (aa)), so in the sense just explained the pluperfect will follow the aorist; thus, οὐδεμίαν διατριβὴν ἐποιησάμην, ἀλλ ̓ εὐθὺς παρεκέκληντο οὓς εἶπον, προειρηκως δ ̓ ἦν αὐτοῖς ἐφ ̓ ἃ συνεληλυθότες ἦσαν, ἀνέγνωστο Só Móyos, "I made no delay, but those whom I mentioned were immediately summoned, and I had told them why they were met, and the speech had been read to them." Sometimes an imperfect follows the pluperfect in this case; thus, τὴν ἀγορὰν ἀνεσκεύασαν καὶ αἱ πύλαι ἐκέκλειντο καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν τειχῶν ὅπλα ἐφαίνετο, “ they dismantled the market-place, and the gates were and remained closed, and arms began to appear on the walls."

(dd) In some writers, especially in Homer and Herodotus, we find the pluperfect when we should expect the aorist; thus Hom. Π. Ι. 221: ἡ δ ̓ Οὐλυμπόνδε βεβήκει, “ the goddess was already gone to Olympus," she had vanished in a moment; v. 65: tòv μèv Μηριόνης, ὅτε δὴ κατέμαρπτε διώκων, βεβλήκει, “ as soon as he overtook him, he smote him at once." Herod. 1. 84, ad fin.: TÓTE

δὴ ὁ αὐτός τε ἀναβεβήκεε καὶ κατ ̓ αὐτὸν ἄλλοι Πέρσαι ἀνέβαινον, προσβάντων δὲ συχνῶν, οὕτω δὴ Σάρδιές τε ἡλώκεσαν καὶ πᾶν τὸ ἄστυ ἐπορθέετο. That the aorist might have been substituted for these two pluperfects is clear from the passage of Thucydides (III. 22) quoted above (427, (aa)). The similarity in meaning between the aorist and pluperfect in these cases has given rise to an occasional confusion between aπIKéαTо the 2 aor. and ariKaто the plup. in the text of Herodotus: see e. g. VII. 157.

(C+B) The Future of the Perfect Passive or Paulo-post Futurum.

(aa) The perfects of intransitive verbs denote the state or condition which is consequent upon an action. Whether, therefore, they retain their original forms or receive new inflexions, they become present tenses, and may have their own futures, as well of the active as of the middle inflexion; thus,

θνήσκω, “I am dying; θανοῦμαι, “ I shall die;” τέθνηκα, “I am dead;” hence τεθνήκω, id.; τεθνήξομαι οι τεθνήξω, “ Ι shall be dead."

Similarly if the present is transitive; as

lorηue, "I am placing;"

ἵστημι,

oтnka, "I have been placed" or

"I stand;' ἑστήξω, ἑστήξομαι, “I shall stand

and in the

same way perhaps the well-known verb xw, adsum, "I am come," has been formed (see above, 319, 352).

(bb) This rule is particularly applicable to perfects of a passive form; as

μέμνημαι,

μμvýσкw, "I am reminding;" μéμvnμai, "I have been reminded," i. e. "I remember;" fut. μeμvnooμai, "I shall remember."

ypάow, "I am writing;" ypápoμai, "I am being written;" Yрapnooμaι, "I shall be written; γραφήσομαι, γέγραμμαι, “I have been written," i.e. "I stand or remain written;" yeypároμai, "I shall stand or remain written;" as in the following example:

οὐδεὶς κατὰ σπουδὰς μετεγγραφήσεται,

ἀλλ ̓ ὥσπερ ἦν τὸ πρῶτον ἐγγεγράψεται,

(Aristoph. Equites, 1371),

i.e. "no one shall be tsferred by private interest to another

catalogue, but as he was at first enrolled, so shall he remain inscribed."

SV. Primary Predicates considered with reference to the Secondary Predicates. Voices of the Verb.

429 In itself every finite verb involves a primary predication, and therefore, with its nominative expressed or understood, includes the whole of the proposition, as Tρéxe, "he is running." That proposition, however, is very frequently not complete or intelligible without the addition of some secondary predication. Accordingly, the verb is divided into different classes, which are not always in the Greek language distinguished by differences of form, but which, in their syntactical usage, require or dispense with the adjunct of an accusative case denoting the secondary predication of the object implied in the action.

It has been already mentioned (287), that, according to the inflexions, there are only two differences of voice, namely, that in which the person-ending represents an instrumental case, or indicates that there is an act by some one, as Sidwμ, "there is a giving by me," and that in which the person-ending represents a locative case, or indicates that there is an act done upon some one, as didoμai, "there is a giving on or of me." As a matter of usage, however, in the Greek language there are five distinctions of voice, two for the former and three for the latter class of person-endings, namely, one transitive and one intransitive or neuter for the active form, and two transitive and one intransitive for the passive form, as in the following table:

I. Active inflexions.
a. Active (transitive).

b. Neuter (intransitive).

II. Passive inflexions.

c. Passive (intransitive).
d. Middle

e. Deponent} (transitive).

I. Active Inflexions. Transitive and Neuter Verbs.

430 Although it is the custom to place the transitive before the intransitive verb in the active form, there can be no doubt that, in the active, as in the passive inflexions, the intransitive usage is anterior to the transitive, which is merely a causative or secondary signification, and requires an objective case as a secondary predica