^{page 19 note 1} Études d'Archeologie Grecque, Annales de l'École des Hautes Études de Gand, tome ii, 1938, p. 106Google Scholar.

^{page 19 note 2} Flaceliere (loc. cit.) denies this, and supposes that the change to αἱ καтŰ μ⋯να μανтεῖαι took place subsequently to the fourth century B.C. He appears to explain such an instance as the Athenian consultation of 480 B.C. (Hdt. vii. 140) as an exceptional privilege, and as evidence for this kind of extraordinary consultation cites the phrase used in Plu. Alex. 14—καт тύχην ⋯μερ⋯ ⋯πο;ϕράᔡων— arguing that dies nefastus (⋯μέρα ⋯ποϕράς) could not be described as καт셰 тύχην, if it was only possible to consult the oracle on a few specified dates. But this argument would cut logically against both the system of annual and monthly consultations, strictly interpreted. On the other hand, if extraordinary consultations were always possible, except on a few dies nefasti, it seems futile for Plutarch to write as if consultation was actually limited to specific dates. The story of Alexander's consultation is silly and apocryphal, and the phrase must not be pressed to mean more than ‘as luck would have it, it was a dies nefastus’, without stating the odds in favour of such a possibility.

^{page 20 note 1} Cf. Munro, , CAM. iv, pp. 283Google Scholar and 300.

^{page 20 note 2} I.G. ii². 1096 and Hesperia, ix, 1940, pp. 86 ff.

^{page 21 note 1} Plutarch elsewhere (Moralia, 389 c) mentions Apollo's absence from Delphi for the three winter months. So it must be taken that when he refers to at α⋯ καтŰ μ⋯να μανтεῖαι he does not include the period mid-November to mid-February. For other references cf.Parke, , A History of the Delphic Oracle, p. 15Google Scholar, n. 4, and see a discussion of the point inHalliday, , Plutarch's Greek Questions, p. 621Google Scholar.

^{page 21 note 2} e.g. Halliday, op. cit., pp. 61 ff.Farnell, Contrast, Greek Cults, vol. iv, p. 186Google Scholar, who seems to accept Plutarch's evidence rather hesitantly. Halliday distinguishes three periods: (1) when consultations only took place on 7th Busios, (2) when consultations took place on all days except a few ⋯μέραι ⋯ποϕράδες, (3) αἱ καтŰ μ⋯να μανтεῖαι of Plutarch's time. But though Plutarch, Alex. 14 (cf. supra, p. 19, n. 2), is the only source of literary evidence which he produces for the second period, Plutarch himself in the Moralia only recognized two periods, i.e. (1) and (3). This is proved, asVallois, R. points out (B.C.H. lv, 1931, p. 3351Google Scholar) by Plutarch's use of πρóтρον, not πρ⋯тον, in referring to the former period. Vallois does not like to confine the consultation to a single day a month, but supposes that, as in some festivals, the original day was extended. This theory, as Flaceliere suggests, ignores the second passage cited above from the Moralia (398 A). Plutarch, , Alex. 14Google Scholar, is the only reference extant to actual ⋯μέραι ⋯ποϕράδες Delphi. The question of the days allowed by rule for consultationmust not beconfused bycitingpassages which refer to the sacrifice, which was always offered before consultation to ascertain whether Apollo was willing to answer, e.g. Halliday cites Eur. Ion, 418, which refers to this. For other references seeParke, , Delphic Oracle, p. 21Google Scholar, n. 2.

^{page 21 note 3} B.C.H., 1936, pp. 139–40, quoted by Flace lière, op. cit., p. 107.

^{page 22 note 1} e.g. the Thebans in 363 B.C.; B.C.H. xxix 1899, p. 517Google Scholar; Ditt, . Syll, ³176Google Scholar.

^{page 22 note 2} Aesch, . Eum. 32Google Scholar; Parke, , Delphic Oracle, p. 39Google Scholar, n. 10.