^{page 63 note 1} Cf.Schmid, W., Der Atticismus in seinen Hauptvertretern i, p. 97Google Scholar, which combines the two: ‘diesen dem jetzigen Gebrauch ganz abhanden gekommenen … Modus ziehen diese Schriftsteller mit aller Absichtlichkeit wieder hervor und gebrauchen ihn, bei ober-flächlicher Beobachtung früherer Ausdrucks-formen, in einer nicht immer korrekten, manierierten Weise.’

^{page 63 note 2} e.g. Meillet, , Aperçu d'une histoire de la langue grecque, p. 213Google Scholar. Most recently Perretti, A., ‘Ottativi in Luciano’, published in Studi Italiani di Filologia Classica, 1949, p. 73Google Scholar: ‘Luciano usa liberamente l'ottativo in tutte Ie sue opere, con le incoerenze e gli errori che sono inseparabili dall‘ uso convenzionale, artificioso, letterario, di una lingua che non si parla piu come si scrive’.

^{page 63 note 3} Cf. Bis Accusatus 27, where Rhetoric says .

^{page 64 note 1} e.g. the frequent (Schmid, , op. cit. i. 428) and often un-Attic use of the particle ; the placing of adjectives in predicative position without cause, as . in Timon 54; and die use of die article widi an accusative, as though diere were an ellipse of some participle, e.g. de Electro 2 Google Scholar

^{page 64 note 2} Kühner-Gerth, , Ausfūhrliche Grammatik d. gr. Sprache, ii. 553. i and 5(A). See below, section 5.Google Scholar

^{page 64 note 3} Schmid, , iii. 86Google Scholar. The use of die particles at different periods is also summarized by Perretti (p. 89, n. 1), who remarks on die absence of from die New Testament. If die reading of Souter and of Westcott and Hort is right, however, diere appears to be a noun-clause of die form . in St. Mark 4. 26. It is explained by Moulton, , Prolegomena to Grammar of NT Greek, p. 185Google Scholar, as a ‘futuristic’ subjunctive. Alternatively (as suggested by Professor J. B. Skemp) there may be an ellipse of ivα to avoid . The Resultant Greek Testamen t, 3rd edn., gives as a reading (so Lachmann etal.).

^{page 64 note 4} Meillet, , op. cit., p. 205Google Scholar; Grammatik d. gr. Papyri, i. 22.Google Scholar

^{page 64 note 5} Cf.Hatzidakis, , Einleitung in die Neugr. Grammatik, pp. 304 f.Google Scholar

^{page 64 note 6} Hal, Dionysius. De Compositione Verborum, 14Google Scholar, distinguishes vowels by quantity and quality, though even he, in the analysis of the rhythms of Demosthenes (ch. xviii), allows the last syllable of to be long or short, preferably the former, and treats the second syllable of as short (Rhys Roberts, ad loc).

^{page 64 note 7} Meillet, , pp. 209 ff.Google Scholar; Hatzidakis, , p. 218Google Scholar; Schmid, , p. 97.Google Scholar

^{page 64 note 8} Perretti, , p. 85.Google Scholar

^{page 64 note 9} In Epistidae Satumales 30 both moods occur, . Similarly in Fugitivi 33 there is a negative final clause with the sub-junctive, and a positive one with the optative. But in Toxaris 37 the two moods occur in one negative clause without distinction- unless indicates a single action and a continuing state of affairs (cf. Perretti, , p. 90, n. 3.Google Scholar

^{page 65 note 1} Reference is to paragraphs in the Teubner text of Nilén, supplemented by that of Jacobitz for the works not published in Nilén's edition.

^{page 65 note 2} e.g. Sophocles, Ph. 989; Plato, Rep. 507 d; Demosthenes 45. 5; Theocritusv 15–91.

^{page 67 note 1} Or perhaps as consecutive =‘so that (if I had been successful) I should have… ’, etc. Cf. de luctu 19, mentioned on p. 73 below. The relative seems more likely, but there is little difference when the action described is hypothetical.

^{page 69 note 1} Essai sur la vie et Us auvres de Lucien, p. 48.Google Scholar

^{page 69 note 2} Ibid., p. 45. It cannot be definitely dated, but Christ-Schmid, , Griech. Lit.-Gesch., ii, p. 718 says ‘der rhetorischen Periode scheint anzugehören’.Google Scholar

^{page 69 note 3} Perretti's statement (p. 78), ‘la forma dialogica o non dialogica non influesce per nulla sull' uso più o meno frequente dell' ottativo in Luciano’, may perhaps be qualified or expanded. The grammar of dialogue tends to be different from that of other writing; e.g. the proportion of verbs in the second persons and first person plural is higher, and so is the proportion of present and future tenses and imperatives. Thus there are fewer opportunities of using the optative according to Attic rules.

^{page 69 note 4} Perretti, , p. 92.Google Scholar

^{page 69 note 5} Cf. the Toxaris, throughout.

^{page 69 note 6} Some of the subjunctives attributed to characters mentioned in this paragraph and some attributed to persons who do not use the optative at all, though of similar status, are due to other considerations and are discussed below.

^{page 70 note 1} It is assumed that Lucian intended to iubject the gods to indignity through ridicule is well as to compose charming fantasies. cf.Caster, , Lucien et la pensie religieuse de son temps, iv. i.Google Scholar

^{page 70 note 2} Liddell and Scott, s.v. 3(a).

^{page 70 note 3} Where Harmon reads optatives.

^{page 70 note 4} The subjunctives in 5, 33, 61 in this work e perhaps used to indicate a continued state of affairs; cf. p. 64, n. 9 above.

^{page 71 note 1} The optative may follow the aorist, but the action is future.

^{page 71 note 2}

^{page 71 note 3} It concerns the distribution of food, among guests, and the misfortunes the rich should suffer if they do not feed the poorproperly. Eating is a serious subject in Lucian; cf. Somn, . (Gall.) 9–11, de Mer. Con. 26.Google Scholar

^{page 71 note 4} Those in I and 29 are 3rd pi., of which, for whatever reason, there are 41 examples food of the optative against 15 of the subjunctive, The proportion for all persons together is 3 to 2.

^{page 72 note 1} In Pisc. 7 the best sense is made by Harmon‘s text, omitting

^{page 72 note 2} The identification of o, ω, and later η, of course reduced the real number of parts of Greek verbs, though distinctions in the spelling are still maintained (cf. Hatzidakis, , pp. 305 ff.)Google Scholar. A sophist in the second century A.D. would no doubt have made sound different from . The latter occurs, contrary to Lucian's practice, in de mor. Per. 8, but is fitting in the mouth of the man referred to as , who is beginning an elaborate speech.

^{page 73 note 1} A close parallel in form is St. John 17.

^{page 73 note 2} Hatzidakis, , pp. 214 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 73 note 3} I am very grateful to Professor G. B. A. Fletcher and Professor J. B. Skemp, who have both kindly read the draft of this paper and enabled me to correct some errors.