Page:History of Greece Vol VIII.djvu/220

198 HISTORY OF GREECE. grossly illegal and unconstitutional, presenting a notice of indict ment against Kallixenus, under the Grapbe Paranomon, for having proposed a resolution of that tenor. Several other citizens supported the notice of indictment, which, according to the received practice of Athens, would arrest the farther progress of the measure until the trial of its proposer had been consummated. Nor was there ever any proposition made at Athens, to which the Graphe Paranomon more closely and righteously applied. But the numerous partisans of Kallixenus especially the men who stood by in habits of mourning, with shaven heads, agitated with sad recollections and thirst of vengeance were in no temper to respect this constitutional impediment to the discus- sion of what had already been passed by the senate. They loudly clamored, that " it was intolerable to see a small knot of citizens thus hindering the assembled people from doing what they chose :" ard one of their number, Lykiskus, even went so far as to threaten that those who tendered the indictment against Kallixenus should be judged by the same vote along with the generals, if they would not let the assembly proceed to consider and determine on the motion just read. 1 The excited disposition of the large party thus congregated, farther inflamed by this menace of Lykiskus, was wound up to its highest pitch by various other speakers ; especially by one, who stood forward and said : diafa%ri[i t uevov in place of Kpiveiv iiaXs^rififievov. He is assailed by two obtrusive and importunate customers, neither of whom will wait until the other has been served. Accordingly he says : " Clearly, I ought to be divided into two parts, like a dikastery acting under the psephism of Kannonus, to deal with this matter : yet how shall I be able to serve both at once ?" This I conceive to be the proper explanation of the passage in Aristopha- nes ; and it affords a striking confirmation of the truth of that which is generally received as purport of the psephism of Kannonns. The Scholiast appears to me to have puzzled himself, and to have misled every one else. 1 Xenoph. Hcllen. i, 7. Tdi> 6e Ka2.M!-evov irpoasicateaavTo Trapuvopa $ao- nov~f gvyyeypatifvai, EvpVTroXe/iof re *tot uAAot Tivff TOU 6e dypov evioi ravra kiryvavv rb tie 7rA^i9of /3oa, deivbv sivai, el (iri rif euaei rdv 6y 1*0 v irparretv, o uv ^ovTirjrai. Kot fat TOVTOI; el~6vrof A.VKIOKOV, KO.I rovTOVf Ty avTy ^<JMf> Kpiveo-dai, Jjrfp sot TOIY arparriyodf, iav firi uQuai rijv IK K?. 17 oi a v , tirf&opvpqae KUAIV 6 (J/^of, nal All this violence is directed to the special object of getting tie proposi- tion discussed and decided on by the assembly, in spite of corstitutional hstacles.