). At first, after the institution of the new census and
the introduction of the συμμορίαι
archonship of Nausinicus in B.C. 378-7 (Harpocr. s. v. συμμορία
), the state collected the εἰσφορὰ
directly from those liable to it, and those who
fell in arrear were proceeded against in the same way as all debtors to the
state (Lys. c. Philocr.
§ 9;--Dem. c.
p. 609.54; p. 615.70; c. Timocr.
To avoid the delay necessarily arising from this, the προεισφορὰ
was introduced, viz. certain individuals had to
pay the whole tax at once and to recover the sum advanced afterwards from
the others liable to the tax. Fränkel (Boeckh,
3 ii. p. 123, App. n. 838)
supposes that at first each demus appointed one of the dhmo/tai
the whole tax at once for the demus; that, to save time, in B.C. 362-1, it
was resolved that the senate (instead of the demi) should return the names
of those who were to pay the taxes in advance (Dem. c.
p. 1208.8; cf. § 6, διὰ
), and that after this date the first class of the
census, the 300 richest men, had to make this advance (Dem. c.
1046.25; cf. Schol. Dem. Olynth.
p. 26.29, εἰσέφερον γὰρ οἱ πλουσιώτεροι ὑπὲρ
αὐτῶν καὶ προετέλουν, καὶ ἐδέχοντο ταῦτα ὕστερον κατὰ σχολήν
. . . . οὗτοι δὲ ἦσαν οἱ τριακόσιοι οἱ πάνυ πλούσιοι οἱ
πρῶτοι, οἵτινες προεισέφερον,
etc. Dem. de Cor.
p. 285.171). By this means the possibility of taxes
falling into arrears was prevented. To recover money thus advanced was
called προεισφορὰν κομίζεσθαι,
(Dem. c. Pantaen.
p. 1209.9), and all actions arising from it
belonged to the jurisdiction of the strategi. Koehler (Mitth. d. d.
a. Inst. Ath.
7.1882, p. 98 ff.) discusses an inscription dating
from the first half of the 4th century, referring to the actions (διαδικασίαι
) brought to decide who were liable
to [p. 2.501]
the names are arranged according to demi, and the sanctuaries of the demi
are not exempted (cf. C. I. A.
ii. No. 947).
The face that the προεισφορὰ
some time after the archonship of Nausinicus (it is first mentioned in Dem.
p. 1208.8; i. e. B.C. 362-1) throws a new
light on Dem. c. Androt.
p. 606.44, ὑμῖν παρὰ τὰς εἰσφορὰς τὰς ἀπὸ Ναυσινίκου, παρ᾽ ἴσως
τάλαντα τριακόσια ἢ μικρῷ πλείω, ἐλλείμματα τέτταρα καὶ δέκα
Grote (Hist. of Gr.
333) is of opinion that “a total sum of 300 talents or thereabouts had
been levied by all the various property-taxes imposed from the
archonship of N. down to the date of the speech,” . a period of
about twenty-three years; but Lipsius. (Jahrb. f. cl. Phil.
1878, p. 297 ff.) points out in the first place that the sum of 300 talents
is too small, as the aggregate of all property-taxes imposed for
twenty-three years; and, secondly, that since the introduction, of the
arrears could not possibly
accrue. Hence, he concludes, the commission appointed at the instigation of
Androtion to collect all outstanding arrears could only collect such arrears
as had accrued between the archonship of N. and the introduction of the
and the sum of 300 talents
represents the total sum of taxes called for within that period only. Boeckh
i.3 p. 607) thought that the
300 talents here mentioned were levied in the single year of N.; yet
cannot have this
meaning. Fränkel (ad l.c.
ii. p. 120,
App.), not accepting Lipsius' explanation, suspects that the reading of the
passage is corrupt. [SYMMORIA