) and the correlative term φανερὰ
have been variously explained. First, that ἀφανὴς οὐσία
answered to the Roman res incorporales
or intangible property, i. e.
] But this
distinction did not exist in the older Roman law, and it is still less
likely to have occurred to the simpler legal conceptions of the Greeks.
Secondly, that φανερὰ οὐσία
immovable (in English law, real) property, ἀφανὴς
movable property or personalty. This is the opinion of
Böckh, K. F. Hermann, and Schömann, founded on the express
testimony of the grammarians (Harpocrat., Suid., Bekk. Anecd.
1.468); and it is by much the most probable. A third explanation,
originating with M. de Koutorga (Essai sur les trapézites
ou banquiers d'Athènes
), is supported by Caillemer in
Daremberg and Saglio: that φανερὰ οὐσία
meant unconcealed property, en évidence
before the tax-gatherer; ἀφανὴς
the reverse. It would seem that this view rests upon a confusion between the
technical legal phrase φανερὰ οὐσία
the ordinary expressions φανερὸν ἀργύριον, φανερὰ
for “ready money” or “balance at
the banker's.” The following passages, not cited by M. Caillemer,
are, we think, decisive against his view, all referring to the conversion of
real property into money:--Isaeus, Philoctem.
Dem. de Pace,
p. 59.8, and c.
p. 986.9. The words of Harpocration are worth quoting for
their brevity and clearness: Ἀφανὴς οὐσία καὶ
φανερά: ἀφανὴς μὲν ἡ ἐν χρὴμασι καὶ σώμασι καὶ σκεύεσι,
φανερὰ δὲ ἡ ἔγγειος.
Schömann in his latest work
1.180 n., E. T.) remarks on (φανερὰ οὐσία
or immovable property:
“This is at least the predominant signification of the expression,
although it is sometimes used in a more general sense of all property of
every kind which was not concealed.” He refers, as does M.
Caillemer, to Isocr. Trapezit.
§ 7, where however
the expression is τὰ φανερὰ τῶν