[312] Glotz, _op. cit._ p. 465 ff.; Dem. _in Arist._ 640. [313] _Laws_, ix. 871E. [314] ὑπὲρ ὧν μὴ διδῷ φόνου δικασάσθαι. CHAPTER II THE DRACONIAN CODE Restored inscription of 409-8 B.C. and author’s explanation: other Draconian homicide-laws derived from Demosthenes: Plato’s code confirms and supplements these data: classification of Attic homicide laws as follows: (_a_) those relating to accidental homicide, to death caused by animals or inanimate objects; and to homicide by persons unknown: (_b_) those relating to justifiable and to justifiably accidental homicide: (_c_) those relating to manslaughter: (_d_) those relating to wilful murder: some problems suggested by these laws: origin of confiscation of property: evolution of State-execution: parricide and kin-slaying: historicity of Plato’s legislation regarding homicide. The only direct source of evidence which we possess for the historical murder-laws of Attica—for the murder-laws of other Greek States we have no direct evidence at all—is a fragmentary inscription of the year 409-8 B.C., containing a few lines written in the old Attic alphabet, which, though ‘restored’ in a manner sufficiently satisfactory to render it trustworthy and intelligible, gives us nevertheless the most rudimentary information about the Attic murder-code. The real value of this inscription has been indicated by Lipsius.[1] The fragments of laws which are found on the inscription are so closely identical with the corresponding portions of the Draconian laws as they are cited by Demosthenes that they must, he says, be regarded as furnishing a convincing proof of the validity of the remaining laws which Demosthenes has cited. Now, these remaining laws are written in the Ionic alphabet, which was used by Athenian writers in the fourth century and in the latter half of the fifth century B.C., and it so happens that the date of the change in the alphabet used in Attic inscriptions, namely, the year 403-2 B.C., was also the date of what Glotz[2] describes as ‘la grande révision législative qui signala l’archontat d’Euclide.’ If, then, any changes occurred in Attic murder-law, in the period which elapsed between Dracon and Eucleides, it was probably in the year 403-2 B.C. that such changes were finally incorporated in the written code. We shall see that there is no reference to the Areopagus in our fragment, but it may of course have been mentioned in the missing portion of the inscription which referred to wilful murder. Pollux and Plutarch[3] state that the Areopagus was created by Solon. We shall see later[4] what elements of truth this dictum may contain. The only change which we believe to have been made in the period from Dracon to Eucleides was the isolation of the Areopagus from the general list of the Ephetae courts.[4] This change we attribute to Solon, and with this exception we accept the murder-laws which are quoted by Demosthenes as the original