78 IIISTORi OF GREECE. formally cast beyond the border. 1 All these distinctions of course imply the preliminary investigation of the case, called anak risis, by the king-archon, in order that it might be known what wad the issue, and where the sittings of the ephetae were to be held. So intimately was the mode of dealing with homicide connect- 1 llarpokration, vv, 'E^ercw, 'E~t Ae/l^mu, 'E?r2 lla?J.adi< l >, 'Ev Qpe Pollux, viii, 119, 124, 125; Photius, v, 'E<j>e-aij Hesychius, tf 4>ptaroi;; Deracsthen. cont. Aristokrat. c. 15-18, pp. 642-645 ; cont. Mukartat. c. 13, p. 1068. When Pollux speaks of the five courts in which the cphct;c judged, he probably includes the arcopagus (see Demosth. cont Aristokrat c. 14, p. 641). About the judges tv ^pearrol, see Aristot. Polit iv, 13, 2. On the general subject of this ancient and obscure criminal procedure, see Matthia:, DJ Judiciis Athenicnsium (in Misccllan. Philologie, vol. i, p. 143, scq.); also Schomann, Antiq. Jur. Pub. Att. sect. 61, p. 288; Plainer, Prozess und Klagen bey den Attikern, b. i, ch. 1 ; and E. W. Weber, Comment, ad Demosthcn. cont. Aristokrat. pp. 627, 641 ; Meier und Schomann, Attisch. Prozess, pp. 14-19. I cannot consider the ephetae as judges in appeal, and I agree with those (Schomann, Antiq. Jur. Pub. Gr. p. 171 ; Meier und Schumann. Attisi-h. Prozess, p. 16; Plainer, Prozess und Klagen, t. i, p. 18) who distrust the etymology which connects this word with l<j>eat/j.o{. The active sense of the word, akin to k^iefiai (JEsch. Prom. 4) and tyETiti), meets the case bet- ter: see 0. Miiller, Prolcgg. ad Mythol. p. 424 (though there is no reason for believing the cpheta? to be older than Drako) : compare, however, K. F. Hermann, Lehrbuch der Griechischen Staats Alterthumcr, sects. 103, 104. who thinks differently. The trial, condemnation, and banishment of inanimate objects which had been the cause of death, was founded on feelings widely diffused throughout the Grecian world (see Pausan. vi, 11, 2; and Theokritus, Idyll, xxiii, 60) : analogous in principle to the English law respecting deodand, and to the spirit pervading the ancient Germanic codes generally (see Dr. C. Triimmer, Die Lehre von dcr Zurechnung, c. 28-38. Hamburg, 1845). The Germanic codes do not content themselves with imposing a general obligation to appease the relatives and gentiles of the slain party, but deter- mine beforehand the sum which shall be sufficient to the purpose, which, in the case of involuntary homicide, is paid to the surviving relatives as a com- pensation ; for the difference between culpable homicide, justifiable homicide, and accidental homicide, see the elaborate treatise of Wilda, Das Deutsche Strafrccht, ch. viii, pp. 544-559, whose doctrine, however, is disputed by Dr. Trammer, in the treatise above noticed. At Rome, according to the Twelve Tables, and earlier, involuntary homi- cide was to be expiated by the sacrifice of a ram (Walter, Geschichte des Romisch. Rechts, sect. 768).
