682—viz., that the Dorians were properly Achæans, expelled from
their own country after the Trojan war, and afterwards collected and
brought back by one Dorieus.
188 Pind. Pyth. V. 70. In Pyth. I. 61, he calls them descendants of
Pamphylus and the Heraclidæ, not mentioning Dymas. Compare the
fragment of the Isthmians, Ὕλλου στρατὸς Δωριεύς.
189 See Pausan. IV. 2. 1. There are two other passages of Hesiod
referring to the expedition of the Heraclidæ. Schol. Apollon I. 824.
Θεσσάμενος γενεὴν Κλεαδαίου κυδαλίμοιο,
the connexion of which is very obscure (see Bentley ad Callim. Cer.
Calath. 48); and Schol. Pind. Olymp. XI. 79. _e cod. Vratisl_.
Τιμάνδην Ἔχεμος θαλερὴν ποιήσατ᾽ ἄκοιτιν.
From this passage Apollod. III. 10. 6. Pausan. VIII. 5. 1. draw
their materials. This, however, might also occur among the actions
of Hercules, particularly at the first Olympian festival, as may be
seen from Pindar.
190 VI. 52.
191 Compare Pausan. IV. 2. 1. with V. 17. 4. and Valckenar. Diatrib.
Eurip. pp. 58, 59.
192 Herod. ubi sup. et c. 51. Wesseling misinterprets the first passage;
its purport is, “_The Lacedæmonians give a different account from
all the poets, who make Eurysthenes and Procles first come to
Sparta._” Schweighæuser does not see the exact meaning of the
second; the sense is, “_So far is the national tradition of the
Lacedæmonians; in what follows, I relate the common tradition of
Greece._”
193 Herodot. IX. 26.
194 IX. 26.
195 In general the tragic poets successively descend, according to their
age, to a later date of mythological history.
196 Pausan. IV. 2. 1.
197 I take this opportunity of renewing the memory of one of these
Doric-Heraclide leaders, who has been so far forgotten, that in the
passage of Pausanias IV. 30. 1. his name has been driven from the
text. It should be thus written from the MSS.: Ὕλλου δὲ καὶ Δωριέων
μάχῃ κρατηθέντων ὑπὸ Ἀχαιῶν, ἐνταῦθα Ἀβίαν Γλήνου τοῦ Ἡρακλέους
τροφὸν ἀποχωρῆσαι λέγουσι, &c. This Glenus occurs as the son of
Deianira in Apollod. II. 7. 8. and Schol. Soph. Trachin. 53.
Diodorus IV. 37. calls him Gleneus. Pherecydes ap. Schol. Pind.
Isth. IV. 104. reckons him among the children of Megara by Hercules.
198 Ap. Longin. 27. Creuzer. Fragment. p. 54. Apollodorus II. 8. 1.
almost makes it appear that the Heraclidæ had been entertained by
Eurystheus; but this does not agree with what precedes. Euripides
Heraclid. 13. 195. represents them as flying first from Argos to
Trachis, and to Achaia in Thessaly, and then to Athens.
199 Thus Pherecydes in Antonin. Liber. 33. Sturz (Fragm. 50. p. 196.)
does not quite understand this passage.
200 At Marathon, according to most authors. Diodorus IV. 57. mentions
Tricorythus; Compare XII. 45.
201 The outline of the narrative is furnished by Pherecydes and Herod.
IX. 27. the details by Euripides in the Heraclidæ, whose account was
influenced by the circumstances of the time (Boeckh. trag. Gr.
princ. p. 190). Whether the Heraclidæ of Pamphilus (Aristoph. Plut.
385. Schol. ad I. p. 112, Hemsterh.) was a _tragedy_ or a _picture_,
was frequently contested by the ancients. The latter appears to be
most probable: see Winckelmann and Meyer Kunstgeschichte, p. 166.
Pamphilus painted the battle of Phlius, one of those which took
place in the 102nd or 103rd Olympiad; and it may be fairly supposed
that he flourished about Olymp. 97, 4, the year in which the second
edition of the Plutus was brought forward, and he might have lived
to be the master of Apelles, who had obtained great celebrity in the
reign of Philip.—Concerning the battle, see Elmsley ad Eur.
Heraclid. 860; concerning the death of Eurystheus, Wesseling. ad
Diod. IV. 57. and Staveren. Misc. Obs. vol. X. p. 383. Pallene is
between Marathon and Athens;—according to Strabo VIII. p. 377. the
tomb was at Gargettus on the western coast; according to Pausanias
I. 40. in Megaris. Concerning Macaria, see Pausan. I. 32. Schol.
Aristoph. Eq. 1148. Zenob II. 61. and other grammarians in v. βάλλ᾽
εἰς Μακαρíαν. A totally different tradition is preserved by Duris
ap. Schol. Plat. p. 134, Ruhnk. In the above quoted passage of
Strabo, τὴν δὲ κεφαλὴν χωρὶσ ἐν ΤΗΙ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΩΙ, ἀποκόπσαντος αὐτὴν
Ἰολάου περὶ τὴν κρὴνην τὴν Μακαρίαν should probably be written ἐν
ΤΡΙΚΟΡΥΘΩΙ; thus in VIII. p. 383. one MS. has Τρικόρινθος. (In this
correction I now find that I was anticipated by Elmsley ad Eurip.
Heracl. 103.) Heyne indeed (_ad Apollod._ II. 8. 1.) explains ἐν τῇ
Κορίνθῳ of the tomb of Eurystheus in Pausan. I. 44. 14.; but this
was in Megaris, and there never was any change in the boundaries of
Corinth and Megaris. Heyne also considers the tomb near the temple
of the Pallenian Minerva and that at Gargettus as identical; but
this is not possible, on account of the situation of the two
places.—Concerning Gargettus see the article _Attika_ in Ersch’s
Encyclopædia, p. 222.
202 Demosth. de Corona, p. 147.
203 It does not follow from Pindar Pyth. IX. 82. that Iolaus was
restored to life, which must have been alluded to elsewhere. I
follow the second Scholiast, ηὔξατο δὲ τῷ Διὶ ἐπὶ μίαν ὤραν ἡβῆσαι,
&c. Compare Ovid. Met. IX. 408.
204 See book II. ch. 11. § 10.
205 Ap. Antonin. Lib. 33.—There is also a trace of another tradition in
Apostolius XVIII. 7.
206 See book II. ch. 11. § 7.
207 Thus also Thucyd. I. 9. Plat. Leg. III. p. 686. In Schol. Eurip.
Orest. 5. write αὐτοὺς μὲν (the Atridæ) ἀποστῆσαι Λακεδοίμονες, τοὺς
δὲ Περοείδας βασιλεῦσαι. Polyænus I. 10. is singular in mentioning
Eurysthidæ in Sparta at the time of the migration; but by Eurysthidæ
must be meant “_descendants_ of Eurysthenes,” not “Eurysthenes and
his party.” See Clinton F. H. vol. I. p. 333.
208 See particularly Plato ubi sup.
209 Apollod. II. 8. 2. ὁ δὲ θεὸς ἀντεῖπε τῶν ἀτυχημάτων αὑτοὺς αἰτίους
εἶναι. τοὺς γὰρ χρησμοὺς οὐ συμβάλλειν. λέγειν γὰρ οὐ γῆς ἀλλὰ
γενεᾶς καρπὸν τρίτον καὶ στενυγρὰν τὴν εὐρυγάστορα, δεξίαν κατὰ τὸν
Ἰσθμὸν ἔχοντι τὴν θάλασσαν. With the word εὐρυγάστωρ compare κύτους
κοιλογάστορος, Æschyl. Theb. 478. and 1026. In later times, however,
these oracles were put into an epic form, as may be seen from
Œnomaus ap. Euseb. Præp. Ev. V. 20.
210 See Herod. IX. 26. Pausan. I. 41. 3. I. 44. VIII. 5. 1. VIII. 45. 2.
Diod. IV. 58. Schol. Pind. Olymp. N. 80. Van Staveren Misc. Observ.
X. 3. p. 385.
211 Pausan. VIII. 5. Apollod. II. 7. 7. Diod. IV. 58. Strabo IV. p. 427
C. Isocrat. Archidam. p. 119 B. τελευτήσαντος Εὐρυσθέως.
212 Manso, Sparta, vol. I. p. 61.
213 Apollod. II. 8. 3. In Pausan. II. 28. 3. Orsobia, a daughter of
Deiphontes of Epidaurus, is the wife of Pamphylus.
214 He was mentioned by Hesiod; see above, p. 55. note k. [Transcriber’s
Note: No such note on that page, nor any reference to Cleodæus.] A
different genealogy is given by Tzetzes ad Lycophr. 804, viz., that
Cleodæus was the son of Hyllus, the brother of Lichas and Ceyx, the
husband of a certain Peridea, and the father of Temenus.
215 See Crates ap. Tatian. cont. Græcos, p. 107. ed. Oxf. Interpret. ad
Vellei. I. 1.
216 See particularly Œnomaus ap. Euseb. Præp. Ev. V. 20.; and concerning
the second see Apollod. II. 8. 2. Pausan. II. 7.
217 Isocrates Archidam, p. 119, only supposes one expedition.
218 Pausan. V. 3. Eusebius ubi sup. Polyæn. I. 9. Compare Heyne ad
Apollod. p. 208.
219 See Strab. IX. p. 427. Ephorus, p. 105. ed. Marx. Compare Stephanus
and Suidas in Naύpaktoς.
220 Bekk. Anecd. Græc. p. 305. 31. στεμματιαῖον. μίμημα τῶν σχεδιῶν αἷς
ἔπλευσαν οἱ Ἡρακλεῖδαι τὸν μεταξὺ τῶν Ῥίων τόπον. Hesychius,
στεμματιαῖον. δίκηλόν τι ἐν ἑορτῇ πομπέων δαιμόνων (as should be
read for δαίμονος, rather than πομπέως for πομπέων with Siebelis ad
Pausan. III. 20. 9). Δίκηλον is explained by Hesychius to be a
Lacedæmonian word for “statue.” These πομπεῖς δαίμονες, the
“conducting deities,” were probably Zeus Agetor (book III. ch. 12. §
5.) and the Carnean Apollo: and their festival doubtless was
connected with the Carnea. At this solemnity then (as it seems) a
boat was carried round, and upon it a statue of the Carnean Apollo
(Ἀπόλλων στεμματίας), both adorned with lustratory garlands, called
δίκηλον στεμματιαῖον, in allusion to the passage from Naupactus.
Compare book II. ch. 3. § 1. ch. 8. § 15.
221 Paus. III. 20. 9.
222 See _Orchomenos_, p. 333. To the passages there quoted may be added
Etymol. in v. Ἀλήτης. And see book II. ch. 8. § 15.
223 There were in later times Acarnanian soothsayers at Thermopylæ,
Herod. VIII. 221. in the case of Pisistratus, and elsewhere.
224 Thucyd. I. 103. The city was afterwards Ætolian: Boeckh. Corp.
Inscript. Gr. No. 1756.
225 Polyb. Excerpt. lib. XII. ap. Mai, Script. Vet. Nov. Coll. vol. II.
p. 386.
226 And of Pleuron with Xanthippe the daughter of Dorus, Apollod. I. 7.
7, although Ætolus is also represented as killing Dorus the son of
Apollo.
227 Perhaps the Ætolians had from early times worshipped the three-eyed
Zeus (Ζεὺς τριόφθαλμος), which Sthenelus the Ætolian brought from
Troy, according to Pausanias II. 24. 5.
228 Oxylus is said to have contracted an alliance with the Heraclidæ in
the island of Sphacteria (Steph. Byzant.); but this story is
probably founded merely on the etymology of the name Sphacteria.
229 As also Pausanias, V. 1. says.
230 Pausan. ubi sup. Strabo X. p. 463. Compare Il. ψ. 630.
231 This is the representation given by Pausanias V. 4. 1. ἐπὶ ἀναδασμῷ
τῆς χώρας.
232 Pausan. V. 15. 7. Concerning the Tyrrhenians who accompanied them,
see _Orchomenos_, p. 443. note 3, together with Pausan. II. 31. 3.
Of the Thebans, who are said to have joined under Autesion, see a
detailed account in the same place.
233 As, _e.g._, Apollodorus evidently.
234 The name of Tisamenus, as an epithet of his father (τισάμενος),
corresponds to Eurysaces the son of Ajax, Telemachus and
Ptoliporthus of Ulysses, Astyanax of Hector, Nicostratus the
youngest son of Menelaus according to Hesiod, Gorgophone the
daughter of Perseus, Metanastes the son of Archander, Aletes of
Hippotes; but it cannot be inferred from this that it was mere
fiction, since this method of giving names existed in historic times
(Polyæn. VI. 1, 6) even in the royal family of Macedon. See also
what Plutarch de Malignit. Herodot. 39, says on the names of the
children of Adeimantus the Corinthian. Names derived from a
characteristic of the parent (an example of which occurs in Iliad
IX. 562) were called φερώνυμα, according to Schol. Steph. in Dionys.
Gramm. ap. Bekker Anecd. Gr. vol. II. p. 868.
235 Pausan. V. 4, 1. See below, ch. 7, § 6, note.
236 Pausan. VIII. 29, 4. It is related as a stratagem of Cypselus by
Polyænus I. 7. Perhaps _Cypsela_, a fort in Parrhasia, near Sciritis
in Laconia, is the same as Basilis, Thucyd. V. 33. It would not
however be very accurate to say of Basilis that it lies ἐπὶ τῇ
Σκιρίτιδι. An oracle referring to the amity with the Arcadians is
preserved in Schol. Aristid. Panathen. p. 191, ed. Steph.; p. 33,
ed. Frommel.
237 See _Æginetica_, p. 39, note e, and Euripides ap. Strab. VIII. p.
366. Sophocl. Aj. 1287. (comp. Suidas in v. δραπέτης), Hesychius in
ἀνανομὴν and καταβολή.—Plato Leg. III. p. 686. Apollodorus, Polyæn.
I. 6. The vase in Tischbein I. 7, represents an ἀγὼν ὑδροφορικὸς,
and not this casting of lots, as Italinsky supposes. The same group
indeed sometimes occurs on gems _armed_ (Gemmæ Florentinæ, tom. II.
tab. 29; compare Winckelmann Monum. ined. n. 164, vol. III. of his
works, p. xxvii.); but I believe that an ἀγὼν ὑδροφορικὸς is equally
meant, as, _e.g._, that of the Argonauts in Apollon. Rhod. IV. 1767,
since the expedition of the Heraclidæ, early as it was, was not one
of the usual subjects of art.
238 See below, ch. 5.
239 Boeckh Inscr. I. p. 81, 82.
240 In an oracle preserved by Plutarch de Pyth. Orac. 24, p. 289, the
Spartans are called ὀφιοβόροι. The word of the oracle itself
doubtless was ὀφιόδειροι (ὀπφιόδειροι), as in Aristot. Mirab.
Auscult. 23, which however might have been explained to have the
same meaning as the former word, viz. “_drawing back the skin of
serpents in order to eat them_.” The frog was the emblem of the
Argives, as never coming out of their hole; compare ch. 8, § 7.
241 Isocrates, Panath. p. 286 A., says far too generally, μάχῃ δὲ
νικὴσαντες τοὺς μὲν ἡττηθέντας ἔκ τε τῶν πόλεων καὶ τῆς χώρας
ἐξέβαλον, which he afterwards modifies considerably.
242 V. 4, 2. An _Achæan_ from Helice occurs as the cotemporary of
Hercules in Theocrit. XXV. 165; a greater inconsistency with the
received chronology than poets usually permit themselves.
243 Pausan. VII. 1.
_ 244 Orchomenos_, pp. 398, 477.
245 Aristot. Pol. V. 8, according to the most probable reading.
246 Pind. Nem. XI. 32.
247 Peloponnesus is called the ἀκρόπολις γῆς in Phlegon de Olymp. p.
129, in Meurs. Op. vol. VII.
248 As Pouqueville several times remarks. The mountain-chains are more
connected by the Œnean promontory, and the mountains running
westward from Sicyon and joining mount Cyllene.
249 Ap. Gemin. Elem. Astron. XIV. p. 55, in Petavius Uranolog. The
passage is from the work of Dicæarchus, entitled Καταμετρήσεις τῶν
ἐν Πελοποννήσῳ ὀρῶν, concerning which see Pliny N. H. II. 65, and
Suidas in Δικαίαρχος.
250 Apollodorus ap. Steph. Byz. (p. 400, ed. Heyne.) Eustath. ad Hom. p.
1951, 15. According to Capt. Peytier Cyllene is 7266 Paris feet in
height, Taygetus 7434, Parthenion (Zagura) 6095. These measurements
make Taygetus somewhat higher than Cyllene.
251 Holland in Walpole’s Travels, p. 426.
252 Aristot. Meteorol. I. 13.
253 See Polybius IV. 21, 1, who particularly mentions Cynætha. Close by
was the cold spring of Λοῦσοι, or Λοῦσσα; and Sprengel in his
translation of Theophrastus, vol. II. p. 383, well corrects in
Theophrast. IX. 15, 8, τὸ δὲ κώνειον ἄριστον περὶ Λοῦσα καὶ ἐν τοῖς
ψυχροτάτοις τόποις.
254 From the Journal of Fourmont the younger.
255 Polyb. V. 22.
256 According to the interpretation of the Venetian Scholiast and
others.
257 Abaris is said to have appeased a pestilence, which had been
occasioned by this heat; Jamblich. in Vit. Pythagor. 19. Compare
Apollon. Dyscol. Hist. Mirab. c. 4, p. 9, ed. Meurs.
258 Theophrastus calls Laconia ῥοώδης, ἔπομβρος, καὶ ἔλειος (de causis
pluviæ III. 3, 4).
259 ῥωχμοὺς ἀπὸ σεισμῶν ἔχουσα, Eustath. ad Hom. p. 294, 10, p. 1478,
43, ed. Rom.
260 See Des Monceaux in Corneille le Bruyn, tom. V. p. 465.
261 Alcman ap. Athen. I. p. 31 C. Theognis, v. 879 sq. ed. Bekker.
262 Book III. ch. 2, § 3. Boeckh’s Economy of Athens, book IV. ch. 19.
263 Ἀλιμενότης, Xenoph. Hell. IV. 8, 7.
264 In Strabo VIII. p. 366. See Cresphont. fr. 1, ed. Dindorf.
265 It has been beautifully said of this district that ὀφρυᾷ τε καὶ
κοιλαίνεται, Strabo VIII. p. 381.
266 Polybius XVI. 16. 4. places it about west-south-west from Corinth.
Comp. Athenæus II. p. 43 E. Pindar Olymp. XI. 30. means the same
place.
267 Aristot. Meteor. I. 14. p. 755 C, and Aristides, Ægypt. vol. II. p.
351, ed. Jebb.
268 Athen. V. p. 219 A. Lucian. Icaromenipp. 18. Nav. 20. Liv. XXVII.
31. Schol. Aristoph. Av. 969. Zenobius III. 57.
269 According to Fourmont’s Journal and Gell’s Argolis.
270 See Schol. Pind. Olymp. VII. 152. Boeckh Comment. Pind. p. 175.
Siebelis ad Pausan. II. 25, 6.
271 Elis in general is a χώρα ὕπαμμος, according to Theophrastus, Hist.
Plant. I. 6.
272 I here follow the Journal of the younger Fourmont, which appears
deserving of credit: he also states that he saw iron rings on the
blocks of stone.
273 Compare with this _Orchomenos_, chap. 2.
274 See Schol. Eurip. Orest. 626. comp. Manso, Sparta, vol. I. p. 11.
275 Strabo VIII. p. 363 A.
276 Polyb. V. 22. 6.
277 Thucyd. I. 120. κατακομιδὴ τῶν ὡραίων.
278 See book III. ch. 10. § 2, 5.
279 Isocrates Panath. p. 286 C, says, that in the most ancient times
there were only 2000 Dorians in Sparta; but his statement is too
uncertain to found any calculation upon.
280 See Boeckh on the four ancient tribes of Attica, Museum Criticum,
vol. II. p. 608.
281 Pausan. VII. 1. 6, 7.
282 Pausan. VII. 18. 3, book III. ch. 4, § 8.
283 Clarke’s Travels, II. 2. p. 646, &c.
284 Below, ch. 5. § 1 and 8.
285 See Thucyd. I. 122. III. 85, and the example of Decelea.
286 Εὐρυσθέος Κυκλώπια πρόθυρα, Pindar. Fragment. Incert. 48, ed.
Boeckh.
287 πολυχρυσοῖο Μυκήνης, Homer. Compare book IV. ch. 1.
288 Fourmont supposes that he has recognised Temenium in a citadel to
the south of Lerna, but it must lie to the north.
289 See Callimach. Fragm. 108. ed. Bentl. from Schol. Pind. Nem. X. 1.
Concerning the taking of Argos see Polyæn. II. 12.
290 Plutarch. Qu. Gr. 48. p. 404. Cf. Schol. Callim. Pall. 37.
291 Pausan. II. 28. 3. The names given by Apollodorus II. 7. 6., viz.
Agelaus, Euryphylus, and Callias, are probably from the Temenidæ of
Euripides. Ceisus and Phalces are mentioned by Ephorus ap. Strab.
VIII. p. 389. Scymn. Chi. V. 525 sq. Pausan. II. 6. 4. II. 12. 6.
II. 13. 1. Ceisus is also mentioned by Hyginus, Fab. 124 (where read
_Cisus_ Temeni filius); but his account is very confused. See
_Æginetica_, p. 40.
292 Pausan. II. 6. 3. Eustath. ad Il. V. p. 520. Stephanus Byzant. says
Φαῖστος Ῥοπάλου, Ἡρακλέους παιδός.
293 Νύμφης Συλλίδος; I conjecture Ὑλλίδος.
294 Fourmont’s Journal contains a detailed and accurate account of this
river.
295 Pausan. II. 11. 2.
296 Pausan. II. 13. 1. ἐπ᾽ ἀναδασμῷ γῆs.
297 Pausan. ubi sup. and VII. 3. 5.
298 Pausan. III. 16. 5. Θερσάνδρου τοῦ Ἀγαμηδίδα, βασιλεύοντος μὲν
ΚΛΕΕΣΤΩΝΑΙΩΝ, τετάρτου δὲ ἀπογόνου Κτησίππου τοῦ Ἡρακλέους. Since
some Doric state must be here meant, ΚΛΕΩΝΑΙΩΝ, the conjecture of
Kühn, seems most probable; and all doubt is removed by a comparison
of Ælian N.A. XII. 31., where, however, Thersander is called the son
of Cleonymus, not of Agamedidas. Perhaps Pausanias means
“Thersander, the son of the son of Agamedes.”
299 Sophocl. Acris. ap. Hesych. in ἀκτίης. Scymnus Chius 526. from
Ephorus, Polyb. V. 91. 8. Conon. 7. Diodor. XII. 43. XV. 32. XVIII.
11. Strab. VIII. p. 389. Ælian. V. H. VI. 1. Plutarch. Demetr. 25.
Pausan. II. 8. 4. Ἐπιδαύριοι καὶ Τροιζήνιοι, ὁι τὴν Ἀργολίδα ἀκτὴν
ἔχοντες. It is different from the Ἀργολικὸς κόλπος, which is the
south coast.
300 Concerning these doubtful names (Ἀγαῖος, Ἀγραῖος), see _Æginet_. p.
40. The name was common in Macedonia in later times; see Harpocrat.
in Ἀργαῖος.
301 This is stated by Pausanias. See also Jamblichus Pythagor. 2.
concerning the Epidaurian colony in Samos. Aristotle ap. Strab.
VIII. p. 314, states that the Ionians came _together with_ the
Heraclidæ from the Attic Tetrapolis to Epidaurus. The former account
is by far the most probable.
_ 302 Æginet_. p. 43.
303 Pausan. II. 30. 9.
304 Book II. ch. 2, § 8. According to Pausanias II. 30. 9. Anaphlystus
and Sphettus, the sons of Trœzen, passed over to Attica, and gave
their names to the two boroughs so called. See Appendix II.
305 Pausan. II. 33. 1.
306 Pyth. IV. 49.
307 Strab. VIII. p. 312. 377.
308 Plutarch. de Def. Orac. p. 620. Paus. X. 18. 4.
309 See book III. ch. 4, § 2.
310 This is evident from Thucyd. V. 53. Κυριώτατοι τοῦ ἱεροῦ ἦσαν
Ἀργεῖοι.
311 Ibid. According to Diodorus XII. 18. the Lacedæmonians were bound to
send sacrifices to Apollo Pythaëus (Πύθιος); but his account is
confused.
312 Pausan. II. 35. 2. 36. 5. Compare book II. ch. 3. § 4.
313 Above, ch. 2, § 4.
314 Pausan. II. 28. 2. 34. 6.
315 Steph. Byz. in Νέμεα, where, from the context, τῆσ Ἀργολίδος should
be written for Ἠλίδος.
316 II. 8.
317 Conon. 26. Etymol. Mag. in Ἀλήτης.
318 Compare p. 72, note f.
319 Aristot. ap. Proverb. Vatic. IV. 4. Μηλιακὸν πλοῖον. Compare
Apostol. XIX. 89, and Suidas, Diogenianus VII. 31, explains it
differently.
320 Δέχεται καὶ βῶλον Ἀλήτης. See Duris in Plutarch. Prov. Alex. 48. p.
593. Diogenian IV. 27. Zenobius III. 22. Suidas in δέχεται, Schol.
Pind. Nem. VII. 155. Perhaps Suidas in ἀδηλώσας refers to this
story.
_ 321 Orchomenos_, p. 352. See also Plutarch. Qu. Gr. 13. The delivery of
a clod of earth (a common symbol of transfer of possession of land,
Grimm Rechtsalterthümer, p. 110-21) also occurs in the history of
the Ionic colony, Lycophron 1378. and Tzetzes Chil. XIII. p. 468. v.
112.
322 Thucyd. IV. 42. Compare Polyæn. I. 39.
323 Schol. Pind. Olymp. XIII. 56.
324 Didymus Schol. Pind. Olymp. XIII. 17. Conon ubi sup. Compare
Diodorus in Euseb. Chronic. p. 35. (Fragment. 6. p. 635. Wessel.)
Ephorus in Strab. VIII. p. 389 D, and Scymnus Chius, 526.
325 According to Velleius Paterc.
326 IV. 42.
_ 327 Orchomenos_, p. 140. According to Conon ubi sup. Aletes found
Sisyphidæ and Ionians mixed with them.
_ 328 Orchomenos_, p. 257.
329 II. 4. 3.
330 Pindar. Olymp. XIII. 11. Compare Boeckh’s Commentary, p. 213.
Callimachus ap. Plutarch. Symp. Qu. V. 3. p. 213. Ἀλητιάδαι παρ᾽
Αἰγαιῶνι θεῷ Θήσουσιν νίκης σύμβολον Ἰσθμιάδος Ζήλῳ τῶν Νεμέηθε.
331 Herodot. V. 92. 2. This perhaps may afford some explanation of the
ancient affinity between the Cypselidæ and Philaidae (see Herodot.
VI. 128.), by a comparison of the table, _Orchomenos_, p. 465.
332 II. 4. 4. compare V. 18. 2.
333 See Blanchard Recherches sur la ville de Mégare, Mém. de l’Acad. des
Inscr. tom. XVI. p. 121.
334 Herodot. V. 76. Lycurg. in Leocrat. p. 196. Strabo IX. p. 293. XIV.
p. 653. Conon 26. Scymnus Chius, 503.
335 See Raoul-Rochette III p. 56. who has omitted the remarkable passage
of Pausan. VII. 25. according to which the Lacedæmonians had partly
taken Athens. There was at Athens a Delphian _gens_ named
Cleomantidæ, whose ancestor was said to have communicated to the
Athenians the prophecy concerning the king’s death, Lycurgus in
Leocrat. p. 196.
336 Lycophr. 1388. and Tzetzes’ note.
337 See particularly Schol. Pind. Nem. VII. 155. Schol. Aristoph. Ran.
440. Pausan. I. 39. 4.
338 Schol. Pind. et Aristoph. ubi sup. According to Zenobius V. 8. the
Megarians mourned for a daughter of their own king Clytius, and of
Bacchius the Corinthian.
339 This event is always narrated in explanation of the proverb; see
Schol. Pind. ubi sup. Schol. Plat. Euthydem. pag. 97. edit. Ruhnken.
and Schol. Aristoph. Ran. 440 (from Demon). Compare Aristoph.
Eccles. 828. Zenob. III. 21. Vatic. Prov. III. 13. Apostolius VII.
17. XIV. 97. Suidas, Hesychius, Dissen ad Pind. ubi sup. It is
probably of this victory of the Megarians that Pausanias (VI. 19.
9.) had read in some document that it took place before the
commencement of the Olympiads, when Phorbas was archon for life at
Athens; but in my opinion he is incorrect in referring it to a
treasury of Dontas the Lacedæmonian (Olymp. 60.), the inscription of
which spoke indefinitely of a victory of the Megarians over the
Corinthians, in which the Argives were supposed to have had a share.
Phorbas was archon from the 173rd to the 148th year before the first
Olympiad, according to Eusebius.
340 Thucyd. I. 103. Diod. XI. 79. Plutarch Cimon. 17. It was probably in
some war of this kind that Orsippus of Megara enlarged the territory
of his native city, according to Etymol. M. p. 242; he was conqueror
in the 15th Olympiad, see book IV. ch. 2. note. Pausan. I. 44. 1.
and the epigram in Anthol. Pal. II. App. 272. See Siebelis ad
Pausan. ubi sup.
341 See the account in Plutarch. Qu. Gr. 17. p. 387.
342 Above, ch. 3. § 11.
343 See above, ch. 3. § 3.
344 Called in the Doric dialect Προκλέας, Kühn ad Pausan. III. 1.
According to Polyænus I. 10. Procles and Temenus together conquered
Lacedæmon.
345 Herod. VI. 52. and it is followed by Xen. Agesil. 8. Plutarch.
Agesil. 19. [The same is preserved in a fragment of Alcæus (Mus.
Crit. I. p. 432) ὡς γὰρ δή ποτε φασίν Ἀριστόδαμον ἐν Σπάρτᾳ λόγον
οὐκ ἀπάλαμνον εἰπεῖν, as Niebuhr has remarked. History of Rome, vol.
I. note 94. ed. 2.]
346 The words of the oracle, which Herodotus paraphrases, probably were
μᾶλλον δὲ γεραίτερον ἔστι γεραίρειν.
347 V. 16. Also in Plato Leg. III. p. 683. Megillus the Spartan, to the
question καὶ βασιλεὺς μὲν—Λακεδαίμονος Προκλῆς καὶ Εὐρυσθένης;
answers, πῶς γὰρ οὐ, against his national tradition.
348 Pindar Pyth. I. 65. says that the Dorians, “coming down from Pindus,
immediately took Amyclæ.” Compare Boeckh Comment, p. 479. This is
equally fallacious with his other statement, that Pylos fell at the
invasion, see below, § 15. According to Ephorus ap. Strab. p. 364
D., Philonomus the Achæan, who had betrayed Lacedæmon to the
Dorians, received Amyclæ from them as a reward for his treachery,
and held the νόμος Ἀμυκλαῖος (to which his name seems to allude) as
a vassal. Compare Conon Narr. 36. Nicol. Damasc. p. 445. Vales.
349 Servius ad Æn. X. 564. and Lucilius, ibid, compare Heyne Excurs. II.
ad Æn. X. Sosibius ap. Zenob. Prov. I. 54.
350 Pausan. III. 2. 6. ib. 12. 7. ib. 19. 5. The temple was still
standing in his time. Compare _Orchomenos_, p. 313-321.
351 Pausan. VII. 6. 2. where Preugenes, their leader, is stated to have
been descended from Amyclas.
352 Polyb. V. 19. 2.
353 Ap. Schol. Eurip. Orest. 46. Simonides fragm. 177. ed. Gaisford.
354 Εὔπυργος Θεράπια, ap. Priscian. p. 1328. Fragm. 1. ed. Welcker.
355 Isthm. I. 31.
356 Ἐν γυάλοις Θεράπνας Pindar Nem. X. 55. The δόκανα were, according to
some, tombs of this description.
357 See Dissen’s Commentary to Pindar ubi sup. p. 471.—Concerning Helen
at Therapne, see Euripid. Hel. 211. and Tryphiod. 520. Schol.
Lycophr. 143. Isocrat. Encom. Hel. p. 218 D. ἔτι γὰρ καὶ νῦν ἐν
Θεράπναις (Μενελάῳ καὶ Ἑλένῃ) θυσίας ἁγίας καὶ πατρίους ἐπιτελοῦσιν
οὐχ ὡς ἤρωσιν ἀλλ᾽ ὡσ θεοῖς. Concerning the Menelaia, see
Athenagoras Leg. p. 14. A. Θεραπναῖος Ἀπόλλων Apollon. Rhod. II.
162. Therapne, according to some, was ἐν Σπάρτῃ, Schol. Apollon. et
Pind. ubi sup.; according to other authors, referred to by Steph.
Byz., it was Sparta itself. Both are in the wrong.
358 It was first discovered by Gropius.
359 Polyb. ubi sup. See ch. 4. § 3.
360 Od. B. 327. 359. A. 459. N. 412. 414. The passage in Od. A. 10. is
also to be explained in this manner.
361 Pausan. III. 2. 6.
362 Pausan. III. 2. 7. Phlegon Trallianus ap. Euseb. Arm. p. 130.
According to Strabo VIII. p. 365 A. however it was conquered by
Agis. Concerning a war between Sparta and its periœci in the time of
Lycurgus, see Nicol. Damas. fragm.
363 Pausan. III. 22. 9.
364 See above, ch. 3. § 4.
365 This is now evident from the restoration of the fragment of Ephorus
in Strabo VIII. p. 364 D. Χρῆσθαι δὲ ΛΑΙ ΜΕΝ ὀ[χυρώματι, Ἐπιδαύρῳ
(or Γυθείῳ) δὲ ἐμπορίῳ διὰ τὸ] εὐλίμενον, ΑΙΓΥΙ δὲ πρὸς τοὺς
πολεμίους [ἐπιτειχισμῷ, ταύτην] γὰρ ὁμορεῖν τοῖς κύκλῳ [πολεμίοις],
ΦΑΡΙΔΙ δὲ [εἰς συνόδους] ἀπὸ τῶν ἐντος ἀσφάλειαν ἐχούσῃ. Polybius
II. 54. 3. calls Αἰγῦτις a boundary-district of Sparta, where no
alteration is required. See Meursius ad Lycophr. 831.
366 The νόμος Ἀμυκλαῖος according to Nicol. Damasc.
367 See Steph. Byz. and Pausanias. The Διοσκοῦροι Λαπέρσαι are derived
from this town.
368 Ὑαμεία πόλις Μεσσηνίων τῶν πέντε, Stephanus Byz. Compare Pausan. IV.
14. 3. Μεσόλα πόλις Μεσσήνης μία τῶν πέντε. Νικόλαος τετάρτῳ,
Stephanus. From this Ephorus in Strabo VIII. p. 361 C. should be
thus restored, ὤστε τὴν Στενύκλαρον μὲν ἐν τῷ μέσῳ τῆς χώρας παύτης
κειμένην ἀποδεῖξαι βασίλειον αὑτῷ τῆς βασιλείας, πέμψαι δὲ ἐς Πύλον
τε καὶ Ῥίον [καὶ Μεσόλαν καὶ] Ὑαμῖτιν ποιήσοντας ἰσονόμους πάντας
τοῖς Δωριεῦσι τοὺς Μεσσηνίους. Compare Μεσόλα καθήκουσα εἰς τὸν
μεταξὺ κόλπον τοῦ Ταυγέτου καὶ τῆς Μεσσηνίας, Strab. VIII. p. 360;
Ῥίον ἀπεναντίον Ταινάρου, ibid.
369 The same termination may be observed in the name of the ancient
Laconian city Ἱππό-λα, Pausan. III. 26. 6. Steph. Byz.; and in the
ancient gentile name of Argos, Ἀργό-λας.
370 See Herodotus, Pausanias, Cicero de Divin. II. 43.
371 Cicero ut sup.
372 See above, p. 90. note n. [Transcriber’s Note: This is the footnote
to “Epidaurus,” starting “Pausan. III. 16. 5.]”
373 See Valckenaer. ad Theocrit. Adoniaz. p. 266.
374 Plutarch. Lycurg. 2, 3.
375 Plutarch. Lycurg. 2. Lac. Apophth. p. 234.
376 From what is not clear, though probably from the Μέσση of the
Homeric Catalogue, the position of which is however quite uncertain,
since it is not connected with the _city_ of Messene.
_ 377 Orchomenos_, p. 366. The territory of Pylos had, according to the
tradition in Pausan. IV. 15. 4. once extended as far as Καπροῦ σῆμα,
near Stenyclarus.
378 Cresphontes, as well as Aristomenes, were names in Messenia in late
days, Boeckh Inscript. No. 1291.
379 Ap. Strab. p. 633 B. He was one of the Colophonians who had settled
in Smyrna.
380 Strabo, p. 355 D. Pausanias IV. 3. 3. and others speak too generally
of the expulsion of the Nestoridæ.
381 Pausan. IV. 18. 1. IV. 23. 1. Pindar Pyth. V. 70. is not so
accurate; Λακεδαίμονι ἀν Ἄργει τε καὶ ζαθέᾳ Πύλῳ ἔνασσεν ἀλκᾶντας
Ἡρακλέος ἐκγόνους Ἀἰγιμιοῦ τε (Ἀπόλλων).
382 Apollod. II. 8. 5. Pausan. IV. 3. VIII. 5. 5. Isocrates Archidam. p.
120. represents the Lacedæmonians as having long governed Messenia,
which had been given them by the sons of Cresphontes. Euripides in
the Merope told the story as follows:—viz. that Polyphontes killed
Cresphontes, and obtained possession of his queen Merope and of his
empire: that on this her son Telephon, whom Merope had sent to a
friend in Ætolia, returned, and, after various tragic scenes, slew
the usurper by stratagem. See the fragments of the Merope, and
Hyginus, Fab. 137, with the continuation in Fab. 184. The narrative
of Apollodorus is made to coincide more with the national tradition.
383 The pedigree is, Æpytus—Cypselus—Merope—Æpytus—Æpytidæ.
384 As it is evident from several passages in the 4th book of Pausanias.
385 II. 171.
386 Pausan. IV. 20. 2. 26. 5, 6. 27. 4. 33. 5. It is to this time
probably that Methapus the Athenian belongs, who restored the
ancient worship of Andania, with some few changes, Pausan. IV. 1. 5.
387 Leg. III. p. 684.
388 In the following discussion, although beginning somewhat in advance,
I still take for granted what is stated in my _Æginetica_, p. 42.
The ancient expression Λιμοδωριεῖς was referred to this migration.
See Hesychius, Plutarch, Prov. 34. p. 590. Yet Didymus in Hesychius
calls the Dorians who dwelt under mount Œta Λιμοδωριεῖς. See above,
page 44. note e. [Transcriber’s Note: This is the footnote to
“Dorians as inhabitants of the sea-coast.”]
389 The Rhodians came from Argos, according to Thucyd. VII. 57. The
Coans were also of Argive origin, according to Tacit. Ann. XII. 61.
390 The Eratidæ refer to Argos, according to the note of Boeckh, Explic.
ad Pind. Olymp. VII. p. 165. Cleobulus also was a Heraclide,
according to Diog. Laert. I. 6. § 89.
391 There were different ways of making the 100 towns of Crete mentioned
in the Iliad agree with the 90 in the Odyssey, as may be seen from
Schol. Venet. Catal. 156.—According to Ephorus, Althæmenes founded
10 cities in Crete, so that in the time of Ulysses there were only
90, but in Homer’s time 100. Strabo X. p. 479. This was the manner
in which Ephorus wrote history. “Pylæmenes the Lacedæmonian” in the
Venetian Scholiast is probably only a corruption of the name. Conon
47. derives the Tripolis of Rhodes from Althæmenes.
392 VII. 99.
393 We find in both the worship of serpents, incubation, the custom of
votive tablets, &c.
394 Pausan. III. 23. 4.
395 Sprengel’s Geschichte der Medicin, vol. I. pp. 343. 326. new edit.
396 Rhod. Orat. II. p. 396.—Concerning the Asclepiadæ in Cnidos, see
particularly Theopompus in Phot. cod. 176.
397 Sprengel, ibid. p. 554.
398 Vitruvius II. 8. 12. _Cum Melas et Areuanius ab Argis et Trœzene
coloniam communem eo loco induxerunt, barbaros Caras et Lelegas
ejecerunt_.—The 1200 years, mentioned by Tacitus, from the time of
its founding to Tiberius, must be taken as a round number.
399 The religious ceremonies of Halicarnassus, as shown on its coins,
can be completely traced up to their origin. The head of Medusa, and
of Athene, the trident, and head of Hephæstus, belong to the worship
of Athene and Hephæstus at Trœzen and Athens: the tripod, lyre, and
heads of Apollo and Demeter to the _sacra Triopia_. At _Cos_ the
insignia of Æsculapius predominated, besides those of Hercules as
father of Pheidippus.
400 Callimach. ap. Steph. in v. Ἁλικάρνασσος. compare _Æginetica_, p.
140.
401 Vitruvius, ubi sup.
402 See book II. ch. 3. § 5.
403 Dionys. Hal. Rom. Hist. IV. 25. probably ascribes to it too much
influence.
404 Herodot. I. 144.
405 According to the account of Gelon’s ancestors in Herodot. VII. 153.
406 Compare Herodotus with Diod. V. 54.
407 Diod. ubi sup.
408 Scymnus Chius, 549. Probably with the colony of Althæmenes.
_ 409 E.g._ ε [δοξε] ταυ βουλαι και τωι δαμωι φιλ ... θενευς επεστατει
γνωμα πρυ [τανιων], &c. from Villoison’s papers.
410 See the quotations in Villoison in the Mém. de l’Acad. des Inscr.
tom. XLVII. p. 287. An inscription among his papers refers to the
building of the temple of Apollo and Aphrodite at that place. The
worship of Aphrodite appears to indicate a Laconian colony.
411 Concerning Pholegandrus, see Mém. de l’Acad. tom. XLVII. p. 307.
339.
412 Paus. II. 30. 8. Raoul-Rochette is wrong in stating that Scylax
declares Caryanda to have been Doric.
413 Herodot. V. 121. Ἡρακλείδης Ἰβανωλίος, ἀνὴρ Μυλασεὺς as leader of
the Carians.
414 Plut. de Mul. Virt. p. 271. 4. Polyæn. VIII. 56. According to
Lycophron, v. 1388. the Doric colony also possessed Thingrus and
Satnium, which were places in Caria, according to Tzetzes, in whose
notes Ἰκαρίας should be twice altered into Καρίας.
415 Concerning Noricum, see below, § 11. The coins of Synnada have
ΣΥΝΝΑΔΕΩΝ ΔΩΡΙΕΩΝ; also ΣΥΝΝ. ΙΩΝΩΝ, and both together; also the
expression Καστολοῦ (better Καστωλοῦ) πεδίον Δωριεών, Stephan. Byz.
Xenophon mentions it twice in the Anabasis, without precisely
stating its position.
416 Compare Steph. Byz. in Ἀραὶ, Ἰωνίας (this is false. They were
situated between Syme and Cnidos, Athenæus VI. p. 262.) νῆσοι τρεῖς
οὅτω λεγομέναι διὰ τὰς ἀρὰς, ἅς Δωριεῖς ἐποιήσαντο πρὸς τοὺς
Πενταπολίτας, ὡς Ἀριστείδης. According to Dieuchidas in Athenæus,
the curse was in the time of Triopas and Phorbas.
417 Polyb. XVI. 12. 1.
418 See the decree of the Jasians, which includes that of the
Calymnians, in the Doric dialect: Boeckh. Corp. Ins. Gr. No. 2671.
419 Strabo VIII. p. 374, endeavours to give the tradition an historical
colouring by supposing that Pelops drove away _Anthes_. compare XIV.
p. 656. Apollod. ap. Steph. in Ἁλικάρνασσος.
420 Ap. Steph. Raoul-Rochette also perceives this, tom. III. p. 31.
421 II. 30. 8.
422 Steph. Byz. in Ἀθῆναι. Hence Athens is called the son of Poseidon,
Paus. II. 30, &c. Concerning the Antheadæ as priests of Poseidon see
an Halicarnassian inscription in Corp. Inscript. No. 2655, and
Boeckh’s Commentary. It is well known that Posidonia in the south of
Italy received the worship of Poseidon and also its name, from a
Trœzenian colony.
423 Indeed Pindar appears to represent him as dwelling at Argos, the
native place of the descendants of Hercules, at a time when all the
Heraclidæ were there living together undisturbed; and from Argos he
sails to Rhodes.
424 Olymp. VII. 24. Concerning the mother of Tlepolemus, see the
epigram, quoted below, p. 121 note s. [Transcriber’s Note: This is
the footnote to “epigram of Aristotle,” starting “Peplus Troj.”.]
425 In Iliad E. 628 sqq. there is no necessity for assuming that the
poet intended to represent Tlepolemus as a Rhodian. In the
catalogue, indeed, four insular Greeks are mentioned, Nireus of
Syme, Antiphus and Phidippus of Cos, and Tlepolemus of Rhodes (Il.
B. 653-680). But of these the three first are not elsewhere
mentioned. Tlepolemus therefore remains the only Greek, of the
Asiatic colonies, on the Achæan side, in the Iliad; and the
connexion of the catalogue with the other parts of the poem does not
seem to intimate as to prove this exception to have been intended by
the writer of the fifth book. Tlepolemus must therefore be
considered as a Grecian of the mother country. I feel convinced,
that, according to Homer, no enemy of Troy comes from the eastern
side of the Ægæan sea. Concerning the numerous differences between
the catalogue and the genuine Homeric traditions, see the author’s
History of the Literature of ancient Greece, ch. 2, § 9.
426 Il. B. 668. When Strabo XIV. p. 653, states that Tlepolemus did not
lead out Dorians, but Achæans and Bœotians (as a Heraclide of
Thebes), he does not follow any ancient tradition, but the
chronological system of his times. The ancestors of Theron of Rhodes
(Schol. Pind. Olymp. II. 14.) have no reference to this: and
Raoul-Rochette, tom. II. p. 272, mixes various accounts.
427 See book II. ch. 12. § 6.
428 Peplus Troj. Her. Epig. 27.
429 Book II. ch. 11. § 4.
430 See particularly Etymol. Mag. p. 219. 8. also Raoul-Rochette, tom.
III. p. 157.
431 Hecatæus ap. Stephan. Byz.
432 As Raoul-Rochette, tom. III. p. 251. clearly shews from Herodotus
and Aristænetus περὶ Φασηλίδος ap. Steph. Byz. in Γέλα and other
words.
433 Eckhel D. N. III. p. 68. According to Strab. XIV. p. 671 D. Ῥοδίων
καὶ Ἀχαιῶν, which Raoul-Rochette, tom. III. p. 379, proposes to
refer to Achæa in Rhodes, and leave out καὶ, but the Gentile name
would be rather Ἀχαιεὺς than Ἀχαῖος. Solon, the Lindian, of Rhodes,
is called the founder of this Soli in Cilicia, Vita Arati, vol. I.
p. 3. vol. II. p. 444. Buhle.
434 Both names in Etymol. Magn. in v. Γέλα.
435 Herodot. VII. 153. The coins of Telos have the head of Jupiter and
the _Crab_, like those of Agrigentum; the last symbol is also on
those of Cos and Lindus.
436 Thucyd. VI. 4.
437 According to the spurious letters, which are correctly treated of by
Bentley in several passages of his Dissertation (without, however,
noticing the historical connexion), and also by Lennep in the notes.
438 According to Hippostratus ad Pind. Pyth. VI. 4.
439 Compare, besides Meursius, Heyne, Nov. Comment. Gotting. II. cl.
philol. p. 40 sqq. That Lyons was a Rhodian colony, has, though
without any grounds, been lately maintained, after Father Colonia,
by count Wilgrin de Tailefer, Antiquités de Vésone.
440 See Raoul-Rochette, tom. II. p. 124. who also believes in the
victory of Perseus over Sardanapalus.
441 See particularly Dio Chrysost. Orat. Tars. 33, pp. 394, 406, 408.
Hercules was called ἀρχηγὸς, and on the day of his festival a
funeral pile was built to his honour; compare Athenæus V. p. 215 B.
on the Stephanephorus or priest of Hercules at Tarsus.
442 Raoul-Rochette, tom. II. p. 403 sqq.
443 Steph. Byz. in Ἰώνη.
444 The arrival of Diomede the Argive among the Daunians may likewise
refer to the founding of Elpiæ. He is said to have come with
_Dorians_. Antonin. Liber. 37.
445 Polyb. Exc. Leg. XX. 7. Il. Liv. XXXVII. 56.
446 Ap. Strab. XIV. p. 676.
447 Steph. Byz. in Γέλα. Compare Athen. VII. p. 297, from the Ὦροι
Κολοφωνίων of Heropythus, and Philostephanus περὶ τῶν ἐν Ἀσίᾳ
πόλεων.
448 Book II. ch. 2, § 7.
449 Pompon. Mela I. 14. The tradition is very ancient. Strab. XIV. p.
668. from Callinus. τοὺς λαοὺς μετὰ Μόψου τὸν Ταῦρον ὑπερθέντας τοὺς
μὲν ἐν Παμφυλίᾳ μεῖναι, τοὺς δ᾽ ἐν Κιλικίᾳ μερισθῆναι καὶ Συρίᾳ,
μέχοι καὶ Φοινίκης. Concerning Mopsus in Pamphylia, see also Clem.
Alex. Strom. I. p. 334.
450 Strab. XIV. p. 675, and others.
451 Philosteph. ubi sup.
452 Rhodia, near Phaselis, is also without doubt a Rhodian colony; and
Mopsus (Theopompus ap. Phot. cod. 176) was the founder merely in the
above sense. In the same manner probably Lyrnessus; compare
Raoul-Rochette, tom. II. p. 404 sqq., who, however, has not
perceived any thing of all this.
453 De Div. I. 40.
454 Book II. ch. 2. § 7.
455 Thucyd. III. 102.
456 See § 10.
457 For what Plutarch. Amator. and Diodor. Exc. II. 228. p. 548. Wess.
relate of the expulsion of Archias, is stated by the Scholiast to
Apollonius IV. 1211, of the family of the Bacchiadæ. The former
affirm the accidental murder of the son of Melissus to have been the
cause of the founding of Syracuse, the latter of that of Corcyra.
Yet this is contradicted by the Parian Marble, I. 47. Archias
δέκατος ἀπὸ Τημένου, since the Bacchiadæ derived themselves from
Aletes, not Temenus. In either case Archias is an Heraclide. See
Boeckh. Explic. ad Pind. Olymp. 6. p. 153. Compare Göller de situ
Syracusarum, p. 5. sq.
458 Strab. VII. p. 380 D.
459 Strab. VI. p. 269. Compare Scymnus Chius, v. 274.
460 See Boeckh’s Introduction to the sixth Olympiad.
461 Book II. ch. 9. § 4. ch. 10. § 1.
462 Athen. IV. p. 167. from Demetrius Scepsius. Archilochus made mention
of this Æthiops (Siebel. Fragm. p. 233).
463 Clem. Alex. Strom. I. p. 298. His προσόδιον was composed before the
Messenian wars, about the same time.
464 Adoniaz. 53. compare Thucyd. VI. 77. ὅτι οὐκ Ἴωνες τάδε εἰσὶν,—ἀλλὰ
Δωριεῖς, ἐλεύθεροι ἀπ᾽ αὐτονόμου τῆς Πελοποννήσου τὴν Σικελίαν
οἰκοῦντες.
465 Dio Chrys. Or. XXXVIII. 4.
466 According to Thucyd. VI. 5. Raoul-Rochette, III. p. 319. supports
the contrary opinion.
467 Thucyd. I. 108. where this Chalcis is evidently intended.
468 Raoul-Rochette, ib. p. 290. The coins of Alyzia do not necessarily
prove it to be of Corinthian origin, since barbarous towns
frequently adopted the devices of the neighbouring Greek cities.
Herodotus IX. 28. does not afford any reason for supposing that Pale
was a Corinthian colony; yet both here and in Thucyd. I. 27. it
appears as closely united with Corinth.
469 This I believe, because it was founded by Heraclidæ, _i.e._ by
Bacchiadæ, according to Anton. Lib. 4; hence also the worship of
Hercules existed there. Compare also concerning the Doric migration
to Ambracia, the Epigram of Damagetus in the Palat. Anthol. VII.
231.
470 Γόργος is probably the most correct form of those in Plut. Conv.
VII. Sap. 17. p. 42. Strab. X. p. 452, 7. p. 325. Scymn. Ch. 427.
Antonin. Lib. I. 4. p. 23. Teuchn., who alone considers him as the
brother of Cypselus. See book III. ch. 9. § 6. note. The form ΓΟΡΓΟΣ
is also confirmed by a coin of Ambracia. See Raoul-Rochette, Annali
dell’ Instituto di corrisp. archeol. 1829, p. 316.
471 Thucyd. II. 68.
472 See Boeckh. Corp. Inscript. No. 43.
473 Plutarch. Themist. 24.; but the whole history is inaccurately
related.
474 Thus Schol. Apollon. IV. 1212., and from Timæus at V. 1216.
475 Yet Timæus ubi sup. places Chersicrates 600 years after the Trojan
war, the date of which he fixed (according to Censorinus de Die Nat.
21.) 417 years before the first Olympiad; consequently the date
which he gives to Chersicrates is Olymp. 46. 3. 594. B.C. in the
time of the Cypselidæ. But since it is scarcely credible that Timæus
could place the foundation of Corcyra so low down, it is probable
that he fixed an earlier date for the Trojan war, according to
Clinton F. H. vol. I. p. 135. ω. III. p. 490. Compare Mustoxidi
Illustrazioni Corciresi, I. 5. p. 65.
476 Thucyd. I. 47.
477 Strab. VII. p. 326. Scymn. Ch. 620.
478 Scymn. Ch. 412. According to Raoul-Rochette, IV. p. 86. it was
founded at the same time that Dionysius founded Lissus.
_ 479 Orchomenos_, p. 297.
480 Thucyd. I. 13.
481 μάλιστα ὑπὸ ἀποίκων στεργόμεθα, the words of the Corinthians in
Thucyd. I. 38. compare I. 26. Plutarch Timol. 3.
482 I. 56. See book III. ch. 8. § 5.
483 According to Eusebius. See Raoul-Rochette, III. p. 233.
484 According to Hesychius Milesius de Constant, p. 48. the founder’s
name was Dineus.
485 The situation of Byzantium, in a political and commercial point of
view, is well described by Polybius IV. 44.
486 Dionys. Byzant. de Thracio Bosporo in Hudson’s Geogr. Min. vol. III.
sacrifices were offered to her on the first day of the year. Heyne
Comment. Rec. Gotting. tom. I. p. 62. has treated of the fables of
Io at Byzantium with sufficient fulness, but without tracing the
origin of the traditions.
487 Ibid.
488 See, besides others, Palat. Anthol. VII. 169. Why does not
Raoul-Rochette admit here as elsewhere, the supposition of an
ancient colony under the guidance of Io, an Argive princess?
489 See Dionysius. There is something on this head also in Hesychius.
Besides the names in the text, there are Athene Ecbasia—Artemis
Dictynna (also _Lucifera in piscinis_), Ajax Telamonius, and
Achilles—Rhea—Hecate and Fortune—The Dioscuri—Amphiaraus ἐν συκαῖς,
Aphrodite the preserver of peace, and Aphrodite Πάνδημος.
490 With whom there were at times dissensions. See Aristot. Pol. V. 2.
10.
491 See, besides the decrees in Demosthenes, Constantin. Porph. Them. I.
p. 1452. in Meursii Opp.
492 Μεταμβριανων and Μεσαμβριανων on coins.
493 According to Scymnus Chius, v. 714.
494 Plut. Qu. Gr. 57. _Æginetica_, p. 67. It is probable that Perinthus
also at that time received a party of Doric colonists, as it is
called an allied town by the Byzantians (Demosth. de Corona, p.
255), and the worship of Hercules was prevalent there. Compare
Panofka Res Samiorum, p. 22, where, however, several passages are
incorrectly applied.
495 Arrian, Periplus of the Pontus Euxinus, p. 14. Hudson. Compare
Orelli Heracleot. p. 115. Raoul-Rochette places it as far back as
the 30th Olympiad, but according to Scymnus Chius, 231, the founding
took place in the time of Cyrus.
496 Megara was founded in the same year as Naxus, Olymp. 11. 3,
according to Ephorus (in Strabo and Scymnus); according to the more
exact Thucydides some time after, 245 years before its destruction
by Gelon. Gelon reigned from Olymp. 72. 2, in Gela, from Olymp. 73.
4, till 75. 3, in Syracuse (Boeckh ad Pind. Olymp. I. Explic. p.
100). From the narrative of Herodotus VII. 156, it appears that he
conquered Megara in the interval of Olymp. 74. 1-3; in which case
the foundation would fall about Olymp. 13. 1, 728 B.C. According
then to the account of Thucydides, the arrival of Lamis the Megarean
must have been some years before. This event was contemporary with
the founding of Leontini, which was five years after that of
Syracuse: this cannot, therefore, be reconciled with the account of
Eusebius, who dates the building of Syracuse Olymp. 11. 4. (Hieron.
Scal.) The statement of the Parian Marble agrees better, viz. Olymp.
5. 3. Raoul-Rochette, III. p. 214, reckons on false suppositions.
Compare Heyne Opusc. Academ. tom. II. pp. 259. sq.
497 See Passow ad Theogn. 773. Welcker ad Alcman. p. 85, adds Schol.
Platon. p. 220. See also Welcker’s Theognis, p. 14. In literary
history many instances occur of the same persons being called
citizens of the mother-state, and of the colony; _e.g._, Archilochus
was a Parian and Thasian; Protagoras and Hecatæus the younger were
citizens both of Teos and Abdera; Terpander belonged to Arne in
Bœotia and Lesbos at the same time; Mimnermus was both a Colophonian
and citizen of Smyrna, &c.
498 See _Orchomenos_, pp. 313-359. Thrige’s _Res Cyrenensium_ (1828),
pp. 23-35. Concerning a family of the Heraclidæ, see the interesting
passages of Synesius, Καταστ. (p. 10. Morell.) and of Theodorus
Metochita in the Supplem. ad Nicol. Damasc. Orellii. The account of
the latter is very confused.
499 Pind. Pyth. IX. Boeckh Explic. p. 325. Thrige ibid, 121 sq.
500 Δωρικοὶ τάφοι, Synesius, ubi sup.
501 Herodot. I. 174. Diodorus V. 53. speaks of an Argive-Lacedæmonian
colony in this district.
502 V. 9. 53. Tzetzes ad Lycophr. 1388, calls him Ἱππότης ὁ Ἀλήτης, but
I can hardly think that he is the same as the ancestor of the
Corinthian Heraclidæ.
503 Diodor. V. 53.
504 Also at Nisyrus, according to its coins.
505 I here speak on the authority of some beautiful drawings by M.
Huyot, amongst which is a plan of Cnidos; an accurate plan of the
harbour was shown me by Captain Beaufort. Compare Clarke, part II. §
1, plate 13.
506 It is stated by Diodorus V. 9, that the Cnidians in the 50th
Olympiad (580 B.C.) sent a colony to Lipara under the guidance of
three descendants of their countryman Hippotes, Gorgus, Thestor, and
Epithersidas, who, in conjunction with 500 of the former
inhabitants, founded a state. Now it was natural to call Æolus the
god of the winds, who was supposed to reside on these islands, a son
of the new national hero, Hippotes; and hence he became Αἴολος
Ἱπποτάδης. If this is true, then the name Ἱπποτάδης in the Odyssey
(K. 2. 36.) is certainly _later_ than the Homeric age; which might
be almost supposed from the statement of the learned Asclepiades,
that the Æolus of Homer was the son of Poseidon (not of Hippotes),
which he could hardly have said, if all the copies of the Odyssey
had Ἱπποτάδης.
507 See particularly Pausan. X. 11. 3, from Antiochus, and Diodorus V.
9, probably from the same author.
508 Pseud-Plutarch, de fluv. Mars. Eustath. ad Dionys. Perieg. 321.
509 See Strab. XII. p. 570. The inscription on their coins is Σελγέων
Λακεδαιμονίων ὁμόνοια. Compare Mionnet Descript. III. p. 525.
Raoul-Rochette, tom. II. p. 427, with whom I do not entirely agree.
See also Nicephorus Blemmidas, ed. Spohn. p. 13.
510 Dionys. Perieg. 860, where I consider that “the Amyclæans” is not a
mere poetical ornament, although the testimony is not to be much
depended upon. Compare Eustathius ad 1.
511 See Raoul-Rochette’s argument, tom. II. p. 428.
512 Lycophr. vv. 452, 593. Strab. XIV. p. 682. Λακεδαίμων ἐν Κύπρῳ
Eustath. ad Homer. p. 293. 45. ed. Rom. Golgi in Cyprus was founded
by _Sicyonians_ (Steph. Byz. in Γόλγοι), and it was the _only_
colony sent out by that state, with the exception of Phæstus in
Crete, whither a Heraclide of Sicyon is said to have gone; see ch.
5. § 2.
_ 513 Ut fertur, octavus ab Hercule_, Schol. Vetust. ad Hor. Carm. II. 6.
12; and so likewise Servius ad Virgil. Georg. IV. 125. Æn. III. 551.
Compare, concerning the Phalantiadæ, Steph. Byz. in Ἀθῆναι.
Callimachus is referred to in a verse quoted by Schol. ined. ad
Dionys. Perieg. (Spohn. Opusc. Niceph. Blemm. 29.) πάντες ἀφ᾽
Ἡρακλῆος ἐτήτυμον ἔστε Λάκωνες according to Goettling’s conjecture.
514 Ὑακίνθου or Ἁπόλλωνος Ὑακίνθου τάφος, Polyb. VIII. 30. 2.
515 Ib. VIII. 35. 8.
516 Scymn. Ch. 330.
517 Strabo VI. p. 264, from Antiochus.
518 Herodot. III. 138. IV. 164.
519 Strabo VIII. p. 387.
520 Pausan. III. 3. 1. Jamblichus Vit. Pythag. 10. Raoul-Rochette, III.
p. 187.
521 See book II. ch. 3.
522 Metam. XV. 15. _Grates agit ille parenti Amphitryoniadæ._
523 See Pausan. ubi sup. The newly discovered fragments of Polybius
confirm the participation of Sparta in the colonization of Locri, p.
384. Mai, inasmuch as they mention the sending of Locrian
auxiliaries to the Spartans as the cause of the foundation of Locri
in Italy.
524 Justin XX. 2.
525 Thucyd. VI. 44. Raoul-Rochette, p. 194, derives it from Dorians, who
had previously settled at Cape Zephyrium: but even if there were
Dorians there, they must have been Megareans.
526 It would lead us too far from our subject to explain the tradition
concerning the Lacedæmonians among the Sabines and Samnites. It is
remarkable that, according to Silius Italicus, these Lacedæmonians
came from Amyclæ and Therapne, the ancient settlements of the
Achæans. I must also pass over the Cretan colonies, for many
reasons.
527 Paus. III. 2. 7.
528 A war with Cnosus is very improbable and almost impossible; Paus.
II. 21. III. 11. Vell. Paterc. I. 4. (_Lacedæmonii in Asia
Magnesiam_), had probably some account of the share of the Spartans
in these Cretan colonies, which will be discussed book II. ch. 3.
529 Pausan. V. 20. I, according to Clavier, Plutarch. Lycurg. I.
530 Λυκοῦργος ὑπὸ πάντων συμφώνως ἱστορεῖται μετὰ τοῦ Ἰφίτου τοῦ Ἠλείου
τὴν πρώτην ἀριθμηθεῖσαν τῶν Ὀλυμπίων θέσιν διαθεῖναι, Athen. XIV. p.
635 F.
531 Pausan. V. 8. 3. ἐξ οὗ γὰρ τὸ συνεχὲς ταῖς μνήμαις ἐπὶ ταῖς
Ὀλυμπίασιν ἐστί—
532 γράμματα Ἡλείων ἐς τοὺς Ὀλυμπιονίκας, Pausan. V. 21. 5. VI. 2. 1.
533 See Aristodemus ap. Syncell. Chron. p. 196 C. Compare Goeller de
Situ Syracusarum, p. 198.
534 Pind. Olymp. VII. 86. ἐν Μεγάροισίν τ᾽ οὐχ ἔτερον λιθίνα ψᾶφος ἔχει
λόγον. Compare Boeckh Explic.
535 Plutarch de Musica, 3. 8.
536 Sturz. Hellanici fragment. p. 79 sqq. ed. 2.
537 Agesil. 19.
538 In Colot. 17. p. 268. Λακεδαιμόνιοι τὸν περὶ Λυκούργου χρησμὸν ἐν
ταῖς παλαιοτάταις ἀναγραφαῖς ἔχοντες. Concerning this oracle see
Theodoret Græc. Affect. 9. 10. Max. Tyr. Diss. XXIX. p. 72. The
oracle in Œnomaus (Euseb. Præp. Ev. V. p. 113.) is evidently a
modern forgery.
539 Above ch. 5. § 14. Eurysthenes, according to Eusebius, reigned 42
years.
540 Suidas in Χάρων.
541 Athen. XI. p. 475 B. concerning the καρχήσιον.
542 XII. 12. 1.
543 Plutarch. Lycurg. I. Diod. I. 5. who calls the ἀναγραφὴ of the kings
a παράπηγμα. Eusebius says that at the beginning of the Olympiads
_Lacedæmoniorum reges defecerunt_, which error arose from the lists
ending here, which had been made for computing the preceding
periods.
544 Apollod. ap. Diod. ubi sup. Eratosthenes ap. Clem. Alex. Strom. I.
p. 336. ed. Colon. Compare Tatian. adv. Græcos, p. 174. Censorinus
de Die Natali 21. Euseb. Scalig. p. 23. Cicer. de Rep. II. 10. who
also followed the Χρονικὰ of Apollodorus.
545 I do not contend that the chronological statements in the Spartan
lists form an _authentic document_, more than those in the
catalogues of the priestesses of Here and in the list of
Halicarnassian priests (Boeckh Corp. Ins. Gr. No. 2655). The
chronological statements in the Spartan lists may have been formed
from imperfect memorials; but the Alexandrine chronologists must
have found such tables in existence, since they could not have been
produced by mere computation; and yet the date of 328 years before
the 1st Olympiad was entirely founded upon them.
546 Ap. Clem. comp. Diod. de Virt. et Vit. p. 547, ed. Vales.
547 P. 411. Fragm. ed. Heyn. from Tatian and Clemens I. p. 327. comp. p.
309. Pausan. III. 2. 4. Eusebius’s quotation of Apollodorus at the
18th year of Alcamenes is incorrect, as may be seen from Plutarch.
Lycurg. I.
548 I. 65. Pausan. III. 2. 3.
549 Ælian. V. H. IX. 41.
550 Simonid. ap. Plutarch. Lyc. 2. and compare Schol. Plat. Rep. X. p.
474. 21 Bekker. The latter, also, according to Aristot. Polit. II.
7. 1. Ephorus ap. Strab. X. p. 482. Compare Dieuchidas, ap.
Plutarch. Lycurg. 2. et Clem. Alex. Strom. I. p. 328. ed. Colon, (p.
390 Potter). cf. Strab. X. p. 481. He took Lycurgus for a son of
Polydectes and a younger brother of Eunomus, and placed him 290
years after the taking of Troy. Dionys. Hal. Arch. Rom. II. 49.
calls Lycurgus the uncle of Eunomus, whom he probably places with
Herodotus (VIII. 131.) _after_ Polydectes. Thucydides I. 18. places
Lycurgus not long before 800 B.C. Timæus escaped the difficulty by
supposing that there were two Lycurguses. Xenophon disagrees the
most (Rep. Lac. 10. quoted by Plutarch. Lyc. I.), as he says that
Lycurgus lived κατὰ τοὺς Ἡρακλείδας, _i.e._ κατὰ τὴν Ἡρακλειδῶν
κάθοδον.
551 VIII. 131.
552 See Clinton, F. H. vol. I. p. 144. The same explanation also
diminishes the difficulty about the relationship of Lycurgus; yet
there still remains the great discrepancy between Herodotus (where
the emendation proposed by Marsham does not suit the context) and
Xenophon.
553 The dates of these are given, doubtless from Alexandrine
chronologists, by Diodorus, fragm. 6 p. 635, where (with Wesseling
after Didymus) 30 years must be assumed from the return of the
Heraclidæ to the reign of Aletes, by which the computation comes out
right. This has been overlooked by Eusehius, since he makes Aletes
contemporary with Eurysthenes. See the Armenian Eusebius, p. 16.
Mai.
554 See above, p. 136. note t. [Transcriber’s Note: This is the footnote
to “district of Laconia.”]
_ 555 Æginetica_, p. 62. Comp. Theocritus XVII. 27.
556 As may fairly be inferred from V. 4. 3.
557 V. 4. 4 In an inscription at Olympia (Brunck. Anal. II. p. 193.) he
was called the son of Hæmon; according to common tradition, he was
the son of Praxonides. In Eusebius (Hieronym.) should be written,
_Iphitus Praxonidis vel Æmonis f_.
558 I. 66, 67.
559 Concerning this word see Boissonade, Classical Journal, vol. XX. p.
289.
560 Boeckh Inscript. No. 11.
_ 561 E.g._ by Wolf Proleg. Homer. p. 67.
562 Of Clem. Alexand. Strom. I. p. 308.
563 For the date of Terpander, see book IV. ch. 6. § 1. note.
564 Scymnus Chius, v. 313. Strabo VI. p. 259.
565 Plutarch. Lyc. 13. whose words should be thus understood, “_Lycurgus
did not enact any written laws, but merely sanctioned existing
customs._” The ῥῆτραι however were evidently not mere ἔθη, but
oracular dicta, expressed in definite words, which had been
preserved from ancient times. Plutarch. Agesil. 26. calls them Αἰ
καλούμεναι τρεῖς ῥῆτραι, and also de Esu Carn. II. 1. ὁ θεῖος
Λυκοῦργος ἐν ταῖς τρίσι ῥήτραις; consequently this was in a certain
degree a fixed number.—One of these very regulations was μὴ χρῆσθαι
νόμοις ἐγγράφοις.
566 Plutarch, de Pyth. Orac. 19. αἱ ῥῆτραι, δι᾽ ὧν ἐκόσμησε τὴν
Λακεδαιμονίων, πολιτείαν Λυκοῦργος, ἐδόθησαν αὑτῷ καταλογάδην.
567 The Delphian Inscription in Boeckh Corp. Inscript. n. 1711. The
Cretan in Chishull Ant. Asiat. p. 135. The Samian and Prienian in
Chandler Inscript. p. 1. 38. 1, 2, 3. Marm. Oxon. p. 25.
568 I agree with Creuzer Histor. Ant. Fragm. p. 122. that it is
unnecessary _always_ to alter writers concerning ὄροι into
ὡρόγραφοι, _i.e._ chronologists. The above Samian inscriptions
expressly refer to historical works; and are we then to alter in
Herodian p. 7. (where see the passages quoted), and in p. 39. ἐν
Σαμίων ὄροις?
_ 569 Monumenta saxis sculpta et ære prisco_, Tacitus Annal. IV. 44.
570 I mention Eumelus in this place, as being a Lyric poet in the modern
sense of the word, on account of his ᾆσμα προσόδιον for the
Messenian Theoria to Delos, Pausan. IV. 4. 1.
571 Περὶ νομοθετῶν. He must however have either invented himself, or
adopted the inventions of others, if he mentioned the _names_ of the
twenty assistants and friends of Lycurgus, Plutarch. Lyc. 5.
572 Plutarch. Lyc. 31. and 11.
573 See book II. ch. 10. § 2.
574 He was anciently celebrated for his mildness. Plutarch in the Life
of Lycurgus, and de Adul. 16. On the other hand, Heraclides Ponticus
2. καὶ τὸν Χάριλλον (ΧΑΡΙΛΑΟΝ) τυραννικῶς ἄρχοντα μετέστησε.
575 Plutarch. Lyc.
576 Book III. ch. 1. The names of _Eunomus_ as the father and of
_Eucosmus_ as the son of Lycurgus (Pausan. III. 16. 5.) belong to
the class pointed out above, p. 69. note g. [Transcriber’s Note:
This is the footnote to “capture of Ægialea,” starting “The name of
Tisamenus.”]
577 Only Plutarch. Lycurg. 23. and Heraclid. Pont. 2. καὶ κοινὸν ἀγαθὸν
τὰς ἐκεχείρας (the Pythian are probably meant) κατέστησε. The
account of Hermippus is evidently, in part at least, invented.
578 This Cleosthenes is mentioned in Phlegon Trallianus ap. Meurs.
Opera, vol. VII. p. 128. and Schol. Plat. Rep. V. p. 246, 7. Bekker.
579 Συνχώρημα Ἑλλήνων ἱερὰν καὶ ἀπόρθητον εἶναι Ἠλείαν, Polyb. IV. 73.
who calls the peaceable existence of the Eleans in early times a
ἱερὸς βίος; Strab. VIII. p. 357. Diod. Excerpt, p. 547. Wessel.,
where very absurd motives are attributed to the Lacedæmonians.
580 Isthm. II. 23. Boeckh Explic. p. 494. Schneider Lexicon in v. et ad
Xen. Hell. IV. 7. 2.
581 The determination of this time was somewhat ambiguous. See Thuc. V.
49. ἐπαλλέλλειν is the proper word for the announcement.
582 Herod. VI. 19. see also V. 77.
583 Thucyd. V. 49. comp. Pausan. V. 6, 4. VI. 3, 3.
584 As in the well-known treaty between the Eleans and Heræans, αἰ δὲ μά
συνέαν, τάλαντόν κ᾽ ἀργύρω ἀποτίνοιαν τῷ Δὶ Ολυμπίῳ.
585 Thuc. V. 31.
586 Thuc. III. 8, 14.
587 Pausan. IV. 4.
588 Book II. ch. 3, § 2.
589 Pausan. IV. 2. 1.
590 Plutarch Romul. 25. Sympos. Qu. IV. 1. 1. Sept. Sap. Conviv. 16.
Polyæn. II. 31. 2. Plin. H. N. XI. 70.
591 See Fulgentius in Staveren Mythograph. Latin, p. 770. _Si quis enim
centum hostes interfecisset, Marti de homine sacrificabat apud
insulam Lemnum, quod sacrificatum est a duobus, Aristomene
Gortynensi et Theoclo Eleo, sicut Sosicrates scribit._ Apollodorus
ap. Porphyr. de Abstin. II. 55. p. 396. (comp. Meursius, Misc. Lac.
II. 14.) says that the Lacedæmonians also had sacrificed a man to
Mars.
592 Paus. IV. 15. 5.
593 Polyæn. II. 31. 3. Plin. XI. 70. Valer. Maxim. I. 8. ext., 15.
594 Stephanus Byz., who quotes Herodotus, Rhianus, and Plutarch.
Herodotus, however, does not mention the subject. What Stephanus
says is taken from Plutarch de Herodot. Maled. 2. p. 291. where
however for φησὶν αὐτὸς should probably be written φασὶν αὐτόν.
595 Isocrates (Archidam. 11.) connects the Messenian war with the
assassination of Cresphontes; and relates that the Spartans were
much encouraged by the oracle: the narrative evidently had not at
this time received the form in which it was afterwards represented.
Yet he mentions the twenty years’ siege (on the authority of
Tyrtæus), § 66.
596 See Antip. Sidon. VII. 161. Anthol. Palat.
597 Pausan. IV. 16. 4. VI. 32. 5. IX. 39. 5.
598 Lycurgus in Leocrat. 15. p. 155. comp. Isocrates Archidam. 10.
599 Pausan. IV. 27. 4.
600 Also Æschylus of Alexandria wrote Messeniaca, Athen. XIII. p. 599 E.
601 See Athen. XIV. p. 857 D. Diodorus probably follows him, since he
represents Cleonnis in the first war and Aristomenes as fighting
together, Fragm. N. p. 637, Wessel. In XV. 66. he means him among
the ἔνιοι. Boivin and Wesseling endeavour in vain to reconcile the
contradictions. The genuineness of the fragment of Diodorus is
however doubtful.
602 IV. 15. 1.
603 Concerning Rhianus see Jacobs in the Index Auctorum to the
Anthology.
604 See Strabo, VIII. p. 362.
_ 605 E.g._ it was a _Messenian_ account which Myron followed (Pausan.
IV. 6. 2), that Aristomenes killed the king Theopompus (contrary to
Tyrtæus, as may be seen from Plutarch Agid. 21.).
606 I will now point out some instances of modern fiction in the
narrative of Pausanias. The account of Polychares and Euæphnus
supposes a greater power in the Areopagus than it ever possessed;
nor did the quarrel come at all within the province of the Argive
Amphictyons. Besides Pausanias, see Diodorus Excerpt, p. 547, who
generally follows the same authorities. The Cretan bowmen must have
been introduced by Rhianus from his own country; it is certain that
there were no mercenaries at so early a period. How could the
Corinthians have gone to Laconia without passing through an enemy’s
country, and who would have allowed them a free passage? The flight
of the initiated to Eleusis is contrary to all probability; and this
the more, as in the second war they were quiet spectators, Pausan.
IV. 16. 1. Yet we are told the sacred torchbearers (δᾳδοῦχοι) fought
at Athens in military array. The disposition of the light-armed
troops in separate bodies (IV. 7. 2.) is contrary to the account of
Tyrtæus and to ancient usage, compare IV. 8. 4. Οἱ Μεσσήνιοι δρόμῳ
ἐς τοὺς Λακεδαιμονίους ἐχρῶντο (IV. 18. 1.) is contrary to Herodotus
(VI. 112). Many events are attributed to very improbable causes,
_e.g._ that they left the fortified cities (IV. 9. 1.) from want of
money. There is absolutely no reason given for the subjection of
Messenia. That the Argives came in a private capacity, and not at
the command of the state, appears from Herodot. VI. 92. The oracle
in IV. 9. 2. in iambic verses is of a late date, but nevertheless
_more_ ancient than the corresponding one in hexameters preserved by
Eusebius Præp. Ev. V. 27. p. 130. ed. Steph. The verse in Pausan.
IV. 12. 1. ἀλλ᾽ ἀπάτῃ μὲν ἔχει γαῖαν Μεσσηνίδα λαὸς, refers to the
fraud of Cresphontes at the original division. In the oracle in
Pausan. IV. 12. 3. and Eusebius ubi sup. should be written, ἦ γὰρ
Ἄρης κείνων εὐήρεα τείχη, Καὶ τειχέων στεφάνωμα πικροὺς οἰκήτορας
ἕξει. Whence these oracles were derived does not appear: nor is it
easy to decide concerning the date of such short pieces. (The above
oracle is differently, and perhaps more correctly, emended by Lobeck
ad Phrynich. Par. p. 621.)
607 See the Fragments as arranged by Frank, _Callinus_, p. 168.
608 Ap. Strab. VIII. p. 362.
609 By Pausauias and Diodorus de Virt. et Vit. p. 540.
610 Pausan. IV. 4. 4.
611 Justin. III. 5. says eighty years. Thirty-nine years are probably
too short a period; for, as the Spartans did not marry before the
age of thirty (book IV. ch. 4. § 3.), the difference between
grandfathers and grandchildren must have been on an average sixty
years. If the interval had been only thirty-nine years, most of
those engaged in the second war would have been the _sons_ of the
conquerors of Ithome.
612 The same date is in the Parian Marble, Ep. 34. But Pausanias IV. 15.
1. proves _only from Tyrtæus_ that Rhianus was incorrect in calling
Leotychides a contemporary of the _second_ war; consequently the
numbers cannot have much authority. Pausanias had however various
means of judging: _e.g._ after the expulsion and subjugation of the
inhabitants no Messenian occurred in the Ὀλυμπιονῖκαι, Pausan. VI.
2. 5. Different writers however vary remarkably. Dinarchus in
Demosth. p. 99. 29. places the subjection of the Messenians 400
years before their restoration (370 B.C.); Lycurgus in Leocrat. p.
155. 500; Isocrates Archidam. p. 121 B. only 300; but Bekker reads
400 from a manuscript, which agrees better with the early date of
Isocrates for the subjection of the Messenians. Plutarch Reg. Apoph.
p. 126. only 230 years before the liberation by Epaminondas.
613 It has been proved by the succession of the excerpts of Diodorus
that he placed the second Messenian war at the same time as
Eusebius: Krebs Lectiones Diodoreæ, Epimetrum. Now Eusebius places
the beginning of the second war at Olymp. 35. 3. (638 B.C.), and
Tyrtæus at Ol. 36. 3. (636).
614 Pausan. IV. 6. 2. (comp. Frank, _Callinus_, pp. 172, 196. who
proposes Polydôrô without any reason); see Polyæn. I. 15.
615 See above, ch. 5. § 12, 13.
616 Strabo VIII. p. 360.
617 In the time of Augustus it was in Messenia. The name Nedon was only
preserved in that of Ἀθηνᾶ Νεδουσία.
618 IV. 4. 2.
619 Strabo V. p. 257. has nearly the same account as that of the
_Lacedæmonians_ in Pausanias; and so also Heraclides Ponticus, and
Justin. III. 4.
_ 620 Annalium memoria vatumque carminibus_, Tacit. Annal. IV. 43.
621 Pausan. IV. 14. 2. See above, ch. 5. § 13.
622 Probably tradition had preserved some report of a sacrifice to
Artemis Orthia (Iphigenia), concerning which see book II. ch. 9.
623 Plutarch also mentions the same expedition, de Superstit. 7. p. 71,
Hutten.
624 Fragm. 25.
625 Pausan. IV. 4. Strabo VI. p. 257.
626 IV. 14. 2. 23. 3.
627 Hence Hercules Manticlus was worshipped at Messana, Pausan. IV. 23.
5. IV. 26. 3.
628 See particularly Thucyd. VI. 5.
629 Strabo ubi sup. The Rhegini considered the Messenians of Naupactus
as kinsmen, Pausan. IV. 26. We may pass over the often corrected
error of Pausanias concerning Anaxilas (last by Jacobs, Amalthea, I.
p. 199. where Bentley is forgotten).
630 Yet it should be observed that Dionysius Perieg. 376. mentions
Amyclæans as colonists in Tarentum, which is probably not a mere
poetical embellishment.
631 Ἀνδανία.—ἐκ ταύτης Ἀριστομένης ἐγένετο, Steph. Byz. The words οὕτω
γὰρ καὶ ἡ Μεσσήνη Ἀνδανία ἐκαλεῖτο, ἥν οἰκίσαι φασί τινας τῶν μετὰ
Κρεσφόντου καὶ οὕτω καλέσαι, &c. contain two errors; comp. Pausan.
IV. 26. 5.
632 The whole of the following passage is evidently taken from Tyrtæus,
VIII. p. 362. τὴν μὲν πρώτην κατακτ. φησὶ Τυρταῖος—γενέσθαι. τὴν δὲ
δευτέραν, καθ᾽ ἥν ἑλόμενοι συμμάχους Ἠλείους καὶ Ἀργείους [καὶ
Ἀρχάδας addendum] καὶ Πισάτας ἀπέστησαν, Ἀρκάδων μὲν Ἀριστοκράτην
τὸν Ὀρχομενοῦ βασιλέα παρεχομένων στρατηγὸν, Πισατῶν δὲ Πανταλέοντα
τὸν Ὀμφαλίωνος. It is stated by Strabo, p. 355 C. that at the ἐσχάτη
κατάλυσις τῶν Μεσσηνίων the Eleans assisted the Spartans. They must
therefore have espoused the cause of the latter out of hatred
towards Pisa. With Strabo agrees the article of Phavorinus in v.
Αὐγείας, p. 134. viz. that “the Lacedæmonians deprived the Pisatans
of this privilege for siding with Messenia, and gave it to the
Eleans, who took their part.” But if Elis was friendly and Pisa
hostile to the Spartans, Pantaleon can hardly have obtained the
agonothesia, when Sparta had overcome all her enemies, and had ended
the war victoriously. Accordingly, the 34th Olympiad, which
Pantaleon celebrated without the Eleans, probably fell in the period
of the second war.
633 According to Pausanias also the _Sicyonians_.
634 Pausan. VI. 22. 2.
635 Plutarch de sera Num. Vind. 2. p. 216. agrees with Pausanias, and
states that the war lasted for more than twenty years.
636 Ap. Polyb. IV. 33. 2. The words of the inscription are as follows:—
πάντως ὁ χρόνος εὖρε δίκνην ἀδίκῳ βασιλῆι,
εὖρε δὲ Μεσσήνη σὺν Διὶ τὸν προδότην
ῥηιδίως. χαλεπὸν δὲ λαθεῖν θεὸν ἄνδρ᾽ ἐπίορκον.
χαῖρε Ζεῦ βασιλεῦ, καὶ σάω Ἀρκαδίαν.
637 See _Æginetica_, p. 65.
638 Which city was still governed by kings in the Peloponnesian war,
Plutarch Parallel. 32. p. 430. In this strange composition,
arbitrary fictions are curiously mixed with learned notices.
639 See the genealogy of the Orchomenian, Epidaurian, and Corinthian
princes below, ch. 8. § 3. note.
640 The battle ἐπὶ τῇ Μεγάλῃ Τάφρῳ, περὶ Τάφρον (Polyb. IV. 33. Pausan.
IV. 6. 1. 17. 2.), in which Aristocrates is supposed to have
betrayed the Messenians, was also mentioned by Tyrtæus; but the
account which he gave of it quite differs from that in Pausanias,
viz. that the Spartans were intentionally posted in front of a
trench, that they might not be able to run away. Eustratius ad
Aristot. Eth. Nic. III. 8. 5. fol. 46. καὶ οἱ πρὸ τῶν τάφρων καὶ τῶν
τοιούτων παρατάττοντες. τοῦτο περὶ Λακεδαιμονίων λέγοι ἄν; τοιαύτην
γάρ τινα μάχην, ὄτε πρὸς Μεσηνίους ἐμαχέσαντο, ἐπολέμουν, ἧς καὶ
Τυρταῖος μνημονεύει.
641 According to Pausanias.
642 Pausan. IV 15. 4. What he says in IV. 24. 1. does not, however,
agree well with this.
643 Herod. III. 41. That the Lacedæmonians, at the beginning of the
second war, dedicated a statue of Jupiter, twelve feet in height, at
Olympia, with the inscription in Pausan. V. 24. 1. is merely a
conjecture of the ἐξηγηταί.
644 The passage of Strabo VIII. p. 362. should be arranged thus:
“Tyrtæus says that the second conquest of Messenia took place,”
ἡνίκα φησὶν αὐτὸς στρατηγῆσαι τὸν πόλεμον τοῖς Λακεδαιμονίοις, καὶ
γὰρ εἶναί φησιν ἐκεῖθεν ἐν τῇ ἐλεγείᾳ ἥν ἐπιγράφουσιν Εὐνομίαν;
Αὐτὸς γὰρ Κρονίων—νῆσον ἀφικόμεθα. Ὤστε ἤ ταῦτα ἈΚΥΡΩΤΕΟΝ τὰ ἐλεγεῖα
(for ἠκύρωται τὰ ἐλ. some MSS. have ΗΚΥΡΩΤΑΙΟΝΤΑ), ἢ Φιλοχόρῳ
ἀπιστητέον καὶ Καλλισθένει καὶ ἄλλοις πλείοσιν εἰποῦσιν ἐξ Ἀθηνῶν
καὶ Ἀφιδνῶν ἀφίκεσθαι. Comp. p. 52. n. d., and Porson’s Adversaria,
p. 39. But there is nothing surprising in Tyrtæus, who lived among
the Dorians, speaking of the whole nation in the first person
plural, without mentioning his own different origin. In the same
manner Tyrtæus says of the Spartan nation as of a whole, Μεσσήνην
εἵλομεν εὐρύχορον, Pausan. IV. 6. 2. Compare the verses of Mimnermus
in Strab. XIV. p. 634. The Laconian town of Aphidnæ, from which the
Leucippidæ are supposed to have come, has probably arisen from some
misunderstanding. (Steph. Byz. in v.) Archimbrotus also, the father
of Tyrtæus (Suidas in v.), looks like an etymological invention;
Ἀρχίμβροτος, “the ruler of men.”
645 Concerning a defeat of the Spartans by the Argives, see below, § 13.
646 Callisthenes ap. Polyb. IV. 33. 2. Aristomenes, according to Pausan.
IV. 24. married his sister and daughters to persons at Phigalea,
Lepreum, and Heræa. This is alluded to in a verse from the fifth
book of Rhianus in Steph. Byz. in v. Φιγάλεια, τὴν μὲν ἀνήγετ᾽
ἄκοιτιν ἐπὶ κραναὴν Φιγάλειαν, viz. Tharyx.
647 This circumstance was narrated by Rhianus in the sixth (probably the
last) book, in which Atabyrum, a town in Rhodes, was mentioned,
Steph. Byz. in v. Ἀτάβυρον.
648 Aristotle Polit. II. 6. 8. speaks of wars with Argos, Arcadia, and
Messenia, before the time of Lycurgus; but probably he is incorrect.
According to Polyæn. VIII. 34. the Tegeatans took king Theopompus
prisoner (provided the _king_ is meant): and the same authority
states II. 13. that Mantinea was taken by Eurypon.
649 Pausan. VIII. 39. 2.
650 Pausan. VIII. 48. 3. concerning Ἄρης γυναικοθοίας, compare III. 7.
3.
651 Herod. I. 67. Pausan. III. 3. 5. comp. Dio Chrys. Orat. XVII. p.
251. C. the speech of the Tegeatans in Herodotus IX. 26. Polyænus I.
11.
652 At this time probably the oracle was delivered, which held out such
deceitful promises to the Spartans, Δώσω τοι Τεγέην ποσσίκροτον
ὀρχήσασθαι, Καὶ καλὸν πέδιον σχοίνῳ διαμετρήσασθαι, Herod. I. 66.
The ambiguity lies in the word ὀρχήσασθαι, which may be derived from
ὄρχος. Also διαμετρήσασθαι signifies the condition of a Helot, or a
Clarotes, who receives a measured-out piece of land to cultivate.
653 See the stratagem of king Ἄλνης (Ἄλεος Casaubon) in Polyæn. I. 8.
654 See below, ch. 9. § 1.
655 Above, ch. 5. § 1, 4, 5.
656 Pausan. IV. 5. 1. The Amphictyons decided concerning Thyrea,
Plutarch Parallel. Hist. Gr. et Rom. 3.
657 Herod. VI. 92. sqq.
658 Concerning these Amphictyons, see Ste Croix _Governemens fédératifs
anciens_, p. 100. who, however, treats the subject with his usual
carelessness. See Boeckh Corp. Inscript. n. 1121. cf. n. 1124.
Maffei in Muratori, 561.
659 I should not now venture to make such positive assertions as those
made in my _Æginetica_, p. 54.
660 III. 2. 2. III. 7. 1.
661 Paus. III. 2. 2. III. 7.1.
662 III. 7. 3. and hence perhaps Œnomaus ap. Euseb. Præp. Ev. p. 133.
Steph.
663 II. 26. 5. III. 7. 5. IV. 8. 1. IV. 14. 2. IV. 43. 6.
664 Thus, according to Herodotus, Hermione and Asine ἡ πρὸς Καρδαμύλῇ τῇ
Λακωνικῇ, which then probably was the nearest place of importance,
belonged to the Dryopians; comp. Theopompus ap. Strab. p. 373.
665 See Boeckh. Inscript. n. 1193.
666 Æginetica, pp. 51-63.
667 With regard to the dominion of his brother in Macedonia, the
relation of this narrative to that in Herodotus VIII. 137. appears
to me to be as follows. Both describe the same event; but the latter
is the rude native tradition of Macedon, formed among a people which
had few historical memorials; the former is derived from an Argive
tradition, and, though as well as the other not purely historical,
is yet connected together in a more probable manner. Κάρανος is
perhaps only another form of Κοίρανος; see Hesychius in Κόραννος.
The account of Euripides, that Archelaus, the son of Temenus, took
the city of Ægæ in Macedonia, whither he had come as a goatherd in
great distress (Hyginus Fab. 219; Dio Chrysost. p. 70.), is the most
unfounded. Whether Isocrates (ad Philipp. p. 88. D.) was acquainted
with the tradition concerning Caranus, or followed the account of
Herodotus, does not appear. There is also a discrepancy in the
account of Constant. Porphyr. Them. I. p. 1453. See Appendix I. §
15.
668 Æginetica, p. 57. cf. Addenda, p. 199.
669 And _only_ silver (not τό τε ἄλλο καὶ τὸ ἀργυροῦν, as Strabo says),
since copper was not coined till a much later period, and gold was
first coined in Asia. In the Etymologicum Gudianum, p. 549. 58. it
is stated inaccurately that Phido reduced the measures.
670 See book III. c. 10. § 12. The ancient Macedonian coins were struck
according to the same standard.
671 Polyb. II. 37. 10.
672 See in general Julian. Epist. ad Arg. 35. p. 407.
673 According to Eusebius, p. 1297. ed. Pont. Pausanias places τὸν περὶ
τῆς Θυρεάτιδος ἀγῶνα at the end of the reign of Theopompus, at the
same date; Solinus, c. 13. in the seventeenth year of Romulus.
674 Otherwise Herodotus could not have said of the Cynurians,
ἐκδεδωρίευνται ὑπό τε Ἀργείων ἀρχόμενοι καὶ τοῦ χρόνον. Compare
Æginetica, p. 47.
675 Pausan. II. 24. 8.
676 In addition to the passages in Æginetica ubi sup. see the Epigrams
of Simonides VIII. 431. of Dioscorides VII. 430. Damagetus 432.
Nicander 526. Chæremon 720. Gætulicus 244. in the Palatine
Anthology. According to Isocrates Archid. p. 136. D. 300 Spartans
destroyed all the Argives. It is a remarkable continuation of the
legend, that Perilaus, the son of Alcenor, who went away too soon
(Herod. I. 82.), a conqueror at the Nemean games, slew Othryadas,
Pausan. II. 20. 6.—The offerings of the Argives for the battle of
Thyrea, as well as those of the Tegeatans for a victory over Sparta,
at Delphi (Pausan. X. 9. 3, 6.), cannot, from the dates of the
artificers, have been made before the 100th Olympiad (380 B.C.).
677 Hence their institution (according to Eusebius, Olymp. 27. 3. 678
B.C.) is derived from that event. See Athen. XIV. p. 631. Ruhnken ad
Tim. p. 54. Hesychius in Θυρεατικοὶ στέφανοι. Apostolius VI.
56.—Compare Manso, Sparta, I. 2. p. 211.
678 Lucian Icaromenipp. c. 18. calls Cynuria, taking indeed a bird’s-eye
view, a χωρίον κατ᾽ οὐδὲν φακοῦ Αἰγυπτίου πλατύτερον, “not wider
than a bean.”
679 Pausan. IV. 24. 1. IV. 35. 2.
680 According to Eusebius in Olymp. 51. 6. ed. Pontac. comp. Corsini
Dissert. Agon. p. 51.
681 As Dissen has shown, ad Pind. Nem. IV. p. 381.
682 From this I have explained Herod. VIII. 73. in my Æginetica, p. 47,
where however the σύνοικοι after the Persian war are not different
from the former Periœci.
683 I. 18. and compare I. 76. and I. 122. See also Herodotus V. 92. 1.
ἄπειροι τυράννων καὶ φυλάσσοντες δεινότατα τοῦτο ἐν τῇ Σπάρτῇ μὴ
γενέσθαι, Sosicles the Corinthian says to the Spartans, “Heaven and
earth will be changed, before you abolish free governments
(ἰσοκρατίαι) in order to introduce tyrannies.” See also Dionys.
Halicarn. Lys. 30. p. 523. The Syracusans also overthrew many
tyrants, before they had one of their own, Aristot. Polit. V. 8. 18.
684 Tyrtæus Fragm. 3. v. 8. Gaisford.
685 Libanius in Sever, vol. III. p. 251. Reisk.
686 Polit. V. 9. 21.
687 The series is not, however, quite certain, as Herodotus VI. 126.
only goes down as far as Andreas. Aristotle merely says, Ὀρθαγόρου
παῖδες καὶ αὐτὸς Ὀρθαγόρας, and Plutarch, de sera Num. Vind. 7 (see
Wyttenbach. p. 44). Ὀρθαγόρας καὶ μετ᾽ ἐκεῖνον οἱ περὶ Μύρωνα καὶ
Κλεισθένην. From the new Excerpta of Diodorus, VII-X. 14. Script.
Vet. Nov. Coll. vol. II. p. 11. Mai, it appears that Andreas and
Orthagoras are probably the same person: for Andreas is stated also
to have been a cook, by whom the dynasty was first raised.
688 Pausan. VI. 19. 2. II. 8. 1. where for Πύρρων write Μύρων.
689 Herod. I. 163. and others.
690 Aristot. Pol. V. 10. 3. For what Aristotle says, μεταβάλλει καὶ εἰς
τυραννίδα τυραννὶς, ὥσπερ ἡ Σικυῶνος ἐκ τῆς Μύρωνος εἰς τὴν
Κλεισθένους, implies that the tyranny did not pass quietly from
Myron to Cleisthenes, but that the latter re-acquired it by force.
691 Book III. ch. 4. § 3.
692 Herod. V. 67. Ἀργείοισι πολεμήσας.
693 See, besides Herodotus, Diodor. Exc. 2. p. 550. with Wesseling’s
Notes.
694 Herodotus, followed by Dio Chrysost. III. p. 43 B. I would now in
this passage of Herodotus (V. 67.) retain λευστῆρα, where Casaubon
proposed ληιστῆρα; not, however, in a passive sense, but according
to its grammatical form, for a stone-slinger, _i.e._ a γύμνης or
ψιλοὸς, the great mass of light-armed soldiers being furnished with
slings. Compare _e.g._ Thuc. I. 106. οἱ ψιλοὶ κατέλευσαν.—“Adrastus
is king of the Argives, but thou art a common bond-slave,” says the
oracle to Cleisthenes.
695 Pausan. II. 9. 6. X. 37. 4. Schol. Pindar. Nem. IX. 2. Polyæn. III.
5. It is remarkable that Sparta took no part in this war.
696 See Boeckh Explic. Pindar. Olymp. XII. p. 206.
697 Pausan. II. 9. 6.
698 Pausan. X. 7. 5.
699 For the tyranny lasted, according to Aristotle and Diodorus, p. 11.
Mai, 100 years, _i.e._ from about the 26th to the 51st Olympiad,
676-576 B.C.
700 Herod. V. 68.
701 Herod. VI. 128.
702 Strab. p. 378. About 200 men according to Diodorus ap. Syncell.
Cronograph. p. 178. Par.
703 Herod. V. 92. 2.
704 Aristot. Pol. V. 8. 4. V. 9. 22.
705 Ælian. V. II. I. 19.
706 Concerning a stratagem of Cypselus on this occasion, see Polyænus V.
31. 1. That a Bacchiad, Demaratus, should have gone at this time to
Italy, is very probable; but that the Tarquins were descended from
him is a fiction. See Niebuhr’s History of Rome, vol. I. p. 215.
707 According to Eusebius, which agrees with the 447 years in Diodorus
(Fragm. 6. p. 635. Wessel.), from the return of the Heraclidæ until
Cypselus. It is not easy to see what were Strabo’s grounds for
reckoning the dominion of the Bacchiadæ at 200 years, VIII. p. 378.
According to Diodorus they were Prytanes for only 90 years.
708 Aristot. ubi sup.
709 Plutarch. Sept. Sapient. 21. cf. Sympos. Qu. VIII. 4. 4. p. 361.
710 Herod. V. 92. 6. according to Schol. Plat. Hipp. Maj. p. 135 Ruhnk.
he was πρῶτον δημοτικὸς, as should be read in Apostol. XX. 47.
711 Herod, ubi sup. Aristot. Pol. III. 8. 3. V. 8. 7. V. 9. 2.
712 Aristot. Pol. V. 9. 2.
713 Nicolaus Damascenus.
714 Aristot. Pol. V. 9. 22. Heraclid. Pont. 5. Nicol. Damasc.
715 Βουλὴν ἐπ᾽ ἐσχάτων, Heraclides. Compare Aristot. Pol. V. 6.
γίγνονται δὲ μεταβολαὶ τῆς ὀλιγαρχίας καὶ ὅταν ἀναλώσωσι τὰ ἴδια,
ζῶντες ἀσελγῶς. καὶ γὰρ οἱ τοιοῦτοι καινοτομεῖν ζητοῦσι, καὶ ἢ
τυραννίδι ἐπιτίθενται αὐτοὶ, ἢ κατασκευάζουσιν ἔτερον.
716 Ibid.
717 Book III. ch. 3. § 3.
718 Heraclides. Perhaps for προαγωγοὶ should be written προσαγωγοὶ (like
the ποταγωγίδες of Sicily, book III. ch. 9. § 7. note).
719 See Book II. ch. 10. § 7.
720 Concerning the Colossi and offerings of the Cypselidæ, see Aristot.
Polit. V. 9. 2. Theophrast. ap. Phot, in Κυψελιδῶν ἀνάθημα. Ephorus
ap. Diog. Laërt. I. 96. Pausan. V. 2. 4. Plato Phædr. p. 236 et
Schol. p. 313. ed. Bekker. Strabo VIII. p. 353. 378. Plutarch de
Pyth. orac. 13. See book III. ch. 10. § 12.
721 Herodotus. Compare Antenor and Dionysius of Chalcedon, in Plutarch,
de Malign. Herod. 22. p. 302. and the elegant legend in Pliny H. N.
IX. 41.
722 See above, ch. 6. § 8. Besides Gorgus, there was also at Ambracia a
tyrant named Periander, Aristot. Polit. V. 8. 9. Plutarch. Amator.
23. p. 60. perhaps the son of Gorgus.
723 Either to this person, or to Periander, or to Cypselus, the
beautiful Rhadina of Samos was, according to Stesichorus (ap. Strab.
VIII. p. 347.) sent as a bride, but she was killed out of jealousy.
That it was the Ionic Samos is proved against Strabo by Pausan. VII.
5. 6.
724 There is some difficulty in the chronology of this family; the
following is a genealogical table:—
[Transcriber’s Note: Here are the relationships shown in the table:
Aristocrates of Orchomenus: Father of Aristodemus and Eristhenea.
Eristhenea married Procles of Epidaurus, and bore Melissa.
Aëtion fathered Cypselus, who fathered Gorgus and Periander, who
married Melissa.
Melissa and Periander parented Cypselus and Lycophron.]
There are also Gordias and Psammetichus, as to whom nothing is
known. See Æginetica, p. 64. sqq. Periander ruled from Olymp. 38. 1.
(Eusebius) to Olymp. 48. 4. (Sosicrates ap. Diog. Laërt. I. 74.), 44
years according to Aristotle. This is not inconsistent with the fact
mentioned by Herodotus V. 95 and Apollodorus (p. 411. Heyn. comp.
Timæus ap. Strab. 13. p. 600. A. Aristot. Rhet. I. 15. 14.) that he
decided between Athens and Mytilene concerning Sigeum, since Phrynon
of Athens (victor in the 36th Olympiad, Afric.) had contended on
this same point with Pittacus in Olym. 43. 1. (Eusebius), before the
time of Pisistratus. Compare Polyænus I. 25. Plutarch de Herod.
Malign. 15. Diog. Laert. i. 74. Festus in Retiarii. Schol. Æsch.
Eumen. 401. The narrative of Herodotus is not arranged _entirely_ in
a chronological order. Periander, however, was reigning, according
to Herodotus I. 20. in the fifth year of the reign of Halyattes
(Olymp. 41), and before his death sent him a present of Corcyræan
boys, in the third generation (_i.e._ in the 16th Olympiad), before
the siege of Samos by the Lacedæmonians (Olymp. 63.), as Panofka
(_Res Samiorum_, p. 30.) has rightly corrected in Herod. III. 48.
(γ᾽ γενεῇ πρότερον) from Plutarch, de Malign. Herod. 22. Cypselus,
according to Herodotus, reigned thirty years, and therefore ascended
the throne in Olymp. 30. 3.; the Cypselidæ ruled altogether 76-1/2
years (according to my emendation of Aristot. Pol. V. 9. 22);
Procles reigned from about the 35th to the 49th Olympiad;
Aristocrates goes as far back as the 25th Olympiad.
725 Æginetica, p. 64.
726 Who himself had aimed at the tyranny of Athens so early as the 42d
Olympiad. Thucyd. I. 126. Heinrich, Epimenides, p. 83.
727 Aristot. Rhet. I. 2. 19. Polit. V. 4. 4.
728 Like the Enneacrunus of the Pisistratidæ. Pausan. I. 40. 1. I. 41.
2. Theognis v. 894. ὡς κυψελλίζον Ζεὺς ὀλέσειε γένος cannot well
refer to a _factio Cypselidarum_, especially if it has any connexion
with what precedes, concerning the Persian war; but κυψελλίζειν must
mean “to be deaf,” “to have the ears closed,” from κυψέλη.
729 I will only mention the tyrants in Doric states.—Cleobulus at
Lindos, who was similar to Periander, Plutarch, de EI 3. p. 118.
comp. Clem. Alex. Strom. IV. p. 523 B. (the Diagoridæ however still
continued at Ialysus). Cadmus in the island of Cos, whose history
must, from Herod. VI. 23. and VII. 164. be as follows. Scythes, the
tyrant of Zancle, being driven out by the Samians (Olymp. 70. 4. 497
B.C.), fled to the king of Persia, and remained chiefly at his
court. To Scythes’ son, Cadmus, the king of Persia probably gave the
island of Cos. For though it might be objected that Cadmus could not
have been the son of Scythes _of Zancle_, since the latter,
according to Herodotus, died in Persia (ἐν Πέρσῃσι), whereas Cadmus
inherited the tyranny from his father (παρὰ πατρός); it may be
answered that Scythes, _notwithstanding_ that the king had given him
the government of Cos, yet did not reside there, but at the Persian
court, as we know to have been the case with Histiæus. Afterwards,
however, before the 75th Olympiad (480 B.C.), having made a treaty
with the Samians, he returned to his ancient country. He was
followed by Epicharmus the comic poet, Suidas, in v. Ἐπίχαρμος. At
his departure from Cos he gave the state its liberty, and instituted
a senate (βουλή). He was a contemporary of Hippolochus the
Asclepiad, and the ancestor by the mother’s side of Thessalus. See
the 7th Epistle of Hippocrates. In Sicily, Oleander and the family
of Hippocrates, Gelon and Hieron, at Gela and then at Syracuse;
Phalaris, and afterwards Theron, and Thrasidæus at Agrigentum;
Anaxilas at Rhegium and Zancle; Panætius (Olymp. 41. 3. 614 B.C.) at
Leontini. See Aristot. Pol. V. 8. 1. V. 10. 4. Perhaps also
Aristophilidas of Tarentum (Herod. III. 136.) was a tyrant. Tyrants
also existed in Italy, in Croton, Sybaris, and Cyme.
730 Ap. Plutarch, de Herod. Malign. 21. p. 308. Compare Manso, Sparta,
I. 2. p. 308.
731 Although they were the guests of Sparta, τὰ γὰρ τοῦ θεοῦ πρεσβύτερα
ἐποιοῦντο ἢ τὰ τῶν ανδρῶν, Herod. V. 63. 90. Thuc. VI. 53. Aristoph.
Lysist. 1150, &c.
732 See Aristot. Pol. V. 5. 1. and his πολίτεια Ναξίων in Athenæus VIII.
p. 348. According to Herod. I. 61. 64. Lygdamis was established in
his government by Pisistratus, about the 60th Olympiad (540 B.C.).
Comp. Heyne Nov. Comment. Gott. II. Class. Phil. p. 65.
733 See above, § 2. Sicyon gave ships to Cleomenes about the 65th
Olympiad, or 520 B.C.
734 Before the time of Histiæus.
735 Lycurg. 30.
736 Herod. III. 54. Plutarch. de Herod. Malign. 21.
737 This follows from Plutarch ubi sup. and Cimon c. 16. Herod. VI. 12.
Pausan. III. 7, 8.
738 Herod. VII. 159.
739 According to Pausan. III. 4. 1. Therefore _before_ Olymp. 65. 1. or
520 B.C. for Cleomenes was then king, as is evident from a
comparison of Herod. VI. 108. with Thucyd. III. 68. He was in that
year in the neighbourhood of Platæa. According to Plutarch. Lacon.
Apophth. p. 212. Cleomenes was regent in the 63rd Olympiad (525 B.
C), when the Samians came to Sparta: this however would give too
great a length to his reign, (which Herodotus states to have been of
_short_ duration,) viz., from about 525 to 491 B.C.
740 It appears that this wood was near Sepea in the territory of Tiryns.
Apostolius IV. 27. states that the battle took place on the Ἄργους
λόφος. The stratagem of Cleomenes is narrated after Herodotus by
Polyænus I. 14.
741 The marvellous narrative of Herodotus VI. 77 sqq. is also
unconnected, from there being no explanation of the two first verses
of the oracle, ἀλλ᾽ ὅταν ἡ θήλεια, which however must have referred
to some real event. Or does Herodotus refer θήλεια to Juno?
Pausanias II. 20. doubts whether Herodotus understands it. But the
story of Telesilla in Pausanias, Plutarch. de Mul. Virt. 5. p. 269.
and Polyænus VIII. 33. is very fabulous. The festival Ὕβριστικὰ
could not have had this historical origin, but must have belonged to
the mystical rites of some elementary deities. The number of the
Argives who were slain is stated by Plutarch and Polyænus to have
been 7777; by others 6000 (also a tradition of a seven days’
armistice in Plut. Lac. Apoph. p. 211.). This is the battle ἐν τῇ
ἑβδόμῃ ἱσταμένου, but of _what_ month we are ignorant, Pol. V. 2. 8.
Plut. Mul. Virt. ubi sup. Others placed it at the νουμηνία of the
fourth month, anciently Hermæus, but only because the Ὕβριστικὰ were
then celebrated. See Clem. Alex. Strom. IV. p. 522. ed. Sylb. Suidas
in v. Τελέσιλλα.
742 Concerning these slaves, see book III. ch. 3. § 2.
743 Polit. V. 2. 8. Plutarch confounds bond-slaves and Periœci.
744 See Schol. Ven. ad Il. B. 108. concerning the nine hamlets (islands)
near Argos.
745 Pausan. VIII. 27. 1.
746 Strabo VIII. p. 376. distinguishes Orneæ κώμη τῆς Ἀργείας from the
city near Sicyon, as also in the same place a κώμη named Asine, p.
373 B.
747 Diod. XI. 65.
748 Strabo p. 377. Yet Cleonæ soon occurs again as a friendly state.
749 Ch. 7. § 15. Cleonæ was at that time engaged in a war with Corinth,
Plutarch. Cimon. 17.
750 Pausan. VII. 25. 3. Comp. Diodorus XI. 65. It is remarkable how
rapidly Mycenæ fell into oblivion among the Athenians. Æschylus does
not once mention it; succeeding poets frequently confound it with
Argos. In the Electra of Sophocles there is throughout the play the
most confused notion of the locality; compare Elmsley ad Eurip.
Heraclid. 188. Concerning the destruction of Mycenæ, see Brunck
Analect. tom. II. p. 105. n. 248.
751 Pausan. II. 25. 7. cf. II. 17. 5. VIII. 46. 2. Concerning the
emigration, see Strabo VIII. p. 373 B. and Ephorus lib. VI. ap.
Steph. Byz. in v. Ἁλιεῖς. ὅτι οὗτοι Τιρύνθιοί εἰσιν, &c. In
Stephanus in v. Τίρυνς, as well as in Strabo ubi sup. the
Hermioneans in Halieis are spoken of. There is much that is very
singular in the oracle, ποῖ τὺ λαβὼν καὶ ποῖ τὺ καθίξω καὶ ποῖ τὺ
οἴκησιν ἔχων ἀλιέα τε κεκλῆσθαι. See App. V. § 11.
752 Herod. VIII. 43. The Hermioneans however maintained their ancient
connexions at a later period; see above, ch. 7. § 13.
753 Pausan. II. 34. 5. Strabo adds the destruction of Asine; but this
took place at a much earlier period. The statement of Strabo (p. 373
D.) that the Mycenæans used Eiones as their ναύσταθμον, must, if it
is correct, refer to some time before the 75th Olympiad, or 480 B.C.
754 Pausan. II. 25. 1.
755 Diod. XII. 75.
756 Herod. VII. 148.
757 Herod. I. 30. where the ἀστυγείτονες are the Megarians, not the
Eleusinians.
758 Pausan. I. 40, 45. Strabo IX. p. 271. Herod. Vit. Homer. c. 28.
Polyæn. Strateg. I. 20. 1, 2. Diogen. Laërt. I. 48. Quinctil. V. 11.
759 Plutarch. Comp. Solon, et Public. 4.
760 Pausan. I. 40. 4.
761 Plutarch. Solon. 10. 12. confirmed by Ælian. V. H. VII. 19. There
was at Delphi a statue of Apollo armed with a lance, mentioned by
Plutarch Pyth. Orac. 16. p. 273. and Pausan. X. 15. 1. which was
offered up by the Megarians after a victory over Athens, _i.e._
after that gained in Olymp. 83. 3. see book III. ch. 9, § 10.
762 Pausan. V. 23. 1. compare _Æginetica_, p. 126.
763 They occur in the following order; Corinth, Sicyon, Megara, and
Epidaurus, at a later period, after the destruction of Ægina.
764 Herod. VIII. 72.
765 Καὶ ἄλλα γέρεα μεγάλα καὶ—IX. 26. Thucyd. V. 67. Concerning the
fidelity of Phlius towards Sparta, see Theodoret. Græc. Affin. IX.
16.
766 Thuc. II. 9.
767 Thuc. V. 29.
768 Herod. IX. 77.
769 Herod. VIII. 72.
770 Herod. VII. 202.
771 παραστάται, Diod. XV. 12. See also Xen. Hell. V. 2. 3.
772 Thuc. V. 29. 33.
773 Thuc. IV. 134. Concerning this internal war, see below, § 9.
774 Thuc. V. 29. See book III. ch. 4, § 7.
775 Ἡγεῖσθαι, ἡγεμονεύειν, Thuc. I. 71. The Corinthian orator says to
the Spartans, τὴν Πελοπόννησον πειρᾶσθε μὴ ἐλάσσω ἐξηγεῖσθαι (_ad
finem_) ἢ οἱ πατέρες ὑμῖν παρέδοσαν.
776 Thuc. II. 10. περιήγγελλον κατὰ τὴν Πελοπόννησον.
777 Likewise ships, implements for sieges, &c. Thucyd. III. 16. VII. 18.
778 For expeditious without Peloponnesus τὰ δύο μέρη, _i.e._ two thirds
of the whole, appear to have been the common proportion, Thuc. III.
15. Demosth. in Neær. p. 1379.
779 Ἀργυρίον ῥητόν. Thuc. II. 7.
780 Boeckh Inscript. No. 1511. It is probably of the time of Lysander.
781 Ὡς οὐ τεταγμένα σιτεῖται πόλεμος, Plutarch. Cleomen. 27. (Ἀρχίδαμος
ὁ παλαιὸς, _i.e._ the second, ὑπὸ τὴν ἀρχὴν τοῦ Πελοποννησιακοῦ
πολέμου.) Compare Plutarch. Demosth. 17. Crassus 17. Reg. Apophth.
p. 126. and Lacon. Apophth. p. 202. Hutten. In this passage the
apophthegm is incorrectly attributed to Archidamus the Third,
although the Peloponnesian war is mentioned in connexion with it.
782 Thuc. I. 141.
783 Thuc. V. 54. Cleomenes also, Herod. V. 14. conceals the real object;
but the army is soon separated.
784 Thuc. ubi sup.
785 See book III. ch. 12. The army of the 10,000, although composed
entirely of mercenaries, was in many respects like an allied army,
and was under Spartan discipline.
786 Thucyd. II. 10.
787 I. 141.
788 Ibid.
789 Thucyd. I. 125. καὶ τὸ πλῆθος ἐψηφίσαντο. V. 30. κύριον εἶναι ὅτι ἂν
τὸ πλῆθοσ τῶν ξυμμάχων ψηφίσηται ἢν μή τι θεῶν ἢ ἡρώων κώλυμα ᾖ. V.
17. the Megarians, Eleans, Corinthians, and Bœotians are outvoted.
But, according to I. 40, 41, the vote of the Corinthians _alone_
prevented the Peloponnesians from succouring the Samians, _i.e._
they gave the preponderance to the party opposed to war.
790 Besides Herodotus V. 93. see Dio Chrys. Orat. XXXVII. p. 459. 15.
791 Thucyd. I. 67.
792 Thuc. ubi sup. Xenoph. Hell. V. 2. 11. 20.
793 Herod. IX. 9. where however he is distinguished from the ἄγγελοι.
Compare Plutarch de Malign. Herod. 41. Polyæn. V. 30. 1. Plutarch
Themistocl. 6.
794 See the treaty in Thucyd. V. 77, 79.
795 Thucyd. I. 28. cf. V. 79.
796 V. 31.
797 V. 7, 9. καττὰ πάτρια δίκας διδόναι τὰς ἴσας καὶ ὁμοίας. The
expression καττὰ πάτρια does not at all refer to ancient treaties of
the Dorians. The πατρῷοι σπονδαὶ in Pausan. III. 5. 8. probably
refer to the tradition mentioned above, ch. 5. § 16.
798 Thucyd. ubi sup. τοῖς δὲ ἔταις καττὰ πάτρια δικάζεσθαι.
799 Herod. VI. 84.
800 VI. 108. ἐδίδοσαν σφέας αὐτούς.
801 V. 70.
802 V. 49. 70.
803 According to Justin XIX. 1. the Sicilian states also applied to
Leonidas for assistance against Carthage. How general the respect
for Sparta was at that time in Greece, is shown by several passages
in Pindar, which are not otherwise intelligible, _e.g._ Pyth. V. 73.
804 See Appendix IV.
805 Pers. 819.
806 Thuc. II. 71. III. 58. 68.
807 Herod. IX. 106.—These σπονδαὶ are also probably the ζυνθῆκαι,
according to which the Athenians wished δίκας δοῦναι at the
beginning of the war, Thuc. I. 144, 145.
808 Thuc. I. 95.
809 Diod. XI. 50.
810 Thuc. VI. 82. αὐτοὶ δὲ τῶν ὑπὸ τῷ βασιλεῖ πρότερον ὄντων ἡγεμονες
καταστάντες.
811 Of this Eichstädt has treated in his Notes to the translation of
Mitford’s History of Greece; also Mosche in a Dissertation _De eo
quod in Cornelii Vitis faciendum restat_. Francof. 1802; and lastly,
Dahlmann in his _Forschungen auf dem Gebiet der Geschichte_, vol. I.
p. 1-148. with great clearness and accuracy.
812 Herod. VI. 42. See my Review of a work of Kortüm’s, _Göttingische
Anzeigen_, 1822. p. 117.
813 Thuc. VIII. 5. cf. 46. ὅσοι ἐν τῇ βασιλέως Ἕλληνες οἰκοῦσι, an
official expression of frequent occurrence.
814 Plutarch. Themist. 29. Thucyd. I. 138. Diod. XI. 57. His sons also
appear to have possessed them, according to Pausan. I. 26. 4.
815 Xenoph. Hell. III. 1. 6. To this family Procles also belongs, who
married the daughter of Aristotle (when the latter was at Atarneus),
and had by her two sons, Procles and Demaratus, Sextus Empiricus
adv. Mathem. p. 51 B. ed. Col.
816 Xenoph. ubi sup.
817 Thucyd. V. 1.
818 Herod. IX. 35. Pausan. III. 11. Isocrat. Archid. p. 136 A. Hence
also Leotychides in 469 B.C. went to _Tegea_ in exile, Herod. VI.
72. Herodotus IX. 37. also mentions a dissension between Tegea and
Sparta before the Persian war.
819 Fragm. 21. Gaisford.
820 At that time also Tegea assisted Argos against Mycenæ; above, ch. 8.
§ 7.
821 Polyænus I. 41. 5. confounds Archidamus III. and II. Plato Leg. III.
p. 692. has not an accurate idea of the time of this war, of which
Diodorus XI. 64, has given altogether an incorrect and inconsistent
representation.
822 Plin. H. N. II. 79, 81. Cicero de Divin. I. 50.
823 The ἄγος Ταινάριον. See Thucyd. I. 128. Ælian. V. H. VI. 7. Suidas
in Ταινάριον κακόν. Apostolius XVIII. 92. Prov. Vat. IV. 12.
Plutarch. Prov. Al. 54. Pausan. IV. 24. 2. who mentions
Lacedæmonians instead of Helots.
824 Thucyd. I. 101. ᾗ καὶ Μεσσήνιοι ἐκλήθησαν οἱ πάντες.
825 Herod. IX. 64.
826 If in Herod. IX. 35. the alteration πρὸς Ἰθώμῃ may be ventured. The
expression of Pausanias III. 11. πρὸς τοὺς ἐξ Ἰσθμοῦ Ἰθώμην
ἀποστήσαντας is compounded of the passage of Herodotus, which he
reads as we now have it, and Thucyd. I. 101. οἱ Εἵλωτες—ἐς Ἰθώμην
απεστησαν.
827 Thucyd. II. 27. IV. 56.
828 Xenoph. Hell. V. 2. 3.
829 Thucyd. III. 54.
830 Aristoph. Lysistr. 1138. The 4000 hoplitæ, here mentioned by
Aristophanes, were about the third part of the disposable forces of
Athens (Thuc. II. 13); and since the Platæans likewise sent τὸ
τρίτον μέρος of their numbers to the assistance of the Spartans (ib.
III. 54. ἰδιᾳ as opposed to the rest of Bœotia), this was probably a
contingent fixed for such cases. Platæa, it should be observed, had
been on friendly terms with Sparta after the time of Pausanias, and
been connected with that state by προξενίαι, to which the son of the
Platæan general Arimnestus owed his name of Lacon, Thuc. III. 52,
where we should read Ἀριμνήστου, or _vice versâ_ in Plutarch
Aristid. 11. and 19. Ἀείμνηστος should be read for Ἀρίμνηστος.
831 Thucyd. Compare Manso, Sparta, vol. I. p. 377. They must also at
that time have been angry with the Athenians on account of Thasos.
832 These συνθῆκαι may, I believe, be safely referred to this time; from
which Aristotle, quoted in Plutarch, Qu. Rom. 52. p. 343. and Qu.
Gr. 5. p. 380. cites the passages in the text on account of the
expression χρηστὸν ποιεῖν, for “to kill.” Compare Hesychius: χρηστοὶ
οἱ καταδεδικασμένοι. That the Arcadians in a certain manner carried
on war for the Helots is also implied in Zenobius Prov. I. 59.
833 Thucyd. III. 112. IV. 3. cf. VII. 57. οἱ Μεσσήνιοι νῦν καλούμενοι.
834 Thucyd. I. 102. The σπονδαὶ Παυσανίου still, however, remained in
force (the συνθῆκαι in cap. 144).
835 Æginetica, p. 179. and see Boeckh ad Pind. Pyth. VIII. Dissen ad
Nem. VIII. 15.
836 See the excellent explanation of Boeckh ad Pind. Isthm. VI. p. 532.
837 On the oligarchical troubles in Olymp. 80. 4. (457 B.C.) and the
probable share of Cimon in them, see the accurate discussion in
Meier’s Historia Juris Attici de Bonis damnatis, p. 4. n. 11.
838 Thuc. I. 118. τὸ δέ τι καὶ πολέμοις οἰκείοις ἐξειργόμενοι.
839 See Boeckh’s Public Economy of Athens, vol. II. p. 396, note.