Two persistent problems which otherwise enthusiastic readers of the Aithiopika have raised are the apparent contradictions, first in Kalasiris' character, and second in his narrative. The troubling aspect of Kalasiris' character, as some readers feel it, is the tension between his oft-alleged wisdom, piety, virtual sanctity on the one hand, and his outrageous mendacity on the other. Kalasiris is boldly and repeatedly deceitful, cozening anyone – and there are many – who might stand in the way of his success in getting Charikleia and her lover to Aithiopia. The second problem could be said to stem from the first: one particular lie which Kalasiris seems to tell in his long narrative to Knemon is that after exiling himself from Memphis he happened to arrive in Delphi and while there happened to discover that Charikleia was actually the princess of Aithiopia. But he later mentions that he had in fact already visited Aithiopia and undertaken at the queen's request to search for her long-lost daughter. This inconsistency, fundamental to his entire story and motivation, is usually regarded as a simple contradiction in the narrative which Heliodoros should have avoided. I want to suggest that this contradiction is not a mere oversight or poorly planned effect but more like a deliberate narrative strategy on Kalasiris' part, and hence an aspect of the larger problem of his honorable mendacity.