I have had much help from Professor A. Andrewes, who has laboured through all these papers. I am greatly indebted to Professors K. J. Dover, L. Edelstein, E. D. M. Fraenkel, B. D. Meritt, J. M. C. Toynbee, and R. E. Wycherley, and Messrs. J. Boardman, J. M. Cook, R. Meiggs, T. B. Owen, and G. P. Stevens for help on various points. No. XXIV owes a particular debt to Professor A. E. Raubitschek and Mr. G. A. Stamires, who were working on similar lines and shared their material with me, and to members of the Agora Excavations, notably to C. W. J. Eliot and E. Vanderpool. Dr. M. Mitsos of the Epigraphical Museum and his phylax, George Diakoumes, have, as ever, been lavish with their time and patience. The Oxford Craven Committee, the Warden and Fellows of New College, and the President and Fellows of Corpus Christi have continued to make it possible for me to spend most of my time on these matters.

Abbreviations

ATL Meritt, Wade-Gery, and McGregor, The Athenian Tribute Lists.

Crosby. The Leases of the Laurion Mines (Hesperia XIX 189–312).

FdD Fouilles de Delphes.

GAI Meisterhans-Schwyzer, Grammatik der Attischen Inschriften.

GHI Tod, Greek Historical Inscriptions.

ILS Dessau, Inscriptions Latinae Selectae.

PA Kirchner, Prosopographia Attica.

PIR Groag and Stein, Prosopographia Imperii Romani.

^{page 1 note 1} AE 1948–49, 146 ff. (SEG XII 80); Fig. 1.

^{page 1 note 2} IG I² 24 (GHI 40; SEG X 30).

^{page 3 note 3} Aristophanes, Lys. 84.

^{page 3 note 4} Id.488.

^{page 3 note 5} Id.641 ff.

^{page 3 note 6} Id.1130 ff.

^{page 3 note 7} Id.801 ff.

^{page 3 note 8} Id.1137 ff.

^{page 3 note 9} Id.274 ff.

^{page 3 note 10} Id.1149 ff.

^{page 4 note 11} IG II² 1036. 34.

^{page 4 note 12} For this and the rest of the paragraph, see Appendix.

^{page 4 note 13} Moralia 534 C.

^{page 4 note 14} NH XXXIV 76.

^{page 4 note 15} Philopseudes 18–20.

^{page 4 note 16} Pfühl, Die Anfänge der griechischen Bildniskunst 7.

^{page 4 note 17} IG II² 3828, 4331 (revised Meritt, Hesperia XVI 288), 4322, 4895. The son of the Hippolochides who is commemorated in 4895 was trierarch before 334–3 B.C. (II² 1623. 26), probably in 337–6 B.C. The Kephisodotos of Aithalidai of 3828 may be the one who appears in the mining records (Hopper, , BSA XLVIII 245Google Scholar, collects the evidence), and the date in the first half of the century would again be confirmed, but there are two men who differ only in patronymic (PA 8321, 8323) and PA 8322 may be a third. The second-century base, Pergamon 142, also belongs (Carpenter, AJA LVIII 5).Google Scholar

^{page 4 note 18} Pliny, loc. cit.; cf. Xen. De re equestr. I 1.

^{page 4 note 19} Eq. 242 ff.

^{page 4 note 20} See n. 15.

^{page 4 note 21} Thuc. I 29. 2.

^{page 4 note 22} The dates have been pushed even higher, e.g. by Picard, , La Sculpture III 126 ff.Google Scholar, and, very tentatively, on epigraphic grounds, by Raubitschek (Dedications from the Athenian Akropolis no. 143, p. 159) and Meritt, Hesperia XVII 38 ff., no. 24.Google Scholar But Raubitschek warns us specifically (op. cit. 488) that his D 143 is so uncertain as to have no probative value. His photographs hardly do justice to the probability that its two pieces belong together, which seems more likely when the actual stones are examined. He places it in the last quarter of the fifth century. I would not myself have put it much later than 425, and one would perhaps expect a sculptor to be in a position to dedicate for himself later rather than earlier in his career. Meritt's new fragment only has ]πεκε͂θεν ἐπόησεν with nothing of the name, and must in any case be close to 400.

^{page 4 note 23} AM VII 47. The objections of Toepffer (Attische Genealogie 128) are irrelevant since the identification of II² 3464.

^{page 5 note 24} IG II² 3453.

^{page 5 note 25} Op. cit. 125 ff.

^{page 5 note 26} See Appendix, no. 6.

^{page 6 note 27} ÖJh XIX–XX (1919), 304.

^{page 6 note 28} RhMus XL (1885), 439.

^{page 6 note 29} PA 4549.

^{page 6 note 30} I note for the sake of completeness that a statue has been found for the base by Six (RM XXVII 83 ff.), viz. Brit. Mus. 2001, a head of Roman date, and a striking portrait of an old woman which commended itself for the purpose by the aggressive naturalism of her face coupled with the fifth-century nature of her hair. Professor J. M. C. Toynbee has been good enough to confirm that the original was probably a bronze and that the hair appears to be of fifth-century style, but she doubts whether the face could have become nearly as realistic as it now is much before the end of the second century. Therefore, even if we could demonstrate that its prototype is the work of Demetrios, we would still be far from an idea of the bronze original.

^{page 6 note 31} Ad IG II² 3453.

^{page 6 note 32} Pickard-Cambridge, Dramatic Festivals of Athens 52 ff.

^{page 6 note 33} Aristophanes, Lys. 551 ff.

^{page 7 note 34} Cf. e.g. IG II² 1529. 10.

^{page 7 note 35} Aristophanes Lys. 5.

^{page 7 note 36} Schmid, Geschichte der griechischen Literatur IV 2, 1, 206. The name is now known before the middle of the fifth century (SEG X 321) and c. 410 (Beazley, , AJA LIV 319Google Scholar). I have nothing to add to Beazley's remarks on the Jatta vase bearing the names Lysistrate and Myrrhine.

^{page 12 note 1} Pritchett, The Five Attic Tribes after Cleisthenes 30.

^{page 12 note 2} Last dated appearance, an ephebic decree, II² 1009 (117–16 B.C.). On two gravestones dated by Kirchner in the first century B.C., II² 6514, 6516.

^{page 12 note 3} For the date, Hesperia XVI 151.

^{page 13 note 4} Adverbes grecques en -θεν, 98–100.

^{page 13 note 5} Σφὴττη(θεν) for Σφὴττι(ος) in II² 1672. 52.

^{page 13 note 6} Thesm. 898.

^{page 13 note 7} Nubes 134.

^{page 13 note 8} LS⁹ cite Theoenostus, Can. 101 for Κὶκυννα but it is an emendation even there.

^{page 13 note 9} Ad IG I² 186/7. 3. Cf. Athenaeus 40 B, Paus. I 2, 5.

^{page 13 note 10} Steph. Byz. s.v.

^{page 13 note 11} II² 2776. 109–110.

^{page 13 note 12} Inscr. Cret. IV 186 B 16.

^{page 13 note 13} Orph. Arg. 126.

^{page 13 note 14} Robert, Collection Froehner, no. 30; Daux, , REG LIV 222.Google Scholar

^{page 13 note 15} REG LIV 62.

^{page 13 note 16} Hesperia, Suppl. I 54–5.

^{page 13 note 17} See n. 1.

^{page 14 note 18} Meritt, Hesperia V 410Google Scholar; Crosby, , Hesperia X 17.Google Scholar ῾Ιππὸνικος ῾Ιππονὶκου ᾿Αλωπεκῆθεν (II² 4680) should also be added to this family, its last known member.

^{page 14 note 19} Hopper, , BSA XLVIII 245, n. 330a.Google Scholar

^{page 14 note 20} See no. XXVII below.

^{page 14 note 21} Androtion, FGrH 324 F 38.

^{page 14 note 22} IG II² 1374–5.

^{page 14 note 23} FdD III 2, 23.

^{page 14 note 24} IG II² 2825. 12.

^{page 14 note 25} IG II² 1445. 37.

^{page 15 note 26} IG VII 270.

^{page 15 note 27} See n. 21.

^{page 15 note 28} FGrH 239. 56.

^{page 15 note 29} ᾿Αγκυλεεὺς (I² 301. 24), ᾿Αθμὸνοθεν (I² 661), ᾿Αλωπεκειεὺς (I² 237. 56 etc.), ᾿Ανακαὶαθεν (II² 2765) ᾿ΑΧαρνε῀θεν (I² 911), ὲξ ᾿Ελαὶας (I² 370. 8), Θημοκειεὺς (II² 338. 6), Θριῶθεν (II² 1672. 109), Κεραμεὺς (I² 366. 12), Κεφαλεὺς (I² 370. 7, 571), Κοιλεὺς (I² 295.20, etc.), φλυῆθεν (I² 359. 18), Μαραθὼνὸεν (I² 905), Σφὴττοθεν(I² 591). The last two only occur with women.

^{page 15 note 30} Klio V 283–4.

^{page 16 note 31} AM XVII (1892), 319 ff.

^{page 16 note 32} The confirmation is not complete, since trittys-division is not strong in this list, but the continued grouping with ὲξ Οὶου and Εὺπυρὶδαι is striking enough. Milchoefer, (AM XVIII 293 ff.)Google Scholar never really succeeded in shaking this determination, although Judeich (Topographie ² 172 n. 5) quotes him for a refutation.

^{page 16 note 33} For a bibliography, see Hoenigmann, , RE XI 1111–3.Google Scholar No new points have been added since.

^{page 16 note 34} Harpocration, s.vv. ῾Κολωναὶτας ᾿, ῾Εὺρυσὰκειον᾿

^{page 16 note 35} BPhW 1900, 348 ff.

^{page 16 note 36} Op. cit., 168 n. 4.

^{page 16 note 37} It is perhaps pertinent to note that one ὲκ Κολωνοῦ gravestone, II² 6512, was found at Sepolia.

^{page 16 note 38} Hesperia XXII 276.

^{page 16 note 39} See Hesperia VI 348, VII 1 ff. for the site of the Eurysakeion.

^{page 16 note 40} One fairly certain and one possible alteration in Pritchett's new text may be suggested. He reads (Stele V 11. 13 ff):

and says that the Aiakeion must now be sought at the south-west corner of the Agora. I do not see what could have stoc at the end of 1. 13, if not γεὶτου which hardly affects the matter. What is more important is that the reference to the Aiakeion may be delusive. I see nothing against Αὶ[ὰντειον] Ferguson, (Hesperia VII 18 n. 2)Google Scholar pointed out that the cults centre for Aias was the Eurysakeion, and Wycherley will show that there is no difficulty in identifying the Eurysakeion with the Aianteion. If this is so, the Aianteion will fit the topographical requirements of the passage, and we will still be withoi firm evidence for the site of the Aiakeion.

^{page 17 note 41} The late fourth-century metal-worker Νικοκρὰτης ὲκ Κολωνοῦ (PA 10914) adds nothing to this point. The Scholiast on Oed. Col. 57 places μὲταλλα Χαλκοῦ at the Kolonos Hippios. This I doubt, but the cults of Prometheus and Hephaistos in the district may point to a metal-working tradition there quite sufficient to balance Milchoefer's argument.

^{page 17 note 42} IG II² 1558. 65.

^{page 17 note 43} See n. 33.

^{page 17 note 44} Strabo 65.

^{page 17 note 45} See n. 34.

^{page 17 note 46} Schol. Aristophanes, Aves 997.

^{page 17 note 47} Dem. LIV 7.

^{page 17 note 48} IG II² 968. 14. I cannot say what the date of the ‘Long Stoa’ should be. This inscription probably belongs to 141–0. I doubt whether the work entitled δρισμοὶ τῆς πδλεως from which our information comes could have been written before 250 at the very earliest. (See now Jacoby's commentary on FGrH 375.) The first reference to the ‘Long Stoa’, not necessarily the same one, is II² 1469. 130 (c. 320), a treasure-record. One tends to think of tamiai as concerning themselves only with the Acropolis, but cf. II² 1445. 24 ὲ το῀ μητρὼιο παρακαταθὴκη

^{page 17 note 49} IG II² 2617–9, Hesperia IX 267.

^{page 17 note 50} I am much sustained in this view by an unpublished paper by Prof. Wycherley on the different meanings of Kerameikos.

^{page 17 note 1} Both laterals were left undressed. The left lateral now contains a sketched circle and scrolling, but, since it was inscribed with reference to the size of the block as broken, it may be ignored. A metal lug has at some time been inserted off centre of the circle, low to the left; I cannot guess when or why. I am deeply indebted to Mr. G. P. Stevens for examining the block and discussing its architectural problems with me.

^{page 18 note 2} IG II 5, 1200 b.

^{page 18 note 3} Inscriptiones Antiquae II 6, p. 48.

^{page 18 note 4} Travels in Greece (1776), 60–1.

^{page 18 note 5} ADelt 1888, 68. For this wall, cf. Hesperia XII 261.

^{page 18 note 6} Inscriptiones Antiquae xxii.

^{page 18 note 7} FGrH 328 F 149.

^{page 18 note 8} An accurate text in the Addenda; photograph in Ancient Greek Inscriptions in the British Museum IV 939a.

^{page 18 note 9} Marshall in the British Museum volume says ‘step-daughter’; I do not know how he knows.

^{page 19 note 10} IG II² 1247.

^{page 19 note 11} IG II² 145 (cf. BSA XLIX 37 f.).

^{page 19 note 12} Wilamowitz, , Hermes XXXIV 618.Google Scholar

^{page 19 note 13} Cf. Finley, Land and Credit in Ancient Athens no. 157, p. 164.

^{page 19 note 14} Nav. sive Vota I 10.

^{page 19 note 15} Compare the anti-Macedonian politician Eukrates, whose existence was denied until he turned up as proposer of the great anti-tyranny law (Hesperia XXI 357). This is a warning not to take Lucian too lightly.

^{page 19 note 16} [Dem.] LIX 30.

^{page 19 note 17} Isocrates XV 93, but the identification is from name only.

^{page 19 note 18} II² 1609. 46.

^{page 19 note 19} II² 1751.

^{page 19 note 20} II² 1753 (Gomme, Population of Athens 52 n. 1, 58).

^{page 19 note 21} PA 15501 is a creation of Busolt, (Hermes XXV 567)Google Scholar from the letters -]μαντ[- in I² 263. 49.

^{page 19 note 22} RE XIX 2201 ff. Users of this article should note that Philippides, the thesmothetes of 224–3, does not belong to this family or to Paiania. This has been seen since SIG ³ 542, but the references escaped Treves.

^{page 19 note 23} RE XIX 2524.

^{page 19 note 24} IG II² 649, revised by Dinsmoor. Archons of Athens 1 ff.

^{page 19 note 25} II² 1613. 191–2.

^{page 19 note 26} As Kirchner (ad loc.) inferred.

^{page 20 note 27} II² 1628. 374.

^{page 20 note 28} II² 1753. See n. 20.

^{page 20 note 29} Op. cit. 58.

^{page 20 note 30} Kent's, attempt (CR XX 153–5)Google Scholar to show that Aristophanes was still alive in 375 has gone unanswered and ignored.

^{page 20 note 31} II² 3067.

^{page 20 note 32} Aeschines I 11; Aristotle, Ath. Pol. 56.

^{page 20 note 33} II² 478. 36.

^{page 20 note 34} Cf. Schaefer, , Demosthenes und seine Zeit, Beil. 210.Google Scholar

^{page 21 note 35} II² 1609. 117.

^{page 21 note 36} AM XXXV 58.

^{page 21 note 37} I still think this the most likely interpretation, but I am a little shaken by Mrs.Pope's, arguments (Studies presented to D. M. Robinson II 1047–8).Google Scholar The find-spot is difficult, but trierarchs thinking tribally seem to be quite unknown. In any case the inscription must be fifth century, which is the main point.

^{page 21 note 38} Crosby, passim; Raubitschek, , Hesperia XI 304.Google Scholar

^{page 21 note 39} II² 1623. 233.

^{page 21 note 40} II² 1629. 569–71.

^{page 22 note 41} Travels in Greece 100.

^{page 22 note 42} GGA CLXIX (1907), 476.

^{page 22 note 43} Mythology and Monuments 429.

^{page 22 note 44} Hesperia XV 21–25.

^{page 23 note 45} They, of course, also fit Judeich's assignment of it to the Mycenaean palace site (Topographie von Athen ² 260, 284), supported by Immerwahr, , Hesperia XI 342.Google Scholar This view remains without foundations.

^{page 23 note 46} De Choregia Quaestiones Epigraphicae (Kiel, 1906), 18, 31.

^{page 23 note 47} Choregische Weihinschriften 74.

^{page 23 note 48} Op. cit. 8–9.

^{page 23 note 49} Revue belge de bhilologie et d'histoire IX 766.

^{page 23 note 50} Antiphon VI 11.

^{page 23 note 51} Dramatic Festivals of Athens 75.

^{page 23 note 52} Op. cit. 7.

^{page 23 note 53} II² 2318. 320–324. (Cf. Pickard-Cambridge, op. cit. 108, where 334–3 is a misprint.)

^{page 24 note 54} See n. 32.

^{page 24 note 55} Op. cit. 76.

^{page 24 note 56} II² 3039.

^{page 24 note 57} PA 1411.

^{page 24 note 58} [Dem.] L 26.

^{page 24 note 59} Dem. XXI 64; XLII 22.

^{page 24 note 60} Dem. XLIX 22.

^{page 24 note 61} Hesperia VIII 14–16.

^{page 24 note 62} II² 3040.

^{page 24 note 63} Fr. 303 (Koerte); for the date, see Dinsmoor, Archons of athens 41.

^{page 24 note 64} Op. cit. 16, no. 28.

^{page 24 note 65} II² 3054.

^{page 24 note 66} II² 2318. 362.

^{page 25 note 1} IG II² iv. i, p. 8.

^{page 25 note 2} Archons of Athens 423.

^{page 25 note 3} Calendars of Athens 40. Though not drawn up for this purpose, this table is most useful for it.

^{page 25 note 4} Vallois, L'architecture hellénique et hellénistique à Délos, App. A.

^{page 25 note 5} Op. cit. 36.

^{page 25 note 6} Revised by Schweigert, , Hesperia VIII 172 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 25 note 7} Dinsmoor op. cit. 355.

^{page 25 note 8} Aeschines II 61; Dem. XIX 15, 57.

^{page 25 note 9} Aeschines III 67.

^{page 25 note 10} Pickard-Cambridge, Dramatic Festivals of Athens 76 ff.

^{page 25 note 11} Dem. XXI 9.

^{page 25 note 12} Aeschines III 68.

^{page 25 note 13} Ibid. III 67. Made sixteen years after the event, it will be observed.

^{page 26 note 14} Op. cit. 355–6.

^{page 26 note 15} Op. cit. 42.

^{page 26 note 16} See n. 2.

^{page 26 note 1} Gomme (Population of Athens 64) had already suggested this as likely.

^{page 26 note 2} See No. XXIV p. 13.

^{page 27 note 1} Calendars of Athens 47 ff.

^{page 27 note 2} Photograph in Wilhelm, , Attische Urkunden I 48.Google Scholar

^{page 27 note 1} Population of Athens 71–2.

^{page 27 note 2} AM V 346.

^{page 29 note 3} Epigraphische Beiträge 32.

^{page 29 note 4} Op. cit. II.

^{page 29 note 5} Hesperia XVI 151 ff.

^{page 29 note 6} Ath. pol. 53. 4–5.

^{page 29 note 7} Hesperia, suppl. VIII 277.

^{page 29 note 8} I accept tentatively Schweigert's dating of this inscription to 365–4 (AJP LXI 194 ff.), but I must admit that I do not yet see how Timotheos, Theoxenos' colleague, can have been general and trierarch in the same year. In any case, the identification of Theoxenos would completely preclude the erroneous attempt made by Fränkel and Kirchner to put the inscription in the 370s. Even if there were a possible year for a trierarchy of Timotheos, Theoxenos would have been too young to act as his colleague.

^{page 30 note 9} All Delphic dates in this article are taken from La Coste-Messelière, , BCH LXXIII (1949), 201 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 30 note 10} SIG ³ 298 n. 10.

^{page 31 note 11} Hesperia IV 167.

^{page 31 note 12} IG II² 1443. 13. It is now recognised that this office was annual (Busolt-Swoboda II 1055 n. 3), but the Treasurers of Athena of 344–3 could, I suppose, have received money directly from the Treasurer of the Military Fund of the previous year.

^{page 31 note 13} Dow, Prytaneis no. 10; Pritchett and Meritt, Chronology xxi.

^{page 31 note 14} I follow Africanus against Diodorus (XV 78), who calls him winner of the stadion. I hope to discuss the games of 364 elsewhere.

^{page 31 note 15} Hermes XLIV 459.

^{page 32 note 16} Dinsmoor, Archons of Athens 7.

^{page 32 note 17} Ibid. 13.

^{page 32 note 18} Identification in Hesperia, Index to Vols. I–X, s.n.

^{page 32 note 19} Bulletin of the History of Medicine XII (1942), 26. I owe this reference to Professor L. Edelstein.

^{page 32 note 20} A similar dating was reached independently by Süsserott, Griechische Plastik 117 n. 119 on the thinnest possible grounds. The latest bibliography of the relief is in Hausmann, Kunst und Heiltum 173, no. 92.

^{page 32 note 21} Reviewing Jaeger, Diokles von Karystos, AJP LXI 483 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 33 note 22} Hesperia XVI 151.

^{page 33 note 23} Inset in PA opp. p. 192.

^{page 33 note 24} If Γλαυκ[έτης ἐξ Οἴου is the correct restoration in II² 449, a number of difficult problems arise, insoluble on the present evidence. Pritchett and Meritt (Chronology 1; cf. Pritchett and Neugebauer, Calendars of Athens 67) date the inscription between 317 and 307, which does not suit either Glauketes very well. The name Σωτιμὶδης φηγαιεὺς also suggests an earlier date, since he appears as prytanis in II² 1747, dated correctly by Raubitschek between 354 and 335 (Hesperia XI 306).

^{page 33 note 25} Population of Athens 60 n. 2, 72.

^{page 33 note 26} AM V 352.

^{page 34 note 26a} [Εὺθὺ]δικος Σφὴττιος is a likely restoration in II² 449. 8. It intensifies the difficulties pointed out in n. 24.

^{page 34 note 27} See n. 19.

^{page 34 note 28} SIG ³ 296.

^{page 34 note 29} JHS LIX 82.

^{page 34 note 30} BCH XX 676.

^{page 34 note 31} ad FdD III 1, 511.

^{page 34 note 32} Aristotle, , Ath. Pol. 53. 5.Google Scholar

^{page 34 note 33} Epigraphische Beiträge 49.

^{page 34 note 34} Hesperia IX 117.

^{page 34 note 35} See no. XXVII. Cf. also IG II² 7612.

^{page 34 note 36} Plut. Phoc. 1.

^{page 34 note 37} Meritt, , Hesperia XIII 232.Google Scholar

^{page 35 note 38} P. Oxy. 2082 (FGrH 257a. 3).

^{page 35 note 39} Aeschines II 184. I hope to show elsewhere that the accepted date of A's birth is suspect, but it is not wrong enough to affect the issue here.

^{page 35 note 40} II² 1623. 12.

^{page 35 note 41} FdD III 5, passim.

^{page 35 note 41a} BCH LXXVIII (1954), 375–6 with new fragment.

^{page 35 note 42} Hesperia IX 345.

^{page 35 note 43} CAH VI 265–6, 440 ff.

^{page 35 note 44} [Plut.] Mor. 845 F, 851 B.

^{page 36 note 45} Phot Bibl. 491a 35 ff; Hyp. to Dem. XXV.

^{page 36 note 46} [Plut.] Mor. 847 C.

^{page 36 note 47} CAH VI 448.

^{page 36 note 48} Population of Athens 56 ff.