^{page 74 note 2} Except where it is stated to the contrary, the inscriptions commemorating the παιδικὸς ἀγών were all found in the substructure of the Roman circus on the side towards the Eurotas.

^{page 74 note 3} The numbering is carried on from B.S.A. xiii. p. 199.

^{page 78 note 1} He cannot be identified for certain: the name is found also in C.I.G. 1249, 1298b, 1424, 1470. The first of these instances cannot refer to the same man, as his father's name there is also Αγησίλαος

^{page 82 note 1} See also a note on his date, B.S.A. xiii. pp. 200 foll.

^{page 83 note 1} καθηρατόρειν spelt with one θ and ειν for ιν. (which is, of course, a contraction for -ιον) can, I think, only be due to ignorance; and μελλειρονείας is an impossible form for a noun derived from μελλείρην

^{page 83 note 2} See Meisterhans, Grammatik der attischen Inschriften³, p. 34, note 185, who quotes four instances of Αθήνεα for Αθήναια and numerous others of the use of ε for at in Attic inscriptions of the Roman Age.

^{page 83 note 3} Compare the famous gloss on Herodotus, quoted most recently by MrTillyard, , B.S.A. xii. p. 386Google Scholar, note 2. This inscription would lead us to emend μελλείρην for μελείρην there, which is probably a mistake, as the word is compounded of μέλλω and εἴρην. The word is spelt with two lambdas in l'lutarch, Lycurgus, c. 17.

^{page 85 note 1} C.I.G. 1242, Hermogenes is Eponymus: B.S.A. xii. p. 366, No. 14, Γλύκων ῾Ερμογένουςwins the μῶα . For his date see B.S.A. xiii. p. 203.

^{page 85 note 2} Transactions of the American Philological Association, xxvi. (1895), p. 35.

^{page 88 note 1} This was pointed out by MrTillyard, , B.S.A. xii. p. 391.Google Scholar

^{page 89 note 1} The owner preferred that his name and address should not be made known.

^{page 90 note 1} There can be no doubt, I think, that this is a genitive, as it makes the construction far simpler: see a note in B.S.A. xiii. p. 199, where this is pointed out.

^{page 90 note 2} His grandfather was Publius Memmius Sidectas, who was Eponymus when Hadrian first visited Sparta, 125 A.D. See B.S.A. xiii. pp. 207, 8.

^{page 94 note 1} See B.S.A. xiii. pp. 207, 8.

^{page 94 note 2} These are the numbers (followed here by an asterisk for the sake of clearness) under which they were published previously.

^{page 96 note 1} It might equally well be the accusative plural, though this would not simplify the construction.

^{page 98 note 1} This discovery was kindly communicated to me by Mr. Wace while this paper was passing through the press.

^{page 102 note 1} For instances of this use in inscriptions and in literature, particularly in the Lysistrata, see Meister, , Dorer und Achäer, i. pp. 24 foll.Google Scholar

^{page 103 note 1} C.I.G. 1249, S.M.C. 204 i. 378.

^{page 107 note 1} In I.G. ii. Nos. 338 (where the ὁπλομάχος called ὁπλομάχης 465, 466, 467 (= Dittenb. Syll. ² 521), 468, 469, 470, 471, 478, 480. In I.G. iii. about forty different instances. For the institution in other Greek towns see A.J.A. xi. (1896), p. 173, No. 1 (= Dittenb. Syll. ² 935), at Eretria; B.C.H. iv. (1880), pp. 110 foll. (= Dittenb. Syll ² 523), at Teos. See also Dumont, Essai sur l'Ephébie Atlique, pp. 165, 185 foll. For ὁπλομάχος as a contestant in battle, see references to Plato, collected by Dumont, loc. cit. In the fifth and fourth centuries B.C. Sparta did not approve of ὁπλομάχία (Plato, Laches, 183 B, where the pleasant story of Stesilaus' unfortunate appearance with his δορυδρέπανον is told by Laches); but we do not know whether the exercises in which the ὁπλομάχος was instructor were exactly of the same type in the second century A. D., to which our inscription belongs, as they were five centuries or so earlier.

For ὁπλομάχία as a contest see Dittenb. T.A.M. 339, 1. 82 (at Sestos): the object of the hoplomachus; at any rate when he appeared in Rome, seems to have been to poke his opponent's eye out, if we may believe Martial (viii. 74). ‘Hoplomachus nunc es: fueras ophthalmicns ante: Fecisti medicus quod facis hoplomachus.’

^{page 108 note 1} Onomasticon, iii. 153 : we find an allusion to such games in Athens in I.G. iii. 128, 1. 30.

^{page 108 note 2} This new inscription proves that my suggestion that Σεῶ was a Grecized form of Seius is clearly wrong: there was indeed no parallel for it, as it seems to have always been written Σήιος (C.I.G. add. 2322b, 2520, 39022, 3932, 4366W). It is, of course, an example of the archaizing use of σ for θ: we may note that it occurs in one of the series of sickle-inscriptions, where such archaisms are rife, whereas in all the other cases of the tenure of the same office we have θεοῦ or θεῶ

^{page 113 note 1} Published by him in Archdol, Aufsätze, ii. p. 659, No. 21.

^{page 113 note 2} See Foucart's note in Le Bas-Foucart, p. 100, No. 180, which describes his identification of a copy of the only surviving fragment of this stone made by Le Bas in 1844 after the fire. It is republished by Tod as part of a σφαιρεῖς inscription (B.S.A. x. p. 69, No. 9), and, in faesimile, by Dressel-Milchhöfer, , Ath. Mitt. ii. (1877), p. 383Google Scholar, No. 200.

^{page 116 note 1} lxiii. 14: διὰ τοὺς Λυκούργου νόμους ὡς ἐναντίους τῇ προαιρέσει αὐτοῦ ὄντας. His own upbringing was singularly un-Lycurgan in every way.

^{page 116 note 2} Most of it is collected in Gilbert, Griechischen Staatsalterthümer ², pp. 29, 30; English Transl, p. 28.

^{page 117 note 1} See B.M. Inscriptions, iii. pp. 19, 31, 32; J.H.S. viii. (1887), p. 99; Revue des Études grecques, vi. (1893), p. 156; Fabricius, in Berlin. Akad. Sitzungsber. 1894, p. 907.Google Scholar

^{page 117 note 2} These references are giver, by Fabricius loc. cit. The fullest list of references is given in Keil, J. and von Premerstein, A., Bericht über eine Reise in Lydien und der südlichen Aiolis, pp. 4 and 5. [Wien, 1908.]Google Scholar For some of these instances I am also indebted to Mr. Tillyard, who has kindly forwarded a communication of Prof. U. von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff on the subject. The latter also suggests that σεῶ in the inscription alluded to above (p. 108, note 2) = θεοῦ and that we should connect it with the other instances of a divine Eponymus in Asia Minor (as I had already done, since this paper was written before I received Mr. Tillyard's letter).

^{page 118 note 1} For the cult of Lycurgus at Sparta see Herodotus i. 66; Strabo viii. p. 366; Plutarch, Lycurgus, c. 31, where we read ίερόν τε γάρ ἐστιν αὐτοῦ καὶ θύουσι καθ᾿ἔκαστον ἐνιαυτὸν ὡς θεῷ Suidas, s.v. Lycurgus; Pausanias iii. 16 § 6. Cf. Wide, Lai. Kulte, pp. 281 foll.

^{page 118 note 2} Fabricius, op. cit. p. 905.

^{page 119 note 1} The latest παιδικὸς ἀγών inscription seems not earlier than 240 A.D. (see above); the flogging at the altar lasted till nearly the end of the fourth century at least (B.S.A. xii. p. 317).

^{page 119 note 2} This shows clearly that he was προστάτης of the city of Sparta, not, as Foucart thought (Le Bas-Foucart, Explication, p. 100), of the city of Νεόπολις Tod (B.S.A. x. p. 77) points this out plainly.

^{page 122 note 1} Op. cit. p. 34.

^{page 122 note 2} This is pointed out by Mr. Tillyard in a note ad loc. His stemma, however, attributes the dedication of C.I.G. 1340 to the sons of P. Memmius Deximachus (1) instead of to those of his grandson P. Memmius Deximachus (2). Paton's view is the latter, and seems preferable.

^{page 122 note 3} B.C.H. loc. cit.

^{page 123 note 1} I have added from C.I.G. 1442 Ti. Claudius Alcandridas and Elpis Callistonice as children of Ti. Claudius Pratolaus Damocratidas, on the strength of Alcandridas and Damocratidas occurring elsewhere (C.I. G. 1364) as names held by alternate generations in a (probably) collateral family.

^{page 123 note 2} See B.S.A. xii. PI. I.

^{page 123 note 3} The numbering is carried on from B.S.A. xiii. p. 191.