Among the works of Aelius Aristides is preserved an address to an unnamed ‘king’. The prevailing view in this century has been that it is addressed to a third-century emperor, and was attributed to Aristides in error. In an article published in 1972 (JRS 62 (1972), 134–52), I argued that the speech was genuine, and was delivered by Aristides in 144 before Antoninus Pius. In a recent article in this journal (CQ N.S. 29 (1979), 172–97), Stephen A. Stertz has undertaken to rebut this view, and advances a novel one: the speech is a school exercise written in the third or perhaps the fourth century, and does not refer to any particular ‘king’, not even necessarily a Roman emperor. Rather than attempt to answer all of Stertz's arguments, I have selected as samples one each from several diverse fields.

Manuscript tradition. In his first paragraph, Stertz suggests that the manuscript tradition of the Eis basilea itself impugns its authenticity. ‘The oration is entitled єἰς βασιλέα in three manuscripts and єἰς τόν αὐτοκρ⋯τορα in another. It has been pointed out that in the former group of manuscripts the title is not preceded by the words ⋯ριστε⋯δου λόγος, thus casting doubt on Aristidean authorship' (172). The accompanying footnote refers to Keil's apparatus ad loc, and the reader might infer that this argument is borrowed from Aristides’ foremost editor. What Keil said was: ‘Titulus εἰς βασιλ⋯α STC (ubi cum prima haec sit Aristidearum, praemittitur ⋯ριστε⋯δου λόγος): єἰς τòν αὐτοκρ⋯τορα U et in indice D m(anu) recentiss(ima).’