^{page 57 note 1} Prolegomena to his re-edition of Stallbaum's Meno, p. 23.

^{page 57 note 2} Plato, The Man and His Work ³, p. 130.

^{page 57 note 3} Anabasis, ii. vi. 28 παρ Ἀριστίππου μν ἒτι ὡραῖος ὢν στρατηγεῖν διεπράξατο τν ξένων, Ἀριαίῳ δ βαρβάρῳ ὂντι ὂτι μειρακίοις καλοῖς ἣδετο οἰκειότατος [ἒτι ὡραῖος ὢν] γένετο.

^{page 57 note 4} Meno is young in the dialogue; but not very young, since it is remarked (76 b) that he still has lovers, as if it was unusual at his age.

^{page 58 note 1} The recipients are named by Hell. Oxyrh. 2 and 12; Pausanias, iii. 9. 8; Xenophon, Hell. iii. 5. 1. Pausanias' list is the fullest, containing nine names, three from Thebes and two each from Corinth, Argos, and Athens.

^{page 58 note 2} See Plato, , Euthyphro, 11eGoogle Scholar; Isocrates, v. 144;Plutarch, , Amat. 21Google Scholar.

^{page 58 note 3} It is difficult to take seriously the explanation, first suggested by Cobet, , Collectanea, 48Google Scholar, which Wilamowitz repeats in Platon, ii. p. 104: ‘Bei Zenobius (Ath. 2. 24, Paris. 5. 63) hören wir, dass der Thebaner Polykrates eine vergrabene Kriegskasse des Mardonios gefunden hatte. Darauf also bezieht sich Platon. Von einem Anachronismus ist keine Rede…’ And we still have to conjecture how the treasure came into Ismenias' hands.

^{page 58 note 4} Th. H. mit einer Beilage ueber die Rede an die Larisaeer und die Verfassung Thessaliens: E. Meyer, Halle, 1909 (abbrev. TH).

^{page 58 note 5} J.H.S. lvi, 1936, pp. 12 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 58 note 6} H. D. Westlake, London, 1935.

^{page 59 note 1} SeeParke, H. W., A History of the Delphic Oracle, Oxford, 1939, p. 120Google Scholar.

^{page 59 note 2} C.A.H. Vol. iv, p. 77.

^{page 59 note 3} Meyer, , TH, 237Google Scholar.

^{page 59 note 4} It passes frequently from family to family. In the fourth century it was elective: Ditt. Syll ². 108 τν ἂρχοντα… ὂν εἲλοντο Θεσσαλοί (362 B.C.); Diodorus, xv. 60. 5.

^{page 59 note 5} The most plausible correction yet offered, viz. Kip's Κονδαῖον for Κονιαῖον (Thessalische Studien, diss. Halle, 1910, p. 140), does not affect this: Kondaia is as good as unknown.

^{page 59 note 6} Evidently the same. Plato calls him Scopas Creon's son: the scholiast on Theocr. xvi. 36 says the Threnos was about Scopas Creon's son: and Phanias (ap. Athen. 438 c) is quoted for the deep drinking of Scopas son of Creon and grandson of Scopas το παλαιο, in a work entitled τυράννων ναίρεσις κ τιμωρίας, evidently in connexion with the catastrophe. It is perhaps likely that the Threnos is the same as the Threnos for Antiochus who (I suggest below) was Scopas' nephew and perished with him: sc. Simonides, fr. 32–4 (in Bergk, PLG ⁴) are all from one poem.

^{page 60 note 1} Or else Callimachus himself: see the passage in F. gr. Hist. 266 F 6, and Callim. fr. 71 Schneid.; either Apollas Callimach<i>us quem secutus Cicero or Apollas <et> Callimachus quem etc.

^{page 60 note 2} The historian of the aleuads: see schol. Theocr. xvi. 34.

^{page 60 note 3} Diactoridas, ‘one of the Scopads, a Crannonian’, is named by Herodotus among the suitors of Agariste, c. 570 B.C., 6. 127. 4. He might be a brother of Creon.

^{page 60 note 4} Anacreon in Anth. Pal. vi. 142 writes a dedication for Θεσσαλίας ρχς Ἐχεκρατίδας, and ibid. 136 another for Dyseris: evidently the father and mother of Antiochus. In the former of these, the ἂστυ which Echecratidas adorns will be Larisa.

^{page 60 note 5} i.e. ll. 34–5 refer to Aleuads, 36–9 to Scopads. Of Antiochus we hear that Thargelia the Milesian consorted with him when he was ‘king of all the thessalians’ (Aeschines Socrat. fr. 10, ed. Krauss, p. 44, who collects the following passages on p. 45: cf. F. gr. Hist. 6 F 3 and comm.); after his death she was ‘queen of Thessaly’ for 30 years, made all her lovers medize, and entertained Xerxes in 480 (Anon. de mul. II; Plut. Per. 24. 2; Athen. 608 f–609 a; Suid. and EtM.s.v. Θαργηλία). Her patrons were evidently the Aleuads (the chief medizers, Hdt. vii. 130. 3; ix 1. 1). This Thargelia tradition is presumbably not from Simonides: but everything else we hear of Antiochus—in Theocritus and his scholia, in Aristides, [in Quintilian?]—is of course due to the Threnos.

^{page 61 note 1} It is hardly possible to guess which of the three is the Echecratidas Thessalus who won a horse-race at Olympia, Pliny, NH, x. 180.

^{page 61 note 2} Meyer, , TH, 246Google Scholar;Westlake, , Thessaly, 30 fGoogle Scholar.

^{page 61 note 3} See below, p. 65 (Thuc. viii. 3. Cf. Xen. Hell. vi. 1. 8 f., Plut. Pelop. 31 f., Strabo ix. 5. 8).

^{page 62 note 1} Westlake, , ‘The Medism of Thessaly’, J.H.S. Ivi, 1936Google Scholar.

^{page 62 note 2} Ph. sent aid to the confederate army under Cimon which was engaged in reducing the Persian fortresses in Thrace in 476 (Dem. xxiii. 199); and she stood out of the Coinage League formed by Larisa soon after the Persian wars (Heichelheim, , ZNum. 1930, 21)Google Scholar.

^{page 62 note 3} C.A.M. vol. v, p. 466.

^{page 62 note 4} Gr. Gesch ². ii. I. 62³. comparing the fourth-century Aristomedes of Pherae.

^{page 62 note 5} Meno had certainly medized, since his descendant, the Meno of the Platonic dialogue, was πατρικς ξένος of the Great King (78 d).

^{page 62 note 6} Strabo, ix 4. 15; Theopompus, fr. 53 (Jac.).

^{page 62 note 7} See below, p. 66.

^{page 62 note 8} SeeWestlake, , Thessaly, p. 12Google Scholar: ‘It (Ph.) lies at the south-eastern extremity of the western plain against a background of Achaean mountains. A magnificent crag with a double, saddleshaped crest rises very steeply out of the plain, and this furnishes an acropolis so formidable that, if treachery had not so often discounted its natural strength, it would have remained impregnable in ancient times. Natural defences were reinforced by strong walls.… Eastwards an upland valley stretches towards Pherae and Pagasae, while the important high road from the south threads its way beneath the acropolis and over the plain in the direction of Larisa and Macedonia.’

^{page 63 note 1} Preuner, E., Ein delphisches Weihgeschenk, 1900Google Scholar; see alsoHomolle, , BCH, XXIII, 595Google Scholar, and Meyer, , TH, 246ffGoogle Scholar. [Syll.³ 274. vi.]

^{page 63 note 2} See below, p. 70.

^{page 64 note 1} This process is likely to have been encouraged by Perdiccas, whose policy it was to exert influence on the country through the local aristocracies. See Thuc. iv. 132.

^{page 64 note 2} For the terminology cf. Thucydides' description of the Theban constitution at the time of the Persian wars (iii. 62. 3): it was neither an λιγαρχία ἰσόνομος nor yet a δημοκρατία, but a δυναστεία λίγων νδρν. Bearing in mind that Thebes was s city-state and Thessaly an unsynoecized nation, we can see a parallel between δυναστεία λίγων νδρν and the rule of the local princes, and between λιγαρχία ἰσόνομος and the rule of τ κοινόν.

^{page 64 note 3} Geissler, , Chronologie der altattischen Komödie, p. 39Google Scholar, dates it 422, largely on the evidence of Amynias: but cf. also West, , AJP, lvi, pp. 75–6Google Scholar, on Simon.

^{page 64 note 4} Fr. 209 K. Χμυνίας κεῖνος μέλει κλαύσεται ∣ ὂτι… ∣ ὂτι θεν ἒνεκ' ἒπλευσεν κακς ὣν εἲσεται. In the last time Hermann's ὃτι θ' ὧν ἒνεκεν ἒπλευσε seems the best emendation.

^{page 64 note 5} Kaibel, , Hermes, xxx. 443 fGoogle Scholar. ‘apparet haec omnia parieter de Bdelycleone ac de Amynia dicta.’

^{page 65 note 1} He was probably in Athens when Alcibiades came home, whether that was in 408 or 407: this is the most likely occasion for the poem quoted by Plut. Alcib. 33. 1.

^{page 65 note 2} This assertion may, however, be doubted: it looks like a careless extrapolation from his later Laconism. But though he came to discriminate against those who had disliked Laconism in 411 (Ἀθ. πολ 37. 1), his own record at the time was anything but laconizing. He proposed the recall of the non-laconizing Alcibiades and the condemnation of the laconizing Phrynichus: Plut. Alcib. 33. 1 (cf. Thuc. viii. 97. 3); Lycurg. Leocr. 113.

^{page 65 note 3} Aristotle, Rhet. i. 15. 13 (p. 1375^b32).

^{page 66 note 1} Reference to an eclipse enables the battle to be dated accurately.

^{page 66 note 2} Meyer and Westlake both suppose that Lycophron's victory resulted in an oligarchical revolution in Larisa, and that the oligarchs were ‘the opponents at home’ against whom the Aleuads wanted aid. There seems, however, to be no reason to invent opponents when there is Lycophron to hand.

^{page 66 note 3} Meyer, , TH, 252Google Scholar, says ‘im nächsten Frühjahr hat sich dann A. mit seinen Gegnern versöhnt und sendet das Heer unter Führung des Menon dem Kyros zu.… Offenbar hat A. seine Gegner niedergeworfen’. Westlake corrects: ‘According to Xenophon, he became “reconciled to those at home”, and from this indefinite statement it can hardly be inferred that he crushed his opponents, but rather that the withdrawal of external aid forced him to adopt a more conciliatory attitude’ (Thessaly, p. 55): he explains the small number of the troops which Xenophon says Meno brought by asserting that these were additional to the mercenaries (ibid, and n. 6). If this was the case, Xenophon does not say so. The texts are: Anab. I. ii. I νταθα κα παραγγέλλει… τῴ Ἀριστίππῳ συναλλαγέντ πρός τοὺς οἲκοι ποπέμψαι πρς έαυτν ὃ εἷχε στράτευμα; and 6 κα ἦκε Μένων ό Θετταλς όπλίτας ἒχων χιλίους κα πελταστς πεντηκοσίους Δόλοπας κα Αίνινας κα Ὀλυνθίους. The peltasts were probably additional but the hoplites must be a part of the mercenary force. H. W. Parke (Greek Mercenary Soldiers, p. 25, n. 5) had looked at the Greek more attentively than either Meyer or Westlake; he says: ‘Xenophon does not say that Aristippus was reconciled to his opponents, but that Cyrus told him to reconcile himself to them and then send back the mercenaries. As I interpret the events, it appears that Aristippus preferred to comply only very partially with Cyrus' request: he sent what troops he could spare at the moment.’

^{page 67 note 1} e.g.Meyer, , TH, p. 253Google Scholar; Westlake, , Thessaly, p. 59Google Scholar.

^{page 67 note 2} It is of course possible that they had been disbanded when the six months' pay provided by Cyrus was exhausted, but it is difficult to believe that the Aleuads could not support them in their own country. The three months' pay for which Aristippus asked may have been to cover the expenses of their journey to Thessaly.

^{page 68 note 1} There is no reason to suppose Diodorus' statement incorrect because Pharsalians appear in later history (e.g. Xen. Hell. iv. iii. 3), asMeyer, , TH, p. 253²Google Scholar. The party favourable to the Aleuads would have been spared.

^{page 68 note 2} Meyer, , TH, p. 255Google Scholar, puts the slaughter of Medius' mercenaries at the end of his career in 394, solely because he does not believe that he could have survived such a reverse.

^{page 68 note 3} Beloch, GG, ii³1. 132, n. 2; iii². 2. 16–18 (400 01 399); Costanzi, Studi ital. d. fil. class. vii. 137–59 (410/9); Drerup [Ἡρώδου] περί πολιτείας, Studien z. Gesch. und Kult. d. altertums, ii. 1 (404); Meyer, TH, 201–83 (400 or 399, see p. 263). Münscher, l.c., p. 954, makes much of this disagreement: ‘alle behaupten, dass der Verfasser eine ganz bestimmte Situation ins Auge gefasst habe: die Uneinigkeit in der Bestimmung dieser Situation beweist aber, dass der Verfasser in Wahrheit keine bestimmte historische Situation im Auge hat.’ This principle would prove that, e.g. the Decrees of Callias and the Pirate Law on the Aemilius Paulus monument at Delphi were spurious.

^{page 68 note 4} Thrasymachus ap. Clem. Str. vi. 16; Critias ap. Athen. 663a; Philostr. Vit. sophist. ii. I. 14.

^{page 68 note 5} There are five passages whose idiom Knox Claims to be late and foreign:

I. πολιτικός πόλεμος: ‘a translation of civile bellum’. The phrase in full is (§ 11) ν… τῷ ξενικῷ πολέμῳ τν πατρίδα σώζοντες ποθνήσκουσιν, ν δ τῷ πολιτικῷ διαϕθείροντες αυτούς. Cf. Xen. Hell. IV. iv. 19 τ πολιτικν στράτευμα )( τ τν συμμάχων. Also Ditt. Syll ³. 306. 28 (Fourth century B.C. Tegea) πολιτικν δικαστήριον (composed of local citizens) )( ξενικόν (cmposed of invited foreigners).

II. § 18 ὂταν πίκουροι μηδαμόθεν ἲωσι τοῖς πιβουλεύουσι. ‘ὦσι would be expected… influence of Latin Subvenio.’ I can see nothing unclassical in the phrase. πίκουρος as an adjective is used with a verb o motion in Iliad, 21, 431; Pindar, Ol. 13, 97 Ὀλιγαιθίδαισιν δ' ἒβαν πίκουρος.

III. πέϕυκεν twice used with accusative ‘absolute’ (?), as Latin naturale est. The occurrences are: § 10 αὐτόν βούλεσθαι πέϕυκεν ὑμς στασιάζειν: and § 32 Λακεδαιμονίους οὐκέτι πέϕυκεν ὑμῖν πιτίθεσθαι. Compare Demosthenes, xiv. 30 κα γρ τς κρνας πιλείπειν πέϕυκεν ἂν τις π' αὐτν θρόα πολλά λαμβάνη. Also Aristotle, Politics, 1261^b6 οὓτε πέϕυκε μίαν οὓτως εἶναι τν πόλιν; Poetics, 1450^aI πέϕυκεν αἳται δύο τνπράξεων οὓτε πέϕυκε εἶναι, διάνοιαν κα ἦθος.

IV. The most important. § 30 πόλις ν ᾖ τ τρίτον μέρος οὐ μετέχει τν πραγμάτων αὐτόθι. ‘This use, probably an orientalism, occurs in Callimachus and is very common in LXX and NT.’ αὐτόθι and αὐτο are used pleonastically with definitions of place in all types of Greek from Homer downwards.

V. § 9 χωρίον ‘translates locus, a chance, suitable opportunity’. τοτο τ χωρίον is almost certainly a gloss, but if we must regard it as part of the text, there are examples in classical Greek, e.g. Thuc. i. 97. 2, of the metaphorical use of the word.

^{page 69 note 1} Πρ μν μν γρ ἠθέλομεν αὐτοῖς συνδιακινδυνεύειν. Cf. Hdt. vii. 172, and Westlake, ‘The Medism of Thessaly’, JHS, lvi. 16 f.

^{page 69 note 2} In § 33 (περ δ τν πάντων οὐ λέγει οὐδ περ τς πόλεως) there is some temptation to take πόλις as equivalent to Thessaly. Πόλις is used for the territory of the Thessalian nation in Aristotle, fr. 498 (διελὼν δ τν πόλιν Ἀλεύας) and in schol. Pind. Pyth. iv. 246 (τν ποταμν πρτερον δι μέσης τς πόλεως ῥέοντα κα πολλ τν χωρίων διαϕθείροντα): cf. Wade-Gery, JHS, xliv. 58. n. 16; Kahrstedt, GGN, 1924, p. 130, n. 1. who both reckon with the possibility that the texts are sound, though the former proposes the corrections τν πολιτικήν and τν πολιτικς. In Eur Androm. 1176 (ὦ πόλι Θεσσαλία) the text can hardly be doubted, nor that Θεσσαλία is in apposition to πόλι: but it is not prose, and Euripides is pretty free in this respect, cf. Ion, 294 Εὒβοι Ἀθήναις ἒστι τις γείτων πόλις) and ibid. 1591 (Δωρς πόλις = Peloponnese?). However, χώρα and πόλις seem to be clearly distinguished in this speech, cf. especially § 9 ᾦ γρ άλίσκεται μάλιστα κα πόλις κα χώρα: and χώρα is used of Thessaly in §§ 5, 14, etc.

^{page 70 note 1} Meyer, , TH, p. 258Google Scholar, infers from the surviving sentence of Thrasymachus' ὑπρ Λαρισαίων, (Ἀρχελάῳ δουλεύσομεν Ἔλληνες ὂντες βαρβάρῳ) that ‘Larisa ist also zeitweilig von Archelaus abhängig gewesen’, and later asserts that ‘Aristippus in der Tat mit Archelaos im Bunde gestanden hat und durch sein Eingreifen zum Ziel gelangt ist’. Westlake follows him (Thessaly, p. 56). But the threat of subjection, not subjection itself, is to be inferred from Thrasymachus’ question, and the περ πολιτείας shows that Larisa hereself was never subject to Archelaus: his personal intervention occurred only in the cities dependent on her (§§ 16–17).

^{page 70 note 2} And also, if we may be allowed to anticipate our conclusion, to Archelaus' ally Athens (below, p. 75).

^{page 70 note 3} For the evidence of Spartan support of Lycophron see p. 66.

^{page 71 note 1} Philostratus, Vit. Soph. i. 16; Aristotle, Pol. 1275^b27.

^{page 71 note 2} See §§ 1–2.

^{page 71 note 3} The normal classical Greek would be οὐκ λίγον διαϕέρει αὐτούς πλησίους εἶναι. There is no parallel for the use of διαϕέρειν in this sense with a personal subject. The constrction is probably a vulgarism. Its derivation from the correct usage is obvious and the meaning can be in no doubt. Drerup's deletion of πλησίοι εἶναι αὐτῷ makes nonsense.

^{page 71 note 4} See p. 62, n. 8.

^{page 72 note 1} The Greek is equally ungrammatical.

^{page 72 note 2} Knox denies that κατ πλείους is Greek and proposes to read πόλεις, ‘which gives only an historical inaccurancy’. κατ' λίγους Hdt. viii. 133. 3 is sufficient support for may translation, if support is needed.

^{page 72 note 3} ᾢσπερ οὐδ' νθάδε Μακεδόνα. Drerup wishes to omit Μακεδόνα: he may be right, but the analogy between Spartan and hegemony is just possible.

^{page 72 note 4} Meyer, , TH, p. 272Google Scholar, argues exactly the reverse: ‘wohl…setzt diese Stelle (§ 28) gerade den Krieg von 402–400 voraus: denn erst durch diesen ist Elis wieder Mitglied des peloponnesischen Bundes geworden.’ He accordingly places the speech in 400. Elis, who had quarrelled with Sparta over Lepreum (Thue. v. 13. 1), deserted the Peloponnesian League to join the Argive-Mantinean alliance after the peace of Nicias: The Eleans, however, were not present at the battle of Mantinea, having previously fallen out with their allies (Thuc. v. 62. 2). Thucydides does not relate that they, like the Mantinenas (v. 81. 1), made peace with Sparta and rejoined the league after the surrender of Argos, but it is difficult not to assume (withLaistner, , History of the Gk. World 479–323 B.C., p. 122Google Scholar) that this was the case. The fact that their ports, Cyllene (Thuc. vi. 88. 9) and Phea (Thuc. vii. 31. 1), were at the disposal of the league in the last phase of the Peloponnesian war shows that they again accepted the Spartan hegemony, This conclusion is enough to destroy Meyer's argument.

^{page 72 note 5} JHS, 1, 1930, pp. 37 ff.

^{page 72 note 6} Parke, , op. cit., p. 37Google Scholar.

^{page 73 note 1} Parke, , op. cit., p. 50Google Scholar.

^{page 74 note 2} p. 52.

^{page 74 note 3} p. 62.

^{page 75 note 1} TH, p. 278

^{page 75 note 2} Those who argue that the speech is historically worthless have laid stress on § 19, where they allege that the author confuses Archelaus with Perdiccas, while their opponents admit the confusion and plead that it is trivial. The text is: Ἀρχέλαος γρ οὃτ' π Πελοποννησίους ἦλθε μετ' Ἀθηναίων, οὒτε δι τς χώρας ἰέναι βουλομένους ἒπανσεν The statement, however, does not imply that there was any occasion when the Spartans wished to pass through Macedonia any more than that there was an occasion when he might have joined in an Athenian expedition against Sparta. In fact the assertion that Macedonia never prevented a Spartan force from passing through her territory is hardly true of Perdiccas' reign. The occasion in 424 when Brasidas helped Perdiccas against Arrhabaeus can scarcely be described as a passage through the country: and in 422 Perdiccas, through his influence in Thessaly, actually prevented reinforcements from reaching Amphipolis.

^{page 75 note 3} That is, especially, the Meno family (see p. 75, n. 1), to which Thucydides (the proxenos of 411) belonged: Polemo ap. Marcellin. 28. He was perhaps brother of Alexidemus and uncle of Meno III.

^{page 76 note 1} The regular Greek habit of transmitting names from grandfather to grandson suggests that Meno I, who was given Athenian citizenship in 476, was grandfather to Meno II who led the Pharsalian contingent to Athens in 431; and that the latter was father of Alexidemus whose son was Meno III of the dialogue and the Anabasis. Diodorus calls this last Meno Λαρισσαῖος (xiv. 19. 8), Xenophon merely Θετταλός (Anab. I, ii, passim); but Plato implies that he was not a Larisaean (οἱ το σο ταίρου Ἀριστίππου πολῖται Λαρισαῖοι, 70 b), and Diogenes Laertius (ii. 6. 6) calls him definitely Φαρσάλιος.

^{page 77 note 1} Meno is called Anytus' ξένος in 90 b and his πατρικς ταῖρος in 92 d. It is difficult to believe that the connexion between Anytus, the son of a tanner, and Meno, whose family had for generations been prominent in Pharsalus (see p. 75, n. I; Meno, 71 b), was a family tie of long standing, as Plato's words suggest.

^{page 77 note 2} SeePlato, , Gorgias, 497 cGoogle Scholar.

^{page 78 note 1} Bus. I, 221 a τν μν πιείκειαν τν σν, ὦ Π., κα τν το βίου μεταβολν παρ' ἂλλων πυνθανόμενος οἶδα τν δ λγων τινς, ὦν γέγραϕας, αὐτός νεγνωκὼς ἣδιστα μν ἂν σοι περ ὂλης παρρησιασάμην τς παιδεύσεως περ ἣν ἠνάγκασαι διατρίβειν γομαι γρ τοῖς ναξίως μν δυστυχοσιν κ δ ϕιλοσοϕίας χρηματίζεσθαι ζητοσιν, ἂπαντας τοὺς πλείω πεπραγματευμένους κα μλλον πηκριβωμένους προσήκειν θέλοντας τοτον εἰσϕέρειν τν ἒρανον.

^{page 78 note 2} Themist. or. 23, p. 357; Quint. ii. 17. 4.

^{page 78 note 3} 5, 222 d: τοιγαρον εἰ γένοιτ' ξουσία τοῖς τετελευτηκόσι βουλεύοασθαι περ τν εἰρημένων, μν ἂν σοι τοσαύτην ἒχοι χάριν ὑπρ τς κατηγορίας ὂσην.….

^{page 78 note 4} Jebb, Attic Oractors, ii. 95.

^{page 78 note 5} Π. σοϕιστής, ξ νάγκης λθὼν π τ σοϕιστεύειν δι πενίαν, Ἀθηναῖος μν τ γένος, σοϕιστεύων δ νν ν Κύπρῳ.

^{page 79 note 1} Isaeus, 20.

^{page 79 note 2} Pausanias, vi. 17. 9.

^{page 79 note 3} Jebb, , Attic Orators, ii. 8Google Scholar.

^{page 79 note 4} Busiris, 23.

^{page 79 note 5} Hyp. ad Bus.

^{page 79 note 6} The annulment, on the proposal of Archinus, of Thrasybulus' decree conferring citizenship on Lysias seems to indicate that he was not persona grata to all the democrats. His support of Socrates shows a divergence of opinion between him and Anytus.

^{page 79 note 7} [Plutarch] Vit. Lys. 835 f.