^{page 104 note 1} The cases then known are given in Hiller von Gaertringen's Testimonies to I.G. V. ii. (19I3), unfortunately with Pomtow's now obsolete dating; but apparently he did not draw the obvious deduction.

^{page 104 note 2} I.G. V. ii. 549, 550=Syll? 314, where see Killer's notes.

^{page 104 note 3} Supp. Ep. Gr. 1, 75, 1. 23; see Cary, Class. Quart. 1922, p. 142.

^{page 104 note 4} See Bourguet on Fouilles III. 43.

^{page 105 note 1} B.C.H. 38, 1914, p. 451, no. 1.

^{page 105 note 2} Ib. p. 466, no. 9, with Plassart and Blum's commentary.

^{page 105 note 3} G.D.I. 2563 to 2566; Aristagoras also Syll.³ 424.

^{page 105 note 4} Tarn, Antigonos Gonatas, 358, n. 43.

^{page 105 note 5} Emmenidas' dates. Pomtow in 1914, 267; in 1923, 255 for certain. Johnson 259. De Sanctis in 1923, 255/4 or 252/1. Beloch in 1902, 260; in 1923, 256 for certain; in 1924, 252/1, or possibly 251/0. Roussel in 1923, probably 359. This list speaks for itself.

^{page 105 note 6} De Sanctis, Riv. di fil. 1923, 167; Beloch, ib. 1923, 267, and 1924, 192.

^{page 105 note 7} With the articles given in the last note cf. Roussel, B.C.H. 1923, 1, and Rev.Et. Anc. 1924 1; Walek, Rev. Phil. 1924, 5; Kirchner, Phil.Woch. 1924, 869.The problems of Athens and Delphi are interconnected.

^{page 105 note 8} Syll.³ 430 (see Roussel, B.C.H. 1923, p. 30). Even Pomtow now accepts Areus II.; Klio 18, 1923, 308.

^{page 106 note 1} B.C.H. 27, 1903, p. 23; cf. Pomtow, Klio8, 1908, p. 193, n. 1.

^{page 106 note 2} Curt. 10, 1, 3; see Tarn, J.H.S. 1921, p. 14.

^{page 106 note 3} See Roussel in B.C.H. 1923, p. 4.

^{page 107 note 1} B.C.H. 38, 1914, 466, no. 9.