¹ Ferrabino, A., Θεσσαλῶν Πολιτεία, in Entaphia, Torino, 1913, pp. 74–76Google Scholar, and 85, note 3, separates the two. In Frag. 498 he retains πόλιν and refers it to the territory of Larisa only: and he ascribes the Tetrads to an Aleuad of the opening, the κλῆποι of Larisa to one of the closing, sixth century; the former indeed seems to be Eurylochos, who it appears conquers Phthiotis and so converts the Triads into Tetrads. I do not find this convincing.

² τὰς πόλεις Rose. τὴν πολιτείαν et lacunam Schwartz. τὴν πολι<τικὴ>ν ego: nisi -πόλιν fortasse retinendum, vid. not. 16.

³ Ἀλεύας Rose.

⁴ κατἀ Pflugk.

⁵ πελταστὰς Cobet, Pflugk, Schwartz.

⁶ lacunam Preller.

⁷ †—† corruptum: vide testimonium alterum.

⁸ τρί' ἀκόντια Preller. ἄκοντα Pflugk.

⁹ καὶ Schwartz.

¹⁰ μικρὸν Pflugk.

¹¹ Perhaps not a fixed amount, only a fixed system, ὥσπερ (not ὅσπερ) τεταγμένος ᾖν φρειν.—The Scopas who organised the tribute is probably ‘the Ancient,’ grandfather of Simonides' patron (v. note 22): he probably lived just after the Sacred War of c. 590, at the last apogee of Thessalian power before Jason. It would be curious for Jason to ask the same amount as his predecessor two centuries before: natural enough for him to revive the system.

¹² Meyer, Ed., Theopomps Hellenika, mit einer Beilage über … die Verfassung Thessaliens, 1909, pp. 238Google Scholarsqq.—Aleuas the Red as first Tagos, Plut. de frat. am. 21; cf. Aelian, H. An. 8. 11.

¹³ τὰ κύκλῳ ἔθνη = the Perioikis = the σύμμαχοι or ὑπήκοοι = Perrhaebia Magnesia Achaia: Kip, Gerhard, Thessalische Studien, Diss. Halle, 1910, p. 11.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Ephorus, Frag. 18 and 20.

¹⁵ Infra, note 21.

¹⁶ Op. cit. p. 222, note 1. Yet neither Meyer, nor I believe any other scholar, has noticed a curious parallel to this use of πόλις for the plain of Thessaly, as opposed to the hilly Perioikis. Schol. Pind. Pyth. 4, 246 (Poseidon Petraios opened up the Passage of Tempe, and) Wilamowitz here emends πόλεως to πεδιάδος. The two passages should perhaps be treated together. Certainly πεδιάδα would not be an easy correction in the Rhesos scholium, nor perhaps πολιτικῆς in this Pindar scholium. But the land which the blocking of Tempe would flood is identical with the land which produced horsemen and hoplites (cf. Plat. Laws, 625 D.); and I think it just possible that the reading is correct in both cases, and πόλις is a technical term to describe this land. If so, its meaning is exactly what I have supposed for πολιτική, the land of the Politai, opposed to the Perioikis. (How big, and how irrespective of urban agglomerations a Polis can be, cf. Lysias 6. 6, and other passages cited by L. and S., and esp. Ar. Pol. 3. 3. Hesychius πόλιν: τὴν χώραν, is, I imagine, a gloss on Stesiehorus and refers to Pisa, Strab. 8. 3. 31.)

¹⁷ Cf. Ed. Meyer, , Forschungen, I. p. 219.Google Scholar Polybius names four sources for the views of this chapter—Ephorus, Xenophon, Callisthenes, Plato.

¹⁸ ἡ περιοικίς is, of course, well attested: e.g. Thuc. 2. 25. 3 (Elean), 3. 16. 2 (Spartan). The scholiast on the former interprets wrongly. Πολιτική too is used absolutely, later: Hierocles, , Synekdemos, 677, 3–4 (Teubner, 1893)Google Scholar, gives in the Eparehia of Phrygia Salutane the two ‘cities’ of (sic: scil. ) and these reappear, as Κλῆροι as one bishopric in the Notitiae (Ramsay, , J.H.S. viii. 492Google Scholar; Pauly-Wissowa ). Cf. the Attic Ὀρεινή, Strab. 9. 1. 3.

¹⁹ On these see B. Niese's admirable work: for Laconia, Nachr. v. der k. Gesellsch. der Wise. zu Gōttingen, Phil. Hist. Klasse, 1906, pp. 101sqq.Google Scholar; for Elis, , Genethliakon, Carl Robert zum 8 März 1910 überreicht von der Graeca Halensis, p. 3Google Scholarsqq., Elis und seine Periöken.

²⁰ The responsione in our passage of Aristotle are only intelligible if the Politikè is a self-contained area coterminous with the four Tetrarchies, i.e. Thessaly proper. Kip's arguments may be very briefly resumed: Phthiotis is part of Thessaly, Ἀχαία (which does not by any means always have the epitheton distinguens ἡ φθιῶτις) is not: the Thessaloi and Achaioi have separate votes in the Amphiktyony: Herodotus speaks of passing out of Achaia into Thessaly, and vice versa (vii. 196, 198): the early geographers, Scymnus, Scylax, and most explicitly the ‘Pseudo-Dicaearchus,’ recognise the distinction. Later it disappears: under the Macedonians the difference of status vanishes, a Strategos of the Thessalian League comes from Achaia (I.G. ix. 2. 103). Strabo, Pausanias, Diodorus include Achaia in the Tetrarchy; just as Ptolemy finally includes Perrhaebia and Magnesia in the remaining Tetrarchies. Kip's map, based on the early geographers, indicates the frontier clearly. Kip's view is reaffirmed (against Ferrabino) by Costanzi, V., Riv. di Fil. xlii. 1914, pp. 529–544Google Scholar, Ftioti ed Achei Ftioti.

²¹ Meyer's computation of the number of Kleroi, (Theopomps Hellenika, etc., pp. 225–226Google Scholar, followed by Cavaignac, , Population, 1923, p. 67Google Scholar) is quite arbitrary, every figure from which he starts being really an unknown: e.g. the size of the domain of a hoplite or horseman in Thessaly, the proportion of the total area of the Tetrarchies occupied by the Kleroi. The computation, such as it is, gives 160–200 as the number. I suspect both the individual Kleroi, and the total area concerned, were a great deal larger than he supposes: especially the former; a man would take more elbow-room in Thessaly than in Attica. (The Chifliks of modern Thessaly might perhaps throw some light on this, but I have not the facts.) Meyer allows a distinction between Politikè and Perioikis in ‘Phthiotis,’ but does not suggest any actual frontier where the Tetrarchy would end and Achaia begin: he rather suggests the two types of tenure were intermingled over the whole of ‘Phthiotis.’ I cannot agree with this: supra, note 20.

²² Phainias ap. Athen. 438 c.: part of the same genealogy. Sch. Ambros. ad Theocr. xvi. 36: Κρεώνδας δὲ δ Σκόπας. Theocritus' Κρεῶνδαι are Scopas the Drinker and his brothers.

²³ Jason actually gets (Xen. H. vi. 1. 19) ‘more than 8000 horsemen, including the σύμμαχοι and not less than 20,000 hoplites.’ The ‘allies’ are the ‘nations round about,’ i.e. the Perioikis. Jason gets from the Perioikis, in addition to the Scopaio tribute, (a) a huge force of peltasts, (b) a number of horsemen. We cannot say how many horsemen: if we put it at 2000, the residue for the Politikè is 6000 horsemen, 20,000 hoplites.

²⁴ The usage varies, sometimes Θεσσαλός sometimes Φαρσάλιος, etc.: v. Meyer, op. cit. 235, note 2: there is similar variation in Attic inscriptions; e.g. Ditt. Syll. ³ 132, 133. Cf. ibid. 92 and I.G. ii.² 13, Achaeans: the speaker in [Herodes] π. πολιτ. § 28 (v. note 25) rightly compares Thessalians with Achaeans as living κατ' ὸλίγους.

²⁵ The city Tageia exists before the end of the fifth century (I.G. ix. 2. 257), but the eponymous magistrate is the non-urban ὑλωρός (ibid.; cf. Ar. Pol. 1321 B): the speaker in [Herodes] π. πολιτείας, § 28, feels the smallness of their urban agglomerations one of the chief causes of Thes-salian weakness. [This speech is printed in Meyer, Theop. Hellen., pp. 202sqq.Google Scholar: and is regarded by him and others (e.g. Costanzi, in Ann. Univ. Tosc. 33, 1915, 55sqq.Google Scholar: Beloch, , G.G. ² iii. 2.Google Scholar § 7) as a contemporary document of the reign of Archelaus. Messrs. Adcock and Knox have attacked this view in Klio 13 (1913), 249 sqq.: Mr. Knox's marks of lateness are not very damaging (his suspicion of orientalism in § 30 is surely based on mistranslation?): he perhaps makes it likely (p. 257) that it was not widely read until Herodes Atticus' day (unearthed by Herodes?): Mr. Adeock's arguments do not touch Meyer's date, 399 B.C., except that Elis was not then allied with Sparta: a slip of detail affecting one word! (and it perhaps corrupt: ). §19, that Archelaus ‘never refused passage to a Spartan army’ is perfectly true: it is not implied he had granted passage (his step-brother Perdiccas had), rather, that he was in a better position than Thessaly, which had refused, Thuc. 5. 13. 1.]

²⁶ 4. 78. 3. But Dion. Hal. preserves another reading. Growth of Poleis and bourgeoisie; cf. Meyer, op. cit. 235–6; Costanzi, , in Ann. Univ. Tose. 26 (1906), 66Google Scholar; Ferrabino, op. cit. 93–104. Gorgias' joke in Ar. Pol. 3. 1. 9 (the magistrates at Larisa are ‘Larisopoioi,’ they manufacture Larisaeans like kettles) is quoted by Aristotle to illustrate a state of affairs when citizenship, as an institution, goes back less than three generations. The manufactured article is the Larisan bourgeois; before, there had been the Thessalian noble. Circ. 400, the Thessalians are still notably not cockneys; Eur. Elect. 815 sqq.; Sophist. Anon. Δισσοὶ λόγοι, 2. 11 (=Diels, Vorsoh. ² or ³, Kap. 83).

²⁷ Vide Appendix.

²⁸ Contrast the (perhaps unfair) account of Philip's method of unification, Dem. Phil. iii. 26: Philip, who has not Jason's ambitions for Thessaly, returns to the methods of Aleuas.

²⁹ Br. Mus. Cat. Thessaly, Pl. V. 12 (= Fig. 1.). Other examples: (1) Hirsch, , Catalog einer Samml. griech. Münzen, No. xiii., Munich, 1905Google Scholar, No. 1315, Pl. XVII.; (2) Berlin (Z. f. Num. 5, Pl. II. 3); (3) Paris (Rev. Num., 1890, p. 259, No. 94).

³⁰ Though Dieudonné, A. (Rev. Num. 1906, p. 12)Google Scholar and presumably Head, H.N.² 297, use it as such.

³¹ H. v. Gaertringen connects the coin with the ‘Army of Aleuas’: rightly, I think; but he holds this ‘Army of Aleuas’ to be a reflex of the army Jason actually raises, and does not observe that it is already on Jason's lips before he becomes Tagos, and that it materially differs from the one he raises.

³² Thorax and his brothers: Hdt. 7. 6: already in 498 Pindar, Pyth. 10. 3, speaks of these Aleuads as kings. Their father, Aleuas ὁΣίμου is called ἄναξ by Theocritus, 16. 34 (enumeration of Simonides' patrons, cf. Sch. ad. loc.). It was this Thorax who invited Xerxes to Greece, Hdt. I.c.

³³ Dieudonné, A., Rev. Num. 1906, 9–13Google Scholar, thinks ΕλλΑ is a man's name, e.g. Hellanocrates (cf. Ar. Pol., 1311 B.). His conclusions are hardly acceptable as they stand (note 30, supra). Stählin, F., Pauly-Wissowa, s.v. Larisa, p. 853Google Scholar, supposes Hellanocrates to be a rival to Alexander of Pherae, a counter-claimant of the Tageia [with Macedonian support? the eagle and thunderbolt, rev., may point to Macedon], and this is certainly possible; but v. supra, note 31.

³⁴ As especially under Eurylochus in the Crisaean War. Eurylochus (probably an Aleuad, Meyer, op. cit. 242) marks the apogee of Thessalian power: after him come the misadventures against Boeotia and Phocis, Plut. Cam. 19, Hdt. 8. 27–28, etc.—‘Hellas’ and Thessaly: Homer passim, [Dicaearchus] Frag. 61, F.H.G. ii. pp. 263–4.—‘Hellas’ and the Amphictyony: Marm. Par. epoch 5 and 6, Hdt. 7. 214. 2. Aesch. in Ctes. 117 = 119 The Amphictyony in the Crisaean War are Ἕλληνες hence Eurylochus is ὁπλότερος Ἀχιλεύς Euphorion ap. Hypoth. B. in Pind. Pyth. Hdt. 7. 132, the test for Ἕλληνες ἐόντες is membership of the Amphictyony: and, mid fourth century, Philip was of the same opinion.

³⁵ Cf. Isoer. 5. 119. (Jason) …

³⁶ Medios? Diod. 14. 82. 5, Ar. H. An. 9. 31: Eurylochus (D. Laert. 2. 25, Seh. Ar. Plut. 179) is probably earlier.

³⁷ Xen. Hell. 6. 1. 8, 6. 1. 18. Ibid. 6. 1. 14, suggests he had done precisely this.

³⁸ Polydamas is murdered, Xen. Hell. 6. 4. 34: the Aleuads call in Alexander II. of Macedon against Alexander of Pherae, Diod. 16. 14. 2.

³⁹ Head, , H.N. ²308Google Scholar, quoting Theopomp. Frag. 319 (Hunt), explains this by Alexander's supposed reverence for Dionysus πέλεκυς: but Hunt (rightly, I think) follows Maass (Hermes, 23, 70, Roscher, iii. 1814) in reading πελάγιος, not πέλεκυς for the MS. πέλεκος Cf. Pauly-Wissowa, xii. 1. 303, Labrys als Münzzeichen.