¹ Grundy, Thucydides, ch. viii., gives the most recent expression of this theory (at any rate for the fifth century), which appears prominently in Busolt, , Die Lakedaimonier, pp. 26Google Scholar foll.

² Pyth. i. 64.

³ Meyer's view that these passages are fourth-century forgeries will be examined later.

⁴ ap. Strab. viii. 5. 5.

⁵ Resp. Lac. i. 2 and viii. 5.

⁶ i. 65, 66.

⁷ ap. Strab. x. 4. 16–22.

⁸ Hermes, 1907, p. 440.

⁹ ap. Plut., Lyc. 2Google Scholar (the fifth-century historian not the poet).

¹⁰ i. 18.

¹¹ i. 65.

¹² Forschungen, i. pp. 213 foll.

¹³ Laws, iii. p. 642.

¹⁴ Pol. ii. 12.

¹⁵ Lycurgus.

¹⁶ ap. Plut., Lyc. 1Google Scholar.

¹⁷ v. 20. 1.

¹⁸ ἡ γὰρ Λακεδαίμων μετὰ τὴν κτισιν τῶν νῦν ἐνοικούντων αὐτὴν Δωριῶν ἐπὶ πλεῖστον ὦν ἴσμεν χρόνον στασιάσασα ὄμως ἐκ παλαιτάτου καὶ ηὐνο μήθη καὶ αἰεὶ ἀτυράννευτος ἦν ἔτη γάρ ἐστι ἀπαρχαί θύη ἀπαρχαί ξ

¹⁹ Cf. e.g. Ar., Pol. v. 9. 1Google Scholar.

²⁰ Paus. iv. 18. 2.

²¹ Das Spartan. Ephorat, 1870.

²² Cleomenes, 10.

²³ Diog. Laert. i. 68.

²⁴ Hdt. vi. 52.

²⁵ vi. 51.

²⁶ Wachsmuth, , Jahrb. für Class. Phil. 1868, pp. 1Google Scholar foll.; Gilbert, , Gk. Const. Antig. pp. 9Google Scholar foll.

²⁷ Paus. iii. 2. 1.

²⁸ Plut., Lyc. 2Google Scholar.

²⁹ Paus. iii. 2. 2.

³⁰ Polyaenus, ii. 13.

³¹ Paus. iii. 2. 3 and 7. 2.

³² Paus. iii. 2. 5.

³³ Hist. of Greece, Vol. I (transl. Alleyne), pp. 355, 356.

³⁴ Hdt. vi. 56.

³⁵ Paus. iii. 12. 8 and 14. 2.

³⁶ Hesych. s.v., θυμέλαι

³⁷ Cf. my paper, ‘Topographical Conclusions at Sparta,’ in B.S.A. xii. p. 431.

³⁸ iv. 149.

³⁹ E.g. Hyrnaethia in Argos (Müller, , Dorians, ii. p. 77Google Scholar), Aigialeoi in Sicyon (Hdt. v. 68).

⁴⁰ No Dorian remains have been found on the Menelaion, earlier than about 800. Cf. B.S.A. xv. p. 114Google Scholar.

⁴¹ Ath. iv. 131 F.

⁴² Cf. C.I.G. 1272, 1338, 1347, 1377, 1386, 1425, 1426. Hesychius, s.v.

⁴³ Cf. Hesych. s.v. τὰ ἄλφιτα τὰ ἐπιθυόμενα

⁴⁴ Cf. Tod, , B.S.A. x. pp. 63Google Scholar foll.

⁴⁵ Forschungen, i. pp. 213 foll.

⁴⁶ Hom. Untersuch. pp. 267 foll.

⁴⁷ N. Rh. Mus. xxviii. 1 foll.

⁴⁸ Hermes, 1907, p. 440.

⁴⁹ Lycurgus.

⁵⁰ i. 65.

⁵¹ i. 65, 66.

⁵² ap. Strabo, viii. 5. 5.

⁵³ i. 18.

⁵⁴ Gk. Const. Antiq. pp. 7, 8, note 2.

⁵⁵ ap. Plut., Lyc. 1Google Scholar.

⁵⁶ Cf. treaty between Elis and Heraea, Boekh, , C.I.G. 11Google Scholar, Hicks and Hill, No. 9.

⁵⁷ Plut., Lycurg. 6Google Scholar: καθἀπερ γε καὶ ἐν Περγἁμῳ τέφρας γὰρ δή ἐστι καὶ τῇ ῾´Ηρᾳ τῇ Σαμίᾳ βωμὸς οὐδέν τι ἐπιφανέστερος ἠ ἐν τῇ χώρᾳ τῇ ᾿ Αττικῇ ἄς αὐτοσχεδίας ᾿ Αθηναῖο καλοῦσιν ἐσχάρας ἐστία ἐσχἁρα

⁵⁸ Cf. Thuc. i. 20 correcting Hdt. vi. 57. Herodotus knew that in the royal obes there were two votes, one used by the βωμός one by the king. By a natural error he attributed both to the king. A similar confusion led him to the mistake about the Πιτανάτης Λόχος He knew there was a Pitanate corps, but forgot that Pitane was an obe as well as a tribe, and that the obal corps was not a Λόχος

⁵⁹ Resp. Lac. xv. 1.

⁶⁰ Euseb, . Chron, i. p. 189Google Scholar, ii. p. 80.

⁶¹ Paus. ii. 19. 2.

⁶² Pol. viii. 12.

⁶³ Strabo, pp. 228, 258; Diod. xv. 66.

⁶⁴ Paus. iv. 4. 5 and iv. 5. 10.

⁶⁵ Euseb, . Chron. i. p. 194Google Scholar; Dion., Hal., Antiq. Rom. vii. 72Google Scholar.

⁶⁶ E.g. in eighteenth Olympiad, Paus. iv. 8,7.

⁶⁷ iv. 148.

⁶⁸ Pans. iv. 7. 8.

⁶⁹ Wachsmuth and Stein, op. cit.

⁷⁰ Cf. Niese, op. cit.

⁷¹ In i. 65 he seems to put the great Tegean defeat of Sparta in the reigns of Leon and Hegesicles, i.e. about 600 B.C. The real date, as we know from Pausanias and elsewhere, was in the reign of Charilaus, i.e. about 800 B.C. Herodotus dated Lycurgus about 100 years before this war, and so appears to date him here about 700 B.C. Cf. Niese, op. cit.

⁷² For the archaeological evidence on this point cf. the reports of the excavations of the British School of Athens at Sparta in B.S.A. xii.–xv.

⁷³ Paus. iii. 7. 5.

⁷⁴ Müller, , Dorians, ii. pp. 115Google Scholar foll.; Meyer, , N. Rh. Mus. xli. p. 583Google Scholar.

⁷⁵ Holm, , History of Greece, i. p. 181Google Scholar, rejects decisively any Cretan influence in Spartan institutions.

⁷⁶ Plutarch, , Pyrrhus, 5Google Scholar; Klotzsch, , Epirotische Geschichte, pp. 30–32Google Scholar.

⁷⁷ Who were the Dorians? Anthrop. Essays in honour of E. B. Tylor, Oxford, 1907.

⁷⁸ This view is accepted by Müller, (Dorians, ii. pp. 107Google Scholar foll.), Schäfer, (De Ephoris Lac. p. 7Google Scholar), Stein (op. cit. p. 14), Meyer, (N. Rh. Mus. xli. p. 583Google Scholar), Frick, Gachon, and others.

⁷⁹ Entst. und Entwickel. d. Spart. Ephorats, p. 31.

⁸⁰ Gk. Const. Antiq. pp. 20 foll.

⁸¹ De Ephoris Spartanis, p. 8.

⁸² History of Greece, i. p. 181.

⁸³ Grieck. Gesch. i. pp. 149, 150.

⁸⁴ Entstehung und ursprüngliche Bedeutung des Spart. Ephorats, Munich, 1897.

⁸⁵ Entstehung und ursprüngliche Bedeutung des Ephorats, Berlin, 1894.

⁸⁶ Pol. ii. 9 and 10.

⁸⁷ Plut., Cleom. 10Google Scholar. Gilbert maintains the truth of Cleomenes' history of the ephorate, and derives the tradition from Phylarchus.

⁸⁸ i. 68.

⁸⁹ Paus. vi. 22. 2.

⁹⁰ Plut., Reg. et Imper. Apophth. Epam. 23Google Scholar.

⁹¹ Paus. iv. 27. 9 gives the date as 668. Niese, accepts the story about Epaminondas, and makes the first war last from 710–690, the second 630–600 (Hermes, xxvi. [1891], pp. 30 foll.)Google Scholar. His argument seems entirely arbitrary.

⁹² iv. 18. 2.

⁹³ i. 65.

⁹⁴ The stele on the Alpheus giving the terms of the treaty is quoted from Aristotle in Plut., Qaaest. Gr. 5Google Scholar.

⁹⁵ Hdt. 1. 68 fin.: ἤδη δέ σφι καὶ ἡ πολλή τῆς Πελοποννήσου ἦν κατεστραμμένη

⁹⁶ Paus. iii. 18. 9.

⁹⁷ Paus. iii. 12. 11.

⁹⁸ Hdt. iii. 47.

⁹⁹ Cf. B.S.A. vols. xii.–xv.

¹⁰⁰ B.S.A. xiii. pp. 74–77. The objects are Egyptian in form, but probably of Syrian or neighbouring manufacture.

¹⁰¹ B.S.A. xiii. pp. 60, 61.

¹⁰² Paus. iii. 17. 2.

¹⁰³ Hdt. i. 69.

¹⁰⁴ Hdt. i. 69.

¹⁰⁵ Cf. Droop, in B.S.A. xiv. p. 40Google Scholar.

¹⁰⁶ I have received the following interesting figures from Mr. E. Norman Gardiner in reference to the Olympie Games. ‘The first Spartan victory occurs in Ol. 15 (720 B.C.). Between this date and Ol. 50 (576 B.C.) 81 victories are recorded in different events. Of these Sparta is credited with 46. In the Stadion-race for the same period 21 out of 36 winners are Spartans. In Ol. 57 (552 B.C.) another Spartan wins the stadion, and there is not another winner till Ol. 116 (316 B.C.).…Between 548–400 B.C. Forster enumerates 181 victories. The Oxyrhynchus papyrus, which was unknown to Forster, would bring the total to at least 200. In the whole number there are only 12 Spartan victories, 8 of which are in chariot- and horseraces, which we may presume to have been a monopoly of the kings for the most part. Between 548–480 B.C. the only Spartan victory is that of Demaratus in the chariot-race (Hdt. vi. 70).’ Further information is given in Mr.Gardiner's, book, Greek Athletic Sports and Festivals, pp. 56–59Google Scholar and 80. I am much obliged to Mr. Gardiner for permission to publish this most interesting corroborative evidence.

¹⁰⁷ ii. 68.

¹⁰⁸ Chron. ii. pp. 96 f.

¹⁰⁹ Diog. Laert. i. 72 gives another date for his death, Ol. 52 = 572 B.C.

¹¹⁰ Paus. iii. 16. 4.

¹¹¹ i. 68. It is further supported by a quotation from Sosicrates, who calls Chilon the first of the ephors.

¹¹² i. 10. Λακεδαιμονίων γὰρ εἰ ἠ πόλις ἐρημω θείη πολλὴν ἄν οἶμαι ἀπιστίαν τῆς δυνάμεως προελθόντος πολλοῦ χρο.νου τοῖς ἔπειτα πρὸς τὸ κλέος αὐτῶν εἶναι

¹¹³ Ἀθ. πολ. i. 1, and long note by Sandys, ad loc.; Plut., Solon. 12Google Scholar.

¹¹⁴ Paus. iii. 12. 11.

¹¹⁵ Plut., Cleom. 7Google Scholar; Cic., de div. i. 93–96Google Scholar; Paus. iii. 26. 1.

¹¹⁶ Arist ‘Pseudepigraphus’ in Plut, . Q. Gr. 5Google Scholar und Q. Rom. 52.

¹¹⁷ Hdt. i. 67 and 68.

¹¹⁸ Hdt. v. 72.

¹¹⁹ Cf. the vety similar story of the cults of Adiastus and Melanippus in Sicyon (Hdt. v. 67).

¹²⁰ Busolt, , Die Lakedaimonier, iii. pp. 261Google Scholar foll.

¹²¹ Geschichte es Alterthums, iii. p. 467. He points out that the question first became acute after 464, but was in existence before.

¹²² The passage in Thuc. iv. 80 is to be considered only for the fifth century.

¹²³ The remarks typical of Chilon, and called Χιλώνεια by later writers (cf. Diogenes Laertius, Life of Chilon) are full of the spirit of the Spartan ἀγωγή

¹²⁴ Hunt, A. S., The Rylands Papyri, vol. i, No. 18, pp. 29–32Google Scholar. Dr. Huut prefers στρατη γῆσας to στασιᾶσας

¹²⁵ We have the evidence of Pindar and Hellanicus (cf. p. 2) for the general belief that the elements of the Spartan ἀγωγή go back to the beginnings of the Dorian race.

¹²⁶ Meyer, (Geschichte des Alterthums, ii. pp. 765, 766)Google Scholar suggests that Chilon may be the author of the Spartan change of policy in 550, bnt he does not perceive the forces at work on both sides.

¹²⁷ Hdt. i. 152.

¹²⁸ Hdt. v. 42 and 48.

¹²⁹ J.H.S. xxvi. (1906), pp. 84 foll.

¹³⁰ iii. 44–47.

¹³¹ Hdt. iii. 148.

¹³² Hdt. v. 42; Paus. iii. 4. 1.

¹³³ In this connexion it is interesting to remember the grave of the Athenians who accompanied Dorieus, which was pointed out to Pausanias in Sparta (Paus. iii. 16. 4). Niese has not noticed this point, but it adds to the probability of an original state-colony, in which the Spartan allies were invited to participate.

¹³⁴ In the sixth year of their stay, according to Hdt. iii. 59.

¹³⁵ Hdt. vi. 66, the story of Cobon and the deposition of Demaratus.

¹³⁶ Hdt. vi. 52.

¹³⁷ Hdt. vi. 82.

¹³⁸ Paus. ii. 20. 8 and 9.

¹³⁹ Hdt. vi. 74.

¹⁴⁰ Paus. iv. 23. 6.

¹⁴¹ vi. 22.

¹⁴² vi. 4.

¹⁴³ Hdt. ix. 37.

¹⁴⁴ Hdt. vi. 75.

¹⁴⁵ Cf. Plut., Arist. 23Google Scholar; Hdt. ix. 106, 114–121; Thuc, i. 89, 94–96; Diodorus, xi. 37–50.

¹⁴⁶ Thuc. (i. 95) and Plutarch, (Arist. 23Google Scholar) suggest no difference of opinion in Sparta, but the evidence of Diod. xi. 50 for strong partyfeeling on this question in 473 does not stand alone. The jealousy shewn in regard to the building of the walls of Athens is a clear proof of the strained relations of Athens and Sparta at this time, and Pausanias could not have led out the Greek fleet in 478 after the events of the previous autumn unless he had had a considerable following in Sparta.

¹⁴⁷ Thuc. i. 134.

¹⁴⁸ The date is established by Meyer, , Forschungen, ii. pp. 502Google Scholar foll.

¹⁴⁹ Thuc. i. 101.

¹⁵⁰ On the chronology of this period cf. Meyer, , Gesch. des Altert, iii. pp. 515Google Scholar, 518, notes; and Holm, , History of Greece, ii. pp. 102Google Scholar foll.

¹⁵¹ Hicks and Hill, No. 31, dated about 456.

¹⁵² Plut., Cim. 16Google Scholar; Polyaenus, i. 41. 3; Aelian, , V.H. vi. 7Google Scholar.

¹⁵³ Plut., Cim. 16Google Scholar.

¹⁵⁴ At the special instigation of the ephors? Cf. Paus. iv. 24. 5.

¹⁵⁵ Another chronological problem; cf. Meyer and Holm, loc. cit. There is no textual excuse for the substitution of τετάρτῳ for δεκάτῳ in Thuc. i. 103.

¹⁵⁶ There were 5,000 Spartiates between 20 and 60 in 479: in 418 not more than 2,500 at an outside estimate. Cf. Busolt, , Hermes, 1905Google Scholar.

¹⁵⁷ Hdt. iii. 148.

¹⁵⁸ Hdt. v. 49.

¹⁵⁹ Hdt. vi. 84.

¹⁶⁰ Hdt. vi. 85.

¹⁶¹ Hdt. vi. 105.

¹⁶² The Samian exiles expelled from Cydonia by the Aeginetans were friends and allies of Corinth and Sparta; cf. p. 29, supra.

¹⁶³ Plut., Cim. 17Google Scholar.

¹⁶⁴ Thuc. i. 114; Plut., Pericles, 22Google Scholar and 23.

¹⁶⁵ Thuc. iii. 13.

¹⁶⁶ v. 16.

¹⁶⁷ v. 48.

¹⁶⁸ v. 54 and 55.

¹⁶⁹ v. 60.

¹⁷⁰ v. 63.

¹⁷¹ The anger of the ephors on both of these occasions ought to dispose of the legend that they were still carrying out the policy of Chilon.

¹⁷² Cim. 17.

¹⁷³ iv. 24, 6.

¹⁷⁴ xi. 64.

¹⁷⁵ Cf. my article in Classical Quarterly, Oct. 1911: ‘The True Cause of the Peloponnesian War.’