Chapter XI. _Conclusion

ἀγαθὸν δὲ ὄντα διαφερόντως καὶ πλούσιον εἶναι διαφερόντως ἀδύνατον.

PLATO, _Laws_, V. 743_a_.

“We adopted a law that if you bought an office you didn’t get it. I admit that that is contrary to all commercial principles, but I think it is pretty good political doctrine.”—WOODROW WILSON.

This final chapter will contain (_a_) a _résumé_ of the evidence already adduced; (_b_) a short general discussion of the credibility of the whole mass of extant evidence; and (_c_) an attempt to view in their proper perspective the conclusions that the evidence seems to warrant.

(a) _Résumé of previous chapters_

[Sidenote: Introductory chapter.]

The age of the first known metal coins is also the age of the first rulers to be called tyrants. Ancient evidence and modern analogy both suggest that the new form of government was based on the new form of capital. The modern analogy is to be found in the financial revolution which has largely replaced metal coins by paper (thereby rendering capital very much more mobile, just as was done by the financial revolution of the age of the tyrants) and has led many people to fear a new tyranny of wealth. The ancient evidence is to be found in the scanty extant writings of the sixth century B.C. (Solon and Theognis), in scattered notices about early tyrants or tyranny in fifth century writers (Thucydides, Herodotus, Pindar), in certain statements of Aristotle, in references to industrial conditions both during and after the age of the tyrants, in the history of the states where there was never a tyranny, and in the steps taken to prevent a recurrence of tyranny.

If the commercial origin of the early tyranny is not explicitly formulated by any ancient writer it should be remembered how meagre are contemporary documents and how little Greek writers say about economic causes. It is true also that my view is at variance with statements of Plato, Aristotle, and subsequent writers: but their picture of the rise of tyranny clashes with known facts about the seventh and sixth centuries and is due to false generalizations from the conditions of their own days and particularly from the career of Dionysius of Syracuse.

[Sidenote: Athens.]

Peisistratus made himself tyrant by organizing the Attic “hill men” (Diakrioi, Epakrioi) against the two previously existing rival factions of the “plain” and the “coast.” The accepted explanations of these “hill men” are improbable. They cannot have been farmers or shepherds, who were always very conservative, are not recorded as having subsequently supported Peisistratus, and must have lived principally in the plain and very little in the forest-clad mountains where modern theories generally locate them. Nor were the “hill men” confined to the mountainous district of North Attica, the mistaken identification of which with the “hill country” is due to mistaken views as to the triple division of Attica into “hill,” “coast,” and “plain,” which wrongly assigns all South Attica to the “coast” and limits the “coast” to South Attica. These views on the triple division of Attica in the days of Peisistratus are based on the weakest of evidence and are made improbable by the subsequent topographical arrangements of Cleisthenes (502 B.C.), and by the later uses of the terms Diakria and Epakria. The Epakria contained a village named Semachidai which, as shown by a recently found inscription, lay in the hilly mining district of South Attica. Furthermore the Attic “akron” _par excellence_ was Cape Sunium, the Southern apex of the Attic mining district and of the whole Attic peninsula. In view of these facts it becomes probable that the Sunium and Laurium mining district was the “hill country” _par excellence_. The mines were almost certainly in full work at this period, and the miners, unlike those of later ages, free men, good material for a political faction.

That Peisistratus based his power on silver mines is made very likely by what is known of his subsequent career. He finally “rooted his power” on money derived partly from home, partly from the Thracian mining district; he went to the Thracian mining district to prepare for his second restoration; his first restoration is attributed to the dressing up as Athena of a Thracian woman named Phye, who is very possibly to be explained away as the Athena who begins about this time to appear on Attic coins: for this interpretation of the Phye story compare the names “girl,” “virgin,” “Pallas” colloquially given to the Attic coins, and the jest about Agesilaus being driven out of Asia by the Great King’s archers, a colloquial name for Persian gold coins.

The tyranny fell at Athens when the tyrants lost control of the Thracian mining district. Shortly afterwards the ambitious Histiaeus, the Greek friend of the Persian king into whose power the mines had passed, incurred the suspicions of the Persian sovereign through attempting to build up a political power on these very mines and miners.

The history of the Alcmaeonid opposition to the house of Peisistratus likewise suggests that the government of Athens at this period depended first and foremost on the power of the purse.

[Sidenote: Samos.]

Polycrates is perhaps best known for his piracies, but it seems not unlikely that these piracies were in fact an elaborate commercial blockade of Persia that proved almost as unpopular among Greek neutrals as among the subjects of the Great King against whom it was mainly directed. As tyrant Polycrates is found controlling the commercial and industrial activities of his state, building ships, harbour works, and waterworks, and very possibly a great bazaar, and probably employing much free labour on these works. Before he became tyrant he already had an interest in the chief Samian industries, the working of metal and the manufacture of woollen goods. Aiakes the father of Polycrates is probably the Aiakes whom a recently discovered Samian inscription appears to connect with the sea-borne trade of the island. The tyrant is said to have owed his fall to an attempt to get money enough to rule all Greece, a statement of particular value considering the tendency to administer poetic justice that is so frequently displayed by Herodotus, who is our authority for this statement.

[Sidenote: Egypt.]

The great developments of trade and industry that just preceded the age of tyranny in Greece had their parallel if not their origin in Egypt. At the height of this development in Egypt a new and powerful dynasty arises which bases its power on commerce and on the commercial and industrial classes. Already towards the end of the eighth century we find King Bocchoris (somewhat after the manner of the Argive Pheidon) devoting special attention to commercial legislation. His successor Sethon is said by Herodotus to have based his power on “hucksters and artizans and tradespeople.” During these reigns the country was always being occupied or threatened by foreign invaders from Ethiopia or Assyria. The first Egyptian king of this period to rule all Egypt in normal conditions of peace and quietness was Psammetichus I, who rose to power about the same time as Cypselus in Corinth and Orthagoras in Sicyon. Psammetichus according to Diodorus converted his position from that of a petty Delta chieftain (one of twelve who shared the rule of the part of the country not in foreign occupation) into that of supreme ruler of the whole country as a result of the wealth and influence that he won by trading with Phoenicians and Greeks.

This last statement if true establishes Psammetichus as a commercial tyrant. It occurs only in Diodorus, and receives no direct confirmation in earlier writers, but it is in entire harmony with all that is known about events and conditions in Egypt at this period, and more particularly with the notices just quoted as to Bocchoris and Sethon, with the history of Amasis and the other later Saites as recorded in Herodotus, and with the conclusions to be drawn from the excavation of Naukratis and the other Greek settlements that played so important a part in Saite Egypt.

[Sidenote: Lydia.]

From the middle of the eighth century B.C. till the early part of the fifth Lydia appears to have been a power in which the ruler based his position on wealth and struggles for the throne were fought with the weapons of trade and finance. This according to the accounts is the case with Spermos and Ardys in the eighth century and with Croesus in the sixth: the story of Gyges and his magic ring may also be explained in the same sense. A similar state of things is indicated in the advice which Croesus is made by Herodotus to give to Cyrus, in the story of the revolt of Pactyes, and in that of Xerxes and the rich Pythes.

At about the time to which we can trace back this state of things in Lydia, two events were taking place that are both attributed to Lydia, namely the striking of the first metal coins and the appearance of the first tyrant. In neither case are the dates very precise. The first coins are more probably to be placed late in the eighth century than early in the seventh, and though Gyges is stated to have been the first tyrant, there are reasons for suspecting that he may have been merely the first ruler of his kind to attract the attention of the Greeks. The magic ring too by which he secured his tyranny is sometimes attributed not to Gyges but to some (not very remote) ancestor of his or to the eighth century plutocrat Midas king of the neighbouring Phrygia. But on any showing the ring falls within the limits of time and place to which may be ascribed the earliest coins and the earliest tyrant. Rings are one common form of early currency and it is not impossible that it was to the ring in this sense that the first tyrant owed his tyranny. This view, which implies that the earliest coins were private issues and that the coinage was only nationalized when the principal coiner became chief of the state, is supported alike by evidence and analogies.

[Sidenote: Argos.]

Pheidon, who was probably the first ruler to be called tyrant in European Greece, is described by Herodotus as “the man who created for the Peloponnesians their measures,” a description that at once suggests that it was this commercial step that differentiated Pheidon the tyrant from the kings who preceded him. Later writers, of whom the earliest is Ephorus, go further and state that silver was first coined by Pheidon in Aegina. The statement has been called in question, but it is confirmed by the chapters of Herodotus (V. 82 f.) which describe the early relations between Argos, Aegina, and Athens. In the light of recent archaeological enquiries it becomes highly probable that Argos became predominant in Aegina as described in these chapters of Herodotus (which are unfortunately most vague in their chronology) just about the time when Pheidon most probably reigned; and this probability is increased by the tradition that Pheidon recovered the lot of Temenos, the domain of the kings of Argos in early Dorian times, which included the island of Aegina. The occupation of Aegina by Argos which we have seen reason to associate with Pheidon gave rise according to Herodotus to a change in the “measures” (which probably included the weights system) in use on the island, the new measures being half as great again as those previously in use. The Aeginetan standard on which the Aeginetan coins were struck is roughly half as great again as the other and probably earlier standard used in ancient Greece. The statement of Ephorus that silver was first coined by Pheidon in Aegina is thus strikingly confirmed, which means that the first ruler to strike coins in European Greece was also the first to be called tyrant.

[Sidenote: Corinth.]

The tyranny at Corinth coincides with the great industrial and commercial developments of the city described by Thucydides (I. 13) in words that are a paraphrase of his description of the state of things that led to the rise of tyrannies in Greece generally. Scholars agree that the tyrants had a direct interest in some of these developments, notably shipping, colonizing and coinage. The main industry of Corinth at this period seems to have been pottery, with which she supplied much of the Greek world. Of the early career of the first tyrant, Cypselus, very little is known beyond the story in Herodotus which professes to explain how the infant Cypselus got his curious name. We have examined in some detail the meaning of the words cypselus and cypsele, and found that they probably mean potter and pot, so that the man who established the tyranny at Corinth seems to have borne a name that associates him with the main industry of his city.

[Sidenote: Rome.]

Both in date and in character the corresponding period at Rome to the age of the tyrants in Greece is that which is occupied by the reigns of the Tarquins. The first king of this dynasty, Tarquinius Priscus, is said to have been the son of a rich Corinthian named Demaratus. Early in life the first of the Tarquins had settled in Rome. It was by means of his wealth that he secured the throne. Both he and his father are said to have been great employers of labour, and the accounts imply that their employees were free men. Servius Tullius, who succeeded Tarquinius Priscus, is said to have been the first at Rome to strike coins, and to have secured the support of the poor by gifts and benevolences. When the last of the Tarquins, Tarquinius Superbus, overthrew Servius Tullius and secured the throne, he did so by buying up the poorest of the common people. After his succession he is described as employing Etruscans and Roman citizens on a large scale as artizans and quarrymen. He loses the throne when he can no longer pay these employees.

During the first century of the republic the established government several times thought itself threatened with attempts to restore the kingship. In each case it is the wealth or the exceptional financial position of the suspected person that causes the alarm. Early republican statesmen are repeatedly reported as charging the Tarquins with having degraded Roman citizens (from their natural position as soldiers and gentlemen) into tradesmen and artizans, a charge which implies the reverse change as having accompanied the change from kingly government to republican. The final blow to the monarchist movement at Rome seems to have been dealt when army pay was instituted, and the government as paymaster of the army became the greatest employer of paid free labour in the state.

One later attempt to establish a tyranny at Rome has been suspected by Mommsen. The man he suspects of it is Appius Claudius Caecus, the censor of 312 B.C. Appius was noted for the number of his clients and the great public works that he conducted, and he probably had a close connexion with the first real coinage struck by Rome. Attention has also been drawn to the accounts of the secessions, with their curious resemblances to modern strikes and their implication of organization on the part of labour. At Ardea in North Latium about the year 440 B.C. the working-classes are described as playing a decisive part in the struggle for supreme power. At Veii in the year 400 B.C. we are told of a rich employer who became king of his city.

The statements just quoted have all been often regarded with extreme scepticism. The reasons for this scepticism have been examined in the chapter on Rome. It is impossible to resume them here. If my conclusions are not entirely wrong, the scepticism of the last century represented an excessive reaction against the undue credulity of earlier ages. Recent archaeological discoveries enormously increase the probability of the narrative in its main outlines. But if after all the sceptics are right on this particular question, and the Tarquin narrative is a fiction, it is none the less of historical value, and confirms the view that the early tyrannis was commercial, since, if fiction, it must be an early Greek fiction, preserving an early Greek conception of the typical early tyrant as a great capitalist.

[Sidenote: Other early tyrannies.]

In Chapter IX we surveyed the evidence for the origin of the early tyrannies at Sicyon, Megara, Miletus, Ephesus, Leontini, Agrigentum, and Cumae. The material is scanty and it is enough here to recall that as far as it goes it supports the theory of a commercial origin. At Sicyon the tyranny is founded by a tradesman the son of a tradesman. At Megara Theagenes rises to power as the result of what looks very like the creation of a corner in the staple product of his city. At Miletus and Leontini we find tyrants arising as the result of something like class war between rich and poor, while a later tyrant of Miletus tries to establish a great political position by getting control of the mines and miners of Thrace. At Ephesus and Cumae the tyrants’ power is said to be based on the money that they distributed among the poorer classes, while at Agrigentum the tyrant is definitely stated to have secured the tyranny through his position as a great employer.

[Sidenote: Capitalist despots of later ages.]

In the times of Aristotle there are several cases in the Pergamene district of rich bankers and the like making attempts, of which one at least was successful, to secure supreme political power in their cities by means of their wealth. The close personal relationship in which Aristotle stood to some of them partly explains why they are not classed by him as tyrants.

Not long afterwards the far more important power of the rulers of Pergamum owed its origin entirely to the enormous wealth of the founder of the dynasty.

Later still at Olbia chance has preserved an inscription which records how a very rich Olbiopolitan named Protogenes became “financial director” of his city. Though there is no evidence that Protogenes ever became a tyrant the inscription shows that the sort of position which we have imagined to have been normally built up by the would-be tyrant of the seventh or sixth century was actually secured some three or four centuries later by a wealthy individual in this remote and backward Greek city on the Black Sea.

(b) _The credibility of the evidence as a whole_

The value of the various items of evidence collected and reviewed in the preceding chapters varies very greatly. In some cases we have precise statements bearing closely on the point in question and made by almost contemporary writers. At the other end of the list we have anecdotes of doubtful relevance and doubtful authenticity found in writers who lived centuries after the period to which they refer. It is difficult to sum up the value of so miscellaneous a collection. The estimate is bound to vary greatly according to the temperament and training of the person who makes it. There are however two points which seem in the present state of scholarship to need especial emphasis.

The first of these refers to the generally prevalent attitude towards the question of historical truth as it affects generally the period under consideration. No one who has read at all widely in modern writings on ancient history can have failed to observe that the scepticism or credulity of any given scholar has always depended largely on that of his generation. Up to a point this is inevitable: but we are reaching a stage when it is no longer necessary to follow quite so blindly as has hitherto been done the natural reaction from excessive credulity to excessive scepticism and _vice versa_. The pendulum has now been swinging long enough for its motion to be observed and allowed for. There is no doubt that scholars of a few generations ago were often and perhaps in general unduly credulous. But it is no less certain that the main tendency of the past century has been to react from excessive credulity to no less excessive scepticism. The beginnings of the sceptical reaction were observed by Byron:

I’ve stood upon Achilles’ tomb And heard Troy doubted: Time will doubt of Rome.

The doubts about Troy have been triumphantly dispelled by the spade. So likewise, as we have seen already, have many doubts as to the reality of the Tarquins’ Rome. But the wonderful discoveries of the last forty years at Troy, Mycenae, Knossos, Phaistos, and other sites of early Cretan civilization have diverted the attention of scholars from later periods. It need therefore cause no surprise if in the preceding pages there has repeatedly been occasion to criticize prevailing views as excessively and uncritically sceptical.

The second point on the question of historical truth that I wish here to emphasize is concerned more directly with the evidence collected in this book. As already admitted, the collection contains many items of doubtful value: it could not be otherwise if it was to be at all complete. The cumulative effect of so much dubious evidence upon some mental temperaments is to discredit the mass of evidence as a whole. It is important therefore to bear in mind the character of our material. It is a heap, not a chain. Its strength is to be measured by its strongest items rather than by its weakest. Weak or irrelevant items do not invalidate any that are relevant and cogent. On the contrary, points of evidence that are individually unconvincing may have a powerful cumulative effect if they are found all pointing, however dimly, in one definite direction, and all suggesting a single explanation arrived at on independent grounds. When dealing with the dawn of history it is uncritical to reject a whole body of evidence merely because it is made up of details scarcely any of which are capable of proof. The evidence of history, or at any rate of Greek history, in its childhood is like that of many an individual child. The child’s idea of truth is often more fluid than that of the adult. It may be harder in any given case to be sure of the exact facts. But it may all the same be certain that facts more or less accurately recorded form a large element of the information.

That, it may be fairly claimed, is how the evidence that has been presented in this volume ought to be regarded. Its cumulative value is really considerable. It should be remembered how independent our witnesses are. Livy on the Tarquins of Rome is corroborated by Diodorus on Psammetichus of Egypt: Herodotus on early tyrants generally is borne out by his critic Thucydides: the later writers who have been quoted so frequently and in such numbers drew upon a great variety of sources: literary evidence is confirmed by archaeological, as for instance when a conjecture as to the “hill men” of Peisistratus that I put forward in 1906 is corroborated by an inscription that was first published just after the publication of my conjecture. When witnesses are so many and they speak on such a variety of topics and under such a variety of circumstances and to all appearances without the possibility of any common cue, the chances of collusion become remote in the extreme.

(c) _Conclusions_

But granted that the various items of evidence that we have so far collected have all a real historical value, and granted too that they lend one another a considerable amount of mutual support, there is a further line of criticism that deserves a careful consideration. The evidence may all be true and yet the inferences that have been drawn from it be false, or at least ill-balanced and misleading. Kings and tyrants have in all ages tended to be extremely rich. In most ages great riches have been indispensable for anyone aiming at great political power, and the greater the power aimed at naturally enough the greater the riches required to secure it. Admittedly the tyrants lived in a commercial age, and the influence of wealth was particularly strong. Does the evidence that has just been presented prove in reality very much more than that? Some of the statements about the men who became tyrants are indeed sufficiently explicit, as for example that about the trading of the young Psammetichus, or the wealth and workmen of the young Lucius Tarquinius, but apart from the question of their trustworthiness they are all so brief and meagre that it is impossible to be sure that we see them in the right perspective. They are not very adequate for forming any picture of the men they refer to or even of their financial position.

In short the early tyrants may have all been rich and all men of business and yet their riches and business activities may have been neither the basis nor the distinguishing feature of their rule. They arose in a many-sided age, and there were many other developments that might have conceivably brought them to the top. The doctrine of the divine right of kings had lost its hold. The struggles between the kings and the nobles had doubtless led both parties to appeal to the people, and from that it might well be no far step to the people’s appointing its own rulers. Then again there had been a revolution in the art of war. The Homeric days were over when the heavy-armed chieftain was everything and his followers a more or less useless rabble. In the new kind of warfare large bodies of trained men-at-arms counted for everything[1456]. Such a change might easily encourage a whole series of military officers to seize the supreme power. Furthermore in the case at any rate of the outlying Greek cities, and particularly those of Asia Minor[1457], the constant danger from barbarian neighbours might readily suggest the appointment of a military dictator. And we do in fact find the early tyrants described as having been previously demagogues or soldiers.

But we find also that these descriptions go back only to Aristotle and have their source in fifth and fourth century conditions. Even if they went further back, the objection just raised against the commercial explanation applies still more strongly here. Kings and rulers who govern in fact as well as in name are generally something of public speakers or soldiers. It is almost an impossibility to find a self-raised ruler who cannot be described as either a demagogue or a polemarch[1458].

Similarly with the notices about important offices of state alleged to have been held by various tyrants before they attained to supreme power. They are indeed among the most reliable items of information that we possess about the early tyrants. But their significance can be easily overrated. If ever a merchant who was aiming at the tyranny sought to strengthen his political influence by obtaining office, the record of his magistracy would be much more likely to be preserved than that of his commercial successes. When we come to the detailed evidence as presented in the previous pages the balance in favour of the commercial theory may be claimed as decisive.

If once the commercial origin of the tyrants’ power is admitted, the various facts recorded about individual tyrants certainly gain in meaning and coherence. The mercenaries, the monetary reforms and innovations, the public works, the labour legislation, the colonial policy and the commercial alliances with foreign states, which have been repeatedly found associated with the early tyrants and which give the preserved accounts of them such a distinct stamp, become far more significant if it is granted that the tyrant’s power was based on his control of the labour and trade of his city. As has been already observed, the fact that a theory explains the connexions between an obviously connected group of phenomena is no proof of its truth: but on the other hand a theory which fails to explain satisfactorily such a connexion is at an obvious disadvantage as compared with one which does. That is one further reason why the typical tyrant is not to be explained as a successful soldier or demagogue whose riches came to him suddenly at the same moment as his throne. The adventurer of either of these types might indeed further the commercial developments of the city that he had seized. It would be of course to his interest to do so. But as a general rule the man who has secured a fortune at a single stroke does not care to improve it by years of patient and organized effort. If all or any considerable number of the tyrants reviewed above had owed their positions to their sword or their tongue, there would inevitably have been some cases of commercial retrogression under the tyrannis, whereas in fact there are none.

This is a fundamental fact. The tyrants were one and all first-class business men. If they did not deliberately use their wealth to secure their position, there is only one other possible explanation of their history: their financial abilities must have led their fellow-countrymen to put them in the way of seizing the throne, and that is roughly the account of them that is to be found in some modern histories, where they are vaguely pictured as the more or less passive products of blind economic forces. This view seems to me untenable. It cannot be reconciled with the impression made by the early tyrants on writers like Aristotle. More fatal still, we have a series of “lawgivers” like Solon, who was a business man who gained his position precisely in the way just indicated. Some of Solon’s friends reproached him with his folly in not making himself tyrant. But the fact remains that no “lawgiver” of the period did so[1459], and that the titles of νομοθέτης and αἰσυμνήτης that were given these legally appointed dictators were never applied either by friends or enemies to any of the tyrants at any period of their careers[1460].

One fact has still to be explained. Different as are the views about tyrants and tyranny expressed by different ancient writers at different times they have this feature in common. All alike express their hatred of tyrannical government. For Plato the man who becomes a tyrant “is changed from a man into a wolf[1461].” When Herodotus digresses into a debate on the merits of the chief forms of government, he makes the critic of tyranny declare that there is nothing more unjust than it or more bloodthirsty in the whole world[1462]. There is no judgment from heaven on the man who lays low a tyrant. This doctrine of Theognis[1463] is perpetually preached all through Greek history. Harmodius and Aristogeiton the Athenian tyrannicides were celebrated in sculpture[1464] and in song[1465] and their names were constantly on the lips of orators[1466].

There are apparent exceptions to this attitude. The Aristotelian _Constitution of Athens_, chapter XVI., records that “the tyranny of Peisistratus was often praised as the life of the days of Kronos,” _i.e._ as the Golden Age, and the pseudo-Platonic _Hipparchus_, 229_b_, speaks of it in similar terms: (under the tyrants) “the Athenians lived much as in the days when Kronos was king.” But the Aristotelian version states also what it was that evoked this praise. “Peisistratus always secured peace and maintained quiet. Therefore his tyranny was often praised.” The phraseology of the two quotations shows that the praise was given not to the form of government, but to the peaceful life that it procured, a life that might be, and sometimes has been, associated with the most oppressive of governments.

The word tyrant appears to be Lydian, and to have been first applied among the Greeks to the rulers who followed in the steps of the Lydian Gyges, whom some ancient writers describe as the first tyrant[1467]. Originally it was used in a colourless sense as a synonym for king or monarch[1468]. It is still so used in the tragedians and frequently in Herodotus[1469]. But wherever the tyrant is spoken of in contradistinction to the king it is always in terms of detestation.

It must have been something in the character of the early tyrants that first gave the word the evil connotation, which it has preserved until this day[1470]. What that something was is not easy to determine with certainty. Much of it may be mere misrepresentation. Aristotle[1471] makes a statement about the tyrants with whom he was acquainted that is generally true of all monarchies. The tyrant, he says, “supports the people and the masses against the nobles (γνωρίμους).” We must not forget that the extant narratives represent almost exclusively the point of view of the aristocracy. It has often been suggested that this fact may account for the almost unanimous condemnation of the tyranny. But is this explanation altogether adequate? The Greek tyrant and the Roman rex are not the only monarchs who have had a bad press. The Emperors of Rome and the kings of Israel and Judah suffered likewise. Yet Jewish priests and Roman senators were not able to turn the titles of King and Emperor and Caesar into a byword and reproach. There must have been some very special circumstances to account for the universal execration of the name of tyrant. Is it not perhaps to be found in the commercial character of its origin? From the days of the Zeus-born king of Homer and long before, back to the very beginnings of leadership among men, legitimate kingship has always been held to rest upon the personal capacity of the ruler. This is the basis of belief in hereditary monarchy, or any other system that attaches great importance to birth and upbringing. It is no less the basis of much republicanism which from one point of view is merely a denial of the value of heredity and specialized political education. Men have often been ready, and with reason, to endure much from a ruler whose power is based on his personality. But there is one basis of political power that mankind has never tolerated, and that basis is mere riches. They have felt with Plato that the plutocrat as such has no right at all to rule. “He seemed to be one of the city rulers,” says Plato[1472], of the oligarch whose power is based on his wealth, “but in reality he was neither its ruler nor its servant, but merely a consumer of its stores.” Plato was here at one with his countrymen[1473]. In the fifth century, as we know from the history of the wealthy Nikias, riches did not exclude an Athenian from the highest position in the state. But neither did they constitute a claim to political power. In his famous funeral oration Pericles twice claims that at Athens poverty is no bar to a political career. Pericles is speaking of course for his own age. If the evidence collected in this book has any value, the state of things during the first four generations or so after the invention of a metal coinage was very different. Money for a while became the measure of a man, and wealth by itself brought political power.

We must beware of expecting simplicity anywhere in history[1474]. Even from the purely commercial point of view there were doubtless powerful side-currents that have left no trace in our extant records. The power of the Medici in Florence was based on their commercial supremacy. But it did not rest entirely on their actual trading. In part it was based on their position in the Papal treasury among the mercatores Romanam curiam sequentes, and in part again on the struggle between Emperor and Pope[1475]. Similar factors must have influenced the careers of Pheidon and other early tyrants of Greece. In part again these early tyrants seem to have stood for a racial movement. This was certainly the case at Sicyon, where the tyranny marked the ascendancy of the pre-Dorian population; probably also at Corinth, where the first tyrant’s father belonged to the Aeolic pre-Dorian element of the population[1476]. This racial factor is easily reconciled with the commercial, quite apart from the possibility that the pre-Dorian element that comes to the top at this period may have been closely related to the Levantine race that plays so prominent a part in Aegean commerce of the present day.

Nor must the personal element be left out of account, though so lamentably little is known about it. Cypselus and Pheidon, Peisistratus and Polycrates were certainly great personalities in their way. The leaders in any movement are generally that. On the whole they seem to have ruled well. Their government, except towards opponents and rivals, was by no means oppressive. All the more surprising therefore is their general condemnation. It is indeed scarcely possible to explain it except on the view that they ruled by right not of their personalities but of their riches. The prosperity that they brought to their cities was altogether material. The famous works of Polycrates were altogether the works of men’s hands. It is characteristic of the rule of a typical early tyrant like Periander that he encouraged the worship of Dionysus and Aphrodite at the expense of the cults of Poseidon and Apollo[1477]. No doubt his object was partly to break down the monopoly of priestly office and religious privilege that had hitherto been enjoyed by the aristocracy[1478]: but it is significant that while the tyrants’ policy meant a material advance in all directions, it meant also a materialization even of religion. That is why with a clearness of judgment that can be matched outside Greece only in Dante, the united verdict of all the Greeks utterly condemned them.

Two centuries after the expulsion of the tyrants from Athens, the city again fell under a ruler who is said to have made its material welfare his chief care, and “to have prided himself that there was much profitable trade in the city and that all enjoyed in abundance the necessaries of life.” Such according to Demochares, a nephew of Demosthenes, was the boast of Demetrius of Phaleron, and for it he is utterly condemned by Demochares as “taking pride in things that might be a source of pride to a tax-collector or an artizan.” The condemnation is quoted by Polybius as “no common charge[1479].” Polybius plainly regards it as particularly damning, for he quotes it _à propos_ of certain monstrous charges that were current about Demochares to prove that Demetrius must have refrained from supporting them for lack of evidence and not from lack of ill-will. Demochares and Polybius are a long step from the early tyrants: but both in a sense belong to the period that followed the tyrants’ fall. Their views about Demetrius and his materialistic policy may well be an inheritance from an earlier age.

The age of the tyrants lasted for little more than five generations, and never so long as that in any one city[1480]. This fact may have some consolation for those who fear a modern tyranny of wealth, and offers perhaps an analogy for the observations of H. G. Wells on the transitory character of the modern financial boss[1481]. The determination not to be permanently governed by mere wealth is as strong to-day as it was twenty-five centuries ago. “The loathing of capital with which our labouring classes to-day are growing more and more infected” is explained by William James[1482] as “largely composed of this sound sentiment of antipathy for lives based on mere having.” He contrasts[1483] the “military and aristocratic” ideal of the “well-born man without possessions.”

It is of course particularly hard to test the scorn of possessions of a class that can always help itself to them at a crisis, and, as William James himself admits, the ideal has always been “hideously corrupted[1484].” Certainly at the present day the antipathies between aristocracy and militarism and capitalism are, to say the least of it, not particularly marked. It is the democracy that loathes capitalism. But this may be merely a phase. The anti-capitalist movement may end by labour becoming fatally materialised or fatally impoverished, and in any country where that happens the way will be open for a new Peisistratus.

Appendix A (to p. 37). _The supposed Agricultural and Northern Diakria._

[Sidenote: (A) The farming population took little part in politics,]

The agricultural or pastoral explanation of the party that supported Peisistratus has no inherent probability[1485]. Of course if it was specifically stated on good authority that in his days people of either of these two classes played the decisive part in politics, objections would be silenced. But the ancient evidence points all the other way. Aristotle repeatedly states that of all people farmers and herdsmen are least prone to support revolutions[1486], and definitely pictures these two classes as having played an entirely passive part both under the regime of the early tyrants and during its establishment[1487]. When on the throne Peisistratus gave financial help to impoverished farmers[1488], a fact that is brought by Grundy[1489] into connexion with his supposed agricultural Diakrioi. But in doing so Grundy disregards some of the words that he himself quotes, which show that the tyrant is dealing not with his supporters but with a body of men who were not interested in politics but threatened to become so if driven off the land. Geographically there is nothing to connect with the Diakria the men whom Peisistratus thus relieved. In his earlier days the most distressed and discontented part of the agricultural population were the pelatai and hektemoroi[1490] who worked the lands of the rich[1491] and therefore presumably lived in the Plain.

According to the _Constitution of Athens_ the hill men were made up largely of people not of pure race, whose claim to citizenship was more than doubtful[1492]. Such a description is singularly inapplicable to the people on the land in Attica, where in the fifth century they still prided themselves on having an undisturbed autochthonous population. Plutarch speaks of the hill men as a “mob of hirelings[1493].” In the days just after Solon shepherds and small farmers of the hektemor class may have been hirelings, but they can hardly have ever been a mob.

There is therefore little to be said for the attempt to identify the hill men with the shepherds and hypothetical farmers of Mount Parnes. We cannot even be certain that the latter ever existed.

The soil of Attica was notoriously poor, abounding in stony districts (φελλεῖς) useful only for pasture[1494]. Attica claimed to be the land not of corn but of the olive. Demeter had her seat not in the great plain of Attica, but in the small and much more fertile plain of Eleusis.

[Sidenote: and lived but little on the mountains,]

None of the champions of an agricultural hill party dwelling on Mount Parnes seems to have seriously enquired into the upper limit of cultivation with wheat on the mountains of Attica. The only ancient writers who talk of agriculture being carried on there are the writer of the Aristotelian _Constitution of Athens_ and Statius.

The former[1495] tells the story of the man with the farm on Hymettus (τὸν ἐν τῷ Ὑμηττῷ γεωργοῦντα). The story says nothing about the frequency of farms on Hymettus or of the height up the hillside of this particular farm. But it does say something about the soil and the crops. The soil consisted of stones, the crops, so the farmer told Peisistratus, were “troubles and sorrows.” This hardly suggests that in the days of the tyranny Hymettus was of any great importance agriculturally. The same conclusion is suggested by the story of the clever Pelasgians who succeeded in cultivating the land at the foot of Hymettus, much to the surprise of the Athenians[1496].

Statius[1497] speaks of the ploughmen of fragrant Hymettus (olentis arator Hymetti), and the vineyards of Parnes (Parnesque benignus uitibus). The former is almost a contradiction in terms. Fragrant is an allusion to the famous honey of Hymettus, or to the thyme that produced it[1498]. Thyme and honey do not go with cornfields. A “Parnes kindly to vines” is not easily reconciled with Pausanias, who makes the mountain a good hunting-place for bears and wild boars[1499]. Plato declares that in his days some of the Attic mountains were barren except for their yield of honey[1500], whereas once they had been covered with forests[1501], some of which had only recently been cut down. The fame of the honey of Hymettus went so far back, that the mountain was claimed as the place where bees were first created[1502]. Aristotle divides bees according to whether their haunts are cultivated (ἥμερα) or mountainous (ὀρεινά). The latter are described in the next sentence as haunting the forests (ὑλονόμοι)[1503].

[Sidenote: which were occupied by forests and wild beasts.]

At the present day the Attic mountains are scarcely cultivated at all[1504], and though in ancient Attica cultivation may have been more intense, yet apart from the difficulties of carrying it up the mountain side, the whole scheme of life presupposes vast supplies of timber for shipbuilding, fuel, and countless other purposes. Bursian is probably right when he says that in antiquity Parnes was “thickly covered with forest in which numerous beasts found shelter, including wild boars and bears[1505].” During the period of Athens’ greatness, between 550 and 350 B.C., the supply of timber must have been constantly diminishing. Yet towards the end of the fifth century the charcoal-burners had their centre at Acharnae, below the southern slopes of Parnes, only about seven or eight miles from Athens. Thucydides excludes Acharnae from the plain[1506], and we must infer that it was not then the land of corn and vines that it is now. If not forest it was waste. If the land round Acharnae had not been claimed for farming, it is hardly likely that farmers abounded higher up[1507].

The same inference is suggested by a passage of Xenophon which implies that corn could not be grown in the mining district, which is distinctly hilly but does not reach anything like the height of Pentelicon, Hymettus, or Parnes, “and there is also land which when sown does not bear fruit, but being mined supports a population many times larger than it would if it was producing corn: and its argentiferous character is plainly due to Providence,” etc.[1508].

Then again frequent mention is made in ancient Attic documents of “boundary estates” and these are explained by the scholiast to Aeschines as “lands on the border of the country, extending either to the mountains or the sea[1509].” Such a definition implies that the mountains were almost as unused to cultivation as the sea itself. In Italy too the limit of cultivation of wheat seems to have been low. Latin writers repeatedly contrast the forest-clad mountains with the arable lowlands, and in some cases the mountains that these writers have in mind are considerably lower than the heights of Parnes[1510].

[Sidenote: (B) The case for a North-east “Hill Country” rests on misreadings or misinterpretations of ancient authorities.]

Enough has been said to show how little reason there is for picturing the mountains of North and East Attica in the days of Peisistratus as the home of a large and active agricultural population. It remains for us to examine the evidence for thinking that this district was known as the “Hill Country.” We shall find that if possible it is flimsier still. The supporters of the prevailing view base their case mainly on the definition of the Diakria found in the printed editions of Hesychius. This definition is the main source of all existing misconceptions. It is necessary therefore to examine it. The words of Hesychius as generally quoted are these. “Diakrieis: not only certain of the Euboeans but also of the Athenians: also a place (τόπος) in Attica: the Diakria is the land from Parnes to Brauron.” The modern name for the hills at Brauron is Περάτι (End), which seems at first sight to harmonize well with the definition of the Diakria just quoted. But if we examine any good map of Attica, we see that Περάτι does not end the Southern extension of Parnes; it forms the North-east extremity of the hills of South Attica. That is a first difficulty. It is at least unusual to define the limits of a district by places beyond those limits. We do not say that Germany extends from Tilsit to Verviers.

The second objection is far more serious. It is that the MSS. say nothing of Brauron. The word they give is Balylon (εἰς Βαλυλωνος, _sic_). This was emended by Aldus to Babylon. Brauron is a conjecture of Palmerius, and by no means a certain one. In Byzantine times the familiar Babylon (pronounced Vavylon) would indeed be a very natural corruption for the then obscure Brauron (pronounced Vrafron). The MS. Balylon is not nearly so likely to be a phonetic corruption of Brauron. It might conceivably be an orthographic corruption of Aulon, a place or region in the mining district in the extreme South of Attica[1511]. The εἰς with the genitive of the MS. suggests however some more complete corruption[1512].

But even if the reading “to Brauron (εἰς Βραυρῶνα)” were certain, Hesychius would still be a doubtful authority on this point. His definition of the “Coast” runs thus: “the Coast: Attica, whence also the ship Paralos (ἡ παραλία· ἡ Ἀττική, ἔνθεν καὶ ἡ ναῦς πάραλος).” This presumably means that the Coast was a synonym for Attica, the coastland _par excellence_. Such a definition might be supported by philological connexions between Ἀττική and ἀκτή[1513]. Conceivably with ἡ Ἀττική we should understand not γῆ but παραλία: the Coast means _par excellence_ the Attic coast (compare the modern “Riviera”). This interpretation is supported by our author’s definition of the men of the coast (οἱ παράλιοι), which runs “those who occupy the coast of Attica.” Neither interpretation vindicates Hesychius as an authority on the triple division of Attica. He makes no mention of the Plain.

Modern writers, it is true, give the word “coast” (παραλία) a conventional meaning and confine it to the Southern apex of the Attic triangle, the district of Attica that has the largest proportion of coast to interior[1514]. Their view has one fact in its favour. After the expulsion of the tyrants, when Cleisthenes set himself to break up the old local political parties, the whole of this Southern apex was included among the “coast” trittyes or (th)ridings of his new triple division of the whole country. But there are indications that the inclusion of this whole district in the coast was never anything but an artificial arrangement[1515] to prevent either of the other two divisions from overbalancing the coast[1516]. The Cleisthenic coast was of course not confined to this Southern apex. The moderns who imagine this restricted use base their assumption on a misunderstanding of their authorities. They quote Thucydides II. 55, where in reference to a Peloponnesian raid on Southern Attica he speaks of “the so-called coast land.” But the precise words of Thucydides show that the ravages were confined to the coast[1517], while inscriptions and passages in other writers prove that the name “coast” was not confined to the Southern apex of Attica but was normally applied to the whole Attic seaboard[1518]. When Thucydides uses the expression “what is called the coast land” he need not be taken as meaning that the name “coast” in Attica was used as a synonym for what Herodotus calls the Sunium Heights[1519]. Very possibly he is commenting rather on the fact that the Attic coast was called by the poetical name πάραλος γῆ, παραλία (the land of the brine) instead of the good fifth century prose word παραθαλάσσιος, ἐπιθαλάσσιος (the land by the sea). He himself uses ἐπιθαλάσσιος in the very next chapter for the coast land of the Peloponnese[1520].

Another text which has been thought[1521] to establish a Northern or North-Eastern Diakria and a Southern Paralia is a fragment of Sophocles[1522] in which the mythical king Pandion divides Attica between his three sons. Two scholia of Aristophanes[1523] and a notice in Suidas[1524] equate the North-Eastern of these divisions with the Diakria. But against this equation must be set that of Stephanus Byzantinus[1525], who says that the Diakria fell to the son who received according to Sophocles the Southern division.

Appendix B (to p. 168). _The Date of the Argive-Aeginetan Embargo on Attic Pottery_

The outstanding facts in the history of Attic pottery are these. During the dark ages Attic pottery takes perhaps the foremost place in the whole of Greece Proper. The dominant ware of this period is of a well defined style generally known as Geometric, of which the Attic “Dipylon” ware (fig. 43) is a superior and well represented variety[1526], that appears to have been in considerable request beyond the borders of Attica[1527]. The period of eclipse for Attic pottery is the seventh century and the beginning of the sixth. During this period oriental influences made themselves felt in all Greek arts and crafts. In Greece Proper the dominant pottery of the period is the Corinthian (figs. 22, 34), and another ware that began somewhat earlier but largely overlapped it, generally known as Proto-Corinthian (fig. 44). These two fabrics flooded most of Greece as well as Sicily and Italy, and are found in abundance in many Greek cities of the East. But in Attica Dipylon ware seems to have held the market well into the seventh century[1528], and to have been followed by the vases known as Proto-Attic and Phaleron[1529], which occupy only a humble place in the ceramic history of the period[1530]. Then in the first half of the sixth century Attica developed its famous Black Figure style (fig. 41), that quickly drove all competitors out of the market.

From the commercial point of view an embargo on Attic pottery between about 670 and 570 B.C. would have been practically pointless. It is only before the earlier date and after the later that Attic pottery was a menace to its rivals. As between these dates all that is known of the history of pottery in the Argolid and Aegina inclines strongly in favour of the earlier period. The most ardent protectionist will admit that protection is useless without something to protect, and from 570 B.C. onwards neither Argos nor Aegina appears to have had any interest in any possible rival to Attic ware. But in the early part of the seventh century Argos and Aegina alike were flooded with both Corinthian[1531] and Proto-Corinthian[1532] pottery, and, as may be gathered from the traditions about the lot of Temenos[1533], it is highly probable that they were much interested in pushing these wares, which are found in large quantities not only in Greece Proper, but also in Italy, Asia Minor, and even further afield[1534]. Corinthian pottery is unquestionably a Corinthian product[1535]. The place of origin of Proto-Corinthian is, as has been already noticed, much disputed. It has been claimed for Aegina itself[1536], and for Argos[1537]. Corinth is a possibility[1538], as also is Chalcis, for which latter the abundant finds at Cumae are interesting but by no means decisive evidence[1539]. Most archaeologists prefer Sicyon[1540].

The balance of expert opinion at present is certainly in favour of the North-east Peloponnesus[1541]. In Chapter VI evidence is cited to show that the whole of this region was probably under Argive domination previous to the establishment of tyrannies at Corinth and Sicyon about the year 660 B.C. But after that the situation changes. Corinth and Sicyon become strong cities, friendly to one another and hostile to Argos[1542]. Corinthian pottery eclipses all its rivals, with Proto-Corinthian as an easy but lagging second. If Argos had wanted protection for her native pottery in the second half of the seventh century, she would have excluded not Attic pottery, but the wares of Corinth, and perhaps Sicyon[1543]. Attic pottery revived and began to dominate the Greek market about 570 B.C., and that is the date to which the embargo is assigned by Hoppin, who published the pottery from the Argive Heraeum. But if that was the date, then, as he himself declares, its motive cart have been “nothing but simple spite, since no increased activity on the part of the Argive potters is the result[1544].” The motive that Hoppin so rightly desiderated can best have been at work when Proto-Corinthian and Corinthian pottery was already on the market, but Corinth and Sicyon were not yet under tyrants.

Thus on _à priori_ grounds the early years of the seventh century form far the most likely period for an Aeginetan or Argive embargo on the pottery of Attica[1545]. The power that destroyed the Dipylon ships[1546] might well have struck a blow at Dipylon pottery, if only to improve its own position in the carrying trade.

It remains to test this general probability by the evidence of the sites more immediately concerned.

In Aegina Attica Black Figure pottery has been found in some abundance[1547]. In fact Attic pottery found a ready entrance from the latter half of the seventh century onwards[1548]. If there is any stage of Attic pottery that is poorly represented on the island, it is the Proto-Attic and Phaleron. Such at any rate is the evidence of the excavations at the temple of Aphaia; and the scarcity of early orientalizing Attic harmonizes with what is known of the Geometric pottery from the site. This latter style, so Thiersch reports[1549], is richly represented, and in two groups, which are plainly imports from the neighbouring regions of Attica and the Argolid. The Attic ware predominates at first, the finds at Eleusis and the Athenian Kerameikos offering the closest analogies. Towards the end of the Geometric style, when it begins to connect up with Proto-Corinthian, the second great group of imports begins, with types that are also found in great numbers in the Argolid, at Tiryns and the Argive Heraeum.

Again, in the Aeginetan temple of Aphrodite, where the pottery found by Stais has been published by Pallat[1550], Geometric sherds, in clay and technique not to be distinguished from Attic, were fairly numerous, but coming down from the eighth century to the seventh, we are told that the Attic pottery of the period, the so-called Proto-Attic, is represented only by a few types, some of which are perhaps only imitations of the genuine Attic.

Similarly, the excavators of the Argive Heraeum report that “in the Argolid we find the Geometric style ceasing almost abruptly, while the Argive style becomes as it were emancipated[1551].” Argive is the Americans’ name for Proto-Corinthian[1552].

The vast majority of the fragments of this period from the Aphrodite temple are Proto-Corinthian or early Corinthian[1553]. Attic pottery reappears among the finds of about the middle of the sixth century, with a few sherds of Kleinmeister kylikes. Pallat indeed[1554] speaks further on of the Proto-Attic (_i.e._ early seventh century Attic) that is richly represented at Aegina, and Loeschcke too speaks of all stages of Attic ware from Dipylon onwards occurring in the island[1555]. Unfortunately, such terms as rare and abundant are still used by archaeologists in the loosest and most misleading way. The only vases Loeschcke quotes are a “Tyrrhenian” amphora, and an Ergotimos cup, _i.e._ two early sixth century vases, both from the Fontana collection, and attributed to Aegina only on the authority of dealers or collectors of the early part of the nineteenth century[1556]. The fact remains that in the properly recorded excavations on the island, it is early in the seventh century that Attic pottery occupies its least prominent position, and that in the museum at Aegina[1557], which includes the Aphaia finds and specimen pieces from the 1904 excavations at the Aphrodite temple, there is plenty of Mycenaean, Geometric, Proto-Corinthian, and Corinthian pottery, some early Black Figure (about 550 B.C.), and a fair number of late Black Figure vases, but no Proto-Attic at all.

For Argos the evidence is limited mainly to the finds from the Heraeum, the temple some miles from the city, that was excavated by the Americans. As mentioned already, the evidence from this site has been used for dating the embargo in the second half of the sixth century[1558]. Unfortunately, the American report is mistaken in the dating of some of its finds. It ascribes to the first half of the sixth century the archaizing Attic potter Nikosthenes, who flourished in the second half[1559]. The only two types of Attic fragments that the report states to have been found in considerable numbers[1560] both belong to the latter part of the century, and not, as the report states, to the first half of it. The finds therefore can hardly be quoted as indicating an exclusion of Attic pottery that started in the middle of the sixth century. They include only a very few fragments of early seventh century Attic[1561].

The indignant Argives and Aeginetans who, at the date that we are trying to determine, had crushed the Athenians in Aegina, did not merely exclude Attic pottery from the temple or temples of their outraged deities. They insisted further on the exclusive use of local pottery. It is highly probable that a whole mass of this local pottery, used for this very purpose, has actually come down to us. In the recent excavations of the Heraeum at Tiryns, the vast majority of the dedicated vases are miniature vessels of local fabric. The number reaches nearly a thousand, forming a series that begins in the seventh century and runs right through the sixth century into the fifth[1562]. Miniature vases similar in style, and presumably of about the same date, were found in like abundance in the Argive Heraeum[1563], where they were dated by the Americans many centuries too early. They form the most characteristic series of vase dedications in the temple. It has been suggested with much plausibility by Frickenhaus in the Tiryns publication[1564], that it was just such a mass of similar votive vases that was seen by Herodotus in the temple of Damia and Auxesia in Aegina. If Frickenhaus is right, the exclusion of Attic pottery from certain temples in Aegina and the Argolid is naturally put back at least into the seventh century. Frickenhaus refuses to believe that the use of these “native pots” was due to the reason given by Herodotus. But does the association of these harmless little local vases with an anti-Attic policy really look like an aetiological invention?

In the Aphaia temple on Aegina a quantity of local hand-made ware was found in the form of pots, jugs, plates, hydriae, amphorae, etc., large enough for use. Furtwaengler refers to them as χύτραι[1565], another form of the word used by Herodotus of the native pots dedicated to Damia and Auxesia. Similar plain ware for practical use is found on many sites[1566], and is not likely to have attracted the notice of Herodotus, though on the other hand the word that he uses (pots, χυτρίδες) points to plain coarse ware[1567]. If this is the ware he noticed, our dating is not however affected, since the principal shapes find their nearest parallels in Geometric graves.

Appendix C (to p. 169). _Early Athenian Sea Power_

The earliest naval battle known to Thucydides was fought between the Corinthians and the Corcyraeans in 664 B.C.[1568]. The Dipylon ships are built with rams (fig. 45. _a_), which by itself sufficiently shows their warlike character[1569]. Some of them are depicted fighting, or with fallen sailors lying all around (fig. 45. _c_)[1570], a fact which led Kroker[1571] to date them after 664 B.C. If Kroker’s argument was sound, they would have to be dated later still, for it is highly unlikely that Athenian vases would depict for the local market a battle in which Athenians were not concerned[1572]. But even 664 B.C. seems too late a date for the vases. Seventh century Greek pottery everywhere shows Oriental influence. This is the case with typical seventh century Attic, which is known as Proto-Attic and Phaleron ware. Dipylon pottery may have lasted on into this century, but it belongs mainly to the eighth and ninth[1573]. A Geometric cup with a naval fight found at Eleusis[1574] occurred in the lowest stratum of the Geometric graves and is dated by Poulsen fairly early in the style[1575].

There is however no necessary discrepancy with Thucydides. Helbig[1576] points out that all Dipylon fights seem to be duels between single pairs of ships. Most of these Dipylon warships are depicted on huge vases that took the place of tombstones, so that the single ship, or ship-duel, might be explained by the single sea-captain who lay beneath[1577]. But against this explanation must be set the single ships and single ship fights on smaller Dipylon vases and the naval duel on the vase signed by Aristonothos, probably an Argive potter of the first half of the seventh century (fig. 46)[1578]. One late Dipylon fragment (fig. 45. _d_)[1579] shows a ship’s crew fighting warriors on land, and the vessel’s prow, in which Helbig sees the form of a horse’s head, is thought by him to indicate that it came from Caria or Phoenicia, where this kind of prow ornament is known to have been used[1580]. The horse’s head is not very distinct. Its identification is regarded as uncertain by Furtwaengler[1581]. At the best it is not decisive for Helbig’s inference. But he is probably right, when he sees in the Athenian ships of the Dipylon period a naval force intended to protect Attica against pirates[1582], which may never have fought a pitched battle at all[1583].

Some such state of things as Helbig outlined is required to explain the behaviour of the naval forces of the combatants in the early Aeginetan war. The war is described as occurring just after the Aeginetans had built ships and become masters of the sea[1584]. The fleet may have been the outcome of the shipbuilding recorded in the Hesiodic Eoiai, where it is said of the Aeginetans that they “were the first to fashion ships with oars on either side, and first to set up sails, the wings of the ship that crosses the sea[1585].” The thalassocracy must have been local[1586], and may well mean simply that Aegina had outstripped Athens, and become the leading member of the Kalaurian league, though possibly it is to be associated with the early Aeginetan settlement at Naukratis[1587]. The Athenians claimed to have sent only a single ship to Aegina. But this appears to have been the version of the official bulletin, with the incapacity apparently inherent in such documents for describing a serious reverse as such. “The Aeginetans said that the Athenians had come not with one ship but with many[1588].”

That Athens too possessed a fleet is implied when Herodotus says that the Argives crossed to Aegina undetected[1589]. Yet there is no hint of a sea battle. Both sides have their explanation[1590], but neither is very satisfactory. The state of things implied by Herodotus’ narrative of the Aeginetan war is remarkably like that pictured by Helbig for the time of the naval activities of the Dipylon ships.

One further point on this naval question may be noted, though it must not be pressed. Triremes are mentioned in connexion with the crossing of the Athenians to Aegina. This may be a mere anachronism[1591]. But there is nothing to prove that it is so. A state of things which includes fleets of triremes, but no naval actions on a large scale, suits admirably the early part of the seventh century, before the naval battle of 664 B.C. and after the invention of the trireme. The first triremes in Greece are said to have been built at Corinth, some time before 704 B.C., when Ameinokles constructed four for the Samians[1592]. Some of the Dipylon ships appear already to possess two banks of oars (fig. 45_b_)[1593]. Ships with two banks of oars appear on monuments of Sennacherib (700 B.C.)[1594].

Triremes were used by the Pharaoh Necho (610–594 B.C.)[1595]. Both Sennacherib and Necho probably relied largely on Phoenician sailors and shipwrights. “We are told that the Sidonians were the first to construct a trireme[1596].” All these statements fall in excellently with the notice of Thucydides. It is true that in the next chapter he says that Aegina and Athens possessed few triremes a little before the death of Darius (486 B.C.), and uses this fact to argue that Greek naval power only developed on a large scale from about that time. His facts are hardly to be questioned; but in his conclusions he appears to be misled by the fallacy (which he shares with so many moderns) that no development of first class importance could possibly be dated much earlier than his own age[1597].

The troubles that overtook Aegina about the time of her break with Epidaurus probably included a war with Samos[1598], in which the Samians “sent an expedition against Aegina, and did much harm to the Aeginetans, and received much from them[1599].” In such a state of affairs Aegina would be doing her utmost to turn out ships on the up-to-date pattern with which Ameinokles was supplying the enemy.

The Dipylon ships are rightly associated by many modern scholars with the naukraric organization that is found existing at Athens at the end of the dark ages[1600]. The presidents of the naukraroi (or perhaps of the naukraries) are said by Herodotus to have been administering (ἔνεμον) Athens at the time of Cylon’s attempted tyranny, _i.e._ about 632 B.C.[1601]. The statement is challenged by Thucydides, who says that “at that time the nine archons conducted most of the business of the state[1602].” Herodotus however is at the worst only being inaccurate. The naukraroi were very possibly “the authorities in charge of the siege (οἱ ἐπιτετραμμένοι τὴν φυλακήν)” of Thucydides and were probably responsible for the levy _en masse_, recorded by Thucydides himself (ἐβοήθησαν πανδήμει ἐκ τῶν ἀγρῶν), that led to Cylon’s discomfiture[1603]. Herodotus may have exaggerated the authority of the naukraroi to palliate the guilt of the Alcmaeonid archon who put Cylon’s followers to death[1604].

Attica in the days of Cylon was divided into forty-eight of these naukraries, each of which had to provide a ship[1605]. The business of the naukraroi was however largely financial[1606], so much so that later writers, who may have known them best from references to them in the laws of Solon, seem to have regarded them as exchequer officials[1607], the more so as Cleisthenes replaced the naukraric organization by demes[1608], which had no naval associations.

Even the etymological connexion of naukrary with ναῦς (navis, ship) has been called in question. Doubt is first cast on it by Pollux, who wrote his _Onomasticon_ in the second century A.D.[1609]. Modern writers have proposed alternative derivations. Grote derives it from ναίω (I dwell), and explains the naukraroi as the principal householders[1610], a reflex of the suffrage basis of the nineteenth century. Others[1611] connect it with an obscure word ναύω, said by Hesychius and Photius to mean “I beseech,” and connected by Photius with ναός (temple). ναός and ναύω they connect with a dubious gloss of Pollux[1612], which explains ναύκληρος (ship’s captain) by the rare word ἑστιοπάμων (householder, lit. hearthholder), and which they emend by reading ναύκραρος for ναύκληρος. As further Hesychius defines ναύκληρος (_sic_) as the president of a community (συνοικία) they connect the origin of the naukraries with the unification (συνοικισμός) of Attica by Theseus, symbolized by a common hearth[1613].

These philological doubts have been met by G. Meyer[1614], who argues that even assuming that ναός means “hearth,” compounds would require not ναυ- but ναο- or ναυο-. Phonetic analogies all point to a derivation from ναῦς (ship)[1615]. -κραρος is to be connected with κραίνω (make, complete) or perhaps with κραίνω meaning “I rule[1616].”

Pollux’s uncertainty about the derivation simply reflects the uncertainty about the history of the naukraries that was prevalent in his days. No naval activities of the naukraroi are recorded by any ancient writer[1617]. But this proves nothing. Naukraries probably had a long history at Athens, like ship-money in England, and in the course of time lost their dominatingly naval character.

Gilbert indeed[1618] doubted the existence of naukraries before the time of Solon, who is suggested as a possible founder by a Scholiast of Aristophanes[1619]. He suspects the evidence of the pro-Alcmaeonid Herodotus, and notes that he describes the attempt of Cylon and its suppression by the naukraroi as having happened “before the time” not of Solon but “of Peisistratus.” He argues also against the possibility of a pre-Solonian Attic fleet of forty-eight ships, since Solon, when he attacked Salamis, sailed against the island with nothing but a large number of fishing-boats and one thirty-oared vessel[1620]. He quotes Photius, who s.v. ναυκραρία says, “Solon having thus called them, as Aristotle states.” His views are not tenable. Even if Herodotus is trying to whitewash the Alcmaeonidae, it by no means follows that he is very far from the truth in his account of the naukraries. If he mentions Peisistratus and not Solon, it is simply because Cylon aimed at becoming not a lawgiver but a tyrant. A weak Athenian fleet in Solon’s time is no proof that the Athenian fleet had never been stronger. When Photius says “thus called” (ὀνομάσαντος), he may quite as well mean “used this name for” as “gave this name to”: if he intended it for the latter, all that follows is that he misunderstood Aristotle, as did also the Scholiast to Aristophanes, _Clouds_, 37.

De Sanctis has gone even further than Gilbert, and brings down the establishment of the naukraries, along with the attempt of Cylon, to the time of Peisistratus[1621]. He argues mainly from the naval developments under the tyrant, which, as seen already, are no evidence whatever against a much earlier date.

There is no reason to doubt the existence of the naukraries in 632 B.C. The question to be settled is how much further they go back, and what was the naval need that they were organized to meet.

A date not much before Cylon is argued for by Schoemann[1622], who can find no earlier occasion for their institution than the seventh century struggle with Megara, by Duncker[1623], who similarly explains them as instituted out of rivalry to the seventh century navies of Athens’ neighbours, by Philippi[1624] who dates them 683 B.C. (institution of annual archons), and by Busolt[1625], on account of their connexion with the financial classification and organization of the seventh century. As regards Schoemann and Duncker it has been shown above in Chapter VI how very unlikely it is that Athens started an elaborate naval organization in the seventh century. Busolt’s connexion of the naukraries with seventh century financial organization shows only that they then existed: it does not follow that they were then created. Whether or no Glotz is right in tracing them back to Homeric times[1626], the balance of probabilities indicates that they go back to the period of the Dipylon pottery[1627], and were organized for protection or reprisals against the raiders that then infested the Attic coasts, much as in England the Danegeld was instituted to deal with the pirates of a corresponding period in our own history. There may be something in the view that equates the naukraric organization with the council of Theseus[1628], if by Theseus is meant the head of the Athenian state who established some sort of order on the waters and coasts of the Saronic Gulf after the overthrow of the Cretan civilization[1629]. To quote the words of two particularly sober writers[1630]:

After the breakdown of the Minoan thalassocracy Athens certainly took her part in policing the Saronic Gulf.... Her men of war are frequently depicted on Dipylon vases of the ninth and eighth centuries. In later times need of this protecting squadron may have grown less, when the navies of Megara, Aegina, Chalcis, and Eretria cleared the Aegean of corsairs. We may suppose that the naukraroi of the seventh century seldom saw active naval service[1631].

The writers just quoted, following Helbig, imagine the ancient naukraries pursuing their naval activities as members of the Kalaurian league, and the latter, which lasted on as a religious body through classical times, as gradually taking a back place with the development of the other naval states they mention. Their picture however leaves out of account the chief fact known about the history of the league. Its original members were Hermione, Epidaurus, Aegina, Athens, Prasiae, Nauplia, and the Minyan Orchomenos. Then at the end of the list Strabo adds, “Nauplia used to be represented by Argos, and Prasiae by Sparta[1632].” Strabo is here referring to a later period. It looks as though Argos and Sparta were intruders into the league, who sought membership to secure influence or a recognized position in the Saronic Gulf, just as in later times Philip of Macedon, for political reasons, set such store on recognition by the Delphic Amphictyony[1633]. Is it unreasonable to suppose that the two intruders secured their places in the league each at the time of his aspirations to Peloponnesian hegemony, Sparta in the sixth century, and Argos under Pheidon? All the known circumstances bear out this supposition, at least for Argos which alone at present concerns us. It fits alike the naval power of Athens in the dark ages, the eclipse of that power in the seventh century, and the expansion of Argos just at this period. Nauplia is said by Pausanias[1634] to have fallen to Argos only at the end of the seventh century. But Asine, which lies further from Argos, is said to have been conquered by her a hundred years earlier[1635]. Beloch argues with some reason that the nearer city must have been conquered first. But there is no need to follow him in his passion for lowering dates, and bring down the time of the conquest of Asine. There is more reason for putting back the date of the fall of Nauplia, and thus bringing it into the period of Argive expansion under Pheidon[1636].

Make this not unlikely modification in the picture just quoted from Mitchell and Caspari, and the early war between Athens and Aegina finds a satisfactory historical setting. Before the war Athens, Epidaurus, and Aegina are the leading states in the Saronic Gulf. As a result of it Athens is crippled at sea, and her place, and even more than her place, is taken by Argos. The evidence is admittedly scanty, but as far as it goes it points to the first Aeginetan war as marking the downfall of the naval power that Athens had enjoyed during the dark ages, or, as the legend puts it, after the fall of Minos, when the Kalaurian league and the navy of the naukraries were potent realities. The power that brings about this downfall is that of the Argive tyrant Pheidon.

Appendix D (to p. 170). _Early Athenian Dress_

Thucydides[1637] quotes Athenian dress in the introductory chapters of his first book to illustrate his thesis that civilization and comfort are extremely modern things. He divides Athenian history from this standpoint into three periods, the first that when men went about armed, the second that of luxurious Ionic fashions, and the third that in which they reverted to simple or rational dress (μετρία ἐσθής). It is difficult to date the beginning of Thucydides’ second period later than the first half of the seventh century. At the time indeed when Thucydides wrote his remarks it was not very long since elderly men of the wealthy class in Athens had given up the Ionic dress. It has sometimes been maintained that the dress was always confined to old men, and that Thucydides implies that Ionic at Athens had been recently in full fashion. But the tone of the passage suggests rather the old gentleman who clings to the fashions of an earlier age. Already in the seventies of the fifth century B.C. the woman who typifies Greece in Xerxes’ dream is dressed by Aeschylus in Doric robes[1638] and the monuments confirm the view which regards the Persian Wars as marking the change.

But that does not end Thucydides’ evidence. He speaks of fashions in Sparta as well as in Athens. The return to simple dress was started by the Spartans (μετρίᾳ δ’ αὖ ἐσθῆτι πρῶτοι Λακεδαιμόνιοι ἐχρήσαντο). This statement has two implications[1639]. The Spartans must have reverted to Doric costume before the Persian Wars, and previous to this reversion they must, like the Athenians, have worn some sort of Ionic costume. The importance of these allusions to Sparta seems scarcely to have been realized, no doubt because the controversy took shape before the excavations of the British School at Sparta had challenged many of the received views on the history of archaic Sparta. The very large finds of ivory and lead figurines of the seventh and sixth centuries[1640] show that artistically at least the Spartans of that period were by no means the austere devotees of simplicity that they became in the classical age. Spartan simplicity in fact probably dates in large measure from the days of Chilon, the reformer of the middle of the sixth century[1641]. It is not improbable that the simple dress at Sparta came in with the simple life at just about this period. It is already implied for Spartan young women by the epithet φαινομηρίδες (showing the thigh) of the poet Ibycus, a contemporary of Chilon. There is nothing in Thucydides to discountenance the assumption of an interval of about fifty years between the beginning of simple dress at Sparta, and its adoption at Athens[1642]. The tyranny at Athens roughly covers this period, and standing as it did for material luxury, sufficiently accounts for the interval. Athenian luxury, at least in the matter of dress, is said by Thucydides to have started earlier than Spartan, and Spartan, if it went out in the middle of the sixth century, must plainly have come in considerably before that date.

The Ionic costume is said by Herodotus to be strictly speaking not Ionian but Carian[1643]. Eastern influence began to pass over from the Greek cities of Asia Minor and pervade the more progressive parts of Greece Proper early in the seventh century[1644]: so that once again this seems to be the most probable period for the assumption of Ionic dress at Athens.

The same date is arrived at by working forward from Thucydides’ first period, the age when men habitually went about armed. Thucydides is notoriously sceptical about the existence of the culture so familiar to us now under the names of Mycenaean and Minoan and it does not come into his three periods of Greek dress. The first of these is plainly the dark age that followed the downfall of Crete and Mycenae, the age of the Geometric pottery which about the year 700 B.C. began to make way for orientalizing styles. This is the period _par excellence_ of dress-pins and fibulae as shown by archaeological finds[1645], and the end of it, _i.e._ the beginning of the seventh century, would be the natural time for regulations curtailing or prohibiting their use.

Much has been made of the fact that Thucydides deals exclusively with male attire and Herodotus with female, and scholars who maintain that the Aeginetan disaster occurred towards the middle of the sixth century argue that in early Athens men would take the lead even in matters of dress[1646] and that the early date implied by Thucydides for the male Ionic costume in Attica need not hold for the female as well. If the distinct dates were established beyond dispute the difference of sex might serve as an explanation. We have seen however that there is nothing in the words of Herodotus to justify a sixth century date for the adoption of Ionic costume by Athenian women.

Appendix E (to p. 249). _The Dating of the latest Vases from the Forum Cemetery_

Among the Forum vases that look late are some skyphoi like the “Later Ionic” of Sieveking and Hackl’s Munich Catalogue, _e.g._ _Notiz._ 1903, p. 137, fig. 17, pp. 407 f., figs. 36, 42, 55, 57 (the last two from the same grave as fig. 53, see _ibid._ fig. 52). These skyphoi are closely related to a series of small, flat, handleless bowls similarly decorated, _Notiz._ 1903, p. 137, fig. 17, p. 388, figs. 14, 15 (grave G), p. 409, fig. 39 (grave I), p. 425, fig. 56 (grave K): for the stylistic connexion cp. _Notiz._ 1903, p. 425, fig. 56 (handleless bowl) with _ibid._ fig. 57 (skyphos). The context in which they were found at Rome points to a date not later than fairly early in the sixth century: _Notiz._ 1903, p. 137, fig. 17, was found acting as a lid (see _ibid._ fig. 16) to the skyphos _ibid._ fig. 17 of the later Ionic style; _Notiz._ 1903, p. 388, figs. 14, 15, were found in a single skeleton grave (_ibid._ p. 385 and fig. 11) along with the Proto-Corinthian lekythos, p. 388, fig. 17, that is probably of the seventh century, and other vases that are probably of the sixth: fig. 39 is from a single skeleton grave that contained also the “later Ionic” skyphoi, figs. 36, 42 (_ibid._ p. 400 and figs. 28, 31); fig. 56 is from a single skeleton grave and had a similar context (_ibid._ p. 418 and fig. 52). All these handleless cups (figs. 14, 15, 39, 56) are pierced near the brim with pairs of small holes. This is a practice known in Greek pottery of the Geometric and Proto-Corinthian period (_J.H.S._ XXX. p. 241, n. 42: add _Notiz._ 1895, p. 238, found in the same grave with two sixth century black figure vases. Two vases apparently somewhat similar in shape, style, and decoration to this flat, handleless series, but without the bored holes, were found at Rhitsona in graves of the end of the sixth century, _Arch. Eph._ 1912, p. 115, fig. 15) but not to black and red figure Attic pottery: it occurs on the probably seventh century cup from grave M, _Notiz._ 1905, pp. 151, 155, figs. 9, 12.

Other late-looking vases are the two figured _Notiz._ 1905, p. 150, fig. 7. Pais, _Ricerche_, I. (1915), p. 382, quoting Helbig dates them later than the sixth century. But Piganiol, _Journ. des Sav._ 1915, p. 552, n. 4, supported by Dugas, argues for the possibility of an earlier date on the ground that, though the shape might belong to the end of the fifth century, the decoration, for which cp. Louvre C 44, figured by Pottier, _Album_, I. pl. 23, points to the seventh. This argument will hardly do as it stands. The vase cannot be older than its shape, which rather recalls the fifth and fourth century festooned cups from Gnathia. But though it so much recalls that period, it does not seem to find an exact parallel in it, and the divergence may be more significant than the similarity. No other vases were found in the same grave with these two, so there is no context to suggest an earlier date: but if I am not mistaken, fifth and fourth century Gnathia ware is similarly recalled with a similar slight difference by another Forum vase, _Notiz._ 1903, p. 408, fig. 37, found in a grave with nine others (including figs. 36, 38, 39, 42, quoted above) which all point to a sixth century date. It must not be assumed that features common to early Greek and Italic wares always began earlier in Greece: a whole series of Etruscan bucchero vases has broad ribbon-shaped vertical handles that in Greek ware are distinctive of the late sixth century potter Nikosthenes: yet one of these bucchero vases comes from the early (seventh century) Regulini Galassi tomb at Caere, see _Roem. Mitt._ XXII. p. 126, fig. 18, p. 207. For Forum examples see _Notiz._ 1903, pp. 408, 422, figs. 38, 53.

Appendix F (to p. 249). _Evidence for Intramural Burials in Rome_

Servius declares that the people of Rome and other cities originally buried all their dead within the city and actually within the house[1647]. The latter statement appears to be an inference from the worship of the lares, “people used all to be buried in their own houses, whence has arisen the practice of worshipping the lares within the house,” but may be none the less true for that reason[1648]. Intramural burials are prohibited in the Twelve Tables, “hominem mortuum in urbe ne sepelito neve urito[1649],” a prohibition which implies a practice still to some extent prevalent at the time[1650]. In the consulship of Duilius the prohibition was re-enacted[1651], showing that even then the practice was not altogether obsolete. Quite a number of exceptions were allowed by law. Vestal virgins (both good and bad) and imperatores were as such exempted[1652]. To come to concrete instances, the grandfather of King Tullus Hostilius is said to have been buried “at the best spot in the Forum[1653].” Tullus is a dubious figure in Roman history, and still more so is his grandfather. There is some uncertainty too about the case of the novem combusti, contemporaries of Spurius Cassius in the early years of the republic[1654]. They may have been not cremated but burnt alive[1655]. But there are plenty of later instances. Cicero implies that the exceptions were well known when after quoting the prohibition in his _de Legibus_ he makes another character in it at once exclaim: “But what of the famous men who have been buried in the city since?,” and immediately proceeds to quote the families of Valerius Publicola and Postumius Tubertus, and the individual case of C. Fabricius, buried in the Forum itself in 275 B.C. The exceptions in favour of the Valerii and the Postumii apparently go back to the beginning of the republic, when the consuls P. Valerius Publicola and P. Postumius Q. f. Tubertus were buried within the walls[1656]. To the same period went back the concession to the Claudii of a burial-place under the Capitol[1657]. The intramural (?) tomb of the Cincii, and that of “quidam Argiuorum illustres uiri” said to have been buried within the city, rest on more doubtful evidence[1658]. That of the seven military tribunes buried near the Circus in 267 B.C. may have been still without the city.

The archaeological evidence for intramural burials at Rome has been discussed by Graffunder. At least two cases are well attested for the early republican period[1659].

INDEX

_A.J.A._ see _American Journal of Archaeology_

Aahmes, see Amasis, Pharaoh of Egypt

Abdul Hamid, 270

Abel (E.), _Scholia Vetera in Pindari Nemea et Isthmia_, cited 258 n. 2

Abertawe (Swansea), 106 n. 3

_Abhandlungen d. bayerisch. Akademie d. Wissenschaften zu Muenchen_, cited 199 n. 11, 200 n. 1

_Abhandlungen d. hist. phil. Gesellschaft Breslau_, see Haase

_Abhandlungen d. preussisch. Akademie d. Wissenschaften zu Berlin_, cited 39 n. 1; see also Diels, Erman, Lepsius, Milchhoefer, Schweinfurth, Wiegand

_Abhandlungen d. saechsischen Gesellschaft d. Wissenschaften_, see Overbeck

Abraham, 96

Abrahams (E. B.), _Greek Dress_, cited 166 n. 1

Abu Symbel, 123, 212

Abydos, 92

_Academy_, see Dennis

Acarnania, 52

Acharnae, 310

Achilles, 48, 298

Acragas, see Agrigentum

Acropolis of Agrigentum, 274; of Athens, 17, 40 n. 6, 53, 63, 252, 253, 315 n. 5; of Lampsacus, 281

Actaeon, favourite of Archias, 181

Adrastus, 179 n. 2, 261, 262, 264 n. 5

Adrianople, 200 n. 1

Aeacus, 176 n. 3

Aegean Sea, 33, 112, 130, 135, 286, 305, 330

Aegeis, 41 n. 3

Aegina, Aeginetans, 34, 57 n. 5, 64 n. 3, 68, 109, 116, 117, 154–157, 160–162, 164–171, 173–178, 212 n. 8, 285, 294, 314–320, 324–326, 330, 331, 333

Aeginetan weight system, 24 n. 1, 133, 156, 161, 164, 171–173, 175, 263, 294

Aegon, 158 n. 6

Aeinautai, 269

Aelian, _Historia Animalium_, cited 95 n. 1; _Varia Historia_, cited 10 n. 6, 17, 126 n. 4, 136 n. 3, 137 n. 1, 145 n. 3, 150 n. 6, 155 n. 2, 193 n. 1, 272 n. 1, 273 n. 1, 275 n. 1, 302 n. 6, 307 n. 4

Aeneas, 237 n. 1, 249

Aenus, 200 n. 1

Aeolic (pre-Dorian) stock, 193, 304; see also pre-Dorian

Aeolis, Aeolians, 69 n. 5, 246

_aes formatum_, 219

_aes graue_, 219, 232

_aes rude_, 219, 220

_aes signatum_, 219, 220

Aeschines, _contra Timarchum_, cited 12 n. 7, 13, 312 n. 1; Schol. _contra Timarchum_, cited 310

Aeschines, Socratic philosopher, 30

Aeschines, tyrant of Sicyon, 66, 263 n. 5.

Aeschines of Semachidai, 39 n. 1

Aeschylus, _Agamemnon_, cited 57 n. 5; _Persae_, cited 47, 69 n. 4, 332; Schol. _Persae_, cited 40 n. 9; Schol. _Prometheus Bound_, cited 134 n. 2

Aesop, 56 n. 3

aesymnetes, αἰσυμνήτης, 8, 272, 301

Aethelred, 238

Aetolia, 196 n. 5, 263 n. 5

Africa, 3, 54, 87

Africanus, cited 93 n. 1, 98–100, 143 n. 2, 159

Agamemnon, 10

Agamemnon, king of Cyme, 147

Agariste, 157, 259 n. 1, 262

Agatharchides of Cnidus, 90 n. 3, 203 n. 4

Agathocles, 208–211, 276–278, 303 n. 2

Agesilaus, 20, 57, 291

ἀγορανόμοι, 12

ἀγοράζω, 80

agrarian laws, 230, 289

agriculture, 16, 24, 34, 264, 307–311; see also farmers

agricultural labourers, 24, 37, 38

Agrigentum, Acragas, 10 n. 1, 14, 274–278 _passim_, 296

agroikoi, 48; see also farmers

Ahala, see Servilius Ahala

Aiakes, father of Polycrates, 81, 292

Aiakes, nephew of Polycrates, 75

αἰχμοφόρος, 143

Aipeia, 169 n. 1

Aithalia, 203 n. 4

ἀκήρατος, 68

Akkad, 197

akron, ἄκρον, ἄκρα, ἄκρη, 40, 41, 44, 291

ἀκτή, 312

Ala Shehr, 130 n. 7

alabastron, 119

Aladdin, 127, 148

Albertus (J.), ed. Hesychius, cited 40

Alcibiades, 17

Alciphron, cited 155 n. 1

Alcmaeon, 64, 65

Alcmaeonidae, Alcmaeonids, 14, 64–67, 231, 250, 292, 326, 328

Aldus, 311

Alexander Aetolus, cited 180 n. 2

Alexander Aphrodisiensis, _Problems_, cited 199 n. 9

Alexander the Great, 54 n. 1, 282 n. 4, 284, 288

Alexandria, 160 n. 7

Alexis, cited 21, 74

Alfred the Great, 91 n. 4, 237–239

Alopeke (modern Ampelokipi), 39 n. 1

Alyattes, 59 n. 6, 128, 137–139, 143 n. 1, 145 n. 3, 152 n. 2, 187 n. 8, 273

Amasis, Aahmes, Pharaoh of Egypt, 68, 71, 83, 84, 87, 96 n. 4, 101–105, 107 n. 4, 109, 112, 114, 115 n. 2, 116 n. 3, 117 n. 4, 121–124, 126, 293

Amasis, potter, 245

Ambracia, 189, 213 n. 4, 263 n. 5

Ameinokles, 184, 325, 326

Amelung (W.), _apud_ Pauly-Wissowa, cited 166 n. 1

Amen Rud, see Ammeris

America, see United States of America

_American Journal of Archaeology_, cited 38 n. 2, 81 n. 3

_American Journal of Philology_, see Smith (K. F.)

American School of Classical Studies, Athens, 163, 187 n. 2, 319

Ammeris, Amen Rud, Rud Amen, Nut Amen, 88 n. 1, 99

Ammianus Marcellinus, cited 208 n. 4

Ammonius, _Vita Aristotelis_, cited 282 n. 3

Amon, god of Thebes, 97

Ampelokipi, see Alopeke

Amphictyons, Amphictyony, 65, 259 n. 2, 330

Amphikrates, king of Samos, 69 n. 5, 177, 178

ἀμφιφορῆες, 201

Amphipolis, 36 n. 1

Amphitrope (modern Metropisi), 39

amphorae, 113, 201, 205, 243 n. 1, 246, 253, 320

Anacreon, 84

Anaktorion, 189

Anaphlystus, 39, 41

Anatolia, 72

Anaxilas of Rhegium, 74, 75

Ancus Martius, 216, 217 n. 1

Andocides, cited 47 n. 7

Andreas, father of Orthagoras, 257, 263

Andros, 313 n. 1

Angel of the Lord, 92

Anglo-Saxons, 89 n. 1, 238

Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, 237

Ἀγκὼν γλυκύς, 76, 77 n. 3

_Annali dell’ Instituto_, see Bachofen

Anno, see Hanno

_Annual of the British School at Athens_, cited 317 n. 7; see also Burrows, Edgar, Hogarth, Petrie, Ure

antefix, terra cotta, 250–252

_Anthologia Lyrica_, cited 14; see also Bergk

_Anthologia Palatina_, cited 201

_Antike Denkmäler_, cited 242 n. 3

Antiochis, 39, 41 n. 3

Antiochus I, 147 n. 1, 285

Antiochus of Syracuse, 274 n. 1

Antiphilus (_Anth. Pal._), cited 201

S. Antonia, church of, 252

Anysis, 88 n. 1

Apamea, 147 n. 1, 208

Aphaia, temple of, 318–320

Aphrodite, 107 n. 4, 118, 119, 191 n. 3, 305, 318, 319

Apis stelai, 99 n. 1

ἀπόγονος, 157

Apollo, 65, 70, 107 n. 4, 110, 116, 117, 123, 138 n. 9, 144, 263 n. 5, 305

Apollodorus, cited 180

Apollonius Rhodius, _Argonautica_, 195 n. 2; _Foundation of Naukratis_, cited 117; Schol. _Argonautica_, cited 44 n. 4, 146 n. 7, 180, 181

Appi Forum, 233

Appian, _Bellum Civile_, cited 39 n. 4, 50 n. 1; _Bellum Mithridaticum_, cited 189 n. 8; _Bellum Syriacum_, cited 285 n. 1

Appian Way, see Via Appia

Appius Claudius Caecus, 211, 232, 233, 295

Appius Claudius the decemvir, 231

Apries, Haa ab ra, Hophra, 88 n. 1, 105, 122, 123

Apuleius, _Florida_, cited 69 n. 4

aqueducts, 62 n. 6, 76, 232, 267

Arabia, Arabians, Arabs, 100 n. 8, 116, 261 n. 2

_Arabian Nights_, 145

Aracoeli, church of, 252

Aratus, 257 n. 1

arbitrators, 11

Arcadia, 211, 212

Arcesilaus II of Cyrene, 74 n. 3

Arcesilaus III of Cyrene, 74, 82 n. 1

_Archäologische-epigraphische Mitteilungen aus Oesterreich_, cited 319 n. 2

_Archäologische Zeitung_, see Furtwaengler, Preller

_Archäologischer Anzeiger_, cited 110 n. 4, n. 7, 115 n. 1; see also Assmann, Fabricius

_Archaiologike Ephemeris_, cited 15 n. 4, 169 n. 5; see also Doerpfeld, Skias

“archers,” Persian coins, 57, 291

Archias of Corinth, 180–182

Archias of Sparta, 84

Archilochus, cited 36 n. 3, 55 n. 4, 129 n. 6, 134, 143 n. 3, 145 n. 4, 152

archons, 326, 329

Ardaillon (E.), _Les Mines de Laurium_, cited 40 n. 9, 46, 48 n. 3; _apud_ Saglio, _Dictionnaire des Antiquités_, cited 44 n. 5

Ardea, 234, 235, 296

Ardys, 135, 136, 143, 152, 273, 293

Argeadae, 183

Argolis, the Argolid, 164, 177, 179, 315–318, 320, 333 n. 4

Argonauts, 148 n. 3, 265

Argos, Argive, 24 n. 1, 33, 69 n. 5, 79 n. 2, 82, 149, 152 n. 2, chap. VI _passim_, 184, 185, 259, 261, 264 n. 5, 292, 294, 314, 316–319, 323, 325, 330, 331, 337

Argive pottery, 318; see also Proto-Corinthian

Aricia, 238, 249, 279

Aridaios, 281

Axion, 191 n. 2

Aristagoras, historian, 90 n. 1, 96 n. 4

Aristagoras, tyrant, 59 n. 1, 62 n. 4

Aristarchus of Ephesus, 272

Aristides, Publius Aelius, cited 184 n. 2

Aristippus, 30

Aristodemus of Cumae, 14, 247, 278

Aristodemus, ancestor of Spartan kings, 180

Aristogeiton, 253, 302

Aristokypros, 158

Aristonothos, 323

Aristophanes, _Acharnians_, cited 17, 59 n. 1, 265 n. 3; _Birds_, cited 58, 61; _Clouds_, cited 40, 51 n. 2, 207 n. 6; _Frogs_, cited 17, 187 n. 1; _Lysistrata_, cited 63; _Peace_, cited 265 n. 3; _Plutus_, cited 13 n. 1, 20; _Thesmophoriazusae_, cited 17, 207, 302 n. 6; _Wasps_, cited 51 n. 2, 201 n. 8; Schol. _Birds_, cited 54, 58 n. 1; Schol. _Clouds_, cited 327 n. 2, 328; Schol. _Knights_, cited 51 n. 2, 61; Schol. _Lysistrata_, cited 313; Schol. _Peace_, cited, 199 n. 3, n. 9, 200; Schol. _Thesmophoriazusae_, cited 207 n. 5; Schol. _Wasps_, cited 201 n. 8, 313

Aristotle, 6, 22, 32, 192, 195, 200 n. 2, 212, 258, 267, 280–282, 284, 286, 288, 290, 296, 297, 300, 301, 328

Aristotle, _Constitution of the Athenians_, 19 n. 1; cited 13 n. 6, 16 n. 6, n. 9, 29 n. 1, 31, 35 n. 1, n. 4, 36, 37, 46–48, 49 n. 3, 51 n. 2, 55 n. 1, 59 n. 5, 60, 61, 64, 65, 166 n. 6, 171 n. 2, 302, 307, 308, 326 n. 8, n. 9, 327 n. 1, n. 2; _Constitution of the Sicyonians_, 258; _Historia Animalium_, cited 199, 211, 309; _Meteorologica_, cited 87 n. 9; _Mirabiles Auscultationes_, cited 138, 147, 148; _Ode to Virtue_, 283; _Oeconomica_, cited 63, 189, 283 n. 6; _Politics_, cited 1, 2, 10–12, 14, 18–20, 22 n. 1, 24 n. 3, 25, 27, 28, 31, 35 n. 3, n. 5, 67, 76 n. 4, 77, 154, 182, 189 n. 1, 190 n. 2, 191 n. 2, 194, 196 n. 6, 198, 213, 257 n. 1, 258, 264, 265, 268 n. 3, 270, 274–276, 282–284, 303, 307; _Rhetoric_, cited 18, 134 n. 4, 264 n. 6, 265, 275

Arnobius, _adversus Gentes_, cited 238 n. 3

Arrian, _Periplous_, cited 265 n. 6

Artemidorus of Ephesus, 90 n. 3

Artemis, 128, 130 n. 6, 245, 246 n. 1

_artifices_, 235

artizans, 15–21, 49, 92, 95, 103, 139, 217, 218, 222–225, 230, 233, 269, 292, 295, 305; see also manual labour

aryballi, 112

_as_, 149

Ashdown, 238

Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, 112 n. 8

Asia, 57, 58, 135, 191 n. 3, 221, 284, 286, 291

Asia Minor, 20, 91, 132, 142, 144, 155, 187, 205, 246 n. 8, 285, 300, 316, 333

Asine, 331

Asser, _Life of Alfred_, 237

Assmann, _Archäologischer Anzeiger_, cited 321 n. 5; _Berliner Philologische Wochenschrift_, cited 324 n. 3, 326 n. 3, 327 n. 5

Assos, 280–282

Assurbanipal, 88, 91, 99 n. 3

Assyria, 86, 88, 89 n. 1, n. 3, 91, 92, 97–99, 101, 102, 121 n. 4, 129, 144, 214, 292

Asylum, Asyla, 39 n. 4, 50

Atarneus, 280–284

ἀτελές, 135

Athelney, 238

Athena, 14, 16, 51–55, 60, 61, 63, 214 n. 4, 276, 291

Athena Ergane, 16 n. 7

Athenaeus, cited 21 n. 4, 22 n. 3, 23 n. 1, 45, 50 n. 2, 51 n. 2, 55 n. 1, 70 n. 5, 73 n. 5, n. 6, 74, 76–80, 100, 101 n. 5, 103 n. 6, 104 n. 4, 117 n. 3, 118 n. 5, 126 n. 4, 139 n. 3, 144 n. 3, 167 n. 1, n. 4, n. 5, 187 n. 1, 191 n. 3, 208 n. 1, n. 4, 211 n. 6, 259 n. 1, 268 n. 3, 269 n. 6, 270 n. 1, 271 n. 6, 275 n. 1, 281 n. 3, n. 5, 283 n. 4, n. 5, 284 n. 4, 309 n. 3, 336 n. 1

Athenagoras, 272

_Athenische Mitteilungen_, see _Mitteilungen des deutschen archäologischen Instituts in Athen_

Athens, Athenians, 7, 12, 13–17, 19, 21, 25, 28, 30, 31, chap. II _passim_, 69, 72 n. 2, 76 n. 5, 78, 80 n. 5, 83, 86, 92 n. 2, 137, 147, 149, 151 n. 2, 162 n. 3, 163, 165, 166, 168–176, 178 n. 1, 181, 183 n. 6, 196 n. 5, 215, 229 n. 1, 231, 239 n. 4, 245, 250–253, 258 n. 4, 260, 261, 264–266, 268, 274, 280, 287, 291, 292, 294, 302–305, 309–311, 321–334

Athribis, 214 n. 3

Atotes the miner, 48

Attalids, 284–286, 289

Attalus, (?) father of Philetairos, 284 n. 4

Attalus I, 285, 288

Attalus III, 288, 289

_Atti d. Reale Accademia d. Torino_, see De Gubernatis

Attica, Attic, 16, 21 n. 1, chap. II _passim_, 74, 79, 166, 168–170, 174, 251, 291, 307–313, 315, 327, 329, 334

Attic pottery, 34, 113, 115, 167, 168, 170, 202, 203, 245, 25 n. 1, 253, 254, 314–320, 321, 335; see also Proto-Attic, Black Figure, Red Figure

Atys, 140

Aubert (H.) and Wimmer (F.), ed. Aristotle _Historia Animalium_, cited 211 n. 3

Augustus, 37

Aulon, 312

Aurelius Victor, _de Viris Illustribus_, cited 215–217, 221, 223 n. 1, n. 5, 224 n. 5, 229 n. 4, 238 n. 3, 245

Australia, 164

Auxesia, 167, 170, 175, 320

Avignon, 3

_B.C.H._ see _Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique_

_B.S.A._ see _Annual of the British School at Athens_

Babelon (E.), in _Corolla Numismatica_, cited 56 n. 2, 60 n. 2; _Journal International d’Archéologie Numismatique_, cited 51 n. 3, 52, 53, 56 n. 2, 64; _Les Origines de la Monnaie_, cited 129 n. 1, 130 n. 2, 131 n. 2, 137 n. 2, 141, 142, 148 n. 6, 149, 150, 152 n. 2, 161 n. 1, 162 n. 3, 220 n. 4; _Revue Numismatique_, cited 69 n. 5, 75 n. 1, 128 n. 1, 130 n. 2, 131 n. 2, 132, 133, 143 n. 1

Babylon, 123, 214, 311

Babylonian weight standard, 132

Bacchiads, 26 n. 2, 180–183, 187 n. 9, 190, 192–194, 196 n. 3, 197, 272

Bacchis, 193 n. 3

Bacchylides, cited 129 n. 7, 138 n. 9, 144 n. 4, 169

Bachofen, _Tanaquil_, cited 236 n. 2; _Annali dell’ Instituto_, cited 253 n. 4

Baedeker, _Greece_, cited 39 n. 6

Baetis (modern Guadalquivir), 177 n. 6

Bakenranf, see Bocchoris

Balylon, 311

Βάναυσον, τὸ, 20

Bank of England, 26

bankers, 2, 3, 137 n. 2, 141–143, 152, 280–283, 286, 296

Barnabei and Cozza, _Notizie degli Scavi_, cited 244 n. 1, 246 n. 7

Barth (H.), _Corinthiorum Commercii et Mercaturae Historiae particula_, cited 187 n. 1, 192 n. 5, 261 n. 2

Basilidae, 271, 272

Baton of Sinope, cited 271, 272

Battus of Cyrene, 123

Bauer, _Sitzungsberichte d. Akademie d. Wissenschaften in Wien_, cited 197 n. 6, n. 8, 209

bazaar, 4, 77, 286, 292

Becker (W. A.), _Charicles_, cited 336 n. 1

beehives, 199–201

beehive tombs, 224 n. 5

Bekker (I.), _Lexicon Seguerianum_ (in _Anecdota Graeca_), cited 39, 41 n. 3, 57, 310 n. 4, 326 n. 9, 327 n. 9

Beloch (J.), 177 n. 3, 265 n. 1, 331; _Griechische Geschichte_^2, cited 33 n. 1, 51, 52, 63, 67 n. 1, 158, 161 n. 3, 192 n. 1, 210, 259 n. 5, 269 n. 1, 300 n. 1, n. 2, 325 n. 9; _Rheinisches Museum f. Philologie_, cited 21 n. 1, 34 n. 2, 51 n. 4, 315 n. 3; _Zeitschrift f. Socialwissenschaft_, cited 22 n. 7

_benignitas_, 227

Bent (J. T.), _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, cited 44 n. 5, 243 n. 1

Bentivoglio, Santo, 2

Bentley (Richard), 274

Bérard (V.), _Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique_, cited 48 n. 2

Berezan, 110, 114

Bergk (T.), _Anthologia Lyrica_, cited 48 n. 4, 180 n. 2

von Bergmann, _Numismatische Zeitschrift_, cited 148 n. 6

Berkshire Downs, 238

Berlin Museum, 204, 253 n. 4

_Berliner Philologische Wochenschrift_, see Assmann, Buechsenschuetz, Furtwaengler

Bermion, Mount, 146 n. 7

Bernardini tomb, 93 n. 3

von Bernhardi (F. A. J.), _Germany and the Next War_, cited 5, 6

Bertha, sister of Charlemagne, 193 n. 7

Besa, 39

Bevan (E. R.), _House of Seleucus_, cited 285 n. 2

Binder (J. J.), _Laurion_, cited 44 n. 5

Birch (S.), _History of Ancient Pottery_, cited 187 n. 1

von Bissing (W.), 93

Black Figure pottery, 107 n. 4, 110, 113, 115, 202, 203, 253, 254, 315, 317, 319, 326 n. 3, 335

Black Glaze pottery, 107 n. 4, 108

Black Sea, 112, 114, 265 n. 2, 266, 297

_blandimenta_, 227

Bloch, _La République Romaine_, cited 226 n. 6, 233 n. 6

Bluemner (H.), _apud_ Hermann, _Lehrbuch d. griechischen Antiquitäten_, cited 201 n. 4; _Gewerbliche Tätigkeit_, cited 187 n. 7, 266; _Technologie u. Terminologie der Gewerbe u. Künste_, cited 203 n. 2, n. 4; _Wochenschrift f. klassische Philologie_, cited 199 n. 1; see also Hitzig and Bluemner

Bocchoris, Bakenranf, 88 n. 1, 93–98, 100, 103, 292, 293

Bode (W.), 253 n. 4

Boeckh (A.), _Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum_, cited 80 n. 4; _Kleine Schriften_, cited 280 n. 1, 282 n. 2, n. 4, 283 n. 3; _Public Economy of Athens_, cited 23 n. 1, 44 n. 2, 56 n. 4, 308 n. 2, 310 n. 4, 328 n. 2, 330 n. 3

Boehlau (J.), _Aus ionischen u. italischen Nekropolen_, cited 110 n. 9, 111 n. 1, n. 2, 112, 252; _Jahrbuch des deutschen archäologischen Instituts_, cited 315 n. 4

Boeotia, 24, 106, 108, 114, 196 n. 5, 198 n. 5, 248

Boeotian Kylix style of pottery, 110

Bolbitine mouth of the Nile, 90, 91

_Bollettino di Filologia Classica_, see Costanzi

Bologna, 2

_bona_, 227

Bonacossi, _La Chine et les Chinois_, cited 133, 141 n. 3

Boni (G.), _Journal of Roman Studies_, cited 224 n. 5, 253; _Notizie degli Scavi_, cited 248

Bonnet (A.), see Salvioli

Borrell (H. P.), _Numismatic Chronicle_, cited 131 n. 1

Bosporus, 76

_Boston Museum of Fine Arts Report_, cited 60 n. 1

Boswell, _Life of Johnson_, cited 281

“boundary estates,” 310

Bourlos, 91

Boyle (Charles), 274

Brahami, 39 n. 1

Branchidae, 81, 123

Brandis (J.), _Münz-, Mass-, u. Gewichtswesen_, cited 74 n. 6, 130 n. 3; _Zeitschrift f. Numismatik_, cited 150 n. 1

Brants, _Revue de l’Instruction Publique en Belgique_, cited 21 n. 3

Brasidas, 50 n. 7

Brauron, 310 n. 2, 311, 312

breakwater, 70, 76

Breasted (J. H.), _Ancient Records of Egypt_, cited 44 n. 5, 95 n. 3, 98 n. 6, 99 n. 3, 100 n. 4, 122 n. 5, 123 n. 1, 212 n. 6; _History of Egypt_, cited 87 n. 3, 92 n. 1, 97 n. 3, 100 n. 4, 101 n. 1

Bremer (W.), _Die Haartracht des Mannes in archaisch-griechischer Zeit_, cited 55 n. 5, 56 n. 1

brickmakers, 20

Brilessos, 44

Britain, 89 n. 1, 306 n. 5

British Museum, 81, 101, 109 n. 6, 128, 171 n. 6, 283

_British Museum Catalogue of Chinese Coins_, cited 141 n. 3

_British Museum Catalogue of Greek Coins_, Corinth, cited 188 n. 2; Ionia, cited 132, 133; Lydia, cited 130 n. 7, 138 n. 1; Troas, cited 131 n. 1

_British Museum Catalogue of Coins of Central Greece_, cited 54 n. 5

_British Museum Coins of the Roman Republic_, cited 220 n. 3, 221 n. 7

_British Museum Catalogue of Greek Vases_, cited 62 n. 6, 246 n. 2; _of Terracottas_, cited 246 n. 7; _of Jewellery_, cited 171 n. 1; _of Finger Rings_, cited 70 n. 3

_British Museum Excavations at Ephesus_, cited 128 n. 3, 130 n. 6

British School at Athens, 332

bronze, 80 n. 4, 89–91, 122, 203, 228 n. 3, n. 4, 263; casting, 87; and copper coinage, 142, 218, 219, 221; sculpture, 243, 246, 263

brooches, 168, 170, 171, 173, 174; see also _fibulae_, jewellery

Brueckner and Pernice, _Athenische Mitteilungen_, cited 169 n. 7, 321 n. 6, 323 n. 1, 326 n. 3

Brugsch (H.), cited 96 n. 2, 97 n. 4; _Geschichte Aegyptens_, cited 125 n. 3

Brutus, 223–225, 230, 231, 234, 239

Brygos, potter, 204 n. 1

Bryson, 81

Bubastis, 121 n. 3

bucchero vases, 335

Buda-Pesth, 106 n. 3

Buechsenschuetz (A. B.), _Berliner Philologische Wochenschrift_, cited 327 n. 5, 329 n. 6; _Besitz u. Erwerb im griechischen Altertume_, cited 22; _Die Hauptstätten des Gewerbfleisses im klassischen Altertume_, cited 266

Buerchner (L.), cited 272 n. 4

Buffalo, 267

bull, brazen, 275, 278 n. 2

_Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique_, cited 55 n. 3, 108 n. 2; see also Bérard, Gerster, Kampanes

_Bullettino della Commissione Archeologica Municipale di Roma_, see Pinza, Rizzo

_Bullettino dell’ Instituto_, cited 242 n. 1

Bunbury sale, 55 n. 3

de Burgh (W. G.), 27 n. 4

Burgon (T.), cited 150

burials, intramural, 249, 336–338

Burnet (J.), _Thales to Plato_, cited 30 n. 1, 284 n. 1

Burrows (R. M.), _Recent Discoveries in Crete_, cited 76 n. 7; and Ure (P. N.), _Annual of the British School at Athens_, cited 107 n. 1, 108 n. 1, 110 n. 6, 113 n. 1; _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, cited 108 n. 1, 113 n. 1, 114 n. 5, 248

Bursian (C.), _Geographie von Griechenland_, cited 44, 260 n. 2, 309; _Jahresbericht ü. d. Fortschritte d. klassischen Altertumswissenschaft_, see Lenschau

Bury (J. B.), _History of Greece_, cited 45 n. 5, 159 n. 2, 170, 212 n. 5, 264 n. 3, 278 n. 2, 303 n. 2; _The Nemean Odes of Pindar_, cited 157, 160 n. 5, 259 n. 1, 260

Buschor (E.), _Griechische Vasenmalerei_, cited 114 n. 6, 169 n. 3, 246 n. 2, n. 3, 315 n. 1, 318 n. 7, 323 n. 2

Busolt (G.), cited 159 n. 2; _Griechische Geschichte_^2, cited 2, 35 n. 2, 48 n. 6, 70 n. 2, 128 n. 1, 156, 157 n. 4, 159 n. 2, 160, 187, 188, 189 n. 3, n. 4, 191 n. 4, 192 n. 1, 193 n. 2, 194, 214, 264 n. 5, 265, 317 n. 5, 325 n. 9, 326 n. 6, 329; _Die Lakedaimonier_, cited 187 n. 9, 192 n. 1, n. 4, n. 5, 305 n. 2, n. 3

Butacides, 239, 255

Butades, sculptor, 186 n. 1, 244 n. 1

butcher, 257

_Butler County Democrat_, cited 5 n. 8

Byrd (William), 245 n. 1

Byron, Lord, 3, 127, 285, 298; _Don Juan_, cited 148

Byzantium, 265, 311

_C.I.A._ see _Corpus Inscriptionum Atticarum_

_C.I.G._ see _Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum_

_C.I.L._ see _Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum_

_C.R._ see _Classical Review_

Cadys, 135, 136 n. 3

Caeculus, 238 n. 3

Caere, 219, 240, 242 n. 1, 243, 246, 255, 335

Caeretan hydriae, 246, 255

Caesar (title), 4, 303

Caesar, Julius, 32, 311 n. 1; _de Bello Gallico_, cited 162 n. 1

Cairo, 77

cakes, 238, 239

California, 142 n. 5

Caligula, 160

Camarina, 10 n. 2

Cambyses, 72, 80, 102 n. 1

Camirian pottery, 112 n. 1; see also Milesian pottery

Campania, 160, 232, 233, 246, 247

Camps at Daphnae, 112 n. 4, 121

canals, 87, 189, 191, 267

Candaules, 136, 144, 146

Canopus, 96 n. 2

Capitol, Rome, 224 n. 5, 237, 252–254, 337

Capitoline wolf, 253, 254

Capua, 233

caravans, 135, 145, 147, 149, 273

Caria, Carians, 89, 90, 96, 122, 123, 145, 269, 324

Caromemphites, 96 n. 4

carpenters, 14, 17, 20, 134 n. 4, 222, 224

Cartault (A. G. C.), _Monuments Grecs_, cited 321 n. 3

Carter (J. B.), trans. Huelsen, _Forum Romanum_, cited 247 n. 5

Carthage, 30, 72, 240, 278 n. 2, 282; see also Phoenicians

Carthagena, 45

Carystius, 284 n. 4

Casagrandi (V.), _Nouem Combusti_ (appendix to _Minores Gentes_), cited 337 n. 3

Casaubon, _apud_ Schweighaeuser, ed. Athenaeus, cited 270 n. 2; ed. Athenaeus, cited 77 n. 1; ed. Diogenes Laertius, _Solon_, cited 40 n. 6

Caspari (M. O. B.), see Mitchell

Cassiodorus, _Variae_, cited 218

Cassius Hemina, 224 n. 5

Cassius Iatrosophistes, _Problemata_, cited 199 n. 9

Cassius, Spurius, 32 n. 2, 228, 233, 255 n. 1, 337

caste, 87 n. 3, 122 n. 1

Castelnuovo di Porto, 219

Castor, cited 181

Cato, _apud_ Schol. Veron. _ad_ Virgil, _Aen._, cited 238 n. 3

Caucasus, 41, 44

Cauer (F.), _apud_ Pauly-Wissowa, cited 161 n. 2, 331 n. 3; _Parteien u. Politiker in Megara u. Athen_, cited 46 n. 5, 265 n. 2, 266, 268 n. 2

Cavaignac (E.), _Études sur l’histoire financière d’Athènes au V^e siècle_, cited 21 n. 1, n. 2, 41 n. 2, 309 n. 10; _Vierteljahrschrift f. Social- u. Wirtschafts-Geschichte_, cited 47 n. 6

cavalry organization, 240

Cecrops, 41 n. 3

Cedrenus, _Synopsis Historiarum_, cited 71 n. 4

Celts, 285

centuries, 230

Ceres, 228 n. 3, n. 4, 240 n. 2, 250 n. 1

χαῖρε, 255

Chalcedon, 265

Chalcis, 261, 316, 330

Chalmers’ shillings, 142 n. 5

chamber tombs, 246

chambers of bronze, 263

Chancellor of the Exchequer, 4

χαρακτήρ, 64

Charaxos, 104

Charisius, _Ars Grammatica_ (ed. Keil), cited 218 n. 5

Charlemagne, 193 n. 7

Charon, 134 n. 4

Cheiromache, Cheiromachoi, 269, 270

χειρώναξ, 269

Chem Peh’-resu, 214 n. 5

Chersias, 195, 196, 197 n. 3

Chersonese, Thracian, 53, 63 n. 7, 199 n. 10, 245 n. 2

Chicago, 267

Chigi vase, 316 n. 10

Chilon, 332

China, 133, 141, 142

Chios, 23 n. 1, 191 n. 3, 253

χλανίς, 79, 80

χρήματα, χρηματίζεσθαι, 25, 36

_Chronicles, 2nd Book of_, cited 92 n. 3

Chronographer of 354 A.D., cited 224 n. 5, 226 n. 3

χρυσοῦ καὶ ἀργύρου, 132

church music, 245 n. 1

χύτραι, χυτρίδες, 320

Ciccotti (E.), _Il Tramonto d. Schiavitù nel Mondo antico_, cited 3 n. 2, 20, 22, 29 n. 3

Cicero, _de Amicitia_, cited 228 n. 1, 229 n. 2; _ad Atticum_, cited 57 n. 2, 275 n. 1; _Brutus_, cited 35 n. 3; _in Catilinam_, cited 229 n. 2; _de Divinatione_, cited 238 n. 3, 275 n. 1; _de Finibus_, cited 70 n. 3; _de Legibus_, cited 336 n. 3, 337; _de Officiis_, cited 15 n. 6, 20 n. 6, 145 n. 6, 151 n. 4, 225 n. 2, 302 n. 6; _de Oratore_, cited 35 n. 3; _Philippics_, cited 226, 228 n. 1, 229 n. 2; _pro Rabirio_, cited 226 n. 5; _de Republica_, cited 215 n. 2, 221 n. 5, 222 n. 7, 223 n. 5, 225 n. 2, 228 n. 1, 229 n. 2, 240, 241; _de Senectute_, cited 229 n. 2; _Tusculanae Quaestiones_, cited 247 n. 3; _in Verrem_, cited 275 n. 2; Schol. Bobiens. _pro Sulla_, cited 215 n. 2

Cimmerians, 137, 141 n. 1, 144, 146, 187

Cimon, 67

Cincii, 337

Cincinnati _Commercial Gazette_, cited 5 n. 8

Circus, Circus Maximus, 240 n. 2, 338

_Classical Philology_, see Frank

_Classical Review_, cited 112 n. 8, 319 n. 5; see also Cook, Headlam

Claudii, 231, 337; see also Appius

Claudius Drusus, 233

Claudius (Emperor), 215 n. 2

Clazomenae, pottery of, 114, 115 n. 2, 121 n. 5, 246

Clearchus, cited 76 n. 6, 77, 78 n. 1, 139 n. 3

Cleisthenes of Athens, 17, 28, 29, 39, 45, 65, 66, 67, 258 n. 4, 291, 310 n. 2, 312, 327, 330 n. 3

Cleisthenes of Sicyon, 66, 179 n. 2, 180 n. 3, 215, 258–264

Clement of Alexandria, _Stromata_, cited 93 n. 2, 146 n. 7, 325 n. 8

Cleomenes of Sparta, 79 n. 2

Cleomenes (Cleomis) of Methymna, 191 n. 3

Cleon, 30

Cleonae, 194

Clerc (M.), _Les Métèques Athéniens_, cited 22

_clientela_, clients, 233, 277, 296

_cloaca maxima_, 247

Clytus, cited 73, 74

Cnidus, 90 n. 3

coast, party of the coast, 35, 41, 47, 48, 52, 64 (shore), 291, 312, 313

Cobbett (William), _Paper against Gold_, cited 3

cobblers, boot-makers, 17, 139 n. 2

coinage, debasement of, 64 n. 3, 74, 183 n. 6; invention of, 1, 2, 3, 127, 129, 131, 133, 140, 147, 155, 161, 178, 290, 293, 304

coins, 52–58, 60, 61, 63, 64, 74, 75, 84, 127–133, 137, 138, 140–143, 147, 149, 150, 155–157, 160–162, 164, 166 n. 2, 170–173, 175, 176, 178, 188, 199–201, 204, 205, 209, 213 n. 4, 218–221, 231, 232, 246, 290, 293–296, 304

Collatinus, 226, 227

_collegia opificum_, 222

colonies, colonization, 189, 190, 265, 266, 294, 300

Colophon, 133

colossus, 189, 192 n. 5

“colts” (coins), 188

Columbus, Ohio, 235 n. 3

Columella, cited 201 n. 5, n. 8, 309 n. 7

_Comitia centuriata_, 230

Commons, House of, 4

_Companion to Greek Studies_, cited 179 n. 3

_Companion to Latin Studies_, cited 221 n. 6

Conca (Satricum), 219 n. 4, 243 n. 4, 244 n. 1, 246

Constantinople, 77

_Constitution of the Athenians_, see Aristotle

contracts, 93

Conway (R. S.), quoted 76 n. 7, 134 n. 5, 223 n. 3

Conze (A.), _Jahrbuch_, cited 205 n. 2, n. 3, n. 4, 206 n. 3

cook, 257

Cook (A. B.), _Classical Review_, cited 262 n. 3

copper, 82, 203 n. 1, n. 4

copper coinage, see bronze coinage

copper mines, 37 n. 1

coppersmiths, 14, 222, 224

Coptic, 126

Corcyra (Corfu), 63 n. 5, 184, 187 n. 9, 188, 213, 214, 244 n. 1, 321

Corinth, 14, 21, 22, 28 n. 7, 30, 31, 33, 34, 62 n. 6, 63, 68, 76 n. 5, 123, 124, 167, 178–180, 182, 183, chap. VII _passim_, 215–217, 240–242, 244, 245, 247, 248 n. 2, 251, 255–257, 259, 260, 263 n. 5, 266 n. 1, 272, 274, 287, 293–295, 304, 306 n. 1, 316, 317, 321, 325

Corinthian drachma, 57; helmet, 54 n. 6; pottery, 1, 21, 34, 46, 109 n. 5, 112, 117 n. 4, 186, 187, 208 n. 1, 212 n. 8, 241–245, 251, 295, 315–319

corner (in oil), 2, 12

Corneto, 93, 187, 215; see also Tarquinii

Cornford (F. M.), _Thucydides Mythistoricus_, cited 25, 261

_Corolla Numismatica: Numismatic Essays in Honour of Barclay V. Head_; see Babelon, Evans, Fox

_Corpus Inscriptionum Atticarum_, cited 14, 15, 39, 40 n. 9, 41 n. 3, 50 n. 3, n. 5, 56 n. 4, 312 n. 1, 313 n. 2

_Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum_, 80 n. 4, 208 n. 2

_Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum_, cited 215 n. 2, 223 n. 2

Corsica, 221 n. 2, 240

Costanzi (V.), _Bollettino di Filologia Classica_, cited 51 n. 4; _Rivista di Storia Antica_, cited 34 n. 2, 51 n. 4, 177 n. 3, 329 n. 1

Cozza, see Barnabei

Crassus, 23

Cratinus, 13 n. 3

Crete, Cretan, 128, 156 n. 2, 169, 263 n. 5, 298, 330, 333; Cretan bull cult, 278 n. 2

criers, 17

Crimea, 1

Croeseids, 130, 137

Croesus, 104 n. 3, 123, 127, 128, 130–133, 136 n. 3, 137–140, 143 n. 1, n. 3, 144, 145 n. 2, n. 3, n. 4, 148 n. 3, 152, 176, 215, 272, 273, 289, 293

Cromwell, 194

Croton, Crotonian, 239, 255

Cruchon (G.), _Banques dans l’Antiquité_, cited 141 n. 1, 143 n. 1, 221 n. 4

crucifixion of followers of Spartacus, 23

Cumae, 14, 228, 240, 246, 247, 251, 278–279, 296, 316

Curtius (E.), _Ephesus_, cited 272 n. 3; _Griechische Geschichte_, cited 36 n. 3, 159 n. 2, 198 n. 9; _Peloponnesos_, cited 191 n. 6; _Stadtgeschichte v. Athen_, cited 63 n. 2

Curtius (G.), _Studien z. griech. u. latein. Grammatik_, cited 327 n. 8

Curtius (L.), _Athenische Mitteilungen_, cited 81, 82

Curtius, Marcus, 248 n. 1

Cyaxares, 90, 91

Cyclades, 169 n. 1

cylinders, inscribed Assyrian, 91, 98, 99 n. 3

Cylon, 34, 69, 264, 326, 328, 329

Cyme, 130 n. 6, 131, 135, 136, 147, 155 n. 2, 273, 281

Cynosura, 40

Cyprus, Cypriote, 46, 108 n. 7, 119, 128, 156 n. 2, 160, 169 n. 1, 303 n. 1, 315 n. 2

Cypsela in Thrace, 199, 200, 204–206

cypsele, 197–209, 211, 295

Cypselids, 14, 76 n. 5, 189, 192, 196, 213, 263 n. 5

Cypselus of Arcadia, 211, 212

Cypselus I of Corinth, 9, 26 n. 2, 28 n. 7, 31, 95 n. 1, 180, 187–190, 192 n. 5, 193–200, 207–211, 216, 245 n. 2, 255, 257, 270, 274, 292, 295, 303 n. 2, 305, 306 n. 1

Cypselus II of Corinth, 213, 214

Cypselus, father of Miltiades, 199 n. 10

cypselus bird, 211

Cyrene, 74, 82 n. 1, 123, 239

Cyrnus, 8

Cyrus, 8 n. 3, 71–73, 123, 138, 139, 145 n. 2, 152, 197, 209, 271, 272, 293

Cythera, 176, 177

Cyzicus, 281, 285

Dactyls of Ida, 44

Dagobert I diploma, cited 261 n. 2

δακτύλιοι, δακτυλιογλύφοι, 149

Dale, Sir D., 11 n. 2

Damasenor, tyrant of Miletus, 268, 269

Damia and Auxesia, 167, 170, 175, 320

Damocratidas, 158 n. 6

Damonno, 135, 136, 143, 236 n. 2

Damophilus, 240 n. 2

Danegeld, 329

Danes, 237, 238

Dante, 305; _Paradiso_, cited 57 n. 4

Daphnae (Defenneh), 109 n. 5, 112, 113, 115 n. 2, 121, 122

Daphnae pottery, 115 n. 2, 121 n. 5

daric, 57, 130, 132, 140, 172 n. 4, 291

Darius, 29, 58, 59, 61, 62, 72, 76, 79, 80, 87 n. 9, 140, 142, 152 n. 2, 270, 271, 325

Daskalio, 42

Daskylion, 273 n. 2

Decelea, 45

decemvirate, 233

De Cou (H. F.), _Argive Heraeum_, cited 164 n. 1

dedications, votive offerings, 14, 82, 107 n. 4, 108, 116–118, 124, 144 n. 3, 162, 163, 170, 175, 189, 192 n. 5, 198, 244 n. 1, 263

Deecke, see Mueller

Defenneh, see Daphnae

Deinomenidae, 30

Deiokes, 146 n. 4

Deiophontes, 176

Delos, 49, 70, 71, 162 n. 3, 166 n. 2, 171 n. 5, 260 n. 5, 261

Delphi, 65, 66, 123, 130, 137, 140, 144, 147, 162 n. 3, 194, 198 n. 5, 207 n. 3, 208, 255, 257, 259–262, 276, 283 n. 4, 330

Delta, 88, 95, 96, 98, 99, 121 n. 3, 293

demagogues, 11, 26–32, 35, 190 n. 2, 217, 274, 279, 280, 282, 300, 301

Demaratus, 182, 187 n. 6, 215–218, 225, 236 n. 2, 239–245, 251, 255, 256, 295

Demeter, 238, 266, 308; Malophoros, 266; hymn to, 22

Demetrius, _de Elocutione_, cited 280 n. 1, 283 n. 6

Demetrius Magnes, cited 280 n. 1

Demetrius of Phaleron, 305, 306

demiourgoi, δημιουργοί, δημιουργίαι, 16, 48

Demochares, 305, 306

Demodike of Cyme, 147, 155 n. 2

Demosthenes, 49, 305

Demosthenes, _c. Aphobum_, cited 12; _c. Aristocratem_, cited 277 n. 2; _c. Eubulidem_, cited 19, 20 n. 1; _c. Midiam_, cited 65; _c. Olympiodorum_, cited 13; _Olynthiac Orations_, cited 277 n. 2; _c. Phaenippum_, cited 48 n. 1; περὶ Συντάξεως, cited 277 n. 2; Schol. _c. Aristocratem_, cited 51 n. 2

Demoteles, 69 n. 5

Dennis (G.), _Academy_, cited 76 n. 2

Derbyshire, 40

Diadochoi, 258 n. 2, 284

Diakria, Diakrieis, διακριεῖς, Diakrioi, διάκριοι, 37, 39–41, 44, 48 n. 6, 49, 291, 307–313

Diakrioi, Euboean, 41 n. 2; Rhodian, 41 n. 2

Diamantaras, _Athenische Mitteilungen_, cited 57 n. 3

Diana, 224 n. 5

Dickens (G.), _Catalogue of the Acropolis Museum, Athens_, cited 252, 253; _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, cited 332 n. 4

didrachm, 64, 171 n. 6, n. 8, 172

Didymus, cited 33 n. 1

Diels (H.), _Abhandlungen d. preussisch. Akademie d. Wissenschaften zu Berlin_, cited 35 n. 2

_Digest_, cited 336 n. 5

Dindorf (L.), ed. Diodorus, cited 48 n. 6

Dio Cassius, cited 226 n. 3, 337 n. 4

Dio Chrysostom, _Orations_, cited 35 n. 3, 148 n. 3, 189 n. 8, 198

Diodorus Siculus, cited 10 n. 6, 23 n. 1, 48 n. 6, 59 n. 1, 78 n. 2, 87 n. 7, n. 9, 89–93, 95, 97, 99 n. 1, 100 n. 4, n. 8, 103, 105, 117, 121 n. 4, 122 n. 1, n. 4, 123 n. 1, n. 10, n. 11, 138 n. 8, 146 n. 7, 156 n. 3, 176 n. 2, 180 n. 2, 203 n. 4, 208, 209, 210 n. 4, 211 n. 1, 215 n. 2, 216, 217 n. 1, 228 n. 1, 229 n. 2, 232 n. 1, 257 n. 2, 262 n. 4, 275 n. 2, 276, 277, 280 n. 1, 283 n. 6, 284 n. 1, 293, 298

Diogenes Laertius, cited 30 n. 2, 69 n. 1, 150 n. 3, 167 n. 1, n. 2, 190 n. 1, n. 2, 191 n. 3, n. 6, n. 7, 192, 195, 196, 212 n. 2, n. 8, 280 n. 1, 281 n. 2, 282 n. 2, 283 n. 3, n. 4, n. 5, n. 6, 284 n. 1

Diogenianus, cited 71 n. 1

Dion of Syracuse, 30

Dionysius of Halicarnassus, _Antiquitates Romanae_, cited 32 n. 2, 37 n. 4, 48 n. 6, 191 n. 2, 215 n. 2, 216–218, 221 n. 2, 222 n. 7, 223 n. 1, n. 4, n. 5, 224–231, 234 n. 3, 237 n. 3, 238 n. 3, 239, 245, 247 n. 3, 278 n. 3, n. 4, n. 5, 279 n. 1, 283 n. 6, 337 n. 2, n. 5; _Epistola ad Ammaeum_, cited 280 n. 1; _Isocrates_, cited 13 n. 1

Dionysius of Syracuse, 24, 27, 30–32, 72, 196, 210, 221, 229, 256 n. 1, 265, 274, 278 n. 2, 280, 282, 284, 291, 303 n. 2

Dionysus, 262, 264 n. 5, 305; Botrys, 239

Diphilus, cited 208 n. 1

Dipoenus, 263 n. 5

Dipylon pottery, 169, 314, 315, 317, 319, 321–326, 329, 330

Dives, 102

_dives_, 229

Doerpfeld (W.), _Archaiologike Ephemeris_, cited 62 n. 6; _Athenische Mitteilungen_, cited 63 n. 2

Dorians, 157 n. 7, 158, 176, 179, 180, 257, 259 n. 1, 261, 262 n. 1, 294,305 n. 1, 333 n. 1; pre-Dorian stock, 257, 304, 305; see also Aeolic stock

Doric dress, 169, 332

Doriche, 104

Dorieus, 239

δορυφόρος, 143

drachma, δραχμαί, 57, 58, 64, 149, 162, 171–173, 175

δραχμαὶ τοῦ Στεφανηφόρου, 56

Draco, 53 n. 2

Dragendorff (H.), _Thera_, cited 316 n. 7, 320 n. 5

drains, 224, 247

dress, 164, 167–170, 174, 331–334

drivers, 14

Drumann (W.), _Arbeiter u. Communisten in Griechenland u. Rom_, cited 19

Duemmler (F.), _Jahrbuch des deutschen archäologischen Instituts_, cited 112 n. 4

Dugas (Ch.), _apud_ Piganiol, _Journal d. Savants_, 335

Duilius, 336

Dumont (A.), _Revue Archéologique_, cited 205 n. 4, 206

dumps, 128, 156 n. 2; see also ingots

Duncker (M. W.), _Geschichte des Alterthums_, cited 145 n. 4, 159 n. 5, 166 n. 1, n. 3, 192 n. 1, 198 n. 9, 214 n. 7, 328 n. 3, 329

Dunham (A. G.), _History of Miletus_, cited 117 n. 1, 268 n. 4

Durazzo, 190 n. 3

Duris of Samos, cited 78, 178, 324 n. 6

dyeing, dyers, 14, 139 n. 2, 187, 222

Dying Gladiator, 285

Dymaean War, 159

ecclesia, 17

Edessa, 183

Edgar (C. C.), _Catalogue of the Greek Vases in Cairo Museum_, cited 112 n. 5; _Annual of the British School at Athens_ and _Journal of Hellenic Studies_; see Hogarth and others

Edonia, 271

Edward the Confessor, 238

Edward the Elder, 238

Edward VII, 102 n. 1

Eetion, 193

ἐγείρω, 35

Egestaeans, 239; see also Segesta

Egypt, 1, 44 n. 5, 48 n. 6, 68, 71–73, 80, 83, chap. IV _passim_, 145 n. 4, 148 n. 3, 149, 191, 203 n. 4, 212–214, 285, 292, 293, 298, 303 n. 1, 315 n. 3

Eion, 59 n. 1

Eldorado, 41, 177 n. 7

electrum, electrum currency, 44 n. 5, 74 n. 6, 127–133, 142, 147, 150, 152

Elephantine, 123

Eleusis, Eleusinians, 15, 41 n. 3, 169 n. 5, 250 n. 1, 308, 318, 321, 324 n. 1, 333 n. 4

Elis, 123, 134 n. 2, 154, 159, 160

Ely, 238

embroiderers, 14

embrontaion, 277

Emperor, Holy Roman Empire, 304

employees, 14, 15, 21, 62, 77, 223, 225, 239, 278, 289, 295

ἐμπορίη, 80

ἐμπορικὸν πρᾶγμα, 261

_Encyclopaedia Britannica_, cited 77 n. 3; see also Griffith

Endt (J.), _Beiträge zur ionischen Vasenmalerei_, cited 120 n. 4; _Wiener Studien_, cited 10 n. 6, 14 n. 6, 31 n. 2, 274 n. 1, 283 n. 6

ἐνεργαζόμεναι παιδίσκαι, 139

England, English, 15 n. 6, 126 n. 5, 233 n. 6, 237, 238, 249, 306 n. 2, 328, 329

engravers, 14

Enkomi, 128, 141

Ennea Hodoi, 59 n. 1

Enneakrounos, 62

ἐνύπνιον, 81

Epakria, Epakrioi, ἔπακροι, 37, 39, 41, 45, 291

Epaminondas, 179 n. 3

Ephesus, 90 n. 3, 128, 130 n. 6, 132, 136, 137, 141, 143 n. 1, 144 n. 3, 145 n. 3, 147 n. 3, 156 n. 2, 191 n. 3, 221 n. 2, 245, 246 n. 1, 271–273 _passim_, 296

Ephorus, cited 26 n. 2, 155, 157, 161, 163, 164, 173, 175, 176, 192–194, 196 n. 4, 258, 264, 294, 330 n. 5

Epidamnus, 190 n. 3

Epidaurus, 165–167, 174–176, 178, 326, 330, 331

ἐπιδιδόναι, 281

Epiphanius, _de Mensuris et Ponderibus_, cited 120 n. 3

ἐπισημαίνειν, 277

ἐπίστασις, ἐπιστάτης, 81, 277

ἐπιτετραμμένοι τὴν φυλακήν, 326

ἐπιθαλάσσιος, 313

ἐπιτίθεσθαι, 280, 281

ἔπρησεν, 81

Erastos, 283 n. 3

Erechtheum, 14 n. 9, 20 n. 7

Eretria, 36, 37, 72 n. 2, 261, 330

ἐργασία, ἐργαζόμενοι, 17, 19

ἐργαστήρια, 218

Ergotimos, 245, 319

Erichthonios, 155 n. 2

Erman (J. P. A.) und Schweinfurth (G.), _Abhandlungen d. preussischen Akademie d. Wissenschaften zu Berlin_, cited 87 n. 6

ἔρως χρημάτων ἄμετρος, 272

Erotici Scriptores (ed. Didot), cited 93 n. 2

Erythrae, 133

Esquiline, 338 n. 2

Essendune, 238

ἔστρωται, 79

Ethiopia, Ethiopian, 95–102, 122, 125 n. 3, 292

Ethiopian dynasty in Egypt, 86, 88 n. 1, 93, 95, 97

Etruria, Etruscans, 10, 30, 93, 187, 203 n. 4, 215–217, 219, 220, 223, 225, 234, 235, 241–243, 246, 249, 295, 335

Etruscan language, 134 n. 5

Etrusco-Carthaginian alliance, 240

_Etymologicum Gudianum_, cited 134 n. 1, n. 5

_Etymologicum Magnum_, 41 n. 3, 76 n. 7, 134 n. 1, n. 5, 155 n. 2, 156 n. 1, 162, 163, 193 n. 3; 201 n. 2, 280 n. 1

Euaion, 281, 283, 288

Euboea, 37, 60, 156 n. 1, 261, 262, 311, 313 n. 1

Euboeic standard, 171, 172

Euboulos, 282, 283 n. 6, 288

Eubulus Comicus, cited 54 n. 2

Eucheir, workman of Demaratus, 207, 217, 244, 245

Eucheiros, potter, 244, 245

Eugrammus, 208, 217, 244

Eumelos, 195

eunuch, 280, 284

Eupalinus, 76, 267

Eupatridai, 48

Euphorion, cited 133, 143 n. 2

Euphronios, 169

εὐπορία, εὔποροι, 89, 273

Euripides, 17, 54 n. 2; _Bacchae_, cited 148 n. 1; _Cyclops_, cited 40 n. 9; _Hecuba_, cited 174 n. 3; _Iphigenia in Tauris_, cited 182 n. 4; _Sciron_, cited 57; Schol. _Hecuba_, cited 178 n. 1, 324 n. 6

Europe, 23, 236 n. 2, 284

Eurystheus, 207

Eusebius, _Chronicon_, cited 52, 70 n. 3, 93 n. 1, 95, 96 n. 1, n. 3, 99, 143 n. 2, 146 n. 6, 159 n. 6, 160, 172 n. 5, 190 n. 3, 265 n. 1, 273 n. 4, 275 n. 5

Eusebius, _Praeparatio Evangelica_, cited 280 n. 1

Eustathius, _Commentary on the Iliad_, cited 155 n. 2; _Commentary on the Odyssey_, cited 77 n. 2, 269; _Commentary on Dionysius Periegetes_, cited 37 n. 1, 70 n. 3, 79 n. 2, 90 n. 5; _Opusculum de emendenda vita monachica_, cited 269 n. 4

Eutropius, cited 224 n. 5

Evans (Sir Arthur), _Corolla Numismatica_, cited 128

Evans, Lady, _Greek Dress_, cited 170 n. 1

Exchequer, Chancellor of, 4

exomides, 265

Fabricii, 337 n. 5

Fabricius, Gaius, 337

Fabricius (E.), _Athenische Mitteilungen_, cited 76 n. 2; _Archäologischer Anzeiger_ cited 76 n. 2

factories, 12, 20, 22

faience, 93, 94, 109, 124

fairs, 261 n. 2

Falconer (T.), ed. Strabo, cited 159 n. 2

Falerii, 219

farmers, 18, 37, 44, 48, 49, 307, 308, 310; see also agriculture

Faustulus, 197

_favissae_, 224 n. 5

Feronia, 261 n. 2

Ferrari, _Agathokles_, cited 209 n. 3

Festus, cited 134 n. 5, 221 n. 5, 338 n. 1

_fibulae_, 333

figurines, 118, 119, 332

Fikellura ware, 112–114, 116, 121 n. 5

_flatum_, 218

flax workers, 14

Fleet (London), 247

Florence, 2, 3, 56 n. 3, 304

Florentinus, _Geoponica_, cited 201 n. 8

Florus, _Epitome Liui_, cited 215 n. 2, 222 n. 2, 223 n. 5, 226, 228 n. 1, n. 2, 229 n. 2, 238 n. 3

flower girls, 55–57

flute players, 222

Foerster (R.), _Philologus_, cited 257 n. 2

Fontana Collection of Greek Vases, 319

Forchhammer (P.), _Philologus_, cited 326 n. 6, 329 n. 8

Forum at Rome, 218, 247–249, 251, 334, 335, 337, 338 n. 2

Fotheringham (J. K.), _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, cited 96 n. 3

fountains, 62, 76 n. 5

Fowler, W. Warde, 211 n. 4

Fox (Earle), _Corolla Numismatica_, cited 53 n. 2, 56 n. 2, 156 n. 2, 161 n. 1

Fraenkel (M.), _Inschriften von Pergamon_, cited 285 n. 2

_Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum_, cited 26 n. 2, 36 n. 3, 39 n. 2, n. 3, 59 n. 6, 65 n. 4, 66 n. 3, 79 n. 2, 93 n. 1, 95 n. 2, 98 n. 9, 99 n. 2, 102 n. 2, 130 n. 2, 134 n. 1, n. 2, 135 n. 1, n. 3, n. 4, n. 8, 136 n. 2, n. 3, 137 n. 1, 138 n. 5, 144 n. 1, 145 n. 1, n. 4, n. 5, 146 n. 1, 147 n. 3, 151 n. 1, 156 n. 3, 166 n. 1, 178 n. 1, 180 n. 3, 183 n. 4, 189 n. 1, 190 n. 1, n. 3, n. 4, 191 n. 3, 192 n. 1, n. 2, 194 n. 1, 211 n. 6, 213 n. 3, n. 4, 214 n. 7, 224 n. 5, 226 n. 3, 259 n. 4, 273 n. 2, n. 3, 275 n. 2, 280 n. 1, 283 n. 5

France, 5, 50, 142, 162

France, Anatole, cited 5, 257

François vase, 113

Francotte (H.), _Mélanges_ (Liège, 1910, _Bib. Fac. Phil._), cited 303 n. 2

Frank (T.), _Classical Philology_, cited 219 n. 1

Frazer (J.), _Magic Art_, cited 238 n. 3, 336 n. 2; ed. Pausanias, cited 80 n. 6, 179 n. 10, 263 n. 3, n. 4

Frederic, father of George III, 157 n. 4

Freeman (E. A.), _History of Sicily_, cited 274 n. 3

frescoes, 243, 244 n. 1, 246

Frickenhaus (A.), _Tiryns_, cited 114 n. 5, 163, 164, 317 n. 1, 318 n. 4, 320

von Fritze (H.), _Zeitschrift f. Numismatik_, cited 36 n. 3, 53 n. 2, 56 n. 2

Frohberger, _de opificum apud veteres Graecos conditione_, cited 15 n. 7

Frontinus, _Stratagems_, cited 259 n. 2, 278 n. 1

Frye, Senator, quoted 5 n. 8

Fulgentius, _Sermones Antiqui_, cited 336 n. 2

fulling, 266

furnace, 199, 202, 203, 205, 207, 208 n. 1

Furtwaengler (A.), _Antike Gemmen_, cited 243 n. 3; _Archäologische Zeitung_, cited 324; _Berliner Philologische Wochenschrift_, cited 170 n. 6; _Beschreibung der Vasensammlung im Antiquarium, Berlin_, cited 46 n. 7, 203 n. 3, n. 4, 204 n. 1, 207 n. 2, 242 n. 3; _Olympia_, cited 243 n. 3; _Winckelmannsfeste Program_, cited 171 n. 1; Thiersch and others, _Aegina_, cited 316 n. 1, n. 2, n. 6, n. 7, n. 10, 317 n. 7, 318, 320 n. 4, 333 n. 4

Gabii, 224

Gabrici (E.), _Monumenti Antichi_, cited 316 n. 9

Galassi, General, 93 n. 3, 243, 335

Galatia, Galatians, 285, 286

Galen, _Protrepticus_, cited 13 n. 5, 70 n. 3

Gallipoli, 52

Gambacorti, 2

games, 71, 123, 154, 159, 160, 178, 235, 258–262, 265

Gardner (Ernest), _Naukratis_, see Petrie and Gardner; _Handbook of Greek Sculpture_, cited 63 n. 1, 81 n. 4, 263 n. 5, 302 n. 4

Gardner (Percy), _History of Ancient Coinage_, cited 130 n. 3, 171; _Earliest Coins of Greece Proper_, cited 53 n. 2, 159 n. 5, 161 n. 2, 188; _Gold Coinage of Asia before Alexander the Great_, cited 130 n. 3, 143 n. 1; _Samos and Samian Coins_, cited 75 n. 1; _Numismatic Chronicle_, cited 57 n. 5

Gardthausen (V.), _Mastarna oder Servius_, cited 223, 249

garlands, 55–57, 60

Garrucci (R.), _Le monete dell’ Italia antica_, cited 220 n. 4

Gellius, Aulus, cited 17 n. 3, 221 n. 5

Gelo of Syracuse, 10 n. 6, 30

Gelzer, _Rheinisches Museum_, cited 136 n. 1, n. 3, 137 n. 3, 138 n. 7, 140 n. 4, 141 n. 1, 145 n. 4, 146 n. 1, n. 6, 273 n. 2

genealogies, 156–159, 176, 212

_Genesis_, cited 149

_Geographi Graeci Minores_, cited 90 n. 5, 91 n. 1

Geometric pottery, 163, 169, 314, 315, 318–321, 333, 334; see also Dipylon pottery

Geomoroi, γεωμόροι, 69, 276, 277

George II, 157 n. 4

George III, 157 n. 4

George, King of Greece, 143 n. 1

Gercke und Norden, _Einleitung i. d. Altertumswissenschaft_, cited 157 n. 8

Gergethes (Γέργηθες), Gergithes (Γέργιθες), 269, 270

Gerhard (E.), _Trinkschalen u. Gefässe_, cited 203 n. 3, n. 4

Germany, Germans, 163, 197 n. 6, 253 n. 4, 311

Gerster, _Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique_, cited 191 n. 6

Gibraltar, 177

Gihon (Miriam), 267

Gilbert, _Jahrbücher f. Classische Philologie_ (_Neue Jahrbücher f. Philologie und Paedagogik_), cited 53 n. 2, 63 n. 9, 326 n. 7, 328

Gilliard (C.), _Quelques Réformes de Solon_, cited 48 n. 6, 307 n. 6, 329 n. 7

Glotz (G.), _Études sociales et juridiques sur l’Antiquité grecque_, cited 328 n. 1, 329

γλυκὺς ἄγκων, 76, 77 n. 3

Gnathia ware, 335

γνώριμοι, 303

_Goettingsche Gelehrte Anzeigen_, see Wilisch

gold, 44 n. 5, 54 n. 1, 80 n. 4, 84, 139, 143, 144 n. 3, n. 4, 145, 147, 148, 152, 171 n. 1, 189, 192 n. 5, 198

gold currency, 3, 4, 18, 57, 128, 130–133, 140, 142 n. 5, 152, 156 n. 1, 172, 286, 287, 291; see also daric

gold mines, 39 n. 4, 44 n. 5, 50, 54 n. 1, 58 n. 1, 59 n. 1, 87, 138, 148, 203 n. 4

Golden age, 302

Golden Fleece, 41, 265

goldsmiths, 222

Gonussa, 193

Gorgasus, 240 n. 2

Gorgos, Gorgias, Gordios, 213

γουνὸς Σουνιακός, 41, 44

Government-owned industry, 22 n. 7

Gracchi, 32

Gracchan revolutionaries, 288, 289

Graef (B.), _Die antiken Vasen v. d. Akropolis zu Athen_, cited 315 n. 5; _Wochenschrift f. klassische Philologie_, cited 316 n. 6

Graffunder (P.), _Klio_, cited 338

Graillot, _Mélanges d’Archéologie et d’Histoire_, cited 246 n. 7

Great King (= King of Persia), 20, 57, 61, 69 n. 5, 72, 130, 140, 270 n. 7, 271, 291, 292

greengrocer, 17

Gregorius Cyprius, cited 190 n. 1

Grenfell (B. P.) and Hunt (A. S.), _Oxyrhynchus Papyri_, cited 104, 257, 258, 262 n. 4, 264 n. 4

Griffith (F. Ll.), _Encyclopaedia Britannica_, cited 87 n. 5; _Catalogue of the Demotic Papyri in the Rylands Library at Manchester_, cited 87 n. 4, 93 n. 2, 98 n. 5, 100 n. 4, 125, 126; _High Priests of Memphis_, cited 97, 98 n. 6, 101

Groddech, 195 n. 4

Grote (G.), _History of Greece_, cited 36 n. 1, 66 n. 1, 70 n. 1, 80, 180 n. 3, 262 n. 1, 278 n. 2, 288, 327

Grueber (H. A.), _Coins of the Roman Republic in the British Museum_, cited 221 n. 7

Grundy (G. B.), _Great Persian War_, cited 271; _Thucydides and the History of his Age_, cited 37 n. 7, 307, 310 n. 3

Guadalquivir (Baetis), 177 n. 6

De Gubernatis, _Atti d. Reale Accademia d. Torino_, cited 66, 258 n. 1, n. 2

Guérin (V.), _Patmos et Samos_, cited 76 n. 2

guilds, 87

Guiraud (P.), _La Main-d’Œuvre dans l’Ancienne Grèce_, cited 36; _La Propriété Foncière en Grèce_, cited 309 n. 10

Gutschmid, cited 104 n. 6; _Neue Beiträge z. Geschichte d. alten Orients_, cited 92 n. 1; _Philologus_, cited 90 n. 1, 99 n. 6, 214 n. 6

Gyges, 9, 26, 91, 92, 99 n. 3, 127, 130 n. 2, 134, 136, 137, 139 n. 3, 141, 143–149, 151, 152, 187 n. 8, 221, 236 n. 2, 273 n. 2, 286, 289, 293, 302

Gylippus, 58

Haa ab ra, see Apries

Haase, _Abhandlungen d. historisch. philologisch. Gesellschaft Breslau_, cited 37 n. 7, 38 n. 2

Habron, 181

Hackl (R.), see Sieveking (J.)

Hadrian, 63, 336 n. 5

Haeberlin (E. J.), _Aes Grave_, cited 219, 221 n. 7; _Die Systematik des ältesten roemischen Münzwesens_, cited 233 n. 1

ἁμαξοπηγῶν, 135

Hammer, _Zeitschrift f. Numismatik_, cited 146 n. 7, 148 n. 3

Hanno, 30 n. 3, 282

Hanover, House of, 157 n. 4

hare, 74, 75

Harmodius, 231, 302

Harold, King of England, 238 n. 1

Harpocration, cited 16 n. 7, 56 n. 4, 171 n. 4, 280 n. 1, 310 n. 4, 327 n. 2

Head (B. V.), _Historia Numorum_^2, cited 56 n. 2, 63 n. 7, 75 n. 1, 128 n. 1, 132 n. 3, 143 n. 1, 147 n. 1, 156 n. 2, 159 n. 5, 161 n. 1, 171 n. 6, 172 n. 3, 188, 208 n. 3, 209 n. 6; _Numismatic Chronicle_, cited 53 n. 2, 55, 63 n. 9; see also _British Museum Excavations at Ephesus_; _Catalogue of Greek Coins, Corinth, Ionia_

Headlam (J. W.), _Classical Review_, cited 326 n. 6

Hebrew, 126

Hebrus, 200 n. 1

hektemoroi, 13, 307, 308

Helbig (W.), cited 335; _Das homerische Epos_^2, cited 166 n. 1, 170 n. 1, 332 n. 2; _Mémoires de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres_, cited 169, 321, 324, 325, 326 n. 3, 329 n. 7, 330

Helladius, cited 257 n. 2

Hellanicus, cited 102 n. 2

pre-Hellenic population, 269

Hellenium at Naukratis, 104–106, 107 n. 4, 110, 116, 118

Hellenomemphites, 96 n. 4

Hellespont, 63, 92

helots, 24

ἥμερα, 309

Hephaestus, 14, 16, 92, 97

Hera of Argos, 162

Hera of Samos, 69 n. 5, 76, 116

Hera, temple of, see Heraeum

Heraclea Ioniae, 131

Heraclea Pontica, 265

Heraclean tables, 208

Heracles, 156, 176, 178, 207, 236 n. 2

Heraclid royal family, 158 n. 6, 196, 211 n. 6

Heraclides, cited 79 n. 2, 135 n. 8, 147 n. 3, 167 n. 1, 190 n. 1, n. 2, n. 4, 191 n. 3, 192 n. 1, n. 2, 193 n. 3, 269

Heraeum at Argos, 161–164, 175, 316 n. 7, 318–320, 333 n. 4; at Samos, 76, 82; at Tiryns, 320

Hereward, 91 n. 4, 238

Hermann (C. F.), _Lehrbuch der griechischen Antiquitäten_, vol. I (_Staatsaltertümer_), cited 28 n. 5, vol. IV (_Privataltertümer_), cited 201 n. 4

Hermes, shrine of, 135

_Hermes_, cited 171 n. 6; see also Lehmann-Haupt, Niese

Hermias, 280–283, 288

Hermione, 330

Hermocapelia, 135 n. 4

Hermogenes (ed. Spengel), cited 51 n. 2

Hermotybies, 90 n. 1

Herodotus, 6, 9, 18, 25, 26, 33, 194 n. 6, 196, 212 n. 3, 215, 290, 292, 293, 295, 298, 320, 328; cited 8 n. 3, n. 13, 17, 22 n. 2, 26 n. 2, 27–29, 31, 35–37, 40 n. 8, 41, 46 n. 1, n. 6, 47, 50 n. 6, 51 n. 2, n. 3, 52, 54, 55, 58, 59 n. 1, n. 2, n. 3, n. 4, n. 5, 60–62, 63 n. 5, n. 7, 64, 65, 67, 68 n. 2, n. 3, n. 4, n. 5, n. 6, n. 7, n. 8, 69 n. 5, 70 n. 3, n. 4, 72, 73 n. 1, n. 4, n. 6, 74, 75 n. 1, 76, 77 n. 8, 78 n. 4, n. 5, n. 6, n. 8, 79–81, 82 n. 1, 83–85, 87 n. 1, n. 2, n. 8, n. 9, n. 10, n. 11, 88–92, 96 n. 4, 97 n. 1, n. 6, 99–101, 102 n. 1, n. 2, 103–105, 112 n. 4, 116, 117, 121 n. 4, 122 n. 1, n. 4, 123, 124, 126 n. 3, n. 4, 129–131, 133, 136 n. 2, 137 n. 1, n. 3, n. 5, 138, 139, 140 n. 1, n. 2, n. 3, 143, 144 n. 1, n. 3, n. 4, n. 6, 145 n. 1, n. 2, n. 3, n. 4, 146 n. 1, n. 4, 147 n. 4, 154, 155, 156 n. 3, 157, 158, 161–167, 169–176, 177 n. 4, n. 7, 178 n. 1, 179 n. 2, 180 n. 3, 187 n. 8, 189 n. 2, 190 n. 1, 191 n. 2, n. 3, 193 n. 4, n. 6, 197, 198, 207, 209 n. 5, 210 n. 1, 211, 214 n. 7, 231 n. 4, 239, 240, 255, 259 n. 1, n. 4, 260 n. 2, 261, 264, 268 n. 3, 270 n. 4, n. 5, n. 7, 271, 272 n. 1, 294, 302, 303, 305 n. 2, 306 n. 1, 309 n. 1, 313, 324 n. 6, n. 10, 325, 326, 330 n. 3, 333, 334, 336 n. 1

Herostratos, 103, 118, 119

Hesiod, 24

Hesiod, _Eoiai_, cited 324

Hesychius, cited 39 n. 5, 41 n. 2, 51 n. 2, 54 n. 2, 70 n. 5, 122 n. 4, 129 n. 7, 199 n. 3, n. 4, n. 5, n. 8, n. 9, 200–202, 280 n. 1, 311, 312, 313 n. 4, 327

Hesychius Milesius, cited 280 n. 1, 283 n. 5

hetaerae, 68, 93, 104, 139 n. 3

Heuzey (L.), _Catalogue des Figurines antiques de terre cuite du Musée du Louvre_, cited 123 n. 12

Hezekiah, 267

Hicks (E. L.), _Manual of Greek Historical Inscriptions_, cited 283 n. 2

Hicks (R. D.), _Companion to Greek Studies_, cited 179 n. 3

Hiero, 10, 30, 138 n. 9

Hierocles, cited 135 n. 4

Hieronymus, see Jerome

Hill (G. F.), _Handbook of Greek and Roman Coins_, cited 24 n. 1; _Historical Greek Coins_, cited 53 n. 2, 54 n. 5, 156 n. 2, 161 n. 1; _Historical Roman Coins_, cited 233 n. 1; _Sources for Greek History between the Persian and Peloponnesian Wars_, cited 59 n. 1

hill, party of the, hillmen, hill country, 29, 31, 37, 38, 39, 44, 45, 48, 291, 299, 307–313

Himera, 275 n. 4

Himerius, cited 280 n. 1, 282 n. 4

Hipparchus, 51 n. 2, 268

hippeis, 16, 49

Hippias, tyrant of Athens, 33 n. 1, 50, 51 n. 2, 56 n. 2, 59–61, 63 n. 4, 64, 66, 74, 231, 268

Hippias of Elis, cited 134 n. 2, 160

Hipponax, cited 139 n. 1, 272

Hipponikos, 12

Hirschensohn, _Philolog. Obozrenie_, cited 51 n. 4

Hirschfeld (O.), _Rheinisches Museum_, cited 91, 106, 117 n. 3, n. 5, 120 n. 4, 123 n. 8; _apud_ Pauly Wissowa, cited 166 n. 1

Histiaeus, 61, 62, 268, 270, 271, 287, 292

Hittites, 149

Hitzig and Bluemner, _Pausanias_, cited 158 n. 3, 198 n. 9

Hoar, Senator, quoted 5 n. 8

Hogarth (D. G.), _Excavations at Ephesus_, see _British Museum Excavations at Ephesus_

Hogarth (D. G.) and others, _Annual of the British School at Athens_, cited 106–110, 115 n. 2, 116 n. 3, n. 6, 118 n. 1, n. 2, n. 3, 119 n. 5, 120 n. 2; _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, cited 106, 110, 118 n. 2, n. 4

Holm (A.), _History of Greece_, cited 23 n. 1, 159 n. 5, 198 n. 9, 275 n. 6, 285, 286, 288 n. 3, 303 n. 2; _Geschichte Siciliens im Alterthum_, cited 275 n. 6

Holwerda (A. E. J.), _Album Herwerden_, cited 53 n. 2, 56 n. 2; _Rheinisches Museum_, cited 332 n. 2, 333 n. 2

Homer, 27 n. 4, 40 n. 2, 134, 180, 262 n. 1, 264 n. 5, 303; _Iliad_, cited 16 n. 1, 179, 259 n. 3, 324 n. 5, 333 n. 2; _Odyssey_, cited 16 n. 1, 36 n. 3, 40, 201, 309 n. 6, 328 n. 1; _Hymns_, cited 259 n. 3

Homeric age, 16, 300, 329; talent, 172 n. 4

Homolle (Th.), _apud_ Saglio, _Dictionnaire des Antiquités_, cited 162 n. 3

honey, 309, 310 n. 3

Hophra, see Apries

hoplite, 90, 121

Hoppin (J. C.), _Argive Heraeum_, cited 167 n. 6, 316 n. 7, 317

Horace, _Epist._, cited 201 n. 1; _Odes_, cited 248 n. 1

horse rearing, 187

Horus, 91 n. 4

house martin, 211

How and Wells, _Herodotus_, cited 87 n. 9, n. 10, 90 n. 1, 125 n. 3, 140 n. 5, 144 n. 4, 156 n. 5, 161 n. 2, 165 n. 5, 166 n. 1, n. 4, 168 n. 1, 190 n. 3, 193, 269 n. 7, 305 n. 1, 319 n. 4, 326 n. 7

Howorth (H. H.), _Numismatic Chronicle_, cited 53 n. 2, 56 n. 2

hubris, ὕβρις, 8, 181

Huelsen (Ch.) (trans. Carter), _Forum Romanum_, cited 247 n. 5

ὑλονόμοι, 309

Humbert (G.), _apud_ Saglio, _Dictionnaire des Antiquités_, cited 222 n. 6

Hunt (A. S.), see Grenfell

hydriae, 246, 255, 320

Hyginus, cited 147 n. 2

Hymettus, 39 n. 6, 44, 308–310

Hyperakria, Hyperakrioi, Ὑπεράκριοι (Athenian), 37, 39–41; (Milesian), 40 n. 8, 41 n. 2

Hyperbolus, 207

Hyperboreans, 138 n. 9

Hyperides, cited 47 n. 7, 54 n. 2

Hysiae, 177

Iamblichus, cited 69 n. 1, 93 n. 2

Iasos, vase from, 204–206

Ibycus, 332

Ida, 44

Imbros, 134 n. 5

Imhoof-Blumer (F.), _Monnaies Grecques_, cited 200 n. 1

_imperatores_, 337

_impressisse monetam_, 218

Inaros, 104, 118

India, Indian, 142, 197 n. 6

ingots of metal, 141, 142 n. 4, 150, 152 n. 2; see also dumps

inscriptions, 14, 15, 20 n. 7, 38–41, 44, 48, 50, 56 n. 4, 75, 81, 87, 106–109, 113, 116–118, 123, 128 n. 4, 174 n. 5, 198 n. 2, 208, 212, 221 n. 2, 236, 240 n. 2, 263, 283, 284 n. 4, 286, 288, 291, 292, 297, 299, 313, 316 n. 10; see also cylinders

Ionia, 4, 27 n. 2, 83, 89, 90–92, 108, 123, 133, 245, 246, 249, 251–253

Ionian art, 244, 246; dress, 169, 170, 331–334; league, 245; mercenaries, 122, 123; philosophers, 1; pottery, 118, 120 n. 1, 334; revolt, 72 n. 2, 158, 270 n. 7; terra cottas, 252; tyrants, 270 n. 7

iron, 203, 274; currency, 23, 163 n. 1, 164 n. 1, 221 n. 7; mines, 37 n. 1

Isaiah, cited 92 n. 3, 98 n. 2

Isidore of Seville, _Etymologiae_, cited 224 n. 5, 226 n. 3

Isis, tomb of, 119 n. 3

Ismenias, 24 n. 5

Isocrates, 12; _Antidosis_, cited 65; _Areopagiticus_, cited 17; _de Biga_, cited 64 n. 4, n. 5; _Busiris_, cited 122 n. 1; _de Pace_, cited 265 n. 4; _Panathenaicus_, cited 10, 35 n. 3; _Panegyricus_, cited 261 n. 1, 304 n. 2

Israel, 303

Isthmus, 215

Isthmian games, 260

Italy, Italian, 1, 2, 3, 50, 56, 112, 187, 189, 194, 216, 233, 234, 243–245, 251, 266, 278, 286, 311, 315, 316

Italian pottery, 335

_J.H.S._ see _Journal of Hellenic Studies_

_J. I. d’A. N._ see _Journal International d’Archéologie Numismatique_

Jacoby (F.), _Marmor Parium_, cited 155 n. 2, 160 n. 4, 181

_Jahrb._ = _Jahrbuch des deutschen archäologischen Instituts_, cited 187 n. 4; see also Boehlau, Conze, Duemmler, Kalkmann, Kroker, Winter

_Jahrbücher f. Nationalökonomie u. Statistik_, see E. Meyer

_Jahrbücher f. Classische Philologie_, see Gilbert, Schoemann, Wilisch

_Jahresbericht des Gymnas. Zittau_, see Wilisch

James of Hereford, Lord, 11 n. 2

James (W.), _Varieties of Religious Experience_, cited 306

Janus, 219

Japan, 142

Java, 142

Jebb, _Attic Orators_, cited 10 n. 5; ed. Sophocles, cited 16 n. 7, 134 n. 5

Jerome, cited 52, 95, 96 n. 1, 103, 172 n. 5, 273 n. 4

Jerusalem, 267

Jevons (W. S.), _Money_, cited 3 n. 6, 142 n. 6, 162 n. 2

Jew, 194

jewellery, 164, 167, 170, 171, 175

_Job, Book of_, cited 149 n. 2

Johansen (K. F.), _Sikyoniske Vaser_, cited 316 n. 10

John of Antioch, cited 93 n. 1, 224 n. 5, 226 n. 3

Johnson, Dr, 281

Jones (Stuart), _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, cited 198 n. 2

Jordan, _Topographie der Stadt Rom_, cited 338 n. 1

Josephus, cited 97 n. 5

Josiah, 116, 123

_Journal des Savants_, see Piganiol, Reinach (A. J.), De Sanctis

_Journal International d’Archéologie Numismatique_, cited 171 n. 6, n. 8; see also Babelon, Svoronos

_Journal of Hellenic Studies_, cited 112 n. 8, 114 n. 1, 155 n. 1, 284 n. 4, 285 n. 3; see also Bent, Burrows, Dickens, Edgar, Fotheringham, Hogarth, Stuart Jones, Leaf, Macan, Mahaffy, Munro, Myres, Ramsay, Ridgeway, Ure

_Journal of Roman Studies_, cited, see Boni

Jove, temple of, 223

Juba, king of Libya, 201 n. 8

Judah, 123, 303

jurymen, payment of, 19, 25, 231

Justin, cited 29 n. 2, 31, 54 n. 1, 73 n. 1, 129 n. 6, 136 n. 2, 138 n. 3, 156 n. 5, 183 n. 1, 208 n. 4, 211 n. 1, 221, 278 n. 2

Kabeirion, 108 n. 2

Kahrstedt, _apud_ Pauly Wissowa, cited 120 n. 4

kalasiries, 90 n. 1

Kalaurian league, 324, 330, 331

Kalkmann (A.), _Jahrbuch_, cited 333 n. 1

Kallikrates, 13 n. 3

Kallirrhoe, 62

Kallisthenes, _Apophthegms_, cited 282 n. 2

Kamaresa, 43, 44 n. 3

Kaminia, 44 n. 5

Kampanes, _Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique_, cited 56 n. 2

κάπηλος, καπηλεῖον, καπηλεύειν, 73, 135

Kapsala, 44 n. 5

Karanos, 156, 183

Kavalla, 37

Keil (B.), _Die Solonische Verfassung_, cited 168 n. 3, 327 n. 5

Kelainai, 140, 147 n. 1

Kent, 311 n. 1

Kephisia, 38

κεραμεαί, κεραμευτικὴ τέχνη, 200, 209

Kerameikos (Athens), 318

Keraunos, see Ptolemy Keraunos

κεροπλάστης, 55

Khamois, Satni, 97, 100–102

κιβωτός, κιβώτιον, 198, 208

Kibotos, 147 n. 1

Kieff, 142 n. 4

Kinch (K. F.), _Vroulia_, cited 93 n. 4, 109, 110 n. 4, 112 n. 1, 114

_Kings, Second Book of_, cited 92 n. 3, 98 n. 2

Kinkel (G.), _Epicorum Graecorum Fragmenta_, cited 324 n. 7

Kirchhoff (A.), _Studien z. Geschichte d. griechischen Alphabets_^4, cited 104 n. 7, 106

Kirrha, Kirrhaians, 259 n. 2, n. 5

κιστοφόρος, 57

κιθαρηφόρος, 57

Kitsovouno, 43

Kleidemos, Atthidograph, 328 n. 2

Klein (W.), _Die griechischen Vasen mit Meistersignaturen_, cited 245 n. 1; _Sitzungsberichte d. Akademie d. Wissenschaften in Wien_, cited 198 n. 9

kleinmeister kylikes, 115, 318

kleronomos, 277

_Klio_, see Graffunder, Nordin, Perdrizet, Petersen, Seeck

Knapp (P.), _Korrespondenz-Blatt f. die Gelehrten- u. Real-Schulen Wuerttembergs_, cited 189 n. 7, 192 n. 1, 193 n. 3, n. 7, 194 n. 5, 196 n. 4, n. 5, 197 n. 7, 214 n. 2

Knossos, 128, 141, 298

Knut, 238 n. 1

Kodros, 169 n. 1

Koehler (U.), _Athenische Mitteilungen_, cited 50 n. 3, 163 n. 1; _Rheinisches Museum f. Philologie_, cited 173 n. 1, 174 n. 5; _Sitzungsberichte d. preuss. Akademie d. Wissenschaften zu Berlin_, cited 31 n. 2

Kolaios, 68, 177

Kollytos, 55

Komas, 272

κομίζειν, 139

κόψας (μέτρον), 182

κόραι, 54

Κορινθία συγγραφή, Κορινθιακά, 195

Koriskos, 283 n. 3

Kornemann (E.), _apud_ Pauly Wissowa, 222 n. 3, n. 5

_Korrespondenz-Blatt f. die Gelehrten- u. Real-Schulen Wuerttembergs_, see Knapp

kothons, 248

κραίνω, 328

Kreon, 9

Kresphontes, 180

κρητῆρες, 201

Krisa, Krisaians, 66, 247 n. 2, 259–261

Kroker (E.), _Jahrbuch_, cited 315 n. 1, n. 3, 321, 325 n. 9

Kronos, 302

Ktesias, 157

kylikes, 74 n. 3, 115, 318

Labda, 193

labyrinth, 76, 89 n. 3

Lacedaemon, Lacedaemonia, 144 n. 4; see also Sparta

Lade, battle of, 75, 84

Lakedes, 158

Lakydes, 158 n. 4

Lamb (D.), _Year’s Work in Classical Studies_, cited 244 n. 1

Lampsacus, 53, 63, 281

Lancastrians, 101

Landwehr, _Philologus_, cited 35 n. 2, 48 n. 6

Lanuvium, 246 n. 7

_lapicidae_, 230, 234

Lapithae, 193

Larcher (P. H.), _Mémoires de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres_, cited 280 n. 1, 283 n. 6

_lares_, 336

_lares grundules_, 336 n. 2

Larissa, near Phocaea, 246 n. 8

larnax, λάρναξ, 198, 199, 209

Latium, 219 n. 4, 224 n. 5, 234, 246, 296, 336 n. 1

de Launay (L.), _apud_ Saglio, _Dictionnaire des Antiquités_, cited 44 n. 5, 203

laundrymen, 20

laura, 76, 77

Laurentius Lydus (Johannes), _de Magistratibus_, cited 48 n. 6; _de Mensuris et Ponderibus_, cited 224 n. 5, 226 n. 3; _de Ostentatione_, cited 238 n. 3

Laurium, 21, 23 n. 1, 36, 38, 39, 41–46, 49, 50, 58, 61

Lauth (F. J.), _Aus Aegyptens Vorzeit_, cited 97 n. 4

_lautumiae_, 224 n. 5

lawgivers, 8, 11, 16, 35, 93 n. 2, 182, 183, 301

Lawson (Thos. W.), _Frenzied Finance_, cited 4 n. 1, 5 n. 8

Layard (A. H.), _Monuments of Nineveh_, cited 325 n. 6

Layton (W. T.), _Capital and Labour_, cited 11 n. 2

Lazarus, 102

leaden coins, 74

Leaf, _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, cited 281–283, 286

Leaina, 253

leather currency, 221 n. 7

leather workers, 14, 17, 222

Lebadea, 162 n. 3

Lebedos, 131

Ledl (A.), _Studien zur älteren athen. Verfassungsgeschichte_, 34 n. 2

Lehmann-Haupt (C. F.), cited 157; _Hermes_, cited 161 n. 3

Lelantine war, 68 n. 2, 117 n. 1

Lemnos, 134 n. 5

Lenormant, 24 n. 1, 89 n. 3, 150; _La Monnaie dans L’Antiquité_, cited 74 n. 6, 141; _Monnaies Royales de la Lydie_, cited 130 n. 7; _Monnaies et Médailles_, cited 56 n. 4

Lenschau (T.), _apud_ Bursian, _Jahresbericht_, 34 n. 2, 328 n. 3

Leokedes, 154, 157, 158, 259 n. 1

Leontini, 273–4 _passim_, 296

Leontis, 50 n. 3

Lepsius (K. R.), _Abhandlungen d. preussisch. Akademie d. Wissenschaften zu Berlin_, cited 148 n. 3; _Denkmäler_, cited 123 n. 9; _Königsbuch_, cited 98

Lermann (W.), _Athenatypen_, cited 53 n. 2, 56 n. 2, 63 n. 7

Lesbians, Lesbos, 96 n. 1, 104, 120

Letters of Phalaris, 274

Leukas, 189, 191

λευκὸς χρυσός, 133

Leutsch und Schneidewin, _Paroemiographi Graeci_, cited 71 n. 1, 73 n. 2, 76 n. 6, 77 n. 4, 78 n. 7, 79 n. 2, 190 n. 1, 308 n. 3

Levantine race, 305

Lewis (Geo. Cornewall), _On the Credibility of Early Roman History_, cited 215, 236 n. 2, 237 n. 5

_Lexicon Seguerianum_, ed. Bekker, cited 39, 41 n. 3, 57, 310 n. 4, 326 n. 9, 327 n. 9

Libanius, _Oratio c. Severum_, cited 257 n. 2

Liber and Libera, 250 n. 1

Libya, 68, 74, 86, 89 n. 1, 92 n. 2, 122, 124, 125 n. 3, 201 n. 8

Liddell and Scott, _Lexicon_, cited 80, 313 n. 3

Limir-Patesi-Assur, 214 n. 3

Liopesi, 58 n. 3

liturgies, 67, 79, 287

Livy, cited 54 n. 1, 57 n. 2, 184 n. 2, 215 n. 2, 216–218, 221 n. 2, 222 n. 1, n. 7, 223, 224 n. 5, 225–230, 232 n. 1, 234, 235, 238 n. 3, 245, 247, 248 n. 1, 253 n. 4, 261 n. 2, 278 n. 3, 289 n. 1, 298

Lloyd (Hy. D.), _Wealth against Commonwealth_, cited 4, 5, 6, 14, 235, 267

Locrians, 22

Lodi, 2

Loeper (R.), _Athenische Mitteilungen_, cited 38 n. 5, 41 n. 3, 44 n. 3, 45, 50, 310 n. 1, 312 n. 4, 313 n. 5

Loeschcke (G.), _Athenische Mitteilungen_, cited 316 n. 4, 319

London, 3, 247

Long Walls, 13 n. 3

λόφος, 39, 44

Lophos Loutrou, 42

Lords, House of, 3

Louvre, 74 n. 3, 245 n. 1

λύχνων, οὑκ τῶν, 207

Lucian, _Bis Accusatus_, cited 151 n. 4, 275 n. 1; _Charon_, cited 144 n. 4; _Eunuchus_, cited 280 n. 1, 283 n. 6; _Lexiphanes_, cited 199 n. 9; _Navigium_, cited 151 n. 4; _Phalaris_, cited 275 n. 1, n. 2, 276, 301 n. 2; _Prometheus_, cited 203 n. 4; _Vera Historia_, cited 275 n. 1; Schol. _Cataplus_, cited 134 n. 5; Schol. _Lexiphanes_, cited 199 n. 3, n. 9, 200

Lucius Tarquinius, 216; see also Tarquinius Priscus

Lucretius, cited 311 n. 1

_lucumo_, 239 n. 5

Lucumo, 216; see also Tarquinius Priscus

Luke, cited 239 n. 1

Lycian language, 134 n. 5

Lycophron, son of Periander, 214 n. 7

Lycophron, _Cassandra_, cited 59 n. 1

Lydia and Lydians, 1, 4, 46, 59 n. 6, 64, 72, 73, 86, 90 n. 4, 91, 92, 104 n. 3, 123, chap. V _passim_, 155 n. 2, 187, 188, 191, 236 n. 2, 270, 273, 293, 302

Lydian stone, 129

Lygdamis, 70 n. 2

Lykos, 155 n. 2

Lynkestai, 183, 190 n. 3

Lyons, 215 n. 2

Lysias, _c. Eratosthenem_, cited 12; _c. Frumentarios_, cited 12

Lysimachus, 284

Macan (R.), _Herodotus_, cited 54 n. 6, 59 n. 4, n. 6, 68 n. 4, 156 n. 2, 157 n. 7, 159 n. 2, 161 n. 2, 165, 166, 168, 174, 175 n. 1, 259 n. 1, 262 n. 2, 325 n. 3, 326 n. 7; _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, cited 31 n. 2

Macarius, cited 77 n. 4

Macaulay (G. C.), translation of Herodotus, cited 313 n. 3

Macdonald (G.), _Coin Types_, cited 128 n. 1, 133 n. 4, 143 n. 1, 150

MacDonald (J. Ramsay), _Unemployment and the Wage Fund_, cited 5 n. 8

Macedonia, 59, 61, 147, 156, 157, 158 n. 6, 159, 183, 271, 330

Macfie (J. W. Scott), _Revue d’Ethnologie et de Sociologie_, cited 171 n. 1

μάχιμοι, 122

Macrobius, _Saturnalia_, cited 287 n. 4

Maeander, 131, 147 n. 1

Maeandrius, 84

Maelius, Spurius, 229, 255 n. 1, 277, 278

Maeonian dynasty, 144

μάγειρος, 257

Magians, 209

magic, 101

Magnesia, 131

Mahaffy (J. P.), _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, cited 160

Malalas, cited 71 n. 4, 72 n. 5

Malchus, 278 n. 2

Malcolm (J.), _Memoir of Central India_, cited 142 n. 3

Mallet (D.), _Les Premiers Établissements des Grecs en Égypte_, cited 56 n. 3, 87 n. 6, n. 8, 89 n. 3, 90 n. 1, n. 4, 91 n. 3, n. 4, n. 9, 92 n. 2, 103 n. 1, 105 n. 1, 107, 120 n. 4, 121 n. 2, 122, 123 n. 12, 124 n. 2

Mamertine prison, 224 n. 5

Manetho, cited 95 n. 2, 99, 100

Manlius, Marcus, 229

Mantineans, 212 n. 1

Mantissa, cited 308 n. 3

Mantyes, 58, 59, 62

Manu, laws of, 221 n. 4

manual labour, 13–22, 231, 269, 275, 279

Marathon, 38, 66

Marcellinus, _Vita Thucydidis_, cited 33 n. 1, 50 n. 7

Marchant (E. C.), _Thucydides Book II_, cited 313 n. 1

Marcopoulo, 39 n. 6

Margoliouth (D. S.), _Mohammed_, cited 261 n. 2

Mariéjol (J. H.), _de Orthagoridis_, 259 n. 5, 264 n. 2

Mariette (A.), cited 100 n. 4

Marius, 32

_Marmor Parium_, cited 155 n. 2, 156 n. 3, 157 n. 1, 160 n. 4, 181, 210 n. 1

Maronea, 36 n. 3, 44 n. 3, 46, 47, 50

Marquardt (J.), _Privatleben d. Roemer_, cited 336 n. 4

Marseilles, 246

Marshall (F. H.), see _British Museum Catalogue of Rings_

Martha (J.), _L’Art Étrusque_, cited 240 n. 4, 251 n. 1, 255 n. 3

Marx (Karl), 6 n. 3, 21

masons, 95, 285; see also stonemasons

Maspero (G.), cited 93, 100 n. 4; _Bibliothèque Égyptologique_, cited 96 n. 2, 99 n. 3, n. 4; _Histoire Ancienne_^5, cited 87 n. 9, 99 n. 4, 103, 197 n. 5; _Passing of the Empires_, cited 123 n. 5; _Popular Stories of Ancient Egypt_, cited 101 n. 3, 102 n. 1, n. 3

Mastarna, 223, 249

Matthew, cited 261 n. 2

Mau (A.), _apud_ Pauly Wissowa, cited 203 n. 4

Mauri (A.), _I Cittadini Lavoratori dell’ Attica_, cited 15 n. 2, 17, 37 n. 7, 307 n. 1

Maximus Tyrius, cited 70 n. 3, 180 n. 2, 307 n. 4

Medes, Media, 90, 91 n. 1, 123, 146 n. 4, 157

Medici, the, 2, 285, 286, 304

Mediterranean, 72, 87

Medon, 158

Megabazus, 62, 271

Megacles’ daughter, 52

Megara, 8, 14, 16 n. 2, 29, 31, 76, 166 n. 2, 168, 187 n. 9, 264–268, 296, 329, 330, 336 n. 1

Megara Hyblaea, 265, 273

Megaris, 265

Megiddo, 116

Mela, cited 87 n. 1

_Mélanges d’Archéologie et d’Histoire_, see Graillot

Melanippus, 262

Melas, 136, 272, 273

Melissa, 212

Meltas, K. of Argos, 158

_Mémoires de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres_, see Helbig, Larcher

Memphis, 80, 88, 95, 96 n. 4, 97, 98, 100

Menaechmus of Sicyon, 258 n. 2, 260 n. 1

Menander, _Twins_, cited 50 n. 2

Mendes, 121 n. 3

_mercatores Romanam curiam sequentes_, 304

mercenaries, 36, 78, 89, 90, 92, 102 n. 1, 121–124, 140, 145, 165 n. 5, 166, 212, 300

Mermnadae, Mermnads, 1, 139 n. 1, 144 n. 3, 147 n. 3

Meroe, 98

Merovingians, 142

Mesogeia, Mesogeioi, 39 n. 6, 310 n. 2

Messana, 75

Messene, 179 n. 3, 180

Messenian War, 68 n. 2, 158 n. 6, 167 n. 2, 177, 179, 182, 331 n. 3

metal industry, 21, 69, 73, 74, 80, 81, 146 n. 7, 187, 203 n. 4, 243, 292

Methymna, 191 n. 3

metics, 67, 234

μετρία ἐσθής, 331, 332

μέτρον, μέτρα, 170–172, 182

μετρονόμοι, 171

Metropisi, see Amphitrope

Meyer (E.), _Geschichte d. alten Aegyptens_, cited 102 n. 1, 117 n. 5, 125 n. 3; _Geschichte d. Altertums_, cited 6 n. 3, 29 n. 2, 37 n. 7, 47 n. 2, 54 n. 1, 59 n. 4, 64, 69 n. 5, 70 n. 1, 83 n. 5, 90 n. 4, 105 n. 1, 122, 145 n. 4, 148 n. 5, 168 n. 3, n. 4, 173 n. 2, 180 n. 4, 192 n. 1, 262, 266 n. 1, 267 n. 6, 270 n. 6, 278 n. 2; _Jahrbücher f. Nationalökonomie u. Statistik_, cited 3 n. 3; _Kleinschriften_, cited 21 n. 2, 265; _Rheinisches Museum_, cited 193 n. 2

Meyer (G.), _apud_ G. Curtius, _Studien zur griech. u. latein. Grammatik_, cited 327

Mezentius, 249

Michaelis (A.), _Century of Archaeological Discoveries_, cited 63 n. 2, 74 n. 3, 253 n. 4

Midas, 146, 147, 151, 152 n. 2, 155 n. 2, 213 n. 4, 293

middlemen, 1, 129 n. 3

Migne, _Bibliotheca Patrum Graecorum_, cited 71 n. 4

Milchhoefer, _Abhandlungen d. preussisch. Akademie d. Wissenschaften zu Berlin_, cited 38, 45, 58 n. 3, 312 n. 4; _Athenische Mitteilungen_, cited 50 n. 4; _apud_ Pauly Wissowa, cited 41 n. 3

Miletus, Milesians, 21, 33, 59 n. 1, 61, 62, 63 n. 7, 72–74, 79, 90, 92, 96, 103, 104, 110–112, 116, 117, 121 n. 5, 123, 124, 132, 133, 135 n. 7, 145 n. 3, 191, 212, 266, 268–271 _passim_, 287, 296; Milesian hyperakria, 40 n. 8; Milesian pottery, 1, 107 n. 4, 110–112, 114, 116, 118, 212 n. 8; Milesians’ Fort, 90, 91, 104, 117, 118, 120, 121, 123 n. 8

military despotism, 24, 27–32, 35, 144, 190 n. 2, 196, 258, 280, 282, 300, 301

millionaires, 13 n. 4, 35

Milo, 193 n. 7

Miltiades, 52, 199 n. 10, 245 n. 2

Miluhha, Miluhhi, 98, 99 n. 3

miners, 12–14, 20, 38, 44, 45, 47–49, 152, 271, 291, 292, 296

mines, mining districts, 15, 21, 36–39, 41, 44–47, 49–51, 58 n. 1, 59–62, 64, 68, 87, 137, 140, 146 n. 7, 147, 148, 183 n. 6, 224 n. 5, 271, 291, 292, 296, 310, 312 n. 5

Minns (E. H.), _Greeks and Scythians_, cited 286, 287, 288

Minoan culture, 333; thalassocracy, 330

Minos, 169, 331

Miriam (Gihon), 267

μισθός, 21

Mitchell (J. M.) and Caspari (M. O. B.), ed. Grote, cited 327 n. 1, 330, 331

_Mitteilungen des deutschen archäologischen Instituts in Athen_, cited 108 n. 2, 210 n. 1, 312 n. 5, 316 n. 2; see also Brueckner, L. Curtius, Diamantaras, Doerpfeld, Fabricius, Koehler, Loeper, Loeschcke, Milchhoefer, Oikonomos, Pallat, Pernice, Studniczka

_Mitteilungen des deutschen archäologischen Instituts in Rom_, cited 215 n. 2, 242 n. 1, 255 n. 3, 335; see also Petersen, Pinza

Mitylene, 168, 282 n. 2

mixing bowls (craters), 82, 125, 126, 201, 205, 213

Mnason, 22

Mnesarchus, 69 n. 1

Mohammed, 261 n. 2

Moloch, 278 n. 2

Mommsen (A.), _Heortologie_, cited 16 n. 7

Mommsen (Th.), _de Collegiis_, cited 222 n. 5; _History of Rome_, cited 32 n. 1, 222 n. 6, 230 n. 2, 231, 233, 285, 295; _Roemische Forschung_, cited 228 n. 1, 229 n. 2, n. 4, 255 n. 1, 337 n. 3; _Roemisches Staatsrecht_, cited 222 n. 4

_mons sacer_, 233

_monstrum_, 277

Montelius (O.), _Civilisation Primitive en Italie_, cited 119 n. 3, 242 n. 2, 246 n. 6

_Monumenti Antichi_, cited 248 n. 2, 251 n. 2, 253 n. 2; see also Gabrici, Pinza, Schiaparelli

_Monumenti Inediti pubblicati dall’ Instituto di Corrispondenza archeologica_, cited 213 n. 4

_Monuments Grecs_, cited 325 n. 5

Moret (A.), _de Bocchori rege_, cited 93 n. 2, n. 4, 100 n. 4

Moses, 197

moulders of gold and ivory, 14

μούναρχος, 27

Movers (F. C.), _Die Phoenizier_, cited 191 n. 3

mtk, 125, 126

Mueller (C.), _Aeginetica_, cited 160, 166 n. 1, 167, 176 n. 3, 177, 330 n. 4

Mueller (K.) and Oelmann (F.), _Tiryns_, cited 315 n. 1, 317 n. 1

Mueller and Deecke, _Die Etrusker_, cited 221 n. 1, 249

Muenzer und Strack, _Die antiken Münzen Nord-Griechenlands_, cited 37 n. 3, 60 n. 2

Mullach (F. W. A.), _Fragmenta Philosophorum Graecorum_, cited 19 n. 4

Mundella, Mr, 11 n. 2

Munich, 251 n. 3, 252

Munro (J. A. R.), _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, cited 40 n. 1

Muretus, _Variae Lectiones_, cited 31 n. 2

Muses, 27 n. 4

music, 73, 260 n. 4, 261

Mycenae, 162, 298, 333

Mycenaean culture, 169, 333; period, 163, 164; pottery, 319

Mykalessos, 106, 108; see also Rhitsona

Mylonpolis, 214 n. 6

Myrcinus, 59 n. 1, 61, 62, 271

Myres (J. L.), _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, cited 96, 191 n. 2, 268 n. 3, 324 n. 8; _apud_ Zimmern, 309 n. 9

Myrina, 131

Myron, tyrant of Sicyon, 258, 263

Myrrina, 51 n. 2

ἐν μύρτου κλαδί, 302 n. 5

nails as money, 162

ναίω, 327

Nakauba, see Nechepsus

ναός, 327

Naples, 23

_National Baptist_ of Philadelphia, cited 5

ναύκληρος, 327

naukraries, naukraroi, ναυκραρία, ναύκραρος, 326–331

Naukratis, 53, 56 n. 3, 68, 92 n. 2, 103–118, 120–122, 124, 172 n. 1, 212 n. 8, 293, 315 n. 5, 324

Naukratite pottery, 107 n. 4, 114–116, 117 n. 4, 118

ναύω, 327

Nauplia, 330, 331

ναῦς, 327

_nauis_, 327

Naxos, 70 n. 2, 155 n. 2

Neboshazban, 214; see also Psammetichus I

Nechepsus (Nakauba), 88 n. 1, 98

Necho I (Nekau), 88, 98, 101 n. 1, n. 2

Necho II (Nekau), 87, 88, 116, 123, 124, 325

negroes, 101

Neilos, 169 n. 1

Neith, 102 n. 1, 214 n. 4

Nemean games, 259 n. 1

Nemesis, 83, 84

Neochabis (Nekauba), 100

neolithic age, 336 n. 1

Netos amphora, 113, 315 n. 5

_Neue Jahrbücher_, see _Jahrbücher f. Classische Philologie_

_New York Daily Commercial Bulletin_, cited 5; _State Investigation Report_, cited 5 n. 8; _Sun_, cited 5

Nicolaus Damascenus, cited 59 n. 6, 130 n. 2, 135, 136, 137 n. 1, n. 2, n. 3, 138 n. 5, n. 7, 144 n. 1, 145 n. 1, n. 4, n. 5, 146 n. 1, 180 n. 3, 183, 189 n. 1, n. 8, 190 n. 1, n. 2, n. 3, 191 n. 1, n. 3, 192–194, 196, 197, 211 n. 6, 213, 214 n. 7, 258, 259 n. 4, 273 n. 2, n. 3

Niebuhr (G. B.), _History of Rome_, tr. Walter, cited 239 n. 2

Niese (B.), _Hermes_, cited 212 n. 3; _apud_ Pauly Wissowa, cited 279 n. 3

Nigeria, 171 n. 1

Nikias, 12, 13, 49, 51, 229 n. 1, 304

Nikias, a Megarian, 266

Nikolaos, son of Periander, 214 n. 7

Nikosthenes, potter, 319, 335

Nile, 87, 91, 103, 121, 197

Niloxenos, 104 n. 3

Nilsson (M. P.), _Timbres Amphoriques de Lindos_, cited 151

Nisaea, 29

Nitokris, 99 n. 3

νόμισμα, 149

νόμος, 167

νομοθέτης, 301

Nonius Marcellus, cited 223 n. 1

Norden, see Gercke

Nordin (R.), _Klio_, cited 302 n. 8

_Notizie degli Scavi_, cited 219 n. 4, 251 n. 3, 252 n. 1, 334, 335, 336 n. 1; see also Barnabei, Boni, Cozza, Pasqui

_nouem combusti_, 337

Novgorod, 142 n. 4

Numa, 221 n. 7, 222

_Numismatic Chronicle_, cited 60 n. 2; see also Borrell, Gardner (P.), Head, Howorth, Ridgeway, Six

_Numismatische Zeitschrift_, see v. Bergmann

Nut Amen, see Ammeris

nymph, 117

Nymphi, 130 n. 7

ὀβελοί, ὀβελίσκοι, 149, 162–164

obols, 172 n. 2, 221 n. 7

Oedipus, 9

Oelmann (F.), see Mueller (K.)

Ohio, 235 n. 3

οἰκέται, 22

Oikonomos, _Athenische Mitteilungen_, cited 38, 39, 40 n. 9, 44 n. 1

οἰκονόμος, 10

oil presses, 2

Oil, Standard, 5

ointments, manufacture of, 187

Olbia, 286–288, 297

olentis arator Hymetti, 309

olive oil and yards, 34, 69, 308

Olympia, 192 n. 5, 194, 198, 199, 263

Olympian games, 123, 154, 159, 160, 175, 178, 258, 260, 265

ὀλυμπιονίκης, 34

Omphale, 236 n. 2

κατ’ ὄναρ, 81

ὀνομάσαντος, 328

_opibus superbiaque_, 235

_opifices_, 222, 230, 234, 235

Oppert (J.), _Mémoire sur les Rapports de l’Égypte et de l’Assyrie_, cited 97 n. 4, 98 n. 4

_optimates_, 234

oracle, 158 n. 6, 209, 269, 270; see also Delphi

Orchomenos, Minyan, 330

ὀρεινά, ὀρεινή, 40, 309

Oriental influence, 321

_Orientalische Litteraturzeitung_, see Spiegelberg

Oroetes, 84

Orosius, cited 30 n. 3, 45 n. 4, 54 n. 1, 187 n. 1, 282 n. 1

Orthagoras, 9, 28, 179, 180, 257, 258, 262 n. 4, 263, 293

Orthagorids, 179, 263

ostracism, 67

Ouinin (= Ionians), 123

Overbeck, _Abhandlungen d. saechsischen Gesellschaft d. Wissenschaften_, cited 198 n. 9

Ovid, _Ars Amatoria_, cited 275 n. 2; _Fasti_, cited 238 n. 3; _Ibis_, cited 275 n. 2; _Metamorphoses_, cited 147 n. 2; _Tristia_, cited 275 n. 2

“owls” (coin), 53, 54, 58, 61

“ox” (? coin), 57 n. 5

Oxford, 3 n. 2, 112 n. 8, 237, 257

Oxyrhynchus papyri, 104, 257, 258,262 n. 4, 264 n. 4

Pactolus, 129, 147, 148

Pactyes, 139, 152, 293

Paestum, 221 n. 2

παιάν, παιανίζω, παιωνίζω, 61

Paianians, 55, 58, 59 n. 5, 61

painters, 14

Paionia, Paionians, 59–62, 147, 183 n. 6

παίς, 157

Pais (Ettore), 194 n. 6, 224 n. 5, 236; _Ancient Italy_, cited 255 n. 1; _Ancient Legends of Roman History_, cited 236 n. 1, 237, 238 n. 2, 239 n. 5, 248 n. 1, 249, 255 n. 1; _Ricerche sulla Storia e sul Diritto pubblico di Roma_, 236 n. 1, cited 335; _Storia Critica di Roma_, 236 n. 1

Palatine, 224 n. 5, 253, 338 n. 2

Palazzo di Giustizia (Rome), 65 n. 3

Palestine, 92

Palladius, cited 201 n. 5, n. 6

“Pallas,” παλλάδες (coins), 54, 291

Pallas (goddess), 16, 54; see also Athena

Pallat, _Athenische Mitteilungen_, cited 317 n. 7, 318

Palmerius (Le Paulmier), _Exerc._, cited 40

Pamphaes, 273

Pamphilus, 39 n. 1

Panaitios, 273, 274

Panathenaic amphorae, 113; games, 260

Panciatighi, 3

Pandion, 313

πανδοκεύων, 135

Pangaion, Mt, 36, 54 n. 1, 56, 59, 148

Panionios, 191 n. 3

Panofka (T.), _Res Samiorum_, cited 68 n. 1

Pantagnotos, 82

Pantaleon, 137, 273

Papal treasury, 304

Pape (W.), _Griechische Eigennamen_, cited 199 n. 10

paper currency, 3, 4

Paphlagonia, 48, 50, 284 n. 4

Paphos, 118, 119

papyri, 48 n. 6, 104, 257

Paralia, παραλία, πάραλος γῆ, παράλιοι, 41, 312, 313

Paralos (ship), 312

παραθαλάσσιος, 313

Parian Marble, see Marmor Parium

Parnes, Mt, 40, 41, 44, 308–311

παρθένοι (coins), 54

Pasqui, _Notizie d. Scavi_, cited 219 n. 3

παστάδες, 218

patricians, 216, 227

Patrokleides, 194, 197

Pauly Wissowa, cited 41 n. 3, 56 n. 1, 120 n. 4, 148 n. 5, 156 n. 2, 161 n. 2, 162 n. 3, 166 n. 1, 201 n. 8, 203 n. 4, 207 n. 4, 222 n. 3, n. 5, 268 n. 4, 272 n. 3, n. 4, 276 n. 5, 279 n. 3, 331 n. 3

Pausanias, _Description of Greece_, 160, cited 46 n. 6, 62 n. 5, n. 6, 65 n. 5, 70 n. 3, 145 n. 1, 157 n. 2, 158, 159, 162 n. 3, 165 n. 2, 167 n. 1, n. 2, 169 n. 2, n. 4, 176 n. 3, 177 n. 1, n. 3, 179, 183 n. 3, 193 n. 5, 195, 198, 211, 212 n. 2, 258 n. 3, 259 n. 2, n. 3, 260 n. 4, 263, 264 n. 1, n. 6, 266, 267 n. 5, 284 n. 4, n. 5, 309, 331, 336 n. 1

Pausanias the Spartan, 24, 30, 282

Payne (Henry B.), 5

Peak of Derbyshire, 40

Pearson, ed. Sophocles, cited 16 n. 7

Pegasus, 57, 188, 209

Peile, cited 134 n. 5

Peiraeans, trittys of, 41 n. 3

Peirene, 62 n. 6

Peisistratids, 14, 15, 25, 31, 264, 289, 292

Peisistratus, 7, 10, 13, 15, 16 n. 7, 28–32, chap. II. _passim_, 76 n. 5, 137, 166, 167, 215, 221, 231, 245 n. 2, 260, 265, 268, 271 n. 4, 274, 287, 291, 299, 302, 303 n. 2, 305–307, 308 n. 3, 309, 310 n. 2, 311, 328

Pelasgians, 309

pelatai, 13, 307

Pelham (H.), _Outlines of Roman History_, cited 239

Peloponnese, Peloponnesians, 66, 72, 154, 155, 156 n. 1, 173, 175, 176, 178, 180, 294, 305 n. 1, 313, 317, 330

Peloponnesian brooches, 168; war, 19, 23 n. 1, 26, 33 n. 1, 45, 260 n. 2; weights and measures, 161, 172

Pelusium, 124

Pelusian mouth of Nile, 121

πενέσται, 24

πένητες καὶ πεζοί, 274

pentekosiomedimnoi, 16, 49

Pentelicon, 39 n. 6, 310

Penteskuphia, 207 n. 2, 208 n. 1

Pepoli, Roméo, 2

Περάτι, 311

Perdiccas, 24 n. 5

Perdrizet (P.), _Klio_, cited 36 n. 2, 46 n. 6, 47 n. 3, 50 n. 1, 59 n. 4

perfume vase, 119

Pergamum, Pergamus, Pergamene, 135 n. 4, 148, 284–286, 296, 297

Periander, 21, 24 n. 5, 31, 63, 104 n. 3, 124, 166, 167, 187 n. 8, 189–192, 195–197, 212–215, 259, 260, 305

Pericles, 13 n. 3, 14, 15, 17, 49, 67, 231, 304

Periklytos of Tenedos, 162 n. 3

περιζώματα, 276

Pernice, _Athenische Mitteilungen_, 321 n. 4, 325 n. 5; see also Brueckner

περόναι, 170, 333

Perrot (G.), _Histoire de l’Art dans l’Antiquité_, cited 112, 116 n. 5, 169 n. 3

Perseus, 198, 214 n. 5

Persia, Persians, 20, 24, 31, 33, 47, 50, 53, 57, 61, 62, 66, 69–73, 75, 77 n. 3, 79, 80, 83, 84, 92 n. 2, 102 n. 1, 123, 124, 130, 132, 133, 138–140, 144, 145 n. 2, 172 n. 4, 249, 270, 271, 280 n. 1, 282 n. 2, 291, 292, 312 n. 5

Persian wars, 19, 25, 26, 32, 96, 260 n. 2, 332

Persinos, 282 n. 2

Peru, 44 n. 5

Perugia, 246

Petersen (E.), _Klio_, cited 253; _Roemische Mitteilungen_, cited 246 n. 5

Petra, 193 n. 7

Petrie (Flinders), _apud_ Hogarth, _Annual of the British School at Athens_, 119 n. 5; _History of Egypt_, cited 87 n. 9, 88 n. 1, n. 2, 97 n. 5, 98 n. 5, 100, 101 n. 4, 121, 123 n. 1, 125 n. 3; _Tanis_, cited 109 n. 5, 112 n. 3, n. 4, 121

Petrie and Gardner, _Naukratis_, cited 103, 104 n. 7, 105–107, 109, 110 n. 3, 113 n. 2, 114 n. 1, n. 2, 116, 118 n. 1, n. 2, 119, 172 n. 1

Phacussa, 214 n. 6

φαινομηρίδες, 332

Phaistos, 298

Phalaris, 14, 27 n. 2, 274–278, 289 n. 2, 303 n. 2

Phaleas, 22 n. 1

Phaleron, 305

Phaleron ware, 315, 318, 321

Phalkes, 179

Phanes, 102 n. 1, 124

Phanias of Ephesus, cited 144 n. 3

Pharaoh, 88 n. 1 and chap. IV _passim_, 212

Pharaoh’s daughter, 197

Phasis, 148 n. 3

Pheidias (= Pheidon), 155 n. 2

Pheidon of Argos, 9, 26, 27 n. 2, 64 n. 3, 69 n. 5, 149, 152 n. 2, 154–162, 164, 170, 171 n. 3, 172–186, 221, 235 n. 3, 259 n. 1, 260, 292, 294, 301 n. 1, 304, 305, 330, 331

Pheidon of Corinth, 182

φελλεῖς, 308

Pherecrates, _Metalleis_, cited 51 n. 2

Pheron, 97 n. 1

Philadelphia, 130 n. 7

Philaidae, Philaids, 33, 63

Philemonides, 12

Philetairos, 284–286, 288

Philip of Macedon, 36, 54 n. 1, 282, 330

Philip, son of Butacides, 239, 255

Philippi (Macedonia), 39 n. 4, 50

Philippi (A.), _Beiträge zu einer Geschichte d. Attischen Bürgerrechtes_, cited 329

Philistus, 30

Philochorus, cited 36 n. 3, 39, 65, 66 n. 3, 134 n. 5

Philokypros, tyrant of Soli, 158, 303 n. 1

_Philolog. Obozrenie_, see Hirschensohn

_Philologus_, see Foerster, Forchhammer, Gutschmid, Landwehr, Unger

φιλοπότης, 126

Philostratus, _Vita Apollonii_, cited 151 n. 4

Phocaea, 130 n. 6, 221, 240, 246, 282 n. 2

Phocians, 22

Phoenicia, Phoenicians, 87, 89, 90 n. 4, 93 n. 4, 106, 120, 239, 278 n. 2, 293, 321 n. 5, 324, 325, 326 n. 3

Phoenician standard, 132

_Phoronid_, 44 n. 4

φορτία, 68, 89

Photius, cited 19 n. 3, 54 n. 2, n. 4, 56 n. 4, 70 n. 5, 71 n. 1, 79 n. 2, 151 n. 1, 257 n. 2, 326 n. 9, 327, 328, 330 n. 3

Phrygia, 49, 62 n. 4, 140, 146, 147, 155 n. 2, 208, 213 n. 4, 293

Phye, 51, 52, 54, 55, 58–60, 291

φυλή τε καὶ φρατρία, 217

Pianchi, 88 n. 1, 95, 98, 99 n. 3, 100 n. 4

piece work, 20

Pi-emro, 106 n. 3

Pieria, 147

S. Pietro in Carcere, church of, 224 n. 5

Piganiol (A.), _Journal d. Savants_, cited 335

Pigres, 58, 59, 62

Pillars of Herakles, 68

πίμπρημι, 81

Pindar, 9–10, 290; _Isthmians_, cited 156 n. 1; _Nemeans_, cited 177 n. 7; _Olympians_, cited 10 n. 1, n. 2; _Pythians_, cited 10 n. 3, 275, 289 n. 2, 336 n. 1; Schol. _Nemeans_, cited 258 n. 2, 259–261; Schol. _Olympians_, cited 157 n. 6, 176 n. 3, 182, 186 n. 2, 195 n. 3, 275 n. 5; Schol. _Pythians_, cited 275 n. 2

Pindaros, tyrant of Ephesus, 272, 273

Pinza (G.), _Bullettino della Commissione Archeologica Municipale di Roma_, cited 221 n. 2, 224 n. 5, 243, 336 n. 1, n. 2, 338 n. 1; _Monumenti Antichi_, cited 244 n. 1, 252, 338 n. 2; _Roemische Mitteilungen_, cited 243

Pipin, diploma, cited 261 n. 2

piracy, 70, 71, 129, 292, 321 n. 5, 324, 329, 330

Pisa (Italian), 2; (Peloponnesian), 159, 160

Pisamiilki, see Psammetichus (Assyrian form)

Pitane, 285

πίθος, 207

plague, 92

plain, party of the, 35, 47, 48, 291, 307, 312

Plaka, 42

Plass (H. G.), _Die Tyrannis_, cited 70 n. 2, 71 n. 5, 198 n. 9, 269, 272 n. 4

Plataea, 26; in Libya, 68

Platner (S. B.), _Topography of Rome_^2, cited 247 n. 5, 248 n. 1

Plato, 6, 28 n. 1, 29, 280, 281, 283, 286, 288, 290; _Alcibiades_, cited 18; _Amator_, cited 18; _Apology_, cited 18; _Critias_, cited 16, 40, 308 n. 2, 309; _Gorgias_, cited 18, 208 n. 1; _Hipparchus_, cited 302; _Laws_, cited 16, 18, 176 n. 2, 181 n. 3, 290; _Letters_, cited 30 n. 1, 189 n. 8, 280 n. 1, 283 n. 3; _Meno_, cited 24 n. 5, 85 n. 1; _Minos_, cited 336 n. 1; _Phaedo_, cited 26 n. 2; _Phaedrus_, cited 198; _Protagoras_, cited 16 n. 7, 189 n. 8; _Republic_, cited 18, 20 n. 6, 24 n. 5, 26, 27, 28 n. 4, n. 5, 29 n. 6, 30, 129 n. 3, 145, 149, 151, 189 n. 8, 302, 304; _Timaeus_, cited 122 n. 1, 214 n. 4; Schol. _Hippias Major_, cited 190 n. 1; Schol. _Phaedrus_, cited 198 n. 3

Plautus, _Captivi_, cited 12 n. 3

plebeians, 216, 217 n. 2, 223–225, 227, 228, 230, 233, 234

πλεκταί, 200

Pliny, _Natural History_, cited 17 n. 3, 40 n. 9, 44 n. 1, 68 n. 1, 70 n. 3, 71 n. 2, 80 n. 6, 87 n. 1, 122 n. 4, 129 n. 7, 135 n. 4, 146, 171 n. 3, 172 n. 5, 186 n. 1, n. 2, 211 n. 7, 215 n. 2, 217, 218, 220, 222 n. 3, 224 n. 5, 226 n. 3, 228 n. 1, n. 2, n. 4, 238 n. 3, 240 n. 2, 244 n. 1, 263 n. 5, 266, 275 n. 2, n. 5, 311 n. 1

πλοῖον, 269

Plotheia, 38, 41 n. 3, 45

ploughmen, 20

πλούσιοι, 269

Ploutis, Plontis (?), 269

Plutarch, 22, 39, 181, 183, 196, 269; Lives: _Agesilaus_, cited 20; _Aratus_, cited 336 n. 1; _Brutus_, cited 229 n. 2; _Cato Major_, cited 166 n. 6; _Cimon_, cited 50 n. 7, 59 n. 1; _Demetrius_, cited 93; _Demosthenes_, cited 12 n. 6; _Dio_, cited 284 n. 1; _Fabius Maximus_, cited 162 n. 1, 164 n. 1; _Lycurgus_, cited 336 n. 1; _Lysander_, cited 23, 58, 162 n. 1, 164 n. 1; _Nikias_, cited 12 n. 4, 151 n. 2; _Numa_, cited 160, 222; _Pericles_, cited 13 n. 3, 14, 15, 17, 49 n. 2, 70 n. 5; _Phocion_, cited 336 n. 1; _Poplicola_, cited 223 n. 5, 337 n. 5; _Romulus_, cited 238 n. 3; _Solon_, cited 12 n. 1, 13, 16 n. 5, 34 n. 4, 35 n. 1, n. 2, n. 5, 37 n. 6, 49 n. 3, 63 n. 3, 65 n. 6, 169 n. 1, 170 n. 4, 308, 309 n. 4, 328 n. 5; _Themistocles_, cited 46; _Theseus_, cited 16 n. 4, 329 n. 8; _Timoleon_, cited 302 n. 6, 336 n. 1; Moralia: _de Alexandri Magni Fortuna aut Virtute_, cited 158 n. 6; _Amatoriae Narrationes_, cited 180; _Amatorius_, cited 35 n. 2, 37 n. 6, 275 n. 1; _Apophthegmata Laconica_, cited 57 n. 5, 130 n. 4; _de Ei apud Delphos_, cited 189 n. 8; _de Exilio_, cited 168, 199 n. 5; _de Fortuna Romanorum_, cited 238 n. 3; _Instituta Laconica_, cited 336 n. 1; _de Iside et Osiride_, cited 100 n. 4, n. 8; _de Malignitate Herodoti_, cited 191 n. 3, 195 n. 1, 263 n. 5; _de Mulierum Virtutibus_, cited 49 n. 1, 123 n. 5, 140 n. 3, 278 n. 5, 279 n. 2; _Parallela_, cited 275 n. 2; _Paroemia_, cited 76 n. 6, 77 n. 2, n. 4; _Praecepta Gerendae Reipublicae_, cited 35 n. 2, 37 n. 6, 276 n. 3; _cum Principibus Philosophandum_, cited 276 n. 3; _de Pythio Oraculo_, cited 136 n. 3, 137 n. 1, 167; _Quaestiones Graecae_, cited 69 n. 3, n. 5, 144 n. 6, 145 n. 4, 264 n. 6, 268; _Quaestiones Romanae_, cited 337 n. 1, n. 5; _Regum et Imperatorum Apophthegmata_, cited 179 n. 3, 208 n. 4; _Septem Sapientum Conuiuium_, cited 104 n. 3, 124 n. 1, 191 n. 2, 195, 197, 198, 207 n. 3, 213 n. 4; _de Sera Numinis Vindicta_, cited 257 n. 3, 262 n. 4, 275 n. 1; _de Tranquillitate Animi_, cited 134 n. 4; _de Vita et Poesi Homeri_, cited 134 n. 2; _de Vitioso Pudore_, cited 95 n. 1

Poehlmann (R.), _Geschichte d. socialen Fragen u. des Socialismus i. d. antik. Welt_, cited 4 n. 2, 267, 269 n. 5; _Grundriss der griechischen Geschichte_, cited 37 n. 7, 192 n. 1, 304 n. 3

polemarch, 194, 196, 197, 258, 270, 273, 300, 327 n. 9

Polledrara, 119 n. 3

Pollux, cited 13 n. 5, 19, 54 n. 2, 57 n. 5, 129 n. 2, n. 7, 138 n. 1, 143 n. 3, 147 n. 3, 152 n. 1, 155 n. 2, 156 n. 1, 162 n. 1, 172 n. 2, n. 6, 175 n. 2, 199 n. 6, n. 7, n. 8, n. 9, 200 n. 2, 264, 282 n. 2, 320 n. 4, 326 n. 8, n. 9, 327, 328

πῶλος (coin), 57

Polyaenus, cited 10 n. 6, 20 n. 4, 51 n. 2, 52, 69 n. 5, 70 n. 2, 90 n. 1, 96 n. 4, 140 n. 3, 145 n. 3, 147 n. 5, 211 n. 6, 259 n. 2, 272 n. 1, 273, 274 n. 4, 275–278, 283 n. 3

Polybius, cited 45 n. 3, 189 n. 4, 196 n. 5, 209, 210, 215 n. 2, 216, 275 n. 2, 285 n. 4, 302 n. 6, 305, 306, 336 n. 1

Polycharmus, cited 103, 118, 119

Polycrates, 10, 14, 21, 24 n. 5, 31, 49, 62, chap. III _passim_, 123, 124, 169, 177, 215, 260 n. 5, 267, 270 n. 7, 292, 303 n. 2, 305

Pompey, 23, 32

Pontic amphorae, 246

“pony” (coin), 57

Pope, 304; see also papal

populares, 225

πόρυη, 139

Porphyrius, _de Antro Nympharum_, cited 201 n. 3

Porzio (G.), _I Cipselidi_, cited 27 n. 5, 31 n. 2, 192 n. 1, 194 n. 6, 196, 197 n. 4

Poseidon, 169 n. 2, 305

Postumius Tubertus, Postumii, 337

Potamos, Potamioi, 44 n. 3, 50

ποτήρια, 80

Potidaea, 190 n. 3

potteries, 21, 115, 207, 210, 214, 263

potters, 20, 139 n. 2, 186, 207–211, 217, 222, 243–246, 295, 323

potter’s wheel, 186, 210

pottery, 34, 53, 87, 105–119, 121 n. 5, 139 n. 1, 163, 164, 167–170, 174, 175, 185–187, 200–203, 205–208, 210, 212 n. 8, 214, 241–245, 248, 251, 252, 255, 263, 287, 295, 314–325, 333–335

Pottier (E.), 245 n. 1; _Musée du Louvre, Catalogue des Vases Antiques_, cited 321 n. 4, n. 6; _Vases Antiques du Louvre_ (Album), 242 n. 1, 255 n. 3, 335; _apud_ Saglio, _Dict. d. Antiq._, cited 201, 315 n. 2, 317 n. 1

Poulsen (F.), _Dipylongräber_, cited 315 n. 1, n. 3, 316 n. 7, 321; _Der Orient u. die frühgriechische Kunst_, cited 93 n. 3, n. 4, 112 n. 1, 119

_praedives_, 229

Praeneste, 219 n. 3, 238 n. 3

Prasiae, 330

Preller, _Archäologische Zeitung_, cited 198 n. 9

priest, 92, 272 n. 3, 303, 305

_primores ciuitatis_, 227

Prinz (H.), _Funde aus Naukratis_, cited 92 n. 2, 109, 110, 111 n. 2, 112 n. 2, n. 7, 113, 114 n. 2, 116 n. 4, n. 6, 117 n. 4, n. 5, 120 n. 1, n. 2, 123 n. 12, 212 n. 8, 315 n. 2, n. 5, 316 n. 4, n. 8, n. 10, 320 n. 6

private coinage, 141, 142, 143, 150, 152, 294

Procles of Epidaurus, 167

Proclus, _Comment. in Platonis Rempublicam_, cited 151 n. 4; _in Timaeum_, cited 16 n. 7

Prodicus, cited 19 n. 4

προστὰς τοῦ δήμου, προστάτης, 27, 271

Proto-Attic pottery, 92 n. 2, 113, 315, 318, 319, 321

Proto-Corinthian pottery, 109, 117, 163, 185, 186, 244 n. 1, 248, 249, 263, 315–319, 334

Protogenes, 286–288, 297

prytanis, 270

Psammetichus of Corinth, 212–214

Psammetichus (Psamtek) I of Egypt, chap. IV _passim_, 212, 214, 292, 293, 298, 299

Psammetichus II of Egypt, 88 n. 1, 90

Psammetichus III of Egypt, 88 n. 1

Psammetichus the Libyan, 92 n. 2

Psammetichus, priest, 212 n. 6

Psammetichus son of Theocles, 212

Psammouthis, see Psammetichus II

Psaumis, 10 n. 2

Psellus (M.), cited 313 n. 4

Ptah, 97, 98

Ptolemaic story, 102 n. 1

Ptolemies, 160, 203 n. 4

Ptolemy Keraunos, 284, 285

Ptolemy, _Geographike Syntaxis_, cited 122 n. 4, 179

Ptoon, Mt, 108 n. 2

Publicola (Valerius), 229 n. 1, 337

Punic Wars, 32, 233

Pylaimenes, 48

Pyrrhic War, 32

Pythaenetus, cited 167 n. 4

Pythagoras of Ephesus, 271, 272

Pythagoras of Samos, 69 n. 1

Pythes, 49, 140, 147 n. 1, 152, 293

Pytheus, 140; see also Pythes

Pythia, 144 n. 3

Pythian games, 260–262

Pytho, 137; see also Delphi

pyxides, 248

quarries, quarrying, 21, 224, 225, 230, 233, 237, 276, 295

Quirinal, 253, 254

Radet (G.), _La Lydie et le Monde grec_, cited 2, 77 n. 3, 130 n. 1, n. 2, n. 3, 131, 132 n. 3, 133 n. 4, 134 n. 5, 35, 136, 138, 139 n. 2, 141, 143 n. 3, 144, 145 n. 2, n. 3, n. 4, 146, 147 n. 3, 148, 273; _Revue des Universités du Midi_, cited 128 n. 1, 135, 143 n. 3, 159 n. 5

Ramsay (W. M.), _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, cited 147 n. 3

Ramses II, 87 n. 9, 101

Ramses III, 44 n. 5

Rayet (O.), _Monuments de l’Art Antique_, cited 240 n. 2, 253 n. 4

Red Figure pottery, 107 n. 4, 108, 204, 326 n. 3, 335

Red Sea, 87

Regling (K.), _apud_ Pauly Wissowa, 148 n. 5, 156 n. 2, 162 n. 3

Regulini-Galassi tomb, 93 n. 3, 243, 335

Reinach (A. J.), _Journal des Savants_, cited 110 n. 8

Reinach (S.), _Chroniques d’Orient_, cited 147 n. 3; _Cultes, Mythes, et Religions_, cited 169; _Revue Archéologique_, cited 70 n. 3

Reinach (Th.), _L’Histoire par les Monnaies_, cited 128 n. 1, 129 n. 3, 130 n. 2, 159 n. 5, 172 n. 4; _Revue Numismatique_, cited 161 n. 2, 162 n. 3

Renaissance, 3, 32, 286

Revillout (E.), _Précis du droit égyptien_, cited 93 n. 2; _Les Rapports historiques et légaux des Quirites et des Égyptiens_, cited 93 n. 4; _Revue Égyptologique_, cited 102 n. 1, n. 2,123 n. 7; _Society of Biblical Archaeology Proceedings_, cited 123 n. 7

_Revue Archéologique_, see Dumont, Reinach (S.), Torr

_Revue de l’Instruction Publique en Belgique_, see Brants

_Revue des Universités du Midi_, see Radet

_Revue Égyptologique_, see Revillout

_Revue d’Ethnologie et de Sociologie_, see Macfie

_Revue Historique_, see Waltz

_Revue Numismatique_, see Babelon, Reinach (Th.)

_rex_, 303

Rhagon, 38

Rhegium, 74, 75, 210

_Rheinisches Museum f. Philologie_, see Beloch, Gelzer, Hirschfeld, Holwerda, Koehler, Meyer (E.), Ruehl

Rheneia, 70, 71, 112

Rhitsona (Mykalessos), 106–108, 109 n. 4, 110, 113 n. 1, 114, 248, 335

Rhodes, 109, 112, 114, 119 n. 3, 171 n. 1, 187 n. 4

Rhodian pottery, see Milesian pottery

Rhodopis, 56 n. 3, 68

Rhoecus, 69 n. 1, 76, 80 n. 6

de Ridder (E.), _de Ectypis quibusdam aeneis quae falso uocantur Argiuo-Corinthiaca_, cited 316 n. 9

Ridgeway (W.), _Origin of Metallic Currency and Weight Standards_, cited 132 n. 3, 148 n. 6, 150, 160, 170–172; _Companion to Greek Studies_, cited 128 n. 2, 150 n. 5; _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, cited 172; _Numismatic Chronicle_, cited 129 n. 7

ring of Gyges, 145–152, 293; of Midas, 146, 151; of Minos, 169; of Polycrates, 70 n. 3, 83, 169; of Venetian doge, 169; rings as money, 148, 149, 171 n. 1, 293; rings (seal), 150

Riviera, 312

_Rivista di Storia Antica_, see Costanzi

Rizzo (G. E.), 245 n. 1; _Bullettino della Commissione Archeologica Municipale di Roma_, cited 243 n. 4, 244, 246, 247

road makers, 14

roads, 130, 136, 190 n. 3, 232, 233, 273

Roberts (E. S.), _Introduction to Greek Epigraphy_, cited 106 n. 7, 123 n. 9

Rockefellers, 12

_Roemische Mitteilungen_, see _Mitteilungen des deutschen archäologischen Instituts in Rom_

Rohde (E.), _Psyche_, cited 336 n. 1

Roland, 193 n. 7

Rome, Romans, 12 n. 3, 14, 15 n. 6, 20 n. 2, 22 n. 3, 23, 25, 32, 63 n. 4, 65 n. 3, 149, 160, 162 n. 3, 183 n. 6, 207, 211, chap. VIII _passim_, 261 n. 2, 277, 278, 287–289, 295, 296, 298, 303, 336–338

Roman Empire, 139 n. 2, 232; Emperors, 60, 303

Romulus, 197, 198, 209, 221 n. 7, 239 n. 5

rope makers, 14

Roscher (W. H.), _Lexikon_, cited 336 n. 2

de Rougé (E.), _Inscription Historique du roi Pianchi Mériamoun_, cited 96 n. 2; _Notice de quelques textes hiéroglyphiques récemment publiés par M. Greene_, cited 99 n. 3, n. 4; (ed. J. de Rougé) _Chrestomathie Égyptienne_, cited 95 n. 3

de Rougé (J.), _Étude sur les textes géographiques du temple d’Edfou_, cited 99 n. 3

royal road, great road, 130, 136, 273

Rud Amen, see Ammeris

Ruehl, _Rheinisches Museum_, cited 56 n. 2

Rufous (or Eastern) Swallow, 211 n. 4

Russia, 1, 110, 112 n. 1, 114, 142, 287

_Rylands Library, Manchester, Catalogue of Greek Papyri_, cited 66 n. 2; _Catalogue of the Demotic Papyri_, see Griffith

Sabacon (Shabaka), 88 n. 1, 93, 96, 97

Sacred War, 65, 66, 247 n. 2, 258 n. 4, 259–261, 264

Sadyattes, King, 145 n. 3

Sadyattes, merchant, 137, 138, 152

Saglio (E.), _Dictionnaire des Antiquités grecques et romaines_, cited 44 n. 5, 46 n. 7, 56 n. 4, 142 n. 4, 162 n. 3, 201 n. 2, 203, 222 n. 6, 315 n. 2, 317 n. 1

sailors, 14

Sais, 87–89, 96, 98, 100, 102 n. 1, 104, 120 n. 3, 123, 124

Saite dynasty, 88, 95, 97, 99–103, 105, 121–124, 125 n. 3, 212, 214, 293

Salamis, 26, 29 n. 1, 166 n. 2, 168, 326 n. 3, 328

von Sallet (A.), _Zeitschrift f. Numismatik_, cited 75 n. 1

Sallust, cited 324 n. 5

Salonika, 190 n. 3

Salvioli (G.) (French translation by Bonnet (A.)), _Le Capitalisme dans le Monde Antique_, cited 5, 230 n. 3, n. 5

Samaina, 70, 74, 75, 84

Samnite War, 32

Samos, Samians, 14, 21, 33, 49, chap. III _passim_, 86, 110, 112, 116, 117, 124, 150 n. 6, 151, 177, 178, 215, 251, 266 n. 1, 267, 292, 324 n. 6, 325, 326

Samian pottery, see Fikellura

Samtavi Tafnekht, 100

Samwer (C.), _Geschichte des älteren römischen Münzwesens_, cited 219 n. 1

De Sanctis (G.), _Atthis_^2, cited 34 n. 2, 51 n. 4, 328, 329; _Journal des Savants_, cited 249

Sandys (J.), ed. Ἀθηναίων Πολιτεία^2, cited 35 n. 2, 37 n. 7

Sappho, 56 n. 3, 104, 120

sarcophagus, 246 n. 7

Sardis, 1, 33, 58, 76, 83, 129–131, 135, 138 n. 9, 139, 140, 152, 187, 191 n. 3, 273

Sargon of Akkad, 197

Saronic Gulf, 169 n. 4, 182, 329–331

satni (title), 97

Satni Khamois, 97, 100–102

Satni Tafnekhte, 102

Satrai, 59 n. 1

satrap, satrapy, 83, 132, 270 n. 7

Satricum (Conca), 219 n. 4, 246

Satyrus, cited 156

Saulmugina, 99 n. 3

Saxon, see Anglo-Saxon

Sayce (A. H.), ed. Herodotus, cited 87 n. 11, 89 n. 3, 90 n. 1, 91 n. 4; _Encyclopaedia Britannica_, cited 197 n. 5

Scandinavian, 238 n. 1

scarabs, 105, 106, 109, 118 n. 2, 119 n. 3, 124

Schiaparelli, _Monumenti Antichi_, cited 93 n. 3, n. 4

Schoemann (G. F.), _de Comitiis Atheniensium_, cited 40 n. 5; _Jahrbücher f. Classische Philologie_, cited 326 n. 6, 328 n. 3, 329

Scholia, see under authors concerned

Schow (N.), ed. Hesychius, cited 312 n. 2

Schrader (E.), _Cuneiform Inscriptions and the Old Testament_, cited 98 n. 3

Schubert (R.), _Geschichte der Könige von Lydien_, cited 135 n. 4, 138 n. 7, 144, 145 n. 4; _Geschichte des Agathokles_, cited 209 n. 3, n. 4, 210 n. 2, n. 4

Schubring (J.), _de Cypselo Corinthiorum tyranno_, cited 194 n. 3, 196 n. 5, 197, 198 n. 9, 199 n. 10, 211

Schweighaeuser (J.), ed. Athenaeus, cited 270 n. 2

Schweinfurth (G.), see Erman

Scotland, 162

sculptors, sculpture, 14, 53 n. 2, 81, 101, 128, 206, 228 n. 3, n. 4, 252, 253, 263, 285, 302

Scyllis, 263 n. 5

(Pseudo-) Scymnus, cited 91 n. 1

Scythia, 72, 271

sea power, 68, 70–73, 81–83, 87, 95–97, 103, 165, 168, 169, 177, 184, 321–331; see also thalassocracy

seals, 149–151

secessions, 227, 233, 235 n. 2, 296

Seeck (O.), _Klio_, cited 34 n. 2, 53 n. 2, 56 n. 2

Seeley (J.), ed. Livy I, cited 246 n. 1

Segesta, 80 n. 5; see also Egestaeans

Seleucus, Seleucids, 284, 285

Selinus, 265

Sem of Ptah, 98, 100

Semachos, Semacheion, Semachidai, 38, 39, 41 n. 3, 50, 291

σήμαντρον, 150

Semites, 278 n. 2

Semitic origin of χιτών, 333 n. 2

Sennacherib, 92, 97, 100, 325

serfs, 13, 24

Servilius Ahala, 230

Servius, _ad Vergil. Aeneid._, cited 224 n. 5, 238 n. 3, 311 n. 1, 336, 337 n. 1

Servius Tullius, 218–223, 224 n. 5, 238 n. 2, n. 3, 245, 246, 249, 295

seruus rex, 249

Sethon, Sethos, 88 n. 1, 92, 93, 97–103, 105 n. 2, 292, 293, 303 n. 1

Seti I, 87 n. 9

setmi, 97

Seven against Thebes, 262

seven sages, 189

Sevenoaks, 125 n. 3

Shabaka, see Sabacon

Shabataka, 88 n. 1, 97, 98 n. 3, n. 4, 125 n. 3

Sharpe (S.), _History of Egypt_^6, cited 121 n. 3

sheep breeding, 266

shekel, 132, 133

Shelley (P. B.), trans. Euripides, _Cyclops_, cited 40 n. 9

Shepnepet, 99 n. 3

shipbuilders, shipbuilding, 20, 62, 68, 70, 75, 184, 271, 292, 309, 324, 325, 326

ships, 164, 169, 242, 315 n. 3, 317

shires, 237

shoemakers, 20, 233 n. 6

shops, 135, 218, 224, 247

Sicily, Sicilian, 10, 30, 45, 75, 80 n. 5, 112, 180 n. 4, 181, 182, 187, 189, 209, 220, 228, 239, 265, 273–278, 284 n. 2, 315

Siceliot Greek, 224 n. 5

Sicyon, 28, 66, 157, 178–180, 186 n. 1, 193, 215, 257–264 _passim_, 293, 296, 304, 306 n. 1, 316, 317, 336 n. 1

Sidonians, 325

Sieveking (H.), _Vierteljahrschrift f. Social- u. Wirtschafts-Geschichte_, cited 3, 26 n. 2, 267 n. 1, 304 n. 4

Sieveking (J.) and Hackl (R.), _Die königliche Vasensammlung zu Muenchen_, cited 251 n. 3, 252 n. 2, 334

Sigeium, 63

Sigismund, Emperor, 3

_signauit_, 218

silphium, 74 n. 3

silver, 80 n. 4, 81, 144 n. 3, 177, 227; currency, 4, 18, 57, 58, 61, 127, 128, 131–133, 140, 152, 155, 164 n. 1, 172, 218, 219, 220 n. 4, 221, 294; mines, 38–40, 47, 54 n. 1, 59 n. 1, 62, 68, 271, 291; see also Laurium

Sinope, 50, 135 n. 7, 271

Siphnos, 243 n. 1

Siphnian mines, 44 n. 5, 46, 47

Sipylus, Mt, 129

σιτοφύλακες, 12

_Sitzungsberichte d. preussischen Akademie d. Wissenschaften zu Berlin_, see Koehler, Wiegand

_Sitzungsberichte d. bayerischen Akademie d. Wissenschaften zu Muenchen_, see Wecklein

_Sitzungsberichte d. Akademie d. Wissenschaften in Wien_, see Bauer, Klein

Six (J.), _Numismatic Chronicle_, cited 53 n. 1, 56 n. 2, 64, 128 n. 4, 131

Skabala (? Kavalla), 37

Skapte Hyle, 50 n. 7

Skias (A.), _Archaiologike Ephemeris_, cited 324 n. 1, 333 n. 4

Skiddaw, 40

skyphoi, 248, 334

slaves, slavery, slave labour, 12, 13, 15, 18–23, 30 n. 3, 45, 47 n. 7, 48, 51, 67, 79, 150 n. 6, 151 n. 2, 187 n. 8, 191, 192, 218, 222–225, 234, 235, 266, 280–282, 284, 287; see also helots, πενέσται, serfs, thetes

slave revolts, 23, 45, 234 n. 3

smelting, 44, 48

Smith (G.), _Assurbanipal_, cited 88 n. 2, 91 n. 7, 99 n. 3, 101 n. 2, 143 n. 2, 144 n. 5, 214 n. 3

Smith (K. F.), _American Journal of Philology_, cited 147 n. 6, 148 n. 4

Smith (W.), _Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology_, cited 336 n. 5

smiths, 14, 17, 20, 223, 225

Smyrna, 77, 130, 131

Snooks, Mrs, 125 n. 3

Snowdon, 40

_Society of Biblical Archaeology Proceedings_, see Revillout

_Sociological Review_, see Zimmern

Socrates, 17, 18, 19 n. 4

Soli, 158

Solon, 7, 8, 9, 12, 13, 16, 17, 28, 33–35, 49, 53 n. 2, 63 n. 3, 65, 95 n. 1, 150 n. 3, 158, 166, 170–172, 258 n. 4, 261, 290, 301, 303 n. 1, 308, 309 n. 4, 327, 328; cited 7, 8, 9 n. 3, 14, 28 n. 1, 48, 55

Solonium, 239 n. 5

Sophanes, 174

Sophocles, _Antigone_, cited 129; _Oedipus Tyrannus_, cited 9, 174 n. 3; fragments cited 16 n. 7, 313

Sosias, 51

Sostratos, 68, 177

Σουνιακὸς γουνός, 41, 44

Sourdille (C.), _Hérodote et la Religion d’Égypte_, cited 98 n. 3

σῴζω, 82

Spain, 1, 46, 68, 117, 177

Sparta, Spartans, 20, 23–25, 45, 53, 57, 63 n. 4, 74 n. 5, 84, 144 n. 4, 164 n. 1, 175–177, 178 n. 1, 180, 196 n. 5, 239, 263 n. 5, 282, 330, 332, 333, 336 n. 1

Spartacus, 23

Spermos, 135, 136, 152, 293

σφραγίς, 149

Spiegelberg, _Orientalische Litteraturzeitung_, cited 125 n. 3

spits as coins, 149, 162–164

Spurius Cassius, see Cassius

Spurius Maelius, see Maelius

Staffordshire, 80 n. 6

Stais (V.), 318

Stallbaum (G.), _Platonis Meno_, cited 85 n. 1

Standard Oil Company, 5, 26

stater, 57, 130, 132 n. 3, 137; see also daric, Croeseids

σταθμός, 171

Statius, _Thebais_, cited 308, 309

statuettes (figurines), 118, 119

Stein (H.), ed. Herodotus, cited 51 n. 3

στέφανος, στεφανόπωλις, στεφανηφόρος ἥρως, 55–57

Stephanus Byzantinus, cited 37, 38 n. 4, 40 n. 2, 41 n. 3, 68 n. 7, 96 n. 4, 103, 104, 135 n. 3, 212 n. 1, 313

Stephinates, 88 n. 1, 98, 99, 100

von Stern (E.), _Zeitschrift f. aegyptische Sprache_, cited 125 n. 3

Stesichorus, 275 n. 4; cited 177 n. 6

stm, stne, 97

stone masons, 14, 224

stove, 204, 205

Strabo, cited 40, 41 n. 3, n. 4, 54 n. 1, 59 n. 2, 63 n. 7, 65 n. 5, 70 n. 3, 71 n. 2, 79 n. 2, 80, 84 n. 2, 87 n. 9, 90, 91, 92 n. 2, 103, 104 n. 4, 122 n. 1, n. 4, 129 n. 6, 138 n. 3, n. 4, 139, 146 n. 7, 148, 149 n. 1, 155 n. 2, 157 n. 2, 158, 159, 167 n. 2, 175 n. 3, 176, 177 n. 3, 178, 179, 180 n. 4, 183 n. 2, 184, 187 n. 1, 189 n. 4, 190 n. 3, 191 n. 3, 192 n. 5, 195 n. 1, 198, 215 n. 2, 217, 224 n. 5, 225, 240 n. 1, 246 n. 1, 255, 257 n. 1, 259 n. 5, 260 n. 4, 261 n. 2, 280 n. 1, 282 n. 2, 283 n. 6, 284 n. 3, n. 5, 288, 289 n. 1, 305 n. 2, 310 n. 3, 312 n. 3, n. 6, 313 n. 2, n. 6, 324 n. 2, 330, 336 n. 1

Strack (M. L.), see Muenzer

Strattis, 50 n. 2

στρωμναί, 79

Strymodorus, 59 n. 1

Strymon (Struma), 36, 37, 50, 54, 58, 59, 62, 148

Studniczka (F.), _Athenische Mitteilungen_, cited 318 n. 6; _Beiträge zur Geschichte der altgriech. Tracht_, cited 166 n. 1, n. 7, 170 n. 1, 332 n. 2, 333 n. 2

Suetonius, cited 221 n. 7; _Caligula_, cited 76 n. 4; _Tiberius_, cited 233, 337 n. 6

Suez Canal, 87

Suidas, cited 16 n. 7, 41 n. 3, 50 n. 2, 58 n. 1, 59 n. 1, 70 n. 5, 71 n. 1, 74, 75, 79 n. 1, n. 2, 95 n. 1, 104 n. 4, 137 n. 3, 145 n. 1, n. 6, 171 n. 4, 189, 195 n. 5, 199 n. 2, n. 3, n. 5, n. 8, 200 n. 3, 201 n. 2, 221 n. 7, 224 n. 5, 226 n. 3, 268 n. 3, 269, 271 n. 5, 272, 275 n. 5, 280 n. 1, 281 n. 1, 283 n. 5, n. 6, 305 n. 2, 313, 326 n. 9, 327 n. 2

σύλη, συλον, 81, 82

Sunium, 40, 41, 44, 291, 313

Superbus, see Tarquinius Superbus

Susemihl (F.), 213 n. 4

Svoronos, _Journal International d’Archéologie Numismatique_, cited 37, 53 n. 2, 60 n. 1, 62 n. 2, 64 n. 3, 156 n. 2, 160, 163, 171 n. 1, 183 n. 6

swallow, 211 n. 4, n. 7

Swansea, 106 n. 3

Swoboda (H.), _apud_ Pauly Wissowa, 268 n. 4

Sybaris, 112, 266

Syloson, 69 n. 5, 79, 80, 82, 84

symmories, 328 n. 2

Symonds (J. A.), _Renaissance in Italy, Age of the Despots_, cited 3

Syncellus, cited 95, 156 n. 3

Syracuse, 10, 24, 27, 30, 58, 72, 138 n. 9, 151, 180, 182, 208–210, 221, 274 n. 1, 276, 278 n. 2, 280, 284, 291, 316 n. 8

Syria, 99 n. 3, 123, 131

Tabalos, 139

Tacitus, _Annals_, cited 311 n. 1; _Histories_, cited 223 n. 5

Tafnekht, see Tnefachthus

Taharqa (Tirhakah), 88 n. 1, 97, 98, 99 n. 3, n. 5

tailors, 20

Tanaquil, 236 n. 2

Tanis, 121 n. 3

tanners, 20, 222

Tarbell (I. M.), _History of the Standard Oil Company_, cited 5 n. 8

Tarchon, 237 n. 1

Tarentum, 336 n. 1

Tarpeian Mount, Tarpeius, 223, 237

Tarquinii (Corneto), 93, 94, 182, 187, 215–219, 225, 240–243, 244 n. 1, 249, 251

Tarquinius (name), 237

Tarquinius Priscus, Lucius, 215–218, 221, 222 n. 7, 224 n. 5, 227–229, 238, 239 n. 5, 240, 242, 256, 287, 295, 299

Tarquinius Superbus, 183 n. 6, 218, 223–227, 233, 234 n. 3, 247, 251, 278, 295

Tarquins, 14, 207, 215, 218, 223, 224 n. 5, 225–227, 230, 233, 234, 236, 237, 239, 240, 245, 247, 249, 255, 256, 289, 295, 296, 298

Tartessus (Tarshish), 68, 69, 81, 82, 177

taxation, taxes, 189, 190, 192 n. 1, 259, 287

tax-collector, 274, 305, 326 n. 9, 327 n. 1

τέχνη, 49

τεχνῖται, 21

Tefnakhte, see Tnefachthus

Tegea, 24 n. 1

Τειχιούσης, 81

Teisias, 106

Tellus, 228 n. 2

Temenos, 154, 156–159, 176, 178–180, 183 n. 3, 294, 316

temple, 162, 224, 277; in Aegina (Aphaia), 318–320; (Aphrodite), 318, 319; (Damia and Auxesia), 167, 170, 174, 175, 320; Agrigentum (Zeus Polieus), 274, 276; Argos (Hera), 161–164, 175, 316 n. 7, 318–320, 333 n. 4; Athens (Athena), 63; (Olympian Zeus), 14, 63, 76 n. 5; Corcyra, 244 n. 1; Corinth (Aphrodite), 191 n. 3; (Apollo), 76 n. 5; Delphi (Apollo), 65; Eleusis, 15; Ephesus (Artemis), 128, 130 n. 6, 245, 272 n. 3; Naukratis, 108; (Aphrodite), 118, 119; (Apollo), 110; Olympia, 159; Pallene in Attica (Athena), 52; Rome (Artemis, Diana), 224 n. 5, 245, 246 n. 1; (Ceres), 240 n. 2; (Jupiter Tarpeius), 223, 237; (Tellus), 228 n. 2; Sabine (Feronia), 261 n. 2; in Samos (Hera), 76, 82; Syracuse (Athena), 276; Tiryns (Hera), 320

Tenedos, 162 n. 3

tent-makers, 17

terra cottas, architectural, 243, 244 n. 1, 246, 250–252; see also antefix

terra cotta tablets, 46, 186, 187, 207 n. 2, 242

Terrien de la Couperie (A.), see _British Museum Catalogue of Chinese Coins_

Tertullian, _Apologia adversus Gentes_, cited 280 n. 1

tetradrachm, 131

Tetrapolis, 41 n. 3

Thackeray (W. M.), _Virginians_, cited 157 n. 4

thalassocracy, 76, 83, 95, 96, 165 n. 3, 174, 191 n. 2, 268 n. 3, 324, 330; see also sea power

Thales, 1, 2, 12

Thasos, Thasians, 36 n. 3, 47, 271 n. 4

Theagenes, 9, 14, 30, 62 n. 6, 76 n. 5, 264–268, 296

_Thebais_ (Homeric), 262 n. 1

Thebes, Boeotian, 24 n. 5, 108 n. 2, 164 n. 1, 261, 262

Thebes, Egyptian, 90 n. 1, 97, 99 n. 3

Themistius, _Orations_, cited 65 n. 5

Themistocles, 46, 47, 239 n. 4, 312 n. 5

Theocharides, 273

Theocles, 212

Theocritus, cited 69 n. 2, 79, 201 n. 8, 280 n. 1

Theodorus, 69 n. 1, 73, 76, 80, 83

Theognis, 7–9, 16 n. 2, 195 n. 5, 268, 290; cited 8, 9, 47 n. 2, 57 n. 5, 266, 302

Theomestor, 84

Theophrastus, 189; _Historia Plantarum_, cited 56 n. 2, 308 n. 2; _de Lapidibus_, cited 129 n. 7

Theopompus, cited 144 n. 3, 156, 158 n. 6, 195 n. 2

Thera, Theraeans, 82 n. 1, 315 n. 2, 320 n. 5

θεράπαιναι, 22

Thero, 10 n. 1

Thersites, 28 n. 1

Theseus, 16, 169, 327, 329

Thesmophoria, 274

Thessalos, 56 n. 2

Thessaly, 24, 193

thetes, θῆτες, θητικὸς ὄχλος 14, 16, 19, 49

Thiersch (H.), see Furtwaengler

Thirlwall (C.), _History of Greece_, cited 51 n. 3

Thoas of Miletus, 268, 269

Thomas (E.), _Ancient Indian Weights_, cited 142 n. 3; _Chronicles of the Pathan Kings of Delhi_, cited 142 n. 3

Thonis, 93

Thoricus, 40 n. 9, 41, 44 n. 1

Thrace, 36 n. 1, n. 3, 37, 50–52, 54–56, 58–62, 64, 72, 199–201, 271, 284, 288, 291, 292, 296

Thracian Chersonese, 53, 63 n. 7, 199 n. 10, 245 n. 2

Thrasybulus, 124, 191, 268–270

Thucydides, 25, 26, 33, 290, 299; cited 9, 15 n. 2, 23 n. 1, n. 2, 24 n. 2, n. 4, 28 n. 5, 30 n. 3, 31 n. 1, 34 n. 3, 36 n. 1, 45 n. 5, 50, 51 n. 2, 62 n. 5, 63 n. 6, 68 n. 1, 70, 80 n. 5, 170, 174, 177, 178 n. 1, 180 n. 4, 184, 185, 190 n. 3, 193 n. 7, 212 n. 1, 260 n. 2, 264 n. 6, 294, 308 n. 2, 310, 313, 321, 325, 326, 329 n. 8, 331–334, 336 n. 1

Thyessos, 135

Tiber, 197, 221

Tilden (Mr), 5

Tillyard (H. J. W.), _Agathocles_, cited 209 n. 2, n. 3, 210 n. 1, n. 4

Tilsit, 311

Timaeus of Cyzicus, 281, 283, 288

Timaeus of Sicily, 210; cited 22, 209, 220, 275 n. 2

Timarchus, 12

timber, 62, 271

_Times_, cited 5

Timoleon, 209

Tintoretto, 244

Tirhakah, see Taharqa

Tiryns, 163, 318

Tmolus, Mount, 129, 148

Tnefachthus I (Tafnekht), 88 n. 1, 95, 96, 98, 100, 101 n. 1

Tnefachthus II, 88 n. 1

Torr, _Revue Archéologique_, cited 169, 321 n. 2, n. 3, n. 4, 324 n. 5

“tortoises” (coins), 57 n. 5, 64 n. 3, 143 n. 1, 154, 156, 183 n. 6

touch-stone, 129

trade unions, 3

treasuries at Delphi (Corinthian, Caeretan), 187 n. 8, 255

treasury at Olympia (Sicyonian), 263

Triakon, 176 n. 3

trial by jury, 237

tribunes, military, 338

Trinakria, 44

Triptolemus, 238

triremes, 68, 165, 177, 191, 239, 325

Tritonis (Lake), 54, 55

Troezen, 169 n. 4

Trojan wars, 180 n. 4, 259 n. 1

Troy, 149, 298

trusts, 3, 5

Truth’s Investigator, _The Great Oil Octopus_, cited 5 n. 8

Tudors, 101, 267

Tullianum, see Mamertine prison

Tullus Hostilius, 261 n. 2, 337

τυραννὶς τελευταία, 29

τύραννος, 134, 302 n. 8

Turkey, 50, 270

Twelve Tables, 221, 336

Tyburn, 247

Tyrrhenians, 134 n. 5

Tyrrhenian amphora, 319

Tzetzes, _Chiliades_, cited 70 n. 3, 79 n. 4, 87 n. 9, 134 n. 5, 176 n. 3; _ad Lycophronem_, cited 59 n. 1, 195 n. 2, n. 3

unemployment, 13 n. 5

Unger, _Philologus_, cited 159, 160, 183 n. 5

United States of America, 4, 5, 142, 267

University College, Oxford, 237

Ure (P. N.), _Black Glaze Pottery from Rhitsona in Boeotia_, cited 108 n. 1, n. 6, 248 n. 3, 287 n. 3; _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, cited 38, 81, 155; see also Burrows (R. M.)

Usimares, pharaoh of Egypt, 101

usurers, 2

Valerii, 337; see also Publicola

Valerius (Marcus), 227

Valerius Maximus, cited 17 n. 3, 35 n. 3, 51 n. 2, 70 n. 3, 184 n. 2, 217 n. 5, 228 n. 1, n. 2, n. 4, 229 n. 2, 233, 275 n. 1, 337 n. 4

Varro, _de Lingua Latina_, cited 218 n. 3, 224 n. 5, 229 n. 2, 237, 248 n. 1; _de Re Rustica_, cited 201 n. 5, n. 6, n. 8; _apud_ Charisium, cited 218; _apud_ Nonium Marcellum, cited 223 n. 1; (?) _apud_ Plutarchum, cited 222 n. 3

Vasco da Gama, 87

Vedic, 134 n. 5

Veii, 230, 234, 235, 296

Velabrum, 12 n. 3

Velia, near Paestum, 221 n. 2; in Rome, 221 n. 2, 337 n. 5

Velletri, 246

Venice, 56 n. 3, 70 n. 3

Verrius Flaccus, cited 134 n. 5

Verviers, 311

Vestal virgins, 336 n. 1, 337

Vetterfeld, 171 n. 1

Via Appia, 232, 233

Victoria, Queen, 157 n. 4

Victorian age, 194

Vicus Tuscus, 221 n. 2

_Vierteljahrschrift f. Social- u. Wirtschafts-Geschichte_, see Cavaignac, Sieveking (H.)

Vignate, Giovanni, 3

Virgil, _Aeneid_, cited 238 n. 3, 311 n. 1; Schol. Veron. 238 n. 3

“Virgin” (coin), 54–57, 291

Vitruvius, cited 13 n. 5

Vittorio Emanuele monument, 65 n. 3

Volsinii, 249

Vourva pottery, 315 n. 5, 318 n. 1

Vroulia, 109, 114

Vulci, 119 n. 3, 251 n. 1

Wachsmuth (C.), _Die Stadt Athen_, cited 269 n. 2, 327 n. 5, 329 n. 4

wages, 14, 15, 18, 20, 21, 48, 49, 77, 226, 230, 295

waggoners, 14

Waldstein (C.), _Argive Heraeum_, cited 317 n. 3, 318, 319 n. 5, n. 6, n. 7, 320 n. 2

Walker (A.), 187 n. 2

Wallon (H.), _Histoire de l’Esclavage dans l’Antiquité_, cited 16 n. 8, 23 n. 1, 47 n. 7

Walter (F. A.), trans. Niebuhr, _History of Rome_, cited 239 n. 2

Walters (H. B.), see _British Museum Catalogue of Terracottas_

Walters (H. B.) and Birch (S.), _History of Ancient Pottery_, cited 323 n. 2

Waltz (P.), _Revue Historique_, cited 22 n. 6

Walzius, _Rhetores Graeci_, cited 51 n. 2

Watson (Mr), 11 n. 2

weaving, 187

Webb (S.), _History of Trade Unionism_, cited 233 n. 6

Wecklein, _Sitzungsberichte d. bayerisch. Akad. d. Wissenschaften zu Muenchen_, cited 269 n. 2, 326 n. 7, 327 n. 5, 329 n. 8

Wedgwood, 80 n. 6

Weissenborn (H.), _Hellen_, cited 159 n. 2

Welldon (J. E. C.), trans. Aristotle, _Politics_, quoted 35 n. 5

Wells (H. G.), 125 n. 3; _Anticipations_, cited 306; _Tono Bungay_, cited 306 n. 5

Westminster, 306 n. 5

wheelwrights, 14, 20

Whiskey Combination, 267

Wiedemann (A.), _Aegyptische Geschichte_, cited 91 n. 4, 95 n. 1, 97 n. 4, 99 n. 5, 125 n. 3, 212 n. 6; _Geschichte Aegyptens_, 122 n. 4; _Herodotus II_, cited 87 n. 9, 89 n. 3, 90 n. 4, 91 n. 9, 102 n. 1, 104 n. 6, 106 n. 8, 122 n. 1, n. 4, n. 5, 214 n. 5

Wiegand (Th.), _Abhandlungen_ and _Sitzungsberichte d. preussisch. Akademie d. Wissenschaften zu Berlin_, cited 76 n. 2, 110 n. 4, 111 n. 3

_Wiener Studien_, see Endt

_Wiener Vorlegeblätter_, cited 323 n. 2

von Wilamowitz-Moellendorf (U.), _Aristotel u. Athen_, cited 173 n. 2, 329 n. 7

Wilisch (E.), _Eumelus_, cited 195 n. 2, n. 4; _Goettingsche Gelehrte Anzeigen_, cited 180 n. 3, 191 n. 3, 194, 195 n. 1, 196 n. 4; _Jahresbericht d. Gymnas. Zittau_, cited 46 n. 7, 187 n. 7, 188 n. 1, 191 n. 3, 192 n. 1, n. 4, 242 n. 3; _Jahrbücher f. Classische Philologie_, cited 180 n. 2, 183 n. 5

Willers (H.), _Geschichte der roemischen Kupferprägung_, cited 156 n. 2, 171 n. 6, 219

Wilson, President Woodrow, cited 5, 290

Wimmer (F.), see Aubert

_Winckelmannsfeste Program_, see Furtwaengler

Winckler (H.), _Altorientalische Forschungen_, cited 143 n. 2

wine trade, 104, 120, 125, 126, 143 n. 1, 286

Winter (F.), _Jahrbuch d. deutsch. archäologischen Instituts_, cited 205 n. 1

Wisbech, 233 n. 6

_Wochenschrift f. klassische Philologie_, see Bluemner, Graef

wolf, Capitoline, 253, 254

women in industry, 20 n. 1; political status of, 236 n. 2

woollen industry, 2, 3, 21, 69, 74, 79, 265–267, 292

“working girls,” 139

Wyttenbach, 158 n. 3

Xanthias, 68

Xanthus, cited 130 n. 2, 144 n. 1

Xenophanes, cited 129, 131, 133

Xenophon, _Anabasis_, cited 265 n. 6; _Cyropaedia_, cited 123 n. 3, 144 n. 4; _Hellenica_, cited 20 n. 4, 27 n. 5, 148 n. 2; _Hiero_, cited 302 n. 6; _Memorabilia_, cited 13 n. 3, 17, 18 n. 1, 20 n. 1, 265 n. 3, 267; _Oeconomicus_, cited 17, 19 n. 4; _de Republica Lacedaemoniorum_, cited 17; _de Vectigalibus_, cited 12 n. 4, 18, 44 n. 1, 46, 47, 51 n. 1, 150 n. 6, 308 n. 2, 310

Xerxes, 24 n. 5, 140, 152, 293, 332

ξυλινὴ κιβωτός, 198

_Year’s Work in Classical Studies_, see Lamb (D.)

Young Turks, 270

_Zeitschrift f. aegyptische Sprache_, see v. Stern

_Zeitschrift f. Numismatik_, see Brandis, v. Fritze, Hammer, v. Sallet

_Zeitschrift. f. Socialwissenschaft_, see Beloch

Zenobius, cited 71 n. 1, 73, 78 n. 7, 79 n. 2, 95 n. 1, 308 n. 3

zeugitai, 16, 49

Zeus, 138 n. 9, 198, 303; Olympios, temple of, 14, 63, 76 n. 5; Patroos, altars of, 180; Polieus, temple of, 274, 276

Zimmern (A. E.), _Greek Commonwealth_, cited 309 n. 9; _Sociological Review_, cited 15 n. 5, 20 n. 6

Zonaras, cited 215 n. 2, 223 n. 5, 337 n. 4.

Zopyrion, 287

Footnote 1:

Aristot. _Pol._ I. 1259_a_. The authenticity of the story may be questioned, but the fact of its being attached to Thales is in itself significant.

Footnote 2:

_E.g._ Busolt, _Gr. G._ I.^2 pp. 626–7.

Footnote 3:

_La Lydie_, p. 163; cp. _ibid._ p. 274, “wealth acquires an importance it had never had.”

Footnote 4:

J. A. Symonds, _Renaissance in Italy, Age of the Despots_^2, pp. 103–4; cp. _ibid._ pp. 65 n. 1, 66, 73, 76, 77–78.

Footnote 5:

Some lecturers at Oxford are inclined to minimize the analogies offered by the seventh and sixth centuries B.C. to modern industrial conditions. In so doing they appear to me to be falling into the commonest of modern fallacies, that of overestimating the importance of size and numbers. For a better appreciation of the analogies see _e.g._ Ciccotti, _Tramonto d. Schiavitù n. Mondo ant._ p. 45.

Footnote 6:

E. Meyer, _Jahrb. f. Nationalök._ IX. (1895), p. 713 and below _passim_.

Footnote 7:

Sieveking, _Viert. f. Soc. u. Wirts._ VII. p. 87.

Footnote 8:

Cobbett, _Paper against Gold_, pp. 5, 6 (Aug. 30th, 1810).

Footnote 9:

Jevons, _Money_^{23}, p. 203; cp. _ibid._ p. 285: “It is surprising to find to what an extent paper documents have replaced coin as a medium of exchange in some of the principal centres of business.”

Footnote 10:

Cp. Thos. W. Lawson, _Frenzied Finance_ (published 1906), pp. 33, 35.

Footnote 11:

Cp. Poehlmann, _Sozialismus i. d. ant. Welt_^2, I. p. 170.

Footnote 12:

Hy. D. Lloyd, _Wealth against Commonwealth_ (1894), p. 2.

Footnote 13:

Hy. D. Lloyd, _op. cit._ p. 494; see also pp. 297–8, 311; ch. XXVIII: (on a Standard Oil secretary of U.S.A. treasury), 434, 511.

Footnote 14:

_New York Daily Commercial Bull._ June 4th, 1894, _ap._ Hy. D. Lloyd, _op. cit._ p. 450.

Footnote 15:

New York _Sun_, May 27th, 1884, _ap._ Hy. D. Lloyd, p. 387.

Footnote 16:

_Times_, Nov. 4th, 1916.

Footnote 17:

Anatole France, _L’Île des Pingouins_, pp. 242 f., 309.

Footnote 18:

Salvioli, _Capitalisme dans le Monde Antique_ (traduit A. Bonnet), p. 267.

Footnote 19:

von Bernhardi, _Germany and the Next War_, p. 65.

Footnote 20:

See _e.g._ Thos. W. Lawson, _Frenzied Finance_, pp. 6, 35; Hy. D. Lloyd, _Wealth against Commonwealth_, pp. 341, 353, 386 (quoting the _National Baptist of Philadelphia_, the Cincinnati _Commercial Gazette_, and Senator Hoar); J. Ramsay MacDonald, _Unemployment and the Wage Fund_; I. M. Tarbell, _Hist. Standard Oil Co._ II. pp. 114, 116, 137 (quoting the _Butler County Democrat_, Senator Frye, N.Y. State Investigation Report, 1888), 124, 126–7, 290, 291; Truth’s Investigator, _The Great Oil Octopus_, p. 227.

Footnote 21:

Hy. D. Lloyd, _op. cit._ p. 493.

Footnote 22:

von Bernhardi, _loc. cit._

Footnote 23:

Karl Marx objected to applying the words Capital and Capitalism to the condition of things in antiquity. But see E. Meyer, _Gesch. d. Alt._ III. p. 550.

Footnote 24:

Extant some 300 lines in 35 fragments.

Footnote 25:

Extant 1389 lines of continuous verse.

Footnote 26:

Fr. 2 (13), 5–7.

Footnote 27:

μονάρχου.

Footnote 28:

Fr. 7 (17), 3–4.

Footnote 29:

Fr. 3 (14), 3.

Footnote 30:

For his hatred of tyranny see _e.g._ 1181–2, 1203–4.

Footnote 31:

Cp. of the Greeks in general, Theognis’ contemporary Cyrus (_ap._ Hdt. I. 153), “these taunts Cyrus flung at the Greeks, because they secure marketplaces and engage in buying and selling.”

Footnote 32:

679, φορτηγοὶ δ’ ἄρχουσι κ.τ.λ., the “bad” is the regular term in aristocratic writers for their political opponents.

Footnote 33:

717–8.

Footnote 34:

315.

Footnote 35:

523.

Footnote 36:

699.

Footnote 37:

621.

Footnote 38:

823; cp. Solon quoted above.

Footnote 39:

ὑβριστήν.

Footnote 40:

1081–2.

Footnote 41:

Cp. _e.g._ Hdt. III. 80, ὕβρι κεκορημένος.

Footnote 42:

ὑβρίζῃ, 749–751.

Footnote 43:

47–52.

Footnote 44:

Other interpretations would be possible if in line 51 we read “from this” (ἐκ τοῦ) instead of “from these” (ἐκ τῶν), but the MSS. all support ἐκ τῶν.

Footnote 45:

Is it possible to see in Solon, 12 (4). 29–32, a reference to the fates of the various tyrant families of the seventh century?

Footnote 46:

φορτηγός, Theognis, 679.

Footnote 47:

Soph. _O.T._ 540–542.

Footnote 48:

I. 13.

Footnote 49:

_Olymp._ II. 58–9 (to Thero, tyrant of Acragas).

Footnote 50:

_Olymp._ V. 15–16 (to Psaumis of Camarina). The poem ends with a warning to Psaumis not to emulate the tyrants (μὴ ματεύσῃ θεὸς γενέσθαι).

Footnote 51:

_Pyth._ I. 48.

Footnote 52:

ἀλλ’ ὅμως τὸ τοιοῦτον ἔτη δέκα κατέσχεν (Ἀγαμέμνων), οὐ μισθοφοραῖς μεγάλαις οὐδὲ χρημάτων δαπάναις, οἷς νῦν ἅπαντες δυναστεύουσιν, Isocr. _Panath._ 82 (249).

Footnote 53:

Jebb, _Attic Orators_^2, II. p. 110.

Footnote 54:

_Pol._ VII. (V.), 1314_b_. Endt, _Wien. Stud._ XXIV. (1901), p. 47, sees here a reference to Gelo of Syracuse and quotes Diod. XI. 26; Ael. _V.H._ VI. 11; Polyaen. I. 27, which tell how Gelo appeared naked before the Syracusans and gave an account of his government and offered to resign. But the only reference to the Exchequer is in Polyaenus; and there it is only incidental (εὐθύνας δοὺς τῆς αὐτοκράτορος ἀρχῆς, τῆς δαπάνης, τῶν καιρῶν, τῶν ὅπλων, τῶν ἵππων, τῶν τριήρων).

Footnote 55:

See below on Solon, pp. 34–5, and chapter XI. p. 301, and cp. Aristot. _Pol._ II. 1267; III. 1285_a-b_.

Footnote 56:

_E.g._ Lord James of Hereford, Sir D. Dale, Mr Watson and Mr Mundella, quoted by W. T. Layton, _Capital and Labour_, p. 198. In a simpler and smaller state than the modern kingdom or republic, during an epoch of industrial war between evenly matched parties, it is easy to imagine individuals in a similar position acquiring or even having thrust upon them almost autocratic powers.

Footnote 57:

_Pol._ VI. (IV.), 1296_a_.

Footnote 58:

VI. (IV.), 1295–6.

Footnote 59:

Plut. _Sol._ 2, 14.

Footnote 60:

Aristot. _Pol._ I. 1259_a_.

Footnote 61:

Lysias, _c. Frument._ 16 (165). For an oil ring in the Rome of Plautus see _Captivi_, 489, “omnes conpecto rem agunt quasi in Velabro olearii.”

Footnote 62:

Xen. _de Vect._ 4. 14–15; cp. Plut. _Nikias_, 4.

Footnote 63:

Lysias, _c. Eratosth._ 19 (121).

Footnote 64:

Dem. _c. Aphob._ A. 9–11 (816, 817); cp. Plut. _Demosth._ 4.

Footnote 65:

Aeschines, _c. Timarch._ 97 (13–14).

Footnote 66:

Dion. Hal. _Isocr._ 1, θεράποντας αὐλοποιούς. For θεράπων = slave, cp. Aristoph. _Plut._ 518–521.

Footnote 67:

_c. Olymp._ 12 (1170).

Footnote 68:

_E.g._ Xen. _Mem._ II. 7. 3, 6. The contract for building the long walls of Athens in the days of Pericles is said to have been given to a single individual, by name Kallikrates (Plut. _Per._ 13): of his employees we know nothing except that according to the contemporary comic poet Cratinus they were very slow about their work.

Footnote 69:

Athen. VI. 272_e_ actually speaks of Nikias as a millionaire (ζάπλουτος) owning slaves as capital (ἐπὶ προσόδοις).

Footnote 70:

Plut. _Sol._ XXII. πρὸς τὰς τέχνας (cp. χειροτέχνης = artizan) ἔτρεψε τοὺς πολίτας. Note too, _ibid._ (cp. Galen, _Protrept._ 8 init.; Vitruv. VI. praef.) the law that a son was not obliged to support his father if the father had not taught him a trade, and further Poll. VIII. 42 (in the days of Solon a person thrice convicted of unemployment lost his vote).

Footnote 71:

Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 2. In ch. 12 the _Ath. Pol._ alludes to the difficulties (ἀπορία) of the poor and of those previously slaves who were liberated as a result of the σεισαχθεία (Solon’s measure for dealing with slavery and debt), and proceeds to quote Solon himself.

Footnote 72:

Plut. _Sol._ XXIV.

Footnote 73:

Aesch. _c. Timarch._ 27 (4).

Footnote 74:

_Anth. Lyr._ Solon, 12 (4), 49–50.

Footnote 75:

Notably at Athens and Rome.

Footnote 76:

Aristot. _Pol._ VII. (V.), 1313_b_.

Footnote 77:

Below, pp. 267, 274 f., 279, 223 f.

Footnote 78:

_E.g._ by Endt, _Wien. Stud._ XXIV. (1901), p. 55.

Footnote 79:

Hy. D. Lloyd, _Wealth against Commonwealth_, p. 364.

Footnote 80:

Plut. _Per._ 12.

Footnote 81:

Building of the Erechtheum, 408 B.C. _C.I.A._ I. 321, 324.

Footnote 82:

Plut. _Per._ 16, τὴν δύναμιν αὐτοῦ ... κακοήθως παρεμφαίνουσιν οἱ κωμικοί, Πεισιστρατίδας μὲν νέους τοὺς ἀμφὶ αὐτὸν ἑταίρους καλοῦντες, αὐτὸν δ’ ἀπομόσαι μὴ τυραννήσειν κελεύοντες.

Footnote 83:

Cp. Mauri, _Cittadini Lavoratori dell’ Attica_, p. 56.

Footnote 84:

Cp. Thuc. II. 65, of Athens under Pericles, “nominally it was a democracy, but in fact it was government by the foremost man.”

Footnote 85:

_Arch. Eph._ 1883, pp. 109 f. = _C.I.A._ II. ii. 834_b_ (329–8 B.C.).

Footnote 86:

Zimmern, _Sociological Review_, 1909, p. 166.

Footnote 87:

Cp. Cic. _de Off._ I. 42. 151, mercatura, si tenuis est, sordida putanda est, sin magna et copiosa ... non est admodum uituperanda; atque etiam si ... ex portu in agros se possessionesque contulerit, uidetur iure optimo posse laudari: a view that was doubtless as firmly held in Greece as it has been since in Rome and England.

Footnote 88:

A fairly complete collection of the authorities for ancient Greek views on manual labour is to be found in Frohberger, _De Opificum apud vet. Graec. condit._ chap. II.

Footnote 89:

Hom. _Od._ XXIII. 189; _Il._ VI. 313–5; _Od._ VI. 52 f.; cp. also _Il._ V. 59 f.; XXI. 37; _Od._ V. 241 f.

Footnote 90:

In Megara the aristocratic Theognis has contempt enough for the working classes, but he wrote after the overthrow of tyranny in his city.

Footnote 91:

Plato, _Critias_, 110_c_.

Footnote 92:

Plut. _Thes._ 25.

Footnote 93:

Plut. _Sol._ 2.

Footnote 94:

Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 7.

Footnote 95:

_Laws_, XI. 920_d_. For the character of Athens’ patron deities cp. Proclus ad Plat. _Timae._ 52_b_, Athena Ergane (so called) as patroness of the works of craftsmen (δημιουργικῶν ἔργων); cp. Soph. fr. 844 (Jebb and Pearson); Plato, _Protag._ 321_e_, the common abode in which they (Athena and Hephaestus) practised their crafts (ἐφιλοτεχνείτην); Harpocrat. and Suid. s.v. χαλκεῖα, “A feast common to artizans (χειρώναξι) and especially to smiths”: Suid. adds that it was originally a public feast, not till later observed only by artizans (τεχνιτῶν): A. Mommsen, _Heortologie_, p. 313, thinks that the change may be due to Peisistratus.

Footnote 96:

Wallon, _Histoire de l’Esclavage_, I. 142.

Footnote 97:

Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 13.

Footnote 98:

Xen. _de Rep. Lac._ 7; _Mem._ IV. 2. 22; _Oecon._ IV. 2.

Footnote 99:

Ael. _V.H._ II. 1; so Xen. _Mem._ III. 7. 6.

Footnote 100:

Aristoph. _Ach._ 478; _Thes._ 387; _Frogs_, 840; cp. Plin. _N.H._ XXII. 38; Aul. Gell. XV. 20; Val. Max. III. 4, ext. 2.

Footnote 101:

Hdt. II. 167. Mauri therefore, _Cittadini Lavoratori dell’ Attica_, p. 65, rather postdates when he says that our authorities for Athenian contempt of manual work are fourth century and later.

Footnote 102:

Isocrat. _Areop._ 32 (146).

Footnote 103:

Mauri, _Cittadini Lavoratori dell’ Attica_, p. 69.

Footnote 104:

Xen. _Mem._ IV. 2. 22.

Footnote 105:

Plato, _Apol._ 22_c-e_; cp. Xen. _Mem._ II. 7, where Socrates strongly deprecates the prejudice against manual labour.

Footnote 106:

Xen. _de Vect._ V. 4.

Footnote 107:

Plato, _Rep._ VII. 522_b_, IX. 590_c_; _Laws_, V. 741_e_; _Gorg._ 517_d_–518_a_; _Alcib._ I. 131_b_; _Amator_, 136_b_, 137_b_.

Footnote 108:

Plato, _Laws_, VIII. 846_d_.

Footnote 109:

_Ibid._ XI. 918.

Footnote 110:

_Ibid._ IV. 705_b_.

Footnote 111:

_Rep._ II. 371_e_.

Footnote 112:

οὔτε βάναυσον βίον οὔτ’ ἀγοραῖον, Aristot. _Pol._ IV. (VII.), 1328_b_; cp. _Rhet._ I. 9. 27.

Footnote 113:

γεωργοὶ μὲν γὰρ καὶ τεχνῖται καὶ πᾶν τὸ θητικὸν ἀναγκαῖον ὑπάρχειν ταῖς πόλεσιν, μέρη δὲ τῆς πόλεως τό τε ὁπλιτικὸν καὶ βουλευτικόν, Aristot. _Pol._ IV. (VII.), 1329_a_; cp. VII. (V.), 1317_a_.

Footnote 114:

_Pol._ III. 1278_a_.

Footnote 115:

_Pol._ IV. (VII.), 1326_a_. The _Politics_ was based on a series of studies of particular constitutions one of which, the _Constitution of Athens_, was recovered from an Egyptian rubbish heap some thirty years ago. When Aristotle says that a city of artizans cannot attain to greatness we may feel fairly sure that artizans had played no prominent part in any of the Greek cities since the Persian wars. For the period before that his information must have been less reliable.

Footnote 116:

_c. Eubulidem_, 32 (1308).

Footnote 117:

Pollux, III. 82; cp. Photius s.v. “θητεία· δουλεία.”

Footnote 118:

See _e.g._ Xen. _Oecon._ IV. 2–3, and cp. the unusually sympathetic account of the working classes in the sophist Prodicus, a contemporary of Socrates: “let us proceed to the artizans and mechanics (χειρωνακτικοὺς καὶ βαναύσους), toiling from night to night and with difficulty providing themselves with the necessities of life and bewailing themselves and filling all their sleepless hours with lamentation and tears.” Mullach, _Frag. Phil. Gr._ II. 139.

Footnote 119:

_Arbeit. u. Comm._ p. 46.

Footnote 120:

Women were of course involved in the consequences of the Peloponnesian war. “I am told that many women citizens (ἀσταὶ γυναῖκες) became wet nurses and day labourers and grape pickers (τιτθαὶ καὶ ἔριθοι καὶ τρυγήτριαι) as a result of the misfortunes of the city in those times.” Dem. _c. Eubul._ 45 (1313); cp. Xen. _Mem._ II. 7 f.

Footnote 121:

Cp. the trouble that the Romans were always having with their disbanded troops.

Footnote 122:

Aristoph. _Plut._ 510–525.

Footnote 123:

Plut. _Ages._ 26; Polyaen. II. 1. 7; cp. Xen. _Hell._ VI. 1. 5.

Footnote 124:

Aristot. _Pol._ III. 1278_a_. Aristotle is of course a more valuable authority for his own days than for his “ancient times.”

Footnote 125:

Plato, _Rep._ II. 371_e_. So Cic. _de Off._ I. 42, “est ipsa merces auctoramentum seruitutis.” Cp. Zimmern, _Sociological Review_, 1909, p. 174, who however, when he says that “the Greeks never took kindly to wage earning” is thinking mainly of the fifth and fourth centuries B.C. and rather disregarding the evidence for conditions at that period being of comparatively recent growth.

Footnote 126:

Ciccotti, _Tramonto d. Schiavitù_, pp. 124 f. In the extant fragments of the Erechtheum accounts for 409 B.C. the payments are partly by the piece, partly by the day.

Footnote 127:

Cavaignac, _Études Financ._ p. 173. For the large growth of the servile population in fourth century Attica see Beloch, _Rhein. Mus._ 1890, pp. 555 f.

Footnote 128:

Cavaignac, _Études Financ._ p. 172; E. Meyer, _Kleinschrift._ p. 198.

Footnote 129:

See Brants, _Rev. de l’Instruct. Publ. Belg._ XXVI. p. 106.

Footnote 130:

Athen. XII. 540_d_.

Footnote 131:

Cp. on fifth century Athens Xen. (?) _Ath. Pol._ I. 12, “the city needs resident aliens owing to the number of its handicrafts (δεῖται μετοίκων διὰ τὸ πλῆθος τῶν τεχνῶν).”

Footnote 132:

Below, p. 192.

Footnote 133:

Cp. Phaleas, Aristot. _Pol._ II. 1267.

Footnote 134:

Hdt. VI. 137, οὐ γὰρ εἶναι τοῦτον τὸν χρόνον σφίσι κω οἰκέτας.

Footnote 135:

Timaeus, _ap._ Athen. VI. 264_c_.

Footnote 136:

Clerc, _Métèques Athén._ pp. 324 f.

Footnote 137:

Ciccotti, _Tramonto d. Schiavitù_, p. 47.

Footnote 138:

Buechsenschuetz, _Besitz u. Erwerb._ pp. 321, 341, 193; cp. Waltz, _Rev. Hist._ 117 (1914), pp. 5–41.

Footnote 139:

In the oriental Greek states of the Hellenistic period, as also in the Roman East, the government seems sometimes to have run big industrial concerns whose employees have been held to have been free men. Beloch, _Zeits. f. Socialwiss._ II. pp. 24–25. But these establishments belong to a quite different political order from that with which we are now concerned.

Footnote 140:

For slave revolts in Greece see Diod. XXXIV. 2. 19 and Athen. VI. 272 f. (Laurium, probably latter part of second century B.C.); Athen. VI. 265_c_ (Chios, apparently later still, _pace_ Boeckh, _Public Econ. of Athens_, II. pp. 470–471); cp. Wallon, _l’Esclavage_^2, I. pp. 318 f., 483–484. The movements at Laurium and Chios in the Peloponnesian war, Thuc. VII. 27, VIII. 40, seem to have been not so much revolts against slavery as desertions from one set of masters to another. When Holm, _Hist. Greece_ (English trans.), I. p. 263, says that the essence of tyranny was that it rested on force he makes a statement which, so far as it is true, differentiates tyranny from no other ancient form of government.

Footnote 141:

ἀεὶ ἀτυράννευτος ἦν, Thuc. I. 18.

Footnote 142:

Plut. _Lysander_, 17.

Footnote 143:

Hill, _Handbook of Greek and Roman Coins_, p. 17, quoting Lenormant. Hill himself inclines to think that the Spartan coinage may have resembled the iron pieces of Aeginetan weight attributed to Tegea and Argos. But these latter are not “heavy and hard to carry.”

Footnote 144:

οὐ ξυνοικισθείσης πόλεως ... κατὰ κώμας δὲ ... οἰκισθείσης, Thuc. I. 10.

Footnote 145:

Aristot. _Pol._ II. 1269_a_.

Footnote 146:

Thuc. I. 132.

Footnote 147:

In the days of Plato Thebes contained one citizen of extraordinary wealth in Ismenias, “the man who had just recently received the wealth of Polycrates.” Ismenias is classed with Periander, Perdiccas, and Xerxes as a wealthy man who thought he possessed great power; but he is not called a tyrant. He had become rich not through his own wisdom and care, but suddenly as the result of a bequest, so that his wealth would apparently fall under a different category from that of the seventh and sixth century tyrants, and he is in fact placed by Plato in a very miscellaneous company. Plato, _Meno_, 90_a_; _Rep._ I. 336_a_.

Footnote 148:

See below, pp. 30 f.

Footnote 149:

Aristot. _Pol._ VIII. (VI.), 1316_b_.

Footnote 150:

_Thucydides Mythistoricus_, p. 32.

Footnote 151:

Rep. VIII. 562_a_; cp. 564_a_, 565_d_.

Footnote 152:

On tyrants as plunderers cp. Hdt. V. 92: “(Cypselus) deprived many people of their property.” So Ephorus, _F.H.G._ III. p. 392, “He banished the Bacchiads and confiscated their possessions.” Cp. Plato, _Phaedo_, 82_a_; _Rep._ VIII. end. The spoils of victory however are quite a different thing from the litigious confiscations of fifth and fourth century demagogues. The way the early tyrants used their wealth is sufficient proof that it was not mainly plunder. There is nothing of the condottiere about the typical early tyrant. Cp. H. Sieveking, _Kapitalist. Entwick. i. d. ital. Städt. d. Mittelalt._ in _Viertelj. f. Soc. u. Wirts._ VII. pp. 64 f.

Footnote 153:

Pol. VII. (V.), 1305_a_; cp. VII. (V.), 1310_b_, ὁ δὲ τύραννος (καθίσταται) ἐκ τοῦ δήμου καὶ τοῦ πλήθους.

Footnote 154:

“Pheidon and others became tyrants with a kingship to start from ... those in the parts about Ionia, and Phalaris, from their offices,” _Pol._ VII. (V.), 1310_b_; cp. _ibid._, “through starting with power, some that of kingly office,” and _ibid._, “other (tyrannies) from kings overstepping their inherited positions”; VII. (V.), 1308_a_, “attempts at tyranny are made in some places by demagogues, in other places by dynasts, or those who hold the highest offices when they hold them for a long time.”

Footnote 155:

Cp. also _Pol._ VII. (V.), 1305_a_, where “modern times” means since rhetoric developed and demagogues ceased to be soldiers.

Footnote 156:

Or else for no historical period at all. As pointed out to me by my colleague Professor W. G. de Burgh, Plato’s order is confessedly an order of ascending injustice (_Rep._ VIII. 545_a_; cp. 344_a_), in introducing which he invokes the muses of Homer and asks them not to be too serious (545_e_). Plato’s evidence on this point need not be taken so literally as that of the historically minded Aristotle.

Footnote 157:

Hdt. III. 82. See also Xen. _Hell._ VII. 1. 44–46; and cp. Porzio, _Cipselidi_, p. 207, n. 1.

Footnote 158:

Neither the Homeric Thersites nor the “leaders of the people” of Solon show any of the essential features of the demagogue as known to Herodotus, Plato, and Aristotle. Individual early tyrants are often said to have been demagogues, but only by the writers of the fourth century or later, whose evidence on this point is valueless; cp. below, pp. 30 f.

Footnote 159:

“The demagogues of the present day win favour with the democracies by securing many confiscations through the law courts.” Aristotle, _Pol._ VIII. (VI.), 1320_a_.

Footnote 160:

Hdt. VI. 131.

Footnote 161:

πολεμοποιός, Aristot. _Pol._ VII. (V.), 1313_b_; cp. 1305_a_ (οἱ προστάται τοῦ δήμου, ὅτε πολεμικοὶ γένοιντο, τυραννίδι ἐπετίθεντο) and Plato, _Rep._ VIII. 566_e_ (πολέμους ἀεὶ κινεῖ).

Footnote 162:

Cp. Thuc. I. 17, δι’ ἀσφαλείας ὅσον ἐδύναντο μάλιστα τὰς πόλεις ὤκουν. Hermann, _Staatsaltertümer_^5 p. 253, n. 5, notices that this passage contradicts Plato, _Rep._ VIII. 566_e_ and Aristot. _Pol._ VII. (V.), 1313_b_, 1305_a_, which make the typical tyrant warlike. He does not realize that Thucydides is describing the tyrants of an earlier age.

Footnote 163:

Below, pp. 257 f.

Footnote 164:

Aristot. _Pol._ VII. (V.), 1315_b_. The same change is recorded in the tyranny at Corinth: there Cypselus the first tyrant is said to have been a demagogue, possibly because he became tyrant and was not stated in Aristotle’s sources to have previously waged any war.

Footnote 165:

Hdt. I. 59; according to the _Ath. Pol._ 17, “it is obvious nonsense to say that Peisistratus was general in the war for Salamis against the Megareans.” But this statement based on chronological arguments can only call in question the date and character of Peisistratus’ warlike achievements, not their whole historicity.

Footnote 166:

_Pace_ E. Meyer, _G. d. A._ II. p. 666, following Justin II. 8 (quasi sibi non patriae uicisset, tyrannidem per dolum occupat).

Footnote 167:

On the essentially peaceful character of the Athenian tyranny, see Ciccotti, _Tramonto d. Schiavitù_, p. 49.

Footnote 168:

_Pol._ VII. (V.), 1312_b_.

Footnote 169:

III. 82.

Footnote 170:

Mixed of course with earlier features. _E.g._ in Plato (_Rep._ VIII. 566_a-b_) the banishment and forcible return and the bodyguard are all genuine Peisistratus.

Footnote 171:

Plato, _Letters_ 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 13. On the genuineness of the Platonic letters see Burnet, _Thales to Plato_, pp. 206, 207 and note.

Footnote 172:

Diog. Laert. II. 7. 63; 8. 67 f.

Footnote 173:

Aristotle, _Pol._ VII. (V.), 1307_a_, where Hanno of Carthage, Aristotle’s contemporary, is also quoted. Both these would-be tyrants tampered with the slave population (see Thucydides, I. 132 (Pausanias), Orosius, IV. 6 (Hanno)), and may thus have further helped to obliterate the picture of the peace-loving early tyrant and his relationship to free labour.

Footnote 174:

Cp. Thuc. I. 20; VI. 54 on the inaccurate accounts of the Peisistratids prevalent in Athens in the historian’s own days.

Footnote 175:

On the way that Aristotle’s ideas often colour the facts he quotes see Muretus, _Var. Lect._ I. 14; Koehler, _Sitzungsb. Preuss. Akad._ 1892, p. 505; Endt, _Wien. Stud._ XXIV. (1901), pp. 50–51, quoted Porzio, _Cipselidi_, p. 244.

On the general dubiousness of fifth and fourth century explanations of seventh and sixth century motives, see Macan on the _Athenaion Politeia_ in _J.H.S._ XII. pp. 34 f.

Footnote 176:

Aristot. _Pol._ VII. (V.) 1313_a_.

Footnote 177:

Aristot. _Pol._ VII. (V.) 1315_b_.

Footnote 178:

Mommsen, _Hist. Rome_ (Eng. trans.), III. p. 333.

Footnote 179:

Cp. Dion. Hal. VII. 1, on the statement in his oldest authorities that Dionysius sent corn to Rome in the time of Spurius Cassius (492 B.C.). The name Dionysius appears here a good half century before his birth, doubtless as the Sicilian tyrant _par excellence_.

Footnote 180:

Beloch, _Gr. G._^2 I. ii. p. 295, is surely underestimating the value of Thucydides’ express statements about the Peisistratids when he calls them “merely oral traditions about the relations of a family that had been expelled from Athens 100 years before.” This way of putting it hardly suggests that less than 20 years may have separated the death of Hippias from the birth of Thucydides, and that the tyrant’s family was still sufficiently flourishing at the end of the Peloponnesian war to be excluded from the amnesty that restored Thucydides to Athens (Didymus _ap._ Marcellin. _Vit. Thuc._ 32).

Footnote 181:

See also chapter III, p. 69.

Footnote 182:

Beloch, _Rhein. Mus._ L. (1895), p. 252, n. 1, puts Cylon’s attempt into the time between Solon and Peisistratus, De Sanctis, _Atthis_^2, pp. 280 f., into the time of Peisistratus’ exile; O. Seeck, _Klio_, IV. pp. 318 f., puts it at earliest early in the career of Peisistratus; Costanzi, _Riv. d. Stor. Ant._ V. pp. 518–19, about 570 B.C.; so also Lenschau _ap._ Bursian, _Jahresbericht_ 176 (1918), p. 190. But see _e.g._ Ledl, _Stud. z. d. ält. ath. Verfassungsges._ pp. 77 f.

Footnote 183:

Thuc. I. 126.

Footnote 184:

Plut. _Solon_, 24.

Footnote 185:

Plut. _Solon_, 2; cp. Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 6, where Solon’s enemies accuse him of (dishonest) financial speculations. Aristotle dismisses the charge.

Footnote 186:

Hdt. I. 59; Plut., _Solon_, 13, _Amat._ 18, _Praecept._ 10 (_Moral._ 763, 805), imagines this third party as existing at the time of Solon’s reforms: but his account is inconsistent in itself and contradicts Hdt. See Sandys, _Ath. Pol._^2 p. 55, Busolt, _Gr. G._^2 (1895), II. p. 302, n. 2, following Diels, _Abh. Berl. Akad._ 1885, p. 20, and Landwehr, _Philol._ Suppl. V. (1889), p. 155.

Footnote 187:

So Isocr. _Panath._ 148 (263); Aristot. _Pol._ VII. (V.), 1310_b_; cp. Cic. _de Orat._ III. 34; _Brutus_, 27, 41; Val. Max. VIII. 9; Dio Chrys. XXII.

Footnote 188:

_Pace_ Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 22 (ὅτι Πεισίστρατος δημαγωγὸς καὶ στρατηγὸς ὢν τύραννος κατέστη).

Footnote 189:

Cp. Plut. _Solon_, 29, “helping the needy” of Peisistratus when first suspected by Solon of aiming at tyranny: cp. also Aristot. _Pol._ VII. (V.), 1305_a_ (tr. Welldon), “the ground of this confidence being their detestation of the wealthy classes. This was the case at Athens with Peisistratus in consequence of his feud with the (wealthy landed) proprietors of the plain.”

Footnote 190:

Hdt. I. 64. Grote’s translation, III. (ed. 1888), p. 329, n. 4, which makes the money come from Athens and the mercenaries from Thrace, is highly improbable. Amphipolis, the chief fifth century city on the lower Strymon, is described by Thucydides, IV. 108, as useful to Athens “from its revenues of money.” Grote’s objections to making Peisistratus a Thracian mining magnate are met below.

Footnote 191:

So Perdrizet, _Klio_, X. (1910), p. 5.

Footnote 192:

Guiraud, _La Main-d’Œuvre dans l’Ancienne Grèce_, pp. 30, 31; cp. von Fritze, _Zeits. f. Num._ XX. (1897), p. 154, who notes that Maronea, the name of the place in the Laurium district mined in the time of Peisistratus, is also the name of a town in Thrace opposite Thasos (said by Philochorus, _F.H.G._, I. p. 404, to have been alluded to by Archilochus; cp. Hom. _Od._ IX. 197). E. Curtius (quoted _ibid._) regards the Attic Maronea as having been named after the Thracian.

Footnote 193:

Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 15.

Footnote 194:

Hdt. I. 62, 64.

Footnote 195:

Of iron and copper, Steph. Byz. s.v. Αἴδηψος, Χαλκίς, Eustath. _ad Dion. Perieget._ 764.

Footnote 196:

Svoronos, _Journ. Int. d’Arch. Num._ XV. (1913), pp. 233–4.

Footnote 197:

Cp. Muenzer u. Strack, _Münz. Nord-Griech._ II. i. p. 8, n. 1.

Footnote 198:

Hdt. I. 9; so Dion. Hal. I. 13.

Footnote 199:

Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 13.

Footnote 200:

Plut. _Solon_, 13; _Praecept._ 10 (_Moral._ 805); _Amat._ 18 (_Moral._ 763).

Footnote 201:

See _e.g._ Poehlmann, _Grundriss_^4 p. 85; E. Meyer, _G. d. A._ II. p. 663; Sandys, _Ath. Pol._^2 p. 55; Mauri, _Cittadini Lavoratori dell’ Attica_, p. 29; Grundy, _Thucydides and Hist. of his Age_, p. 116; Haase, _Abhand. Hist. Phil. Gesell. Breslau_, I. p. 105.

Footnote 202:

Below, Appendix A.

Footnote 203:

_J.H.S._ XXVI. pp. 136–8.

Footnote 204:

_A.J.A._ 1889, p. 426; cp. Haase, _Abhand. Hist. Phil. Gesell. Breslau_, I. p. 69, n. 16.

Footnote 205:

_Ath. Mitt._ XXXV. (1910), p. 286, ll. 18–21, μέταλλον ἀνασάξιμον ἐπὶ Λαυρέωι ... ὧι γε(ιτνιᾷ ... πρὸς) νότο(ν) ἡ ὁδὸς ἡ ἔξω τοῦ Ῥαγῶνος ἐπὶ Λαύρεον φέρουσα καὶ τὸ Σημάχειον.

Footnote 206:

Steph. Byz. s.v.

Footnote 207:

_Abh. Berl. Akad._ 1892, p. 37; cp. _ibid._ 47; _Ath. Mitt._ XVII. pp. 422, 424.

Footnote 208:

_Ath. Mitt._ 1910, p. 309. The single tombstone of “Aeschines of Semachidai, the son of Pamphilus” (_C.I.A._ II. 2534), found at Brahami, three and a half kilometres South of the Acropolis, is probably to be classed with _ibid._ 2535–9 as belonging to a Semachid who died at Athens. So too with the fragment ΙΑΧΙΔΟΥ _C.I.A._ III. 3897, found at Alopeke, the modern Ampelokipi, one of the Eastern terminuses of the Athenian tramways. Demesmen seem to have been generally buried either in Athens or in the deme to which they belonged. The ordinary Attic word for travel, ἀποδημεῖν (lit. “to quit one’s deme”), seems to have been still appropriate even in the fourth century.

Footnote 209:

_F.H.G._ I. p. 396.

Footnote 210:

_F.H.G._ I. p. 396.

Footnote 211:

_Ath. Mitt._ XXXV. (1910), p. 277, l. 25; 278, l. 42; 281, l. 46; the word may have been semi-technical. Appian, _Bell. Civ._ IV. 106, speaks of a λόφος not far from Philippi, “in which are the gold mines called the Asyla.”

Footnote 212:

Cp. Hesych. Ἐπάκριος· Ζεὺς ὁ ἐπὶ τῶν ἄκρων τῶν ὀρῶν ἱδρύμενος. ἐπὶ γὰρ τῶν ὀρῶν τοὺς βωμοὺς αὐτῷ ἵδρυον ὡς ἐπιπολύ.

Footnote 213:

_I.e._ with the hill country of the Cleisthenic Interior. Inscriptions (_C.I.A._ II. 602, 603), of the fourth century or later, mention men of the Interior (Mesogeioi) who formed a similar organization to the Epakrioi of _C.I.A._ II. 570, and were possibly composed of lowlanders of the Cleisthenic Interior (Mesogeia). The name Mesogeia is now applied to the “undulating district of hill and plain stretching to the spurs of Pentelicon on the North, to Hymettus on the West, to the vicinity of Marcopoulo on the South, and to the coast hills on the East,” Baedeker, _Greece_, 1905, p. 117.

Footnote 214:

See _e.g._ J. A. R. Munro’s note _J.H.S._ XIX. (1899), p. 187.

Footnote 215:

_Odyss._ III. 278; cp. Steph. Byz. Σούνιον· δῆμος Λεοντίδος φυλῆς. Ὅμηρος δὲ ἄκρον καλεῖ.

Footnote 216:

Aristoph. _Clouds_, 401.

Footnote 217:

Strabo, IX. 390.

Footnote 218:

Palmerius (Le Paulmier), _Exerc._ p. 4, quoted Schoemann, _de Comit. Ath._ p. 343, n. 4.

Footnote 219:

Albertus, _Hesych._ s.v. Alii aliter; _e.g._ Casaubon _ad_ _Diog. Laert._, _Solon_, 58 appears to locate the Diakrioi on the Acropolis.

Footnote 220:

Plato, _Critias_, 110_d_.

Footnote 221:

Strabo, IX. 391; cp. XIV. 632 f. on the Milesian district where Hdt., VI. 20, mentions the existence of a Hyperakria: Strabo distinguishes clearly the ἄκραι on the coast from the ὄρη of the interior.

Footnote 222:

No mines are marked actually at Sunium in the map attached to Ardaillon’s careful study of the mines of Laurium, but a mine at Sunium (μέταλλον ἐπὶ Σουνίῳ) is mentioned in the inscription published by Oikonomos, _Ath. Mitt._ XXXV. (1910), p. 277, l. 9; so also _C.I.A._ II. 781: cp. also Eurip. _Cycl._ 293–4, “aery Sunium’s silver-veined crag (ὑπάργυρος πέτρα),” tr. Shelley. Sunium and Thoricus, also in the mining district (“at Thoricus and Laurium are mines of silver,” schol. Aesch. _Pers._ 238), are coupled together by Pliny, _N.H._ IV. 11 (7), as “promontoria.”

Footnote 223:

Hdt. IV. 99.

Footnote 224:

There were Diakrioi in Rhodes (Cavaignac, _Étud. Financ._ pp. xl, xli) and Euboea (Hesych. s.v.) as well as Attica. Miletus had its Hyperakrioi (Hdt. VI. 20).

Footnote 225:

Besides its connexion with (_a_) Semachidai and (_b_) the party of Peisistratus, we find it as (_c_) one of twelve cities founded by Cecrops (Strabo, IX. 397, Steph. Byz. s.v.), (_d_) one of three groups of cities founded by Cecrops (Suid. and _Et. Mag._ s.v.), (_e_) a country near Tetrapolis (Bekker, _Lex. Seguer._ p. 259), (_f_) a trittys (trittys of the Epakrians: _C.I.A._ II. 1053 and (?) I. 517_b_; cp. Loeper, _Ath. Mitt._ XVII. p. 355, n. 3), and (_g_) the recipient of payments from Plotheia (_C.I.A._ II. 570, about 420 B.C.). It is recognized by Milchhoefer that the word is used in a broader and a more restricted sense (_ap._ Pauly Wissowa s.v. Epakria). Though note _à propos_ of the Epakrian trittys of the inscriptions that trittyes are generally named after not the district but the chief place in the district, _e.g._ trittys of the Eleusinians, of the Peiraeans, _C.I.A._ I. 517. Semachidai and Plotheia belong to different tribes (Antiochis and Aegeis), and consequently to different trittyes.

Footnote 226:

Strabo, XI. 499.

Footnote 227:

_E.g._ Oikonomos, _Ath. Mitt._ XXXV. (1910), pp. 277, l. 25; 278, l. 42; 281, l. 46; cp. Xen. _de Vect._ IV. 2, τῶν ὑπαργύρων λόφων; Pliny, _N.H._ IV. 11 (7), Thoricus promontorium.

Footnote 228:

Bursian, _Gr. Geog._ I. pp. 254–5. Boeckh, _Pub. Econ._ II. p. 416, n. 6, quotes Λαύριον ὄρος, but gives no reference.

Footnote 229:

A site between Kamaresa (Maronea?) and Sunium, which Loeper identifies with Potamos, is described by him as “im Inneren liegend,” _Ath. Mitt._ XVII. pp. 333–4.

Footnote 230:

Schol. Ap. Rhod. _Argon._ I. 1129, quoting the _Phoronid_,

ἄνδρες ὀρέστεροι, οἱ πρῶτοι τέχνην πολυμήτιος Ἡφαίστοιο εὗρον ἐν οὐρείῃσι νάπαις, ἰόεντα σίδηρον, ἐς πῦρ τ’ ἤνεγκον καὶ ἀρίπρεπες ἔργον ἔδειξαν.

Footnote 231:

Binder, _Laurion_, p. 25 (cp. de Launay in Saglio, _Dict. d. Ant._ s.v. ferrum, p. 1087), who says this is still the practice in Peru. Smelting was carried on close by the mines, see Ardaillon in Saglio, _Dict. d. Ant._ s.v. metalla. The sites of the ancient Siphnian mines are to this day called Kaminia (furnaces) and Kapsala (slag?), Bent, _J.H.S._ VI. pp. 196–7.

Note too that at a still earlier epoch gold from mines, as distinguished from alluvial gold, was known in Egypt as “gold of the mountain,” Breasted, _Records Anc. Egypt_, IV. 30: so _ibid._ 28, “electrum of the mountains,” temp. Ramses III.

Footnote 232:

_Abh. Berl. Acad._ _d._ 1892, p. 47.

Footnote 233:

_Ath. Mitt._ XVII.

Footnote 234:

Polyb. XXXIV. 9.

Footnote 235:

Athen. VI. 272_e_; cp. Oros. V. 9, who dates what is apparently the same revolt in the time of the first Sicilian slave war (139–132 B.C.).

Footnote 236:

Thuc. VII. 27; cp. Bury, _Hist. Greece_, p. 485.

Footnote 237:

Hdt. VII. 144; Plut. _Themist._ 4; Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 22.

Footnote 238:

Ardaillon, _Les Mines de Laurium_ (the best book on the subject), pp. 132, 133; where see also a technical explanation of the veins.

Footnote 239:

Plut. _Themist._ 4.

Footnote 240:

Xen. _de Vect._ IV. 2.

Footnote 241:

F. Cauer, _Parteien in Megara und Athen_, p. 17.

Footnote 242:

Hdt. III. 57; they appear to have been exhausted before 490 B.C. (Perdrizet, _Klio_, X. (1910), p. 7, quoting Hdt. III. 57 and Paus. X. 11. 2), a fact that suggests an early discovery.

Footnote 243:

Furtwaengler, _Berl. Vas._ 871 B, 639, 831 A: Wilisch, _Jahresb. Gym._ _Zittau_, 1901, figs. 19 (Saglio, _Dict. d. Ant._ fig. 4987), 20 and p. 20.

Footnote 244:

Hdt. VII. 144.

Footnote 245:

Hdt. III. 57; cp. E. Meyer, _Ges. d. Alt._ II. p. 610, on Theognis, 667 f.

Footnote 246:

_E.g._ Perdrizet, _Klio_, X. (1910), p. 2.

Footnote 247:

Aeschyl. _Persae_, 240 (238).

Footnote 248:

Hdt. VI. 46.

Footnote 249:

_Pace_ Cavaignac, _Viertelj. f. Soc. u. Wirts. Ges._ IX. p. 7.

Footnote 250:

Xen., _de Vect._ IV. 17, advised the Athenian state to buy slaves to the number of three for each citizen and let them out to work the mines. The number of Athenian citizens at the time was about 20,000 (cp. Wallon, _l’Esclavage_^2, I. pp. 222 f.), which makes the proposed number of slave miners about 60,000. This was admittedly many more than the number actually employed at the time of the proposal, and Xenophon suggests starting with 10,000, which Wallon, _ibid._ p. 230, thinks to have been probably the existing number of privately owned mining slaves. But even so these numbers show how influential a free mining population might well have been. See also _de Vect._ IV. 14, 15 and _passim_; Andoc. _de Myst._ 38 (6); Hyp. frag. 33 (Blass); and above, p. 45.

Footnote 251:

Dem. _c. Phaenipp._ 20 (1044–5).

Footnote 252:

Bérard, _B.C.H._ XII. (1888), p. 246, τέχνη δ’ οὔτις ἔριζε.

Footnote 253:

Ardaillon, _Les Mines de Laurium_, p. 91.

Footnote 254:

Solon, Bergk, frag. 12 (4), 49–50,

ἄλλος Ἀθηναίης τε καὶ Ἡφαίστου πολυτέχνεω ἔργα δαεὶς χειροῖν ξυλλέγεται βίοτον.

Footnote 255:

Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 13.

Footnote 256:

A means of equation would be to accept the reading of the Berlin papyrus ἀποίκων for ἀγροίκων and then, _pace_ Busolt, _Gr. G._ II.^2 p. 96, n. 1, identify the ἄποικοι (men away from home; cp. the Milesian ἀειναῦται, men always at sea) with the πάραλοι (men of the coast). The demiourgoi would then be identified with the Diakrioi, and it would have to be assumed that the youthful Peisistratus was already leading his faction. Laurentius Lydus, _de Magistr._ I. 47, makes Solon import from Egypt a triple division into philosopher nobles, warrior farmers, and mechanics (τὴν βάναυσον καὶ τεχνουργόν). The statement appears among the fragments of Diodorus IX. in Dindorf’s text; but the attribution is disputed, _e.g._ by Landwehr, _Philol._ Suppl. V. (1889), p. 141. The reading ἄγροικοι rather than ἄποικοι is supported by Dion. Hal. II. 9; see further Gilliard, _Réformes de Solon_, p. 105, n. 2.

Footnote 257:

Plut. _de Mul. Virt._ 27 (_Moral._ 262).

Footnote 258:

Plut. _Pericl._ 12.

Footnote 259:

Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 13; Plut. _Sol._ 29.

Footnote 260:

Perdrizet, _Klio_, X. (1910), p. 22, quoting Appian, _Bell. Civ._ IV. 106. Cp. above, p. 39, n. 4.

Footnote 261:

Harpocrat. s.v. Ποταμός· “they were lampooned as readily admitting illegal claims to citizenship (ὡς ῥᾳδίως δεχόμενοι τοὺς παρεγγράπτους), as others proclaim and particularly Menander in _The Twins_”; _Potamioi_ was the name of a comedy by Strattis; Athen. VII. 299_b_; Suid. s.v. Ποταμοί.

Footnote 262:

_Ath. Mitt._ XVII. (1892), pl. xii. Inscriptions mention three Potamioi, see _Ath. Mitt._ XVII. pp. 390–1, Π. καθύπερθεν, Π. ὑπένερθεν, Π. Δειραδιῶται. The first two are grouped together apart from the third, and Loeper is probably right, as against Koehler, _Ath. Mitt._ X. (1885), pp. 105 f.; cp. IV. (1879), p. 102, in assigning them to the city trittys of Leontis and making P. Deiradiotai the mining village. καθύπερθεν is therefore no evidence for an inland mining Potamioi. But “Deiradiotai” means “on the ridge,” and supports Loeper’s location of Potamioi Deiradiotai, no matter whether the adjective means “P. on the ridge,” or “P. near Deiradiotai” (a separate deme, see _C.I.A._ II. 864).

Footnote 263:

Milchhoefer, _Ath. Mitt._ XVIII. (1893), p. 284.

Footnote 264:

_C.I.A._ II. 3343.

Footnote 265:

Hdt. V. 23, “by the river Strymon ... a city ... where are mines of silver; and a large Greek population dwells around, and a large barbarian.”

Footnote 266:

Thuc. IV. 105, “Brasidas, ... learning that Thucydides owned workings in the gold mines in that part of Thrace, and as a result was one of the most influential men on the mainland”; Marcellinus, _Vit. Thuc._ 19, “(Thucydides) married a wife from Skapte Hyle in Thrace, who was very wealthy and owned mines in Thrace”; Plut. _Cimon_, 4.

Footnote 267:

Xen. _de Vect._ IV. 14.

Footnote 268:

Hdt. I. 60; Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 14; Athen. 609_c_; Polyaen. I. 21. 1; Val. Max. I. 2. 2 (ext.); Hermog. περὶ εὑρεσ. I. 3. 21 (ed. Spengel); cp. schol. _ibid. ap._ Walzium, _Rhet. Gr._ V. p. 378. In schol. Aristoph. _Eq._ 447 Phye appears to be confused with Myrrina who appears to have been either wife (_ibid._) or daughter (schol. Dem. _Aristoc._) of Peisistratus or more probably wife of Hippias (Thuc., and Hesych. s.v. Βυρσίνης). Athenaeus marries Phye to Hipparchus. The confusion may possibly be due to the fact that myrrina, as a common noun, sometimes means garland (_e.g._ Pherecr. _Metall._ I. 25; Aristoph. _Vesp._ 861; _Nub._ 1364, etc.), while Phye is described as a garland seller (_Ath. Pol._ and Athen.).

Footnote 269:

See _e.g._ Thirlwall, _Hist._^2 II. pp. 67–8; Babelon, _Journ. Int. d’Arch. Num._ VIII. (1905), pp. 17, 18; Stein, Hdt. I. 60; Beloch, _Gr. G._^2 I. i. p. 370; cp. also Beloch, _Gr. G._^2 I. ii. p. 299.

Footnote 270:

Hirschensohn, _Philolog. Obozrenie_, X. (1896), Moscow, pp. 119 f.; Beloch, _Gr. G._^2 I. ii. pp. 290 f., _Rhein. Mus._ XLV. (1890), p. 469; so De Sanctis, _Atthis_^2, p. 278, n. 5; Costanzi, _Riv. d. Stor. Ant._ V. pp. 516 f., _Boll. Fil. Class._ IX. pp. 84 f., 107 f.

Footnote 271:

Euseb. _Chron._ Armenian vers. 544/3 B.C., Pisistratus Atheniensibus iterum imperauit.

Footnote 272:

Jerome, _Chron._ 539 B.C., Pisistratus secunda uice Athenis regnat.

Footnote 273:

Hdt. I. 62.

Footnote 274:

Cp. below, chap. VIII. pp. 237–9.

Footnote 275:

Beloch, _Gr. G._^2 I. ii. pp. 292–3, 297.

Footnote 276:

Hdt. VI. 35, “Peisistratus held supreme power, but Miltiades also had influence (ἐδυνάστευε)” suggests some sort of co-operation (cp. Hdt. VI. 39, below, p. 63), though Hdt. VI. 35, “annoyed with the government of Peisistratus,” shows that it was not cordial.

Footnote 277:

Busolt, _Gr. G._^2 II. p. 316, n. 3.

Footnote 278:

_Journ. Int. d’Arch. Num._ VIII. (1905), p. 19.

Footnote 279:

Six, _Num. Chron._ 1895, pl. VII. 8, 7, 1.

Footnote 280:

_E.g._ P. Gardner, _Earliest Coins of Greece Proper_, p. 28; Hill, _Hist. Gk. Coins_, p. 17; v. Fritze, _Zeits. f. Num._ XX. (1897), pp. 153–5, emphasizing the connexion of Peisistratus with silver as well as with Athena; Lermann, _Athenatypen_, pp. 3 f.

For a somewhat earlier date see Head, _Num. Chron._ 1893, pp. 249, 251; Earle Fox, _Corolla Numismat. B. V. Head_, p. 43; Svoronos, _Journ. Int. d’Arch. Num._ XIV. (1912), p. 3, nos. 1109–1120; Seeck, _Klio_, IV. (1904), p. 176 (Solon or even Draco).

For a date after Peisistratus see Imhoof-Blumer, Howorth, Six, and (_Neue Jahrb._ 1896, pp. 537 f.) Gilbert, all completely answered by Head, _Num. Chron._ 1893, pp. 247 f.; Babelon, _J. I. d’A. N._ 1905, pp. 12–16. Holwerda, _Album Herwerden_, p. 117, who follows Six, only adds some inconclusive comparisons with Greek sculpture.

Footnote 281:

There is no need to assume with E. Meyer, _Ges. d. Alt._^1 IV. p. 28, and others, that Peisistratus’ Pangaion mines were gold. In the days of Philip and Alexander the Great they were best known for their gold; but silver was also mined abundantly, see Hdt. V. 17; VII. 112; Strabo, 331, 34; Livy, XLV. 29; Justin, VIII. 3; Orosius, III. 12.

Footnote 282:

Pollux, IX. 74, 75, quoting Euripides (_d._ 406 B.C.), Hyperides (_fl._ 350 B.C.), Eubulus Comicus (_fl._ 350 B.C.); cp. Hesych. s.v. Παλλάδος πρόσωπον, Photius s.v. Παλλάδος πρόσωπον.

Footnote 283:

Schol. Aristoph. _Birds_, 1106, “the tetradrachm was at that time called an owl.”

Footnote 284:

Cp. Photius s.v. Παλλάδος πρόσωπον, “the staters, from the stamp: for on one side there was a head of Athena.” The stater is the didrachm.

Footnote 285:

Hill, _Hist. Gk. Coins_, p. 16; _Brit. Mus. Coins Central Greece_, pl. XXIV. 18, 19.

Footnote 286:

Hdt. IV. 180, “They dress up together on each occasion their fairest maiden in a Corinthian helmet and full Greek armour, and, mounting her on a chariot, drive her all round the lake.” See further Macan, _Hdt._ IV.-VI. _ad loc._, who quotes Phye.

Footnote 287:

Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 14; cp. Athen. XIII. 609_c_.

Footnote 288:

Solon, frag. 2 (13), ll. 5–6

αὐτοὶ δὲ φθείρειν μεγάλην πόλιν ἀφραδίῃσιν ἀστοὶ βούλονται, χρήμασι πειθόμενοι.

Footnote 289:

_E.g._ _B.C.H._ XXX. (1906), p. 69, fig. 2; Brit. Mus. from Bunbury sale.

Footnote 290:

Archil. frag. 54 (53), τὸν κεροπλάστην ἄειδε Γλαῦκον.

Footnote 291:

Bremer, _Haartracht_, p. 64.

Footnote 292:

Garlands of flowers worn on the head appear in Attica during the second half of the sixth century; see Pauly Wissowa s.v. Haartracht, p. 2132; cp. Bremer, _Haartracht_, p. 15, vogue begins with red figure vase style.

Footnote 293:

Time of Hippias, Head, _Hist. Num._^2 p. 368 (but cp. _ibid._ n. 3); Seeck, _Klio_, IV. (1904), pp. 173–5; 508 B.C., Holwerda, _Album Herwerden_, p. 119; 500 B.C. or after, V. Fritze, _Zeits. f. Num._ XX. (1897), p. 142: Kampanes, _B.C.H._ XXX. p. 75; 490 B.C., Six, _Num. Chron._ 1895, p. 176: Earle Fox, _Coroll. Num. B. V. Head_, p. 43: Babelon, _Coroll. Num. B. V. Head_, p. 8: _J. I. d’A. N._ VIII. (1905), pp. 44 f.; 480 B.C., Howorth, _Num. Chron._ 1893, p. 245: Lermann, _Athenatyp._ pp. 28 f. As regards a post-Hippias dating, the ungarlanded head of a coin with Hippias’ name is not decisive. The coin, which is abnormal, was probably struck by the tyrant in exile, and the absence of garland may indicate either the exile’s grief or the local coiner’s incompetence. Or was the embarrassed despot casting away the ornaments of sovereignty in the hope of retaining or regaining the reality? “The olive again has been known to lose its leaves and yet produce its fruit; this is said to have happened to Thessalos the son of Peisistratos,” Theophrast. _Hist. Plant._ II. 3. 3; cp. Ruehl, _Rhein. Mus._ 1892, p. 460.

Footnote 294:

Just as was probably the case with the flower girls at Naukratis, the most famous centre of the garland trade, where the Thracian hetaera Rhodopis won such great fame in the days of Sappho and Aesop. See Mallet, _Prem. Étab. Gr. en Égypte_, p. 238, who compares the fioraie of Venice and Florence.

Footnote 295:

Phot., Harpocrat. s.v. στεφανηφόρος; cp. Boeckh, _Pub. Econ._ I. pp. 193 f. Lenormant, _Monnaies et Médailles_, p. 60; Saglio, _Dict. d. Ant._ s.v. drachmae Stephanephori, p. 403. The inscriptions, however, in which the expression occurs date only from the end of the second century B.C., _C.I.A._ II. i. 466–8, 476.

Footnote 296:

Bekker, _Anecd. Gr._ I. 301, 19.

Footnote 297:

Livy, XXXVII. 46, 58, 59; XXXIX. 7; Cic. _ad Att._ II. 6, 16; XI. 1.

Footnote 298:

Diamantaras, _Ath. Mitt._ XIV. (1889), p. 413.

Footnote 299:

The practice of course is not exclusively Greek; cp., _e.g._,

il maledetto fiore ch’ ha disviate le pecore e gli agni.

Dante, _Paradiso_, IX. 130.

Footnote 300:

Plut. _Apophth. Lac._, _Agesilaus_, 40 (_Moral._ 211); cp. the proverb τὰν ἀρετὰν καὶ τὰν σοφίαν νικᾶντι χελῶναι (virtue and wisdom are vanquished by tortoises), alluding to the famous coins of Aegina; cp. too βοῦς ἐπὶ γλώσσῃ (there’s an ox on my tongue), Theognis 815, Aesch. _Agam._ 35, Pollux IX. 61, which, whether the ox meant is a gold stater, on which the ox was one of the commonest types, or, as P. Gardner suggests, a leather gag, _Num. Chron._ 1881, p. 289, is an instance of a similar _jeu de mot_ dating from the actual epoch of Peisistratus.

Footnote 301:

Aristoph. _Birds_, 1106; cp. Schol. _ad loc._ “the tetradrachm was at that time (_i.e._ of Aristophanes) called an owl”; Suid. s.v. γλαῦκες Λαυρεωτικαί· “of those who have much money,” is a misunderstanding of the phrase; cp. his statement that the Laurium mines were gold.

Footnote 302:

Plut. _Lysander_, 16.

Footnote 303:

The modern Liopesi, Milchhoefer, _Abh. Berl. Akad._ 1892, p. 17.

Footnote 304:

Hdt. V. 12.

Footnote 305:

Cp. _e.g._ Hdt. V. 23, 126 (Myrcinus on Strymon called Thracian), VII. 75, 115; Aristoph. _Ach._ 273 (“the Thracian daughter of Strymodorus”); Diod. XII. 68. 1, “this city (Ennea Hodoi on the Strymon) Aristagoras the Milesian had tried previously to settle; ... but he had met his death, and the occupants had been driven out by the Thracians” (about 500 B.C.); cp. _ibid._ XI. 70. 5; Plut. _Cimon_, 7, “Eion ... a city in Thrace on the Strymon.” Cp. Suid. s.v. χρυσὸς Κολοφώνιος; Tzetzes _ad_ Lycoph. _Cass._ V. 417 (Hill, _Sources Gk. Hist._ p. 87). For Pangaion see Hdt. VII. 112, “Mt Pangaion, in which are gold and silver mines, which are worked by ... most of all the Satrai,” with which cp. _ibid._ 110, where the Satrai occur in a list of Thracian tribes.

Footnote 306:

Hdt. V. 15, 16; Strabo VII. 331.

Footnote 307:

Hdt. V. 1, 13, 98.

Footnote 308:

Meyer, _Ges. d. Alt._ III. p. 297; Macan, _Hdt._ IV.-VI. app. III., IV. particularly IV. sect. 8; neither of whom sufficiently emphasizes the political importance for Hippias of these Northern mines. Perdrizet, _Klio_, X. (1910), p. 12, denies this removal when he says that the Peisistratid’s Thracian possessions had perhaps remained in Athenian hands between 512 and 475.

Footnote 309:

(_a_) The Paianian (Phye): γυνὴ ... μέγαθος ἀπὸ τεσσάρων πηχέων ἀπολείπουσα τρεῖς δακτύλους καὶ ἄλλως εὐειδής. ταύτην τὴν γυναῖκα σκευάσαντες, Hdt. I. 60; γυναῖκα μεγάλην καὶ καλὴν ἐξευρών ... τὴν θεὸν ἀπομιμούμενος τῷ κόσμῳ, Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 14.

(_b_) The Paionian: ἀδελφεὴν μεγάλην τε καὶ εὐειδέα ... σκευάσαντες ὡς εἶχον ἄριστα, Hdt. V. 12.

Footnote 310:

Nic. Dam. frag. 71, _F.H.G._ III. p. 413, gives the same story, but calls the woman a Thracian and the king Alyattes. Macan, _ad_ _Hdt._ V. 12 (cp. _ibid._ (_Hdt._ IV.-VI.), app. IV. sect. 7) thinks we probably have a local story transferred to Darius; but the transport of Thracians to Asia, recorded also by Nic. Dam., suggests rather that Hdt. is right in attaching the story to Darius. The Lydian king of the Nic. Dam. version is perhaps due to Sardis being the scene of the story.

Footnote 311:

Paionian coins, like Athenian, bore the helmeted head of Athena, _e.g._ _Boston Mus. Rep._ XXII. (1897), p. 40; Svoronos, _J. I. d’A. N._ 1913, p. 197 (fourth century).

Footnote 312:

The corkscrew hair of the most archaic looking garland coins, above, pp. 55–56, is found on an obol, Babelon, _Corolla Num. B. V. Head_, pp. 1 f., inscribed ΗΙ𐅃, presumably short for Hippias. Probably it was struck by him in exile, _ibid._ p. 7, but in any case it associates the corkscrew curls with the tyranny. _Num. Chron._ 1908, pp. 278 f. shows the same corkscrew curls, and the inscription ΙΠ. This has been expanded both as Hippias and as Peisistratus, but cp. Muenzer and Strack, _Münz. Nord-Griech._ II. i. p. 8, n. 1.

Footnote 313:

Hdt. V. 94.

Footnote 314:

Hdt. V. 1.

Footnote 315:

πρῆγμα εὐηθέστατον μακρῷ, Hdt. I. 60; cp. Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 14, ἀρχαϊκῶς καὶ λίαν ἁπλῶς.

Footnote 316:

Aristoph. _Birds_, 1106.

Footnote 317:

Schol. Aristoph. _Knights_, 1092.

Footnote 318:

Hdt. V. 11.

Footnote 319:

Hdt. V. 23. Cp. below, p. 271.

Footnote 320:

Above, p. 58; cp. Svoronos, _Journ. Int. d’Arch. Num._ XV. (1913), p. 277.

Footnote 321:

V. 11.

Footnote 322:

Cp. also with the Histiaeus incident the intrigues of Aristagoras with the deported Paionians whom Darius had settled in Phrygia (a famous mining country), Hdt. V. 98.

Footnote 323:

Thuc. II. 15; Paus. I. 14. 1.

Footnote 324:

_Brit. Mus. Cat. Vas._ II. B 331, where, however, it is called Kallirrhoe (more precisely καλιρεκρενε, perhaps a confusion of Καλλιρρόη and Ἐννεάκρουνος). The aqueduct by which Peisistratus improved and enlarged the supply of water has been discovered by Doerpfeld, _Arch. Eph._ 1894, pp. 3 f.; cp. Theagenes (Paus. I. 40), Polycrates (Hdt. III. 60), and the Corinthian Peirene.

Footnote 325:

E. Gardner, _Gk. Sculp._ fig. 34.

Footnote 326:

Doerpfeld, _Ath. Mitt._ XXVII. (1902), pp. 379 f.; E. Curtius, _Stadtg. v. Athen_, pp. 73 f.; Michaelis, _Cent. Arch. Discov._ pp. 240–2.

Footnote 327:

Plut. _Solon_, 31, “the law against idleness was passed, not by Solon but by Peisistratus.”

Footnote 328:

Aristoph. _Lysistr._ 1150 f. “Do you not know that it was the Spartans again, who when you were wearing the labourer’s dress (κατωνάκας φοροῦντες), came under arms and slew ... many friends and allies of Hippias, ... and set you free, and clothed your people like gentlemen instead of labourers once again (ἀντὶ τῆς κατωνάκης τὸν δῆμον ὑμῶν χλαῖναν ἤμπισχον πάλιν).” Cp. the charges made by fifth century Roman republicans against the kings: below, pp. 223–4.

Footnote 329:

Beloch, _Gr. G._^2 I. i. 387–8; Hdt. V. 94, “(Peisistratus) having secured it (Sigeium), established as tyrant his illegitimate son”; cp. Periander and Corcyra.

Footnote 330:

Thuc. VI. 59.

Footnote 331:

Hdt. VI. 39; cp. above, p. 52. For numismatic evidence of Hippias’ ties with both Lampsacus and the Thracian Chersonese see Head, _Hist. Num._^2 p. 377, Lermann, _Athenatypen_, pp. 17–21, coins of (_a_) Chersonese, _obv._ Athena head, _rev._ Milesian lion (for Milesian colonies in Chersonese see Strabo, XIV. 635; VII. 331, frag. 52); (_b_) Lampsacus, _obv._ Athena head, _rev._ type of Lampsacus. This alliance currency points to a broad and far-reaching commercial policy.

Footnote 332:

Ps.-Aristot. _Oec._ II. 1347_a_, τό τε νόμισμα τὸ ὂν Ἀθηναίοις ἀδόκιμον ἐποίησε, τάξας δὲ τιμὴν ἐκέλευσε πρὸς αὑτὸν ἀνακομίζειν. συνελθόντων δὲ ἐπὶ τῷ κόψαι ἕτερον χαρακτῆρα, ἐξέδωκε τὸ αὐτὸ ἀργύριον.

Footnote 333:

Head, _Num. Chron._ 1893, p. 248 (change very slight); Gilbert, _Neue Jahrb._ 1896, pp. 537 f. (Hippias issued fresh coins from the same silver).

Footnote 334:

_Num. Chron._ 1895, p. 178; _J. I. d’A. N._ VIII. (1905), pp. 23 f.

Footnote 335:

_Ath. Pol._ 10.

Footnote 336:

Cp. Svoronos, _J. I. d’A. N._ V. (1902), p. 32 f. (cp. below, p. 183, n. 6), on a hint that Pheidon may have debased the Aeginetan “tortoises” shortly before his fall.

Footnote 337:

Cp. Isocr. _de Big._ 25, 26 (351).

Footnote 338:

Hdt. VI. 125; cp. Isoc. _de Big._ 25 (351).

Footnote 339:

E. Meyer, _Ges. d. Alt._ II. p. 637.

Footnote 340:

Note, however, Hdt. V. 62 (see next note), χρημάτων εὖ ἥκοντες.

Footnote 341:

δεῖ δὲ πρὸς τούτοισι ἔτι ἀναλαβεῖν τὸν κατ’ ἀρχὰς ἤϊα λέξων λόγον, ὡς τυράννων ἐλευθερώθησαν οἱ Ἀθηναῖοι. Ἱππίεω τυραννεύοντος ... Ἀλκμαίωνιδαι, ... φεύγοντες Πεισιστρατίδας, ... ἐνθαῦτα ... πᾶν ἐπὶ τοῖσι Πεισιστρατίδῃσι μηχανώμενοι, παρ’ Ἀμφικτυόνων τὸν νηὸν μισθοῦνται τὸν ἐν Δελφοῖσι, τὸν νῦν ἔοντα, τότε δὲ οὔκω, τοῦτον ἐξοικοδομῆσαι, οἷα δὲ χρημάτων εὖ ἥκοντες, καὶ ἔοντες ἄνδρες δόκιμοι ἀνέκαθεν ἔτι, τόν τε νηὸν ἐξεργάσαντο τοῦ παραδείγματος κάλλιον, τά τε ἄλλα καὶ, συγκειμένου σφι πωρίνου λίθου ποιέειν τὸν νηὸν, Παρίο τὰ ἔμπροσθεν αὐτοῦ ἐξεποίησαν. Hdt. V. 62.

Footnote 342:

Hdt. V. 63, ἀνέπειθον τὴν Πυθίην χρήμασι.

Footnote 343:

Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 19. For huge sums made in this way in recent times on classic ground see the _causes célèbres_ of the Vittorio Emanuele monument and the Palazzo di Giustizia at Rome.

Footnote 344:

_F.H.G._ I. p. 395, frag. 70.

Footnote 345:

Isoc. _Antid._ 232, “Cleisthenes, having been banished from the city by the tyrants, persuaded the Amphictyons to lend him some of the money of the god, and restored the democracy, and banished the tyrants”; Dem. _Meid._ 144 (561), “(the Alcmaeonids), they say ... having borrowed money from Delphi, freed the city and expelled the sons of Peisistratus.” Themistius, _Orat._ IV. 53_a_, gives the Alcmaeonidae as the contractors without any mention of means or motives. Hdt. II. 180, Strabo IX. 421, and Paus. X. 5. 13 mention the rebuilding of the temple without referring to the Alcmaeonidae.

Footnote 346:

Plut. _Sol._ II.

Footnote 347:

Grote, _Hist. Greece_, ed. 1888, II. pp. 412–413.

Footnote 348:

_Atti R. Accad. Torino_, 1916, pp. 303–4, quoting _Cat. Greek Pap. Rylands_, vol. I. p. 31.

Footnote 349:

That the Peisistratids were unfriendly to Delphi is perhaps to be inferred from the report highly dubious in itself, but prevalent in various quarters, that they had actually caused the fire which destroyed the temple, Philoc. frag. 70, _F.H.G._ I. p. 395.

Footnote 350:

Cleisthenes’ parents appear to have married before 570 B.C. Beloch, _Gr. G._^2 I. ii. p. 286.

Footnote 351:

Aristot. _Pol._ III. 1275_b_.

Footnote 352:

Hdt. V. 66, τὸν δῆμον προσεταιρίζεται. Cp. _ibid._ 69, ἦν τε τὸν δῆμον προσθέμενος πολλῷ καθύπερθε τῶν ἀντιστασιωτέων.

Footnote 353:

Thuc. I. 13; cp. Pliny, _N.H._ VII. 57 (56). Panofka, _Res Samiorum_, p. 15, quotes Pliny, _ibid._, for attributing to the Samians the invention of horse-transports, but the reading is doubtful: edd. hippagum Samii (inuenerunt), but for Samii MSS. give Damiam.

Footnote 354:

Hdt. III. 47 (Messenian war), III. 59 (against Aegina), V. 99 (Lelantine war).

Footnote 355:

Hdt. IV. 152.

Footnote 356:

Macan, _Hdt._ IV.-VI. i. p. 106.

Footnote 357:

Hdt. II. 135.

Footnote 358:

Hdt. II. 178.

Footnote 359:

Hdt. II. 178; cp. Steph. Byz. s.v. Ἔφεσος. On the Greek τεμένη at Naukratis see below, Chapter IV. pp. 116–7.

Footnote 360:

Hdt. II. 179.

Footnote 361:

The most famous names connected with this industry are Rhoecus and Theodorus (below, pp. 73, 76, 80, 83) and Mnesarchus, father of the philosopher Pythagoras (see Diog. Laert. VIII. 1. 1; cp. Iambl. _Pyth._ 5, 9).

Footnote 362:

Theocr. XV. 125–6.

Footnote 363:

Plut. _Qu. Gr._ 57 (_Moral._ 304–5).

Footnote 364:

Apul. _Florid._ II. 15; Aesch. _Pers._ 883.

Footnote 365:

For possible early tyrants in Samos see Meyer, _Ges. d. Alt._ II. pp. 614, 616, who names Amphikrates (Hdt. III. 59), Demoteles (Plut. _Qu. Gr._ 57), and Syloson (Polyaen. VI. 45). All three are extremely doubtful. Amphikrates was probably a legitimate king of the period before the abolition of monarchy: very possibly he was a contemporary of the Argive Pheidon (below, pp. 177–8). Demoteles was, according to our only authority, the monarch whose murder led to the ascendancy of the geomoroi: he is naturally assumed to have been the last sovereign of the legitimate royal house. The Syloson of Polyaenus, VI. 45, is probably a confused recollection of the brother of Polycrates. He helps the Samians during a war with the Aeolians to observe a festival of Hera held outside the city and makes himself tyrant during the celebration. The connexion with Hera points to the family of Polycrates (see below, pp. 76, 81): the Aeolian war may be a disguised version of the struggle waged by Polycrates against the Great King who was in possession of the Aeolian mainland. This struggle went back to the beginning of the reign of Polycrates, when he was associated in his tyranny with his brother Syloson: see also Babelon, _Rev. Num._ 1894, p. 268.

Footnote 366:

Meyer, _Ges. d. Alt._ II. p. 777, following Grote III. (ed. 1888), p. 453.

Footnote 367:

Busolt, _Gr. G._^2 II. pp. 508–9, n. 3, who notes that Lygdamis was already tyrant of Naxos (Polyaen. I. 23, _pace_ Plass, _Tyrannis_, p. 236).

Footnote 368:

Thuc. I. 13; Hdt. III. 39, 122; Strabo, XIV. 637. Max. Tyr. (Teubner), XXIX. 2; Euseb. _Chron._ Armenian vers. “mare obtinuerunt Samii,” Lat. vers. “Dicearchiam Samii condiderunt,” both just after notice of Polycrates’ accession. Cp. S. Reinach’s interpretation of the ring which Polycrates cast into the sea (Hdt. III. 41; Strabo, XIV. 638; Paus. VIII. 14. 8; Pliny, _N.H._ XXXVII. 1; Cic. _de Fin._ V. 30. 92; Val. Max. VI. 9. 5 (ext.); Tzetz. _Chil._ VII. 121; Galen, _Protrept._ 4; Eustath. _ad_ Dionys. V. 534), with which the French scholar compares the ring with which the doge of Venice annually wedded his mistress the sea (S. Reinach, _Rev. Arch._ ser. IV. vol. VI. (1905), pp. 9 f.), but cp. Marshall, _Brit. Mus. Cat. Rings_, p. xxi, n. 7, who points out that wedding rings seem unknown among the Greeks.

Footnote 369:

Hdt. III. 60.

Footnote 370:

Suid. and Phot. Σαμίων ὁ δῆμος; Plut. _Pericles_, 26; Athen. XII. 540_e_; cp. Hesych. Σαμιακὸς τρόπος; Phot. Σάμαιναι.

Footnote 371:

Thuc. I. 13, III. 104.

Footnote 372:

Phot. and Suid. Πύθια καὶ Δήλια. So Zenob. _ap._ Leutsch u. Schneidewin, _Paroem. Graec._ I. p. 165; cp. Diogenian. _ibid._ p. 311.

Footnote 373:

ἐμπορικὸν πρᾶγμα, Strabo, X. 486; cp. Pliny, _N.H._ XXXIV. 4.

Footnote 374:

See below, p. 260.

Footnote 375:

Malalas _ap._ Migne, _Bibl. Patr. Gr._ vol. 97, p. 260. So Cedren. _Synops._ 243; _ibid._ vol. 121, p. 277.

Footnote 376:

Plass, _Tyrannis_, p. 240.

Footnote 377:

Hdt. III. 47, where observe the causes to which the war is attributed.

Footnote 378:

Hence the relevance of the long account of the Thraco-Scythian expedition in the fourth book of Herodotus, immediately preceding the first attack upon Persia by European Greeks, that namely of Athens and Eretria during the Ionian revolt described in Book V.

Footnote 379:

Hdt. III. 44.

Footnote 380:

Hdt. III. 120.

Footnote 381:

Malalas, _loc. cit._

Footnote 382:

κιθαρίζειν τε καὶ ψάλλειν καὶ καπηλεύειν, Hdt. I. 155. So Justin, I. 7, iussi cauponias et ludicras artes et lenocinia exercere.

Footnote 383:

Zenob. V. 1, Λυδὸς καπηλεύει, _ap._ Leutsch u. Schneidewin, _Paroem. Graec._ I. p. 115.

Footnote 384:

pp. 76–7.

Footnote 385:

Cp. Hdt. III. 39 with Diod. I. 95, 98.

Footnote 386:

ὑπὸ τρυφῆς τὰ πανταχόθεν συνάγειν, Athen. XII. 540_c_.

Footnote 387:

Hdt. I. 51; Athen. XII. 514 f.

Footnote 388:

Athen. XII. 540_c-d_.

Footnote 389:

Hdt. IV. 155; cp. _ibid._ 159.

Footnote 390:

Arcesilaus II is represented on a famous kylix in the Louvre as presiding over the weighing and shipment of a cargo of silphium, and has in that connexion been called by Michaelis a silphium merchant, _Cent. Arch. Discov._ p. 235.

Footnote 391:

Hdt. IV. 162–4.

Footnote 392:

Hdt. III. 56. The recipients are Spartan invaders of Samos.

Footnote 393:

Archaic Milesian hects of lead plated with electrum, Brandis, _Münzwesen_, pp. 327–8; F. Lenormant, _La Monnaie dans l’Antiq._ I. p. 225.

Footnote 394:

Suid. s.v. Σαμίων ὁ δῆμος.

Footnote 395:

On Aiakes see Hdt. VI. 13, 22, 25; on the Samaina coins see Head, _Hist. Num._^2 pp. 153, 603–4; P. Gardner, _Samos_, p. 17, Pl. I. 17, 18; Babelon, _Rev. Num._ 1894, pp. 281–2, Pl. X.; V. Sallet, _Zeit. f. Num._ III. p. 135, V. p. 103.

Footnote 396:

Hdt. III. 60.

Footnote 397:

Fabricius, _Ath. Mitt._ IX. (1884), pp. 165 f.; _Jahrb._ IV. _Arch. Anz._ pp. 39–40; Wiegand, _Abhand. preuss. Akad._ Phil. Hist. Class. 1911; Dennis, _Academy_, 1882, Nov. 4, pp. 335–6; Guérin, _Patmos et Samos_, pp. 196–7. The great tunneled aqueduct that took the water through the mountain which separates the city from the source of the supply is still in existence.

Footnote 398:

Hdt. IV. 87, 88.

Footnote 399:

ἔργα Πολυκράτεια, Aristot. _Pol._ VIII. 1313_b_; cp. Athen. XII. 540_d_; Suet. _Calig._ 21 (regia).

Footnote 400:

Water supplies: Cypselids at Corinth (Πειρήνη), Theagenes at Megara (the home of Eupalinus), Peisistratus at Athens (Καλλιρρόη). Temples: Corinth, Athens (the huge Olympiaeum completed by Hadrian 700 years later).

Footnote 401:

Clearchus _ap._ Athen. 540 f.; cp. Ps.-Plut. I. 61, s.v. Σαμίων ἄνθη, καὶ Σαμιακὴ λαύρα _ap._ Leutsch u. Schneidewin, _Paroem. Graec._ I. p. 330.

Footnote 402:

Burrows, _Discoveries in Crete_, pp. 117 f.; cp. Conway, _ibid._ pp. 227 f. The ancient derivations are interesting but not helpful: see _Et. Mag._ s.v. παρὰ τὸ λίαν ἔχειν αὖραν· ἢ δι’ ἧς ὁ λαὸς ῥεῖ εἰς τὴν ὁδόν.

Footnote 403:

Casaubon _ad_ Athen. XII. cap. 10.

Footnote 404:

Ps.-Plut. I. 61; cp. Athen. 541_a_, Eustath. _ad Odyss._ XXII. 128.

Footnote 405:

See _Encyc. Brit._^{11} s.v. Bazaar: “Persian (bazar, market), a permanent market or street of shops or a group of short narrow streets of stalls under one roof.” A similar picture is given by Radet, _Lydie_, pp. 298–9, of the Lydian γλυκὺς ἄγκων.

Footnote 406:

See Macarius VII. 55_ap._ Leutsch u. Schneidewin, _Paroem. Graec._ II. p. 207, “Samian laura: of those indulging in luxury” (ἐπὶ τῶν εἰς τρυφὴν ἐκκεχυμένων); Ps.-Plut. I. 61_ap._ eosd. I. p. 330, “of those indulging in extreme pleasures (ἐπὶ τῶν ὑστάταις ἡδοναῖς χρωμένων).”

Footnote 407:

It goes on to state that “Polycrates, the tyrant of luxurious Samos, perished through his intemperate mode of life.”

Footnote 408:

ἀσχολίαν καὶ πενίαν τῶν ἀρχομένων, Aristot. _Pol._ 1313_b_.

Footnote 409:

See above, pp. 26–32.

Footnote 410:

Athen. 540_d_, μετεστέλλετο δέ, φησί, καὶ τεχνίτας ἐπὶ μισθοῖς μεγίστοις: Hdt. III. 131.

Footnote 411:

Athen. 541_a_, ἔτι δὲ τῆς συμπάσης πόλεως ἐν ἑορταῖς τε καὶ μέθαις. The sentence is corrupt, but probably ἔτι = furthermore, and the subject is still Polycrates. It occurs in an extract from Clearchus that appears to deal exclusively with the Samian tyrant. If Polycrates is not the subject ἔτι is probably temporal, and the sentence described a state of affairs that had persisted from the time of the tyranny.

Footnote 412:

Diod. I. 95, “behaving with violence both to the citizens and to strangers who sailed in to Samos.”

Footnote 413:

Athen. 602_d_, “there are some who regarded παλαῖστραι (wrestling schools) as counter-fortifications to their own citadels and set them on fire and demolished them, as was done by Polycrates the tyrant of Samos.”

Footnote 414:

Hdt. III. 39 and 45.

Footnote 415:

Hdt. III. 120.

Footnote 416:

They consisted of “hired mercenaries” and “native bowmen,” Hdt. III. 45.

Footnote 417:

_Ap._ Zenob. V. 64, s.v. Πολυκράτης μητέρα νέμει in Leutsch u. Schneidewin, _Paroem. Graec._ I. p. 146.

Footnote 418:

Cp. the story in Hdt. III. 119 of the woman who preferred to save her brother rather than her husband, because the latter was replaceable, but the former not.

Footnote 419:

Suid. Σαμίων ὁ δῆμος.

Footnote 420:

Strabo, XIV. 638; Heraclides, _F.H.G._ II. p. 216; Zenobius, III. 90 (_ap._ Leutsch u. Schneidewin, _Paroem. Graec._ I. p. 79), and Eustath. _ad_ _Dion. Perieg._ 534, ἕκητι Συλοσῶντος εὐρυχωρίν; Suid. and Phot. s.v. Σαμίων ὁ δῆμος. Cp. Argos after the massacre of Cleomenes (about 494 B.C.): “Argos was so denuded of men that the slaves had the whole situation in their hands, ruling and administrating until the sons of the victims grew to manhood,” Hdt. VI. 83.

Footnote 421:

πρὸ δὲ τοῦ τυραννῆσαι κατασκευασάμενος στρωμνὰς πολυτελεῖς καὶ ποτήρια ἐπέτρεπε χρῆσθαι τοῖς ἢ γάμον ἢ μείζονας ὑποδοχὰς ποιουμένοις, Athen. 540_d_.

Footnote 422:

Cp. Tzetz. _Chil._ X. 347, τὸ παλαιὸν περὶ στρωμνὰς ἦν τῇ Μιλήτῳ φήμη.

Footnote 423:

Hdt. III. 139.

Footnote 424:

Grote, III. p. 461.

Footnote 425:

Strabo, XIV. 638.

Footnote 426:

Athen. XI. 464_a_.

Footnote 427:

Bronze, Hdt. II. 37; silver, gold, Hdt. III. 148; Boeckh, _C.I.G._ 138. 7, 19, 27.

Footnote 428:

Cp. the borrowed metal vessels used for the entertainment of the Athenian envoys to Segesta just before the Athenian expedition to Sicily, Thuc. VI. 46.

Footnote 429:

Some ancient authorities held that Theodorus flourished more than a century before Polycrates (Plin. _N.H._ XXXV. 43 (152); cp. Frazer, _Paus._ IV. p. 237). Theodorus is always associated with Rhoecus and the two names may have been borne in alternate generations by one family of artists. This would not require the Rhoeci to have flourished longer in Samos than the Wedgwoods have in Staffordshire. Whether or no this explanation holds, the divergence in dates points to the industry having flourished for a long time in the island. If one date for Theodorus is insisted on, that of Hdt. (I. 51), which makes him the elder contemporary of Polycrates, must be chosen.

Footnote 430:

Hdt. IV. 152.

Footnote 431:

L. Curtius, _Ath. Mitt._ XXXI. (1906), pp. 151 f.

Footnote 432:

Illustrated, _ibid._ pp. 151, 152, Pl. XIV.; _Amer. Journ. Arch._ XI. (1907), p. 84.

Footnote 433:

_E.g._ Gardner, _Gk. Sculp._, Fig. 8.

Footnote 434:

Hence perhaps the friendship of Polycrates with Arcesilaus of Cyrene; cp. Hdt. IV. 152, “It was from this action that the Cyreneans and Theraeans first struck up great friendships with the Samians.”

Footnote 435:

_Ath. Mitt._ XXXI. (1906), pp. 160, 161.

Footnote 436:

Hdt. III. 39, 125.

Footnote 437:

Hdt. III. 40.

Footnote 438:

Hdt. III. 43.

Footnote 439:

Hdt. III. 43.

Footnote 440:

So E. Meyer, _Ges. d. Alt._ II. p. 792; cp. above, p. 72.

Footnote 441:

Hdt. III. 120 f.

Footnote 442:

Hdt. III. 121.

Footnote 443:

πᾶσα ἡ ποίησις πλήρης ἐστι τῆς περὶ αὐτοῦ μνήμης, Strabo, XIV. 638.

Footnote 444:

Hdt. III. 55.

Footnote 445:

Hdt. VIII. 85, IX. 90.

Footnote 446:

The wealth of Polycrates was still proverbial in the days of Plato, see _Meno_, 90_a_, and Stallbaum, _Platonis Meno_, _ad loc._

Footnote 447:

Hdt. II. 177; Plin. _N.H._ V. 11; Mela, I. 9 (60).

Footnote 448:

Hdt. II. 177.

Footnote 449:

Breasted, _Hist._^2 p. 574, apparently an inference from Herodotus’ inaccurate statement that a strict caste system prevailed among the Egyptians: only the priests became an exclusive caste, _ibid._ p. 575.

Footnote 450:

Griffith, _Dem. Pap. Rylands_, III. p. 10.

Footnote 451:

Griffith, _Encyc. Brit._^{11}, Egypt, p. 87.

Footnote 452:

Mallet, _Prem. Étab. des Grecs en Ég._ p. 292, quoting Erman u. Schweinfurth, _Abh. Ak. Berl._ 1885.

Footnote 453:

Diod. Sic. I. 66.

Footnote 454:

Hdt. II. 159; on technical progress in shipbuilding in seventh century Egypt see Mallet, _Prem. Étab._ pp. 99 f.

Footnote 455:

Hdt. II. 158, IV. 42; cp. Aristot. Meteor. I. 14 (352 b); Strabo, XVII. 804; Diod. I. 33; Tzetz. _Chil._ VII. 446. A canal connecting the two seas appears (_pace_ Wiedemann, _Hdt._ II. 158) to have been in use 700 years earlier under Seti I and Ramses II; see Petrie, _Hist._ III. p. 13; Maspero, _Hist. Anc._^5 p. 228. Necho’s work was apparently completed by Darius (How and Wells, _ad_ _Hdt._ II. 158).

Footnote 456:

Hdt. IV. 42 and How and Wells, _ad loc._; cp. Hdt. II. 159 on Necho’s fleets of triremes on both the Mediterranean and the Red Sea.

Footnote 457:

_Hdt._ I.-III. p. 338.

Footnote 458:

For convenience of reference I give here a list of the rulers with whom in this chapter we shall be concerned. The bracketed forms of the names are Egyptian. The dates are taken from Petrie’s _History of Egypt_. In the case of acknowledged kings of all Egypt the number of their Dynasty is added after the date.

A. _Saite rulers._

Tnefachthus (Tafnekht) 749–721 Bocchoris or (?) Anysis (Bakenranf) 721–715 (XXIV) Stephinates or (?) Sethon (Tafnekht II) 715–678 Nechepsus (Nakauba) 678–672 Necho I (Nekau) 672–664 Psammetichus I (Psamtek) 664–610 (XXVI) Necho II (Nekau) 610–594 (XXVI) Psammouthis or Psammetichus II (Psamtek) 594–589 (XXVI) Apries (Haa ab ra, Biblical Hophra) 589–570 (XXVI) Amasis (Aahmes) 570–526 (XXVI) Psammetichus III (Psamtek) 526–525 (XXVI)

B. _Ethiopian rulers._

(Pianchi) 748–725 or later Sabacon (Shabaka) 715–707 (XXV) (Shabataka) 707–693 (XXV) Taharqa (Biblical Tirhakah) (701–) 693–667 (XXV) Ammeris (Amen Rud, Rud Amen, Nut Amen) 667–664 (XXV)

C. _Dates of the dynasties._

XXIV (early Saite) 721–715 XXV (Ethiopian) 715–664 XXVI (Saite) 664–525

Footnote 459:

G. Smith, _Assurbanipal_, pp. 20, 27, 28; cp. Petrie, _Hist._ III. p. 299, “Niku of Mempi and Sa’a.”

Footnote 460:

II. 151.

Footnote 461:

Herodotus (II. 147) says that these kings had been set up by the Egyptians themselves. It is generally recognized that his “dodecarchy” is an Egyptian description of the Assyrian administration, but the Assyrians may well have taken over a previously existing state of things, and the dodecarchy have developed out of the Libyan penetration of Egypt much as the heptarchy resulted from the Anglo-Saxon invasion of Britain.

Footnote 462:

Hdt. II. 152.

Footnote 463:

The Assyrian record gives twenty. Twelve may have been the number of kings in Lower Egypt (Mallet, _Prem. Étab._ p. 36, quoting Lenormant), or the total number at times (Wiedemann, _Hdt._ II. 147), or Herodotus may have got the number twelve from the twelve courts of the labyrinth that he erroneously ascribes to this period (Sayce, _Hdt._ _ad loc._).

Footnote 464:

Diod. I. 66.

Footnote 465:

Diod. III. 11.

Footnote 466:

Mallet, _Prem. Étab._ p. 39. Polyaen. VII. 3 (= Aristagoras and Theban tradition, Gutschmid, _Philol._ 1855, p. 692) makes Psammetichus employ Carians because an oracle had warned his rival to beware of cocks and “the Carians were the first to put crests on their helmets.” Here too the armour is the main thing. The Egyptian warriors (μάχιμοι) were called Kalasiries and Hermotybies (Hdt. II. 164). According to Sayce, _ad loc._, Kalasiries = armed with leather; but cp. How and Wells, _ad loc._

Footnote 467:

He says Psammetichus “sent for” mercenaries from Caria and Ionia.

Footnote 468:

Diod. III. 11 quotes and praises two lost writers on Egypt, Agatharchides of Cnidus (second century B.C.) and Artemidorus of Ephesus (about 100 B.C.).

Footnote 469:

_E.g._ Wiedemann, _Hdt._ II. 152; Meyer, _Ges. Alt._ II. p. 461 (but cp. I. p. 562); Mallet, _Prem. Étab._ pp. 37–8 (but cp. p. 41). Only Mallet, however, sees features typical of the rulers of the period and he quotes only Lydian and Phoenician parallels.

Footnote 470:

Strabo XVII. 801; cp. Eustath. _Comment. ad Dion. Perieg._ 823_ap._ _Geog. Gr. Min._ (Didot), II. p. 362; Strabo knew Egypt personally, cp. II. 118.

Footnote 471:

Cp. however Pseudoscymn. 748–750 _ap. Geog. Gr. Min._ (Didot), I. p. 226, Ὀδησσός, ἣν Μιλήσιοι κτίζουσιν Ἀστυάγης ὅτ’ ἦρχε Μηδίας. This method of dating might have its origin in some work that described the expansion of Greece and Media previous to the great clash of 490–479.

Footnote 472:

_Rhein. Mus._ 1887, pp. 211 f.

Footnote 473:

Mallet, _Prem. Étab._ p. 29.

Footnote 474:

II. 151–2. Mallet, _Prem. Étab._ p. 38, cautiously quotes the Horus myth as a parallel for this flight. Nobody now would agree with Sayce (cp. Wiedemann, _Aeg. Ges._ p. 608) that “the story of Psammetichus’ retreat in the marshes is clearly (_sic_) borrowed from the myth of Horus.” It is far more likely that the story of Horus borrowed from the life of some early Egyptian ruler. Psamtek’s flight to the marshes is as natural and well attested as that of Alfred or of Hereward, the latter of whom is suspiciously like Horus in name as well as in behaviour.

Footnote 475:

In Diodorus’ version of the same affair they are specifically stated to have done so.

Footnote 476:

Diod. _loc. cit._

Footnote 477:

G. Smith, _Assurbanipal_, pp. 64, 66, 67.

Footnote 478:

Radet, _Lydie_, p. 177, translates “où l’on franchit la mer.”

Footnote 479:

Assyrian Pisamiilki: see Mallet, _Prem. Étab._ p. 49, n. 1; but cp. Wiedemann, _Hdt._ II. 152.

Footnote 480:

Breasted, _Hist._ p. 566. This view is now commonly accepted. Against it, see Gutschmid, _Neue Beiträge Ges. Or._ pp. x.-xi.

Footnote 481:

Strabo XIII. 590: see Mallet, _Prem. Étab._ p. 48, n. 1. Later in his reign Psamtek is said by Diodorus (I. 67) to have “made an alliance with the Athenians and some of the other Greeks”; but here we may follow Mallet (_ib._ p. 97; cp. pp. 212, 284) and suspect a reflexion backwards of events of the time of Psammetichus the Libyan (_circ._ 445 B.C.), who took part in the uprising against Persia in which Egypt received much help from Athens (Mallet, _ib._ p. 149, n. 3). On the very few examples from Naukratis of late Proto-Attic vases (Attic of about 600 B.C.) see Prinz, _Funde aus Naukratis_, pp. 75 f.

Footnote 482:

Isaiah XXXVII. 36; II Kings XIX. 35; II Chron. XXXII. 21.

Footnote 483:

Hdt. II. 141, ἕπεσθαι δὲ οἱ τῶν μαχίμων μὲν οὐδένα ἀνδρῶν, καπήλους δὲ καὶ χειρώνακτας καὶ ἀγοραίους ἀνθρώπους.

Footnote 484:

Africanus and Euseb. _F.H.G._ II. p. 593; John of Antioch, _F.H.G._ IV. p. 540.

Footnote 485:

Their significance is well put by Griffith, _Dem. Pap. Rylands_, III. pp. 9–10; cp. Moret, _de Bocchori_, pp. 76 f. quoting Revillout, _Précis droit égy._ pp. 190 f. The Diodorus passages are from I. 94 and I. 79; cp. also Plut. _Demetr._ 27 and Clem. Alex. _Strom._ IV. 18, Bocchoris as clever judge in a claim for payment; Iambl. (Didot, _Erot. Scrip._ p. 517) on Bocchoris’ skill in assessment of values (cup, nosegay, kiss). Moret is scarcely right in saying (_de Bocch._ p. 55) that every kind of story is told to illustrate the wisdom of Bocchoris: cp. Revillout _ap._ Moret, p. 78, “Bocchoris avait voulu surtout faire un code commercial.” Diod. I. 94 places Bocchoris fourth among the reputed lawgivers of Egypt. No similar measures are attributed to any of the earlier three.

Footnote 486:

Schiaparelli, _Mon. Ant._ VIII. pp. 90–100 and Tav. II. The context in which the vase was found (Poulsen, _Orient u. frühgriech. Kunst_, pp. 125–6) recalls the Regulini-Galassi and Bernardini graves.

Footnote 487:

See Poulsen, _Orient u. frühgr. Kunst_, p. 64; cp. Kinch, _Vroulia_, p. 249. Schiaparelli, Revillout (_Quirites et Ég._ p. 4), and Moret (_de Bocch._ pp. 27–8) think it of Phoenician make and provenance.

Footnote 488:

Plut. _Demetr._ 27.

Footnote 489:

πάντων φιλοχρηματώτατον (Diod. I. 94), a trait quite reconcilable with the statement of Zenobius (II. 60), that he was remembered for his justice (cp. Suid. s.v. Βάκχυρις) and ingenuity (ἐπίνοια) as a judge. The statement of Aelian that Bocchoris was hated by his countrymen (_H.A._ XI. 11; cp. Plut. _Vit. Pud._ 3, φύσει χαλεπός) proves only that he, like Solon and Cypselus, excited different feelings in different quarters: nobody would now follow Wiedemann (_Aeg. Ges._ p. 579) and quote it against reports favourable to him, as a proof that neither are of any use for serious history.

Footnote 490:

Manetho, _F.H.G._ II. pp. 592–3; see further below, p. 100, n. 4.

Footnote 491:

Breasted, _Records_, IV. 858; J. de Rougé, _Chrestom. Egypt_, IV.

Footnote 492:

_J.H.S._ XXVI. p. 103; cp. pp. 91–2, 94 f. The main divergence is in the Lesbian thalassocracy, where the Armenian version of the canon of Eusebius gives the dates ann. Abr. 1345–1441 (= 96 years), whereas Jerome gives the duration as 68 years.

Footnote 493:

Note that he probably began his career at a small town near Canopus, E. de Rougé (quoting Brugsch), _Inscr. Hist. Pianchi_ _ap._ Maspero, _Bibl. Égypt._ XXIV. p. 290. De Rougé notes that Tafnekht’s name has no cartouche and no qualification announcing royal birth and from these facts argues that he was of comparatively humble origin.

Footnote 494:

Note that the unrevised dating of the Egyptian thalassocracy makes it fall into the reign of Bocchoris as dated by Eusebius, Fotheringham, _J.H.S._ XXVII. p. 87.

Footnote 495:

Cp. perhaps Steph. Byz. Ἑλληνικὸν καὶ Καρικόν, τόποι ἐν Μέμφιδι ἀφ’ ὧν Ἑλληνομεμφῖται, ὡς Ἀρισταγόρας. ibid. Καρικόν· τόπος ἰδιάζων ἐν Μέμφιδι, ἔνθα Κᾶρες οἰκήσαντες ἐπιγαμίας πρὸς Μεμφίτας ποιησάμενοι Καρομεμφῖται ἐκλήθησαν. Cp. Polyaen. VII. 3, ἀπὸ τῶν Καρῶν ἐκείνων μέρος τι τῆς Μέμφεως κέκληται Καρομεμφῖται. These Caromemphites and Hellenomemphites are generally recognized as descendants of Psamtek’s mercenaries who were transplanted by Amasis to Memphis (Hdt. II. 154).

Footnote 496:

Griffith, _High Priests of Memphis_, p. 8, who compares the Herodotean king Pheron of Egypt (Hdt. II. 111) who plainly is simply a nameless Pharaoh.

Footnote 497:

See below, p. 101.

Footnote 498:

So apparently Breasted, _Hist. Eg._^2 pp. 552–3.

Footnote 499:

Wiedemann, _Aeg. Ges._ p. 587; Lauth, _Aeg. Vorzeit_, p. 439 f; Oppert, _Rapp. Eg. et Assyr._ pp. 14 n. 1, 29 n. 1, quoting Brugsch.

Footnote 500:

Joseph., _Antiq. Iud._ X. 1. 4 (17); cp. Petrie, _Hist. Eg._ III. p. 296.

Footnote 501:

Cp. Hdt. II. 30.

Footnote 502:

Griffith, _High Priests of Memphis_, p. 10.

Footnote 503:

_Ibid._

Footnote 504:

_Königsbuch_, p. 47.

Footnote 505:

II Kings XVIII. 21; XIX. 9; Isaiah XXXVI. 6; XXXVII. 9.

Footnote 506:

Schrader, _Cun. Inscr. and O.T._, (marginal) pp. 292, 303; cp. 357. This fact by itself is fatal to Sourdille (_Hdt. et la relig. de l’Ég._ p. 141) when he places Sethon on his index mythologique on the ground that Shabataka was king of Egypt at this time.

Footnote 507:

Hence the equation with Shabataka, while Tirhaka is equated (Oppert, _Rapp. Égy. et Assyr._ p. 29) with the king of Meroe, is impossible, quite apart from its making nonsense of the reference to the bruised reed.

Footnote 508:

Petrie, _Hist. Eg._ III. p. 312; Griffith, _Dem. Pap. Rylands_, III. p. 6.

Footnote 509:

Griffith, _High Priests of Memphis_, p. 10; Breasted, _Records_, IV. 830 (Pianchi stele).

Footnote 510:

G. Smith, _Assurbanipal_, p. 20.

Footnote 511:

See above, p. 88, n. 1.

Footnote 512:

_F.H.G._ II. p. 593.

Footnote 513:

Hdt. II. 151; Diod. I. 66; the Apis stelai.

Footnote 514:

_F.H.G._ II. p. 594.

Footnote 515:

Psamtek’s daughter Nitokris was adopted by Shepnepet, daughter of Taharqa (or, according to J. de Rougé, _Ét. sur les textes géogr. du temple d’Edfou_, p. 62, of Pianchi), sacerdotal princess of Thebes, Breasted, _Records_, IV. 935 f.; cp. E. de Rougé, _Notice de quelques textes hiérogl. publ. par M. Greene_, _ap._ Maspero, _Bibl. Égypt._ XXIII. pp. 70 f.; J. de Rougé, _Ét. sur les textes géogr. du temple d’Edfou_, pp. 59–63; neither of whom understood that N. was daughter of S. only by adoption. From the omission of the revolt of Gyges and Psamtek from the earlier Assurbanipal cylinders and the statement that Miluhha (Ethiopia) revolted with Saulmugina (brother of Assurbanipal), G. Smith, _Assurbanipal_, p. 78, cp. pp. 154–5, infers that the revolt of Gyges and Psammetichus took place at the time of the general rising against Assyria, which means that Psammetichus was allied with Ethiopia at that time. His early flight into Syria, Hdt. II. 152, is to be connected with his father’s policy rather than with his own.

Footnote 516:

Against this identification see Maspero, _Hist. Anc._^5 p. 459, n. 3; E. de Rougé, _Textes pub. par M. Greene_, _ap._ Maspero, _Bibl. Égypt._ XXIII. pp. 74–75.

Footnote 517:

Psamtek himself acknowledged the Ethiopian Taharqa as his predecessor: Wiedemann, _Aeg. Ges._ p. 600.

Footnote 518:

There can be no doubt that the reigns of rival rulers of the period largely overlap. Otherwise, as pointed out long ago by Gutschmid (_Philol._ 1855, p. 659), we have Psamtek I surviving his father for over 100 years.

Footnote 519:

_Hist. Eg._ III. p. 318.

Footnote 520:

Below, p. 101.

Footnote 521:

_E.g._ by Breasted.

Footnote 522:

Diod. I. 45; Plut. _de Is. et Os._ 8 (_Moral._ 354); cp. Moret, _de Bocch._ pp. 6–8, quoting Mariette and Maspero; Breasted, _Records_, IV. 811, 884, _Hist._^2 p. 546; Griffith, _Dem. Pap. Rylands_, p. 6. The Pianchi stele mentions one son of Tafnekht as killed in Pianchi’s campaign against Tafnekht, and another as spared by him (Breasted, _Records_, IV. 838, 854; cp. Moret, _de Bocch._ p. 6, n. 2).

Footnote 523:

_Hist. Eg._ III. p. 334.

Footnote 524:

_Hist. Eg._ III. p. 327.

Footnote 525:

Athen. X. 418_e_.

Footnote 526:

In Diod. (I. 45) and Plut. (_de Is. et Os._ 8) Tnefachthos, the father of Bocchoris, is said to have accidentally discovered while campaigning against the Arabians the joys of the simple life. In Athen. (418_e_) Neochabis and his son Bocchoris are said both to have been moderate in their diet (μετρίᾳ τροφῇ κεχρῆσθαι). But even if we have here variants of a single story, it would be no proof that we are up against the same individuals.

Footnote 527:

It is implied by Breasted, _Hist._^2 p. 556, when he calls Necho I “doubtless a descendant of Tefnakhte.”

Footnote 528:

Necho I enjoyed the favours of the Assyrian conqueror (G. Smith, _Assurbanipal_, pp. 20, 23, 27–28), but his revolt shows that he was making a virtue of necessity.

Footnote 529:

Translated Griffith, _High Priests of Memphis_, chaps. II., III.: Maspero, _Pop. Stories_, pp. 115 f.

Footnote 530:

Petrie, _Hist._ III. fig. 139.

Footnote 531:

Hdt. II. 173; cp. Athen. VI. 261_c_, X. 438_b_.

Footnote 532:

Maspero, _Pop. Stories_, pp. 281–2; the story, however, is Ptolemaic and may be influenced by Hdt.; cp. Wiedemann, _Hdt._ II. 173. E. Meyer, _Ges. Aeg._ p. 366, n. 1, uses the demotic stories about Amasis’ drunkenness as proof that the Saite Pharaohs were not popular with their Egyptian subjects. It might as well be argued that Edward VII must have been unpopular in England because the masses like to associate him with horse-racing and cigars. When the Egyptians represented Amasis as drunken they paid him the compliment of making him like themselves. The catastrophe of 525 B.C. was helped on by the drunkenness of the servants sent by Amasis to capture Phanes the captain of the Greek mercenaries when he was on his way to desert to Persia (Hdt. III. 4). The Egyptian who “complained before his majesty King Cambyses on the subject of all the strangers who dwelt in the sanctuary of Neith (at Sais) to the end that they might be expelled” (so-called demotic chronicle, _ap._ _Rev. Égy._ 1880, p. 75) is a better witness as to the policy of Cambyses than as to the unpopularity of Amasis; cp. the sequel: “His Majesty ordained: expel all the strangers who dwell in the sanctuary of Neith: destroy their houses.”

Footnote 533:

Hdt. II. 172; Hellanicus, _F.H.G._ I. p. 66; but cp. Revillout, _Rev. Égypt._ 1881, pp. 96–98.

Footnote 534:

_Pop. Stories_, pp. 151 f.

Footnote 535:

_Hist. Anc._^5 p. 531. Maspero refers to the evidence of excavations; Mallet, _Prem. Étab._ pp. 52–53.

Footnote 536:

Hdt. II. 179.

Footnote 537:

_Naukratis_, I. pp. 1 f.

Footnote 538:

Hieron. VIII. (Migne), pp. 365–6.

Footnote 539:

s.v. Naukratis.

Footnote 540:

_Ap._ Athen. XV. 675.

Footnote 541:

Strabo, XVII. 801.

Footnote 542:

Hdt. II. 178.

Footnote 543:

Plutarch, _Sept. Sap. Conviv._ 2 (_Moral._ 146), speaks of a certain Niloxenos the Naukratite as entertained by Periander. If the setting of the dialogue was strictly historical, this would be evidence for the existence of Naukratis before 590 B.C. But Amasis is introduced as reigning in Egypt and Croesus apparently as already King of Lydia, so that chronological inferences from this fictitious dialogue would be rash.

Footnote 544:

Strabo, XVII. 808; cp. Hdt. II. 135; Athen. XIII. 596_b_; Suid. s.v. Ῥοδώπιδος ἀνάθημα.

Footnote 545:

_Oxyr. Pap._ I. pp. 10–13.

Footnote 546:

So Gutschmid, _ap._ Wiedemann, _Hdt._ II. 178.

Footnote 547:

It is forcing the sense of Herodotus’ words to regard them, as does Petrie, _Nauk._ I. p. 4, as proof positive of a pre-Amasis occupation. Still less is Kirchhoff justified (_Stud. Gr. Alph._^4 p. 47) in regarding them as proving that there were no Greeks in Naukratis before the reign of Amasis.

Footnote 548:

_E.g._ Mallet and E. Meyer.

Footnote 549:

I was first led to apply to Egypt my views about the Greek tyranny, before I had read Diodorus on Psammetichus, from Herodotus’ account of Sethon and his following of tradesmen and artizans; above, p. 92.

Footnote 550:

_Nauk._ I. pp. 5, 6, 21.

Footnote 551:

_J.H.S._ XXV. pp. 110 f.

Footnote 552:

_B.S.A._ V. p. 39 f.; _J.H.S._ XXV. p. 109; cp. especially the finds there of vases dedicated “to the gods of the Greeks” and also to various different individual Greek deities. The size of the bricks dates this enclosure as earlier half of sixth century, _B.S.A._ V. p. 35.

Footnote 553:

_B.S.A._ V. pp. 41 n. 2, 48; _J.H.S._ XXV. p. 107. In 1899 there was found in Petrie’s “Great Temenos” a fourth century Egyptian inscription that speaks of “Pi-emro which is called Naukratis.” This is, however, _pace_ Hogarth, _J.H.S._ XXV. p. 106, evidence not for but against thinking of Piemro Naukratis as a double town like Buda-Pesth rather than as a bilingual like Swansea Abertawe.

Footnote 554:

_J.H.S._ XXV. p. 107; _B.S.A._ V. p. 43.

Footnote 555:

_B.S.A._ V. p. 49.

Footnote 556:

_Nauk._ I. pp. 54 f.

Footnote 557:

Hirschfeld, _Rhein. Mus._ 1887, pp. 215–219; Kirchhoff, _Stud._^4 p. 44 f.; cp. Edgar, _B.S.A._ V. pp. 50 f. For Gardner’s reply see _Nauk._ II. pp. 70 f. For a _résumé_ of the epigraphical evidence see E. S. Roberts, _Gk. Epig._ I. pp. 159 f., 323 f.

Footnote 558:

Wiedemann accepts them, _Hdt._ II. 178.

Footnote 559:

_B.S.A._ XIV. p. 263.

Footnote 560:

_B.S.A._ V. p. 52.

Footnote 561:

_Prem. Étab._ pp. 167 f.

Footnote 562:

Hogarth’s publication of the additional inscriptions found in 1903 is still more deficient. Edgar’s account of those found in 1899 is better, though by no means adequate. Of 108 probable dedications (some are too fragmentary to be certain), 48 are on vases (black glaze, black figure, red figure) that cannot have been made before the reign of Amasis, 33 are on cups of types that certainly lasted into his reign, 6 on Naukratite fragments (phase not stated), 2 on (late) Milesian. The rest are on fabrics difficult to date from the meagre descriptions. Unfortunately this collection is not typical. It is to be regretted that Edgar thought it “unnecessary to state the provenance of each separate inscription” (_B.S.A._ V. p. 53). Sixteen have dedications to the gods of the Greeks, and only two to Apollo. We may conclude that a large percentage come from the Hellenium and are therefore after 570. But this does not prove a late date for graffiti generally. Of the sixteen dedications to the gods of the Greeks fifteen are on black figure or black glaze vases: the other is on one of the 33 cups mentioned above. This fact suggests that the dedications generally could have been dated from the vases they are inscribed on if the data had been made available, and that Gardner was fairly right in his main conclusion although wrong in his method of reaching it. Of the Milesian fragments one has a dedication to Apollo, of the Naukratite two (both from the old Southern “Temenos”) are to Aphrodite. It is significant that among the finds of the reign of Amasis “the early local pottery was disappointingly scarce” (_B.S.A._ V. p. 57). It is surprising that the excavators did not draw the obvious conclusion.

Footnote 563:

_B.S.A._ XIV. p. 263; _J.H.S._ XXIX. p. 320; Ure, _Black Glaze Pottery_, pp. 59–61. Others still unpublished from Burrows’ excavations of 1909.

Footnote 564:

For later Boeotian examples see _Ath. Mitt._ XV. pp. 412–413 (Theban Kabeirion) and probably those from Mt Ptoon alluded to in _B.C.H._ IX. 479, 523.

Footnote 565:

Occasional earlier inscriptions are no evidence against this later dating for the beginning of the real vogue.

Footnote 566:

The inscriptions are largely dedications to deities.

Footnote 567:

_B.S.A._ V. p. 57.

Footnote 568:

Ure, _Black Glaze Pottery_, pp. 32 f.

Footnote 569:

Three of the stamped black sherds from Naukratis (_B.S.A._ V. p. 56, nos. 113–15) are inscribed, one with a very secular inscription, one with a Cypriote abbreviation, and one with what may be the beginning of a dedication. The secular inscription on one example of a very common fabric is no argument against the use of other examples for religious purposes.

Footnote 570:

The vases so classed by Prinz, _Funde aus Naukratis_, p. 69, do not belong to the style (cp. Kinch, _Vroulia_, pp. 134 f.). His conclusions _ib._ p. 72 therefore do not hold.

Footnote 571:

_B.S.A._ V. p. 57.

Footnote 572:

Kinch, _Vroulia_, p. 26.

Footnote 573:

Cp. Rhitsona, _passim_.

Footnote 574:

Cp. also Daphnae, which flourished contemporaneously with Corinthian and some phases of proto-Corinthian pottery, but yielded no remains of Corinthian nor, apparently, of proto-Corinthian: Petrie, _Tanis_, II. p. 62.

Footnote 575:

Brit. Mus. 1886, 6–I. 40; Prinz, _Funde aus Nauk._ p. 102.

Footnote 576:

_J.H.S._ XXV. p. 136.

Footnote 577:

Edgar, _B.S.A._ V. p. 52.

Footnote 578:

See _e.g._ _Nauk._ I. Pl. IV. 3.

Footnote 579:

Wiegand, _Sitz. Preuss. Akad._ 1905, pp. 545–6; _Arch. Anz._ 1914, p. 222, p. 219, figs. 29–31; Kinch, _Vroulia_, pp. 194–231.

Footnote 580:

_Funde aus Nauk._ p. 37.

Footnote 581:

The Boeotian Kylix style of _B.S.A._ XIV. pp. 308 f., Pls. VIII. and XV.

Footnote 582:

_Arch. Anz._ 1904, p. 105; 1905, p. 62; 1910, p. 224.

Footnote 583:

A. J. Reinach, _Journ. d. Sav._ 1909, p. 357.

Footnote 584:

Boehlau, _Nekrop._ Taf. XII. 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11; cp. pp. 30, 31.

Footnote 585:

An important fact, not sufficiently taken into account by Boehlau and his followers.

Footnote 586:

Boehlau, _Nekrop._ p. 75; Prinz, _Funde aus Nauk._ p. 33.

Footnote 587:

_Sitz. Preuss. Akad._ 1905, p. 545.

Footnote 588:

The ware has often been called Rhodian and more recently (Kinch, _Vroulia_, _passim_) Camirian. Rhodes has produced far the most specimens, but probably only because tomb-robbing has been particularly prevalent in the island. Rhodian provenance is maintained by Poulsen (_Orient u. frühgr. Kunst_, p. 91), but on dangerous stylistic grounds. His treatment of the Russian finds is particularly unconvincing. All the same Perrot does well (_Hist. de l’Art_, IX. pp. 390, n. 2, 403 f.) to remind us that the Milesian attribution is not a certainty.

Footnote 589:

Prinz, _Funde aus Nauk._ pp. 39 f.

Footnote 590:

Petrie, _Tanis_, II. Pls. XXVII., XXVIII.

Footnote 591:

Petrie, _Tanis_, II. pp. 51, 52 (quoting Hdt. II. 30, 154). Duemmler’s doubts as to the identity of Daphnae and the Greek “Camps” (_Jahrb._ X. p. 36) seem somewhat superfluous.

Footnote 592:

Boehlau, _Ion. Nekrop._ pp. 52 f.; cp. Edgar, _Cat. Vases, Cairo_, pp. 10, 13, 14.

Footnote 593:

_Hist. de l’Art_, IX. p. 404.

Footnote 594:

Prinz, _Funde aus Nauk._ pp. 73–74.

Footnote 595:

_C.R._ II. 233_e_, Oxford Ashmolean Museum, G. 127. 2, 3 (the latter two excavated 1903). For an illustration of this type see _J.H.S._ XXX. p. 354, fig. 18.

Footnote 596:

See the evidence of the Rhitsona grave catalogues, _B.S.A._ XIV.; _J.H.S._ XXIX., XXX.

Footnote 597:

_Nauk._ I. Pl. VI. 1, 2; II. Pl. IX. 5; cp. Prinz, pp. 75 f.

Footnote 598:

_E.g._ Petrie and Gardner, _Nauk._ I. Pl. V. and (coloured) _J.H.S._ VIII. pl. 79.

Footnote 599:

_Nauk._ I. p. 51; II. p. 39: cp. Prinz, pp. 87 f.

Footnote 600:

_Vroulia_, pp. 7, 34, 89.

Footnote 601:

_J.H.S._ XXIX. pl. 25 and pp. 332 f.

Footnote 602:

Cp. Buschor, _Gr. Vasenmal._^1 p. 81; Frickenhaus, _Tiryns_, I. p. 53.

Footnote 603:

_Arch. Anz._ 1910, pp. 224–5; 1914, p. 227.

Footnote 604:

Its absence from Daphnae, the military station from which the Greeks were removed by Amasis soon after 570 B.C., was formerly thought to indicate that at that date it had not yet been invented or at least not yet become popular. But the chief wares found at Daphnae, including the typical (Clazomenian?) Daphnae ware, and excepting only a peculiar local type of situla, are not uncommon at Naukratis (_B.S.A._ V. pp. 60–61). This could hardly be the case, at least not to the same extent, if Naukratis started only when Daphnae ceased. We must seek some other explanation of the lack of Naukratite at Daphnae. May it not have been simply that such delicate ware was ill-suited for a camp? The Naukratite cups show a fabric as fragile as the modern teacup.

Footnote 605:

Over 350; _Nauk._ I. pp. 60 f.

Footnote 606:

_Nauk._ I. p. 11.

Footnote 607:

Its central and crowded position is (_pace_ Edgar, _B.S.A._ V. p. 53) no argument against this view, but rather the reverse, especially if it is remembered that Miletus and presumably as a consequence the Milesian part of Naukratis was in a bad way in the days of Amasis.

Footnote 608:

On the evidence of excavation as to these temene see Prinz, _Funde aus Nauk._ pp. 12–13.

Footnote 609:

Note, however, Perrot’s comments, _Hist. de l’Art_, IX. p. 415.

Footnote 610:

Prinz, pp. 39–42; _B.S.A._ V. pp. 41, 60.

Footnote 611:

_Nauk._ II. p. 60.

Footnote 612:

There is little evidence for the attractive suggestion (A. G. Dunham, _Hist. Miletus_, p. 68) that the establishment should be connected with the victory of the Samian side and the defeat of the Milesian in the (seventh century) Lelantine war.

Footnote 613:

IV. 152.

Footnote 614:

Athen. VII. 283_e_. Hirschfeld may be right in inferring that Apollonius took the foundation of Naukratis back to mythical times (_Rhein. Mus._ 1887, p. 220).

Footnote 615:

Prinz, _Funde aus Nauk._ p. 75, connects with it the Corinthian sherds, some of which are much earlier than Amasis. Better evidence for early Aeginetan dealings with Naukratis are the Naukratite sherds, some of them of the earliest phase, found in Aegina, Prinz, p. 88.

Footnote 616:

Hirschfeld, _Rhein. Mus._ 1887, p. 212; E. Meyer, _Ges. Aeg._ p. 368; Prinz, _Funde aus Nauk._ p. 1.

Footnote 617:

Over 100 are recorded, _Nauk._ II. p. 62 f.; others, _B.S.A._ V. p. 41.

Footnote 618:

Not apparently on it: cp. _Nauk._ II. pl. 3 (section of the site down to the basal mud with no black stratum marked); _B.S.A._ V. p. 44 (spoken of as at South end of Greek quarter); _J.H.S._ XXV. p. 107. Considering that the temple lies so very near the scarab factory and due West of it and that the line of cleavage between Greek and Egyptian runs East and West it is strange that no explicit statement is made on this point.

Footnote 619:

_B.S.A._ V. pp. 38, 44.

Footnote 620:

_J.H.S._ XXV. p. 114.

Footnote 621:

Athen. XV. 675 f.

Footnote 622:

_Nauk._ II.

Footnote 623:

_Nauk._ II. Pl. XIV. 11.

Footnote 624:

_Orient u. frühgr. Kunst_, pp. 93–99 (Cyprus for examples with an Oriental character, Rhodes for those that are purely Greek). An example found at Polledrara (Vulci) comes from a grave (“tomb of Isis,” Montelius, _Civ. Prim. en Ital._ Sér. B, pl. 266. 3) that contained also a scarab of Psammetichus I and is probably to be dated in the second half of the seventh century.

Footnote 625:

_Nauk._ I. Pls. XVI., XVII. For Pl. XVI. 4 see below, fig. 17.

Footnote 626:

_Nauk._ I. p. 21; cp. p. 42; but cp. Petrie, _B.S.A._ V. p. 41, “I found nothing but Egyptian South of Aphrodite.”

Footnote 627:

Prinz, _Funde aus Nauk._ p. 84. Prinz, _ibid._ pp. 86–87, regards some of the early jars from Naukratis as Ionian, comparing the shapes of painted Ionian jars. Whether, as Prinz thinks (_ibid._ p. 13), they prove an early Greek settlement in the South quarter is another question.

Footnote 628:

For Phoenician remains at Naukratis see _B.S.A._ V. p. 49, where they are probably overestimated; cp. Prinz, _Funde aus Nauk._ p. 102.

Footnote 629:

For connecting jars of this sort with Greco-Saite trade cp. perhaps Epiphan. _de Mens. et Pond._ 182_d_ ὁ ἀληθινὸς Σαΐτης ξεστῶν ἐστι κβ (= 44 kotylai).

Footnote 630:

For a more modest estimate of early Naukratis see Mallet, _Prem. Étab._ p. 178. The view of Kahrstedt (Pauly Wissowa, S.V. Herostratos) and Hirschfeld (_Rhein. Mus._ 1887, p. 219) (cp. Endt, _Ion. Vasenmal._ p. 68), that Greek Naukratis dates only from 570, is untenable.

Footnote 631:

One great gap in the evidence would be filled if ever the site of the Milesians’ Fort was found and excavated.

Footnote 632:

See below, pp. 122–3.

Footnote 633:

Petrie, _Hist. Eg._ III. pp. 351–2; _Tanis_, II. pp. 51 f.; cp. Mallet, _Prem. Étab._ pp. 129–130.

Footnote 634:

Sharpe, _Hist. Eg._^6 I. p. 167, thought it directed against Tanis, Mendes and Bubastis; but there is nothing to show that Amasis had anything to fear from these seats of earlier dynasties in the Eastern part of the Delta.

Footnote 635:

Hdt. II. 154; cp. II. 30; Diodorus (I. 67) dates the foundation of The Camps after Psamtek’s victory. The site confirms the date. Daphnae could become the military base of the Saite prince only after he had disposed of the dodecarchy and was mainly concerned with the Assyrian peril; see Petrie, _Tanis_, II. p. 48.

Footnote 636:

Whether troops were actually transferred from the “Fort” to the “Camp” is doubtful. There is little trace of Miletus at Daphnae, where the Greek pottery appears to have been mainly from Samos (Fikellura ware, Petrie, _Tanis_, II. pls. 27, 28) and Clazomenae (Daphnae ware, _ibid._ pls. 29–31). The marked differences between the pottery finds at Naukratis and Daphnae are now generally recognized as being local, not temporal, except in so far as the Daphnae series ends earlier. But the fact of these local differences still awaits a satisfactory explanation. Cp. above, p. 115, n. 2.

Footnote 637:

Meyer, _Ges. d. Alt._^1 I. 384; cp. Mallet, _Prem. Étab._ pp. 43, 80. Mallet, _ibid._ pp. 79–80, makes Herodotus’ μάχιμοι a sort of militia, but this hardly suits their description as a caste. Egyptian documents do indeed show that, in spite of Herodotus II. 164, VI. 60; Plato, _Tim._ 23–24; Isocr. _Bus._ 15–17 (224); Diod. I. 28, 73–74; Strabo XVII. 787; there was no hard caste system in ancient Egypt; cp. Wiedemann, _Hdt._ II. 164; Mallet, _Prem. Étab._ p. 411. But the μάχιμοι, though not a caste, were plainly a sharply defined class.

Footnote 638:

_Prem. Étab._ p. 80.

Footnote 639:

_Ges. d. Alt._^1 I. 561.

Footnote 640:

Hdt. II. 30; Diod. I. 67; Strabo XVI. 770 and XVII. 786 (where they are said to have been still in Ethiopia in the days of the historian); Pliny, _N.H._ VI. 35 (30); Ptol. _Geog._ IV. 7 (Didot, i. p. 783); Hesych. s.v. Μαχλαίονας. On the authenticity of this story see Wiedemann, _Hdt._ II. 30, pp. 128 f., _Ges. Aeg._ pp. 137–8 (sceptical); Mallet, _Prem. Étab._ pp. 77 f. Herodotus says there were 240,000, Diodorus over 200,000. These numbers will not now be regarded as sceptically as they were in the last century.

Footnote 641:

Wiedemann, _Hdt._ II. 161; Breasted, _Records_, IV. 1000, 1001.

Footnote 642:

Hdt. II. 169; Diod. I. 68; Petrie, _Hist. Eg._ III. 351–2; Breasted, _Records_, IV. 1003.

Footnote 643:

Hdt. II. 178.

Footnote 644:

Hdt. I. 77; cp. Xen. _Cyrop._ VI. 2. 10.

Footnote 645:

Hdt. III. 39.

Footnote 646:

Maspero, _Passing of the Empires_, p. 645; cp. Plut. _Mor._ 261 (_Mul. Virt._ 25).

Footnote 647:

Hdt. II. 180.

Footnote 648:

From a demotic chronicle published by E. Revillout, _Proc. Soc. Bib. Arch._ XIV. (Mar. 1892), pp. 251–4; cp. _Rev. Égyptol._ 1880, p. 60.

Footnote 649:

Hdt. II. 159; Hirschfeld, _Rhein. Mus._ 1887, p. 219, suggests that the fleet with which Necho defeated the Syrians may have owed much to the Milesians’ Fort.

Footnote 650:

Cp. Hdt. II. 161; Lepsius, _Denkm._ III. 274_d_, _e_; Roberts, _Gk. Epig._ I. 151 f.

Footnote 651:

Hdt. II. 160; according to Diod. I. 95, the appeal was made to Amasis.

Footnote 652:

Hdt. II. 163; Diod. I. 68.

Footnote 653:

Heuzey, _Fig. Ant._ pl. 7. 2; Mallet, _Prem. Étab._ fig. 27; Prinz, _Funde aus Nauk._ p. 107.

Footnote 654:

For Amasis and trade cp. Plut. _Sept. Sap. Conv._ 6 (_Moral._ 151), ἐκείνῳ γὰρ (sc. Ἀμάσιδι) ἂν γένοιτο πλέονος ἀξία τῆς ἐμπορίας ἡ παρενθήκη.

Footnote 655:

Mallet, _Prem. Étab._ p. 414.

Footnote 656:

Cp. Griffith, _Dem. Pap. Rylands_, III. p. 44, n. 5.

Footnote 657:

_Ibid._ p. 201. The word analyses p (article)—san (man, vendor)—mtk.

Footnote 658:

Earlier Egyptologists derived the word quite differently, explaining it as Libyan (_e.g._ V. Stern, _Z. f. Aeg. Spr._ 1883, pp. 24 f. and references, _ad loc._) or Ethiopian (= son of the Sun), (Brugsch, _Ges. Aeg._ pp. 731 f., but cp. Wiedemann, _Aeg. Ges._ p. 623). Meyer, _Ges. Aeg._ p. 363, describes it simply as “not Egyptian,” presumably as not occurring before the Saite period. But this is no argument if the name was till then extremely plebeian. Petrie rejects “man (vendor of) mixing bowls,” as manifestly absurd and analyses P-sam-te-k = the (Egyptian) lion’s (Upper Egyptian) son (Ethiopian) the (Ethiopian suffix) (_Hist. Eg._ III. p. 320, accepted as probable by How and Wells, _ad Hdt._ II. 151). He compares Shaba-ta-ka (Ethiopian dynasty, 707–693) = wild cat’s son the; but this is no parallel for the real difficulty, which is the extraordinary hybrid composition. Linguistic hybrids are legion. Our own forefathers enriched Latin with the word quicksethedgavit. But so complicated a hybrid as Petrie implies cannot be considered seriously without some very solid evidence for really parallel monstrosities. Spiegelberg (_Orient. Litt. Zeit._ 1905, p. 560), after arguing convincingly against Petrie, accepts “bowl vendor” as a popular etymology, but rejects it as the real meaning, “denn kein König wird Mischkrughändler heissen wollen.” He explains the word as really meaning “man of the god Mtk”; only no such god is known. Even if there were, Spiegelberg’s explanation cuts both ways. If, as the evidence has shown, there is a probability that Psammetichus I had really been a vendor of something like mixing bowls, and got his name from his occupation, some such aristocratic explaining away of the plebeian name may perhaps have induced him and his successors to keep it, just as Mrs Snooks in one of Wells’ stories became more than reconciled to her name after it had been explained as an abbreviation of Sevenoaks and spelt accordingly.

Footnote 659:

_Dem. Pap. Rylands_, III. pp. 44, n. 5: 201, n. 3.

Footnote 660:

_Ibid._ p. 201, n. 3.

Footnote 661:

Hdt. II. 151.

Footnote 662:

Griffith, _ibid._ p. 44, n. 5, quoting Hdt. II. 174; cp. Ael. _V.H._ II. 41; Athen. VI. 261, X. 438.

Footnote 663:

There is little evidence for a trade in mixed wine. The ancient Greeks habitually drank mixed wine, but the mixing was done at home. In England there is no wholesale trade in claret cup. But note Mod. Gk. κρασί, = mixture, the normal word for wine.

Footnote 664:

_Ibid._ p. 44, n. 5.

Footnote 665:

Babelon, _Rev. Num._ 1894, pp. 267 f.; Th. Reinach, _L’Hist. par les Monnaies_, pp. 32–3; Head, _Hist. Num._^2 p. 643; Macdonald, _Coin Types_, pp. 6–8; Radet, _Rev. des Univ. du Midi_, 1895, p. 120; Busolt, _Gr. G._^2 I. p. 493.

Footnote 666:

Evans in _Corolla Numismatica B. V. Head_, pp. 363–7; Ridgeway, _Compan. Gk. Stud._^3 p. 537.

Footnote 667:

_Brit. Mus. Excavations at Ephesus_ (1908), chaps. IV., V.

Footnote 668:

Three have the ‏𐤥𐤠𐤩𐤥𐤤𐤦‎ inscription that Six explained as an abbreviation of Alyattes’ name, _Num. Chron._ 1890, pp. 203 f.

Footnote 669:

Babelon, _Origines_, pp. 181 f.

Footnote 670:

Xen. _ap._ Poll. IX. 83; Hdt. I. 94.

Footnote 671:

Cp. Th. Reinach, _Hist. par les Monn._ p. 32. Cp. also the account of the invention of money in _Rep._ II. 371, where Plato connects it with the rise of middlemen.

Footnote 672:

See below, p. 148.

Footnote 673:

Soph. _Antig._ 1037.

Footnote 674:

Strabo XIII. 626 (cp. XIV. 680); Archilochus, quoted below, p. 134; cp. Justin I. 7.

Footnote 675:

Bacchyl. ed. Jebb, fr. 10 (Λυδία λίθος μανύει χρυσόν); Theophr. _de Lap._ 4; Pliny, _N.H._ XXXIII. 43; Pollux VII. 102; Hesych. s.v. βασανίτης and χρυσῖτις λίθος; cp. Ridgeway, _Num. Chron._ 1895, pp. 104 f.

Footnote 676:

Hdt. V. 52 f.; cp. Radet, _Lydie_, pp. 23 f. and references p. 23, n. 1.

Footnote 677:

Radet, pp. 31 f. On the political importance of the great highways of trade in Lydia see Radet, _Lydie_, pp. 108 (tolls along caravan routes in eighth century B.C., Nic. Dam. _F.H.G._ III. p. 381, fr. 49), 227–8 (ferry tolls levied by the state under the dynasty founded by Gyges, and state compensation for damage done by the flooding of the waterways, Xanthus, _F.H.G._ I. p. 37, fr. 4).

For Sardis as geographically more likely than any coast city to have evolved a metal coinage see Radet, _Lydie_, p. 156; Th. Reinach, _Hist. par les Monn._ p. 22. For the contrary view see Babelon, _Rev. Num._ 1895, pp. 352 f., _Origines_, p. 218.

Footnote 678:

_E.g._ P. Gardner, _Gold Coinage of Asia_, p. 4, _Hist. Anc. Coin._ p. 69; Brandis, _Münzwesen_, p. 201; cp. also Radet, _Lydie_, p. 293.

Footnote 679:

Plut. _Apophth. Lac._, _Agesil._ 40 (_Mor._ 211_b_).

Footnote 680:

Hdt. I. 54.

Footnote 681:

The fact that 73 out of 87 early electrum coins found recently in the Artemision at Ephesus are of types usually assigned to Lydia is thus no argument against the usual attribution. Of the rest two are Phocaean, two possibly Phocaean, four possibly belong to Cyme, one perhaps to Ephesus, while five are quite uncertain. Head, _Brit. Mus. Excav. Ephesus_, pp. 79 f.

Footnote 682:

F. Lenormant, _Monn. royal. de la Lydie_, p. 28, quotes two early electrum coins, one _obv._ striated, _rev._ three incuses, as found in the Plain of Sardis, the other, _obv._ four petals, _rev._ one incuse, as found at Nymphi, about 12 miles inland from Smyrna. An electrum third (67·6 grains) _obv._ lion’s head, _rev._ one incuse, _Brit. Mus. Coins, Lydia_, p. 2, no. 4, is said to have been found at Ala Shehr (Philadelphia), 30 miles S.E. of Sardis.

Footnote 683:

Borrell, _Num. Chron._ VI. (1843), p. 156; cp. _Brit. Mus. Coins, Troas_, etc. p. lvii.

Footnote 684:

_Num. Chron._ 1890, p. 210, n. 69; cp. Babelon, _Rev. Num._ 1895, pp. 354 f., _Origines_, pp. 215 f.

Footnote 685:

_Rev. Num._ 1895, p. 303; _ib._ Pl. VI. 3.

Footnote 686:

Head, _Brit. Mus. Coins, Ionia_, p. xviii.

Footnote 687:

Head, _Hist. Num._^2 p. 643, Ridgeway, _Metal. Curr._ p. 293, and others have stated that the 168 gr. standard was in regular use for early electrum, but their only evidence appears to be this one coin; cp. Head, _ib._ p. xl., who notes that no divisions of this standard are known in electrum. They are fully represented in Lydian gold and silver. Others, _e.g._ Radet, _Lydie_, p. 233, explain it as a three-quarter stater of the Phoenician standard normally employed for Lydian electrum, but a three-quarter stater is most unlikely. Nobody has suggested that the coin was meant to pass as gold.

Footnote 688:

_Rev. Num._ 1895, p. 303.

Footnote 689:

Head, _Brit. Mus. Coins of Ionia_, p. xxxviii.

Footnote 690:

_Ibid._ p. 184, nos. 6–11. Babelon himself ascribes three small early silver pieces to Miletus (his nos. 18, 23, 39 = Pl. VI. 7, 10, 17). They weigh 1·26 grammes, 1·75 grammes, 1·10 grammes and are hardly helpful from the metrological point of view.

Footnote 691:

_La Chine et les Chinois_ (1847), p. 173; this, though he refers _ibid._ to ingots of silver mingled with gold dust, called “syce,” of which the literal translation is “fine silk.”

Footnote 692:

See further, Radet, _Lydie_, pp. 155 f.; Macdonald, _Coin Types_, pp. 6–8.

Footnote 693:

_F.H.G._ III. p. 72, fr. 1; so _Et. Mag._ and _Et. Gud._ s.v. τύραννος.

Footnote 694:

Cp. Hippias of Elis, _F.H.G._ II. p. 62; Schol. Aesch. _P.V._ 224; Plut. _Vit. Hom._, Didot V. p. 153.

Footnote 695:

Hdt. I. 12.

Footnote 696:

_Ap._ Aristot. _Rhet._ III. 17 and Plut. _De Tranqu. An._ 10 (_Mor._ 470_c_). The two lines quoted above were not consecutive. Plutarch quotes them thus:

οὔ μοι τὰ Γύγεω τοῦ πολυχρύσου μέλει καὶ οὐδ’ εἷλέ πω με ζῆλος, οὐδ’ ἀγαίομαι θεῶν ἔργα, μεγάλης δ’ οὐκ ἐρέω τυραννίδος.

But the καὶ appears to connect two extracts from a single passage. Aristotle, who quotes only οὔ μοι τὰ Γύγεω, states that the passage was put by Archilochus into the mouth of Charon the carpenter (τέκτων).

Footnote 697:

Cp. _Et. Gud._ quoted above, defended by Radet, pp. 146–8. -αννος, so R. S. Conway writes to me, is neither Greek nor Latin, but occurs often in Etruscan (= Lydian?) and several times in Lycian: “tyrant” is derived from “Tyrrhenian” (= Etruscan) by Philochorus (_ap._ Schol. Lucian, _Catapl._ I: τύραννος εἴρηται ἀπὸ τῶν Τυρρηνῶν ... ὥς φησι Φιλόχορος. οἱ οὖν Ἀθήνησι ῥήτορες ἔθος ἔχουσι τοὺς βασιλέας τυράννους καλεῖν ἀντὶ τῆς παρ’ αὐτοῖς βίας τῶν Τυρρηνῶν: the reference is to the Tyrrhenians of Lemnos and Imbros), Tzetzes, _Chil._ VIII. 890–1 (ἐκ τούτων καὶ τὸ τύραννος ὁμοίως ἐπεκλήθη· βίαιοι γὰρ οἱ Τυρρηννοὶ καὶ θηριώδεις ἄγαν), Verrius Flaccus (_ap._ Festum s.v. turannos, ed. Teubner, p. 484, a cuius gentis (sc. Tyrrhenicae) praecipua crudelitate etiam tyrannos dictos ait Verrius), and the _Et. Mag._ (ἤτοι ἀπὸ τῶν Τυρσηνῶν· ὠμοὶ γὰρ οὗτοι). On Vedic affinities of the word τύραννος see Peile, _ap._ Jebb, _Soph. O. T._ p. 5.

Footnote 698:

_F.H.G._ III. p. 380.

Footnote 699:

Radet, _Lydie_, p. 79.

Footnote 700:

_F.H.G._ III. pp. 380–1; cp. Steph. Byz. s.v. Θυεσσός, “πόλις Λυδίας ... ἀπὸ Θυεσσοῦ καπήλου.”

Footnote 701:

_F.H.G._ III. pp. 381–2. The scene of the story is doubtless Hermocapelia, put by Pliny, _N.H._ V. 33, in Pergamene territory, by Hierocles 670, Teub. p. 21, in the eparchy of Lydia. Schubert, _Könige v. Lydien_, p. 20, identifies Thyessos with Hermes himself.

Footnote 702:

_Lydie_, p. 98.

Footnote 703:

Radet, _Lydie_, p. 79; _Rev. des Univ. du Midi_, 1895, p. 117.

Footnote 704:

Radet, pp. 95 f. and _Rev. des Univ. du Midi_, 1895, pp. 118–9 (foundation of Sinope by Milesians, 756 B.C., implies knowledge on part of Miletus of great eastern caravan routes).

Footnote 705:

Heraclides, _F.H.G._ II. p. 216, fr. 11.

Footnote 706:

_Rhein. Mus._ XXXV. (1880), p. 520.

Footnote 707:

Hdt. I. 7 f.; Plut. _Mor._ 622_f_; Justin I. 7. In Nic. Dam. _F.H.G._ III. pp. 384–5 she does not aid Gyges.

Footnote 708:

_Lydie_, p. 134; cp. Nic. Dam. _F.H.G._ III. pp. 396, 397, fr. 63, 65; Ael. _V.H._ III. 26. The Ephesian connexion is (_pace_ Radet) only attested for the later rulers of Gyges’ house. Cp. Gelzer, _Rhein. Mus._ XXXV. p. 521. Cp. too with the attempt to poison Cadys the attempt to poison Croesus, Plut. _de Pyth. Orac._ 16 (_Mor._ 401).

Footnote 709:

Nic. Dam. _F.H.G._ III. p. 397, fr. 65; cp. Ael. _V.H._ IV. 27; Hdt. I. 92. For a different version or phase of the struggle see Plut. _de Pyth. Orac._ 16 (_Mor._ 401).

Footnote 710:

Babelon, _Origines_, p. 105, calls him a banker, on what authority I cannot discover: Nic. Dam. calls him simply εὖ μάλα εὐπόρου.

Footnote 711:

Note that Sadyattes (_ap._ Suid. (s.v. Κροῖσος), Alyattes) bears a royal name, and that he is almost certainly the rival ἀντιστασιώτης of Croesus of Hdt. I. 92. A _var. lect._ in Nic. Dam. has ἔπαρχος (governor) instead of ἔμπορος (merchant). Sadyattes may therefore well have been a great noble: but that is no reason, _pace_ Gelzer, _Rhein. Mus._ XXXV. 520, for not assigning the chief rôle to his wealth.

Footnote 712:

Pp. 37 f.

Footnote 713:

Hdt. I. 54.

Footnote 714:

Poll. III. 87, _Brit. Mus. Coins, Lydia_, p. XX.

Footnote 715:

Aristot. (?) _Mirab. Ausc._ 52 (834_a_).

Footnote 716:

Strabo XIII. 626; Justin I. 7.

Footnote 717:

Strabo, _ibid._; Hdt. I. 92.

Footnote 718:

Nic. Dam. _F.H.G._ III. fr. 65 end.

Footnote 719:

_Lydie_, p. 242.

Footnote 720:

The ἀνὴρ ἐχθρός of Hdt. I. 92 is almost certainly the Sadyattes of Nic. Dam. See Gelzer, _Rhein. Mus._ XXXV. 520; Schubert, _Könige v. Lydien_, p. 61.

Footnote 721:

Hdt. I. 88–89; the story is repeated but with the point omitted, Diod. IX. 33.

Footnote 722:

Cp. Bacchyl. III., the earliest reference to the fall of Lydia, written for Hiero of Syracuse in 468 B.C., where Croesus is made during the sack of Sardis to immolate himself and his family and to be saved by Zeus and carried off by Apollo to the land of the Hyperboreans.

Footnote 723:

Hdt. I. 93; cp. Hipponax, fr. 5 παρὰ τὸν Ἀττάλεω τύμβον κ.τ.λ. (an almost contemporary reference); Strabo XIII. 627. For excavations of this monument see _Abh. Preuss. Akad._ 1858, pp. 539 f. and Pls. IV. (tomb) and V. (pottery from the tomb). The pottery suits very well the period of the Mermnad dynasty.

Footnote 724:

Radet, _Lydie_, p. 226, infers for the time of Croesus corporations of artizans (potters, boot-makers, dyers, etc.) such as existed in Lydia in the time of the Roman empire, but his suggestion is too speculative to build on.

Footnote 725:

Strabo XIII. 627; cp. Athen. XIII. 573_a_, “Clearchus in Book I. of his Erotica says Gyges, king of Lydia, ... when (his mistress) died, gathered all the Lydians of the land and raised what is called the tomb of the hetaera.” This looks like the version preserved by Strabo with details borrowed from Herodotus: note that the work is here ascribed to Gyges.

Footnote 726:

Hdt. I. 153–4.

Footnote 727:

Hdt. VII. 27, 28.

Footnote 728:

Hdt. VII. 27, 28; Plut. _de Mul. Virt._ 27 (_Mor._ 262); Polyaen. VIII. 42.

Footnote 729:

Gelzer, _Rhein. Mus._ XXXV. p. 521.

Footnote 730:

How and Wells, _Hdt._ VII. 27.

Footnote 731:

_Lydie_, pp. 155 f., and particularly pp. 162–3.

Footnote 732:

Early in his reign before the Cimmerian invasions (on which see Gelzer, _Rhein. Mus._ XXX. pp. 256 f.), _Lydie_, p. 166. So Cruchon, _Banques dans l’Antiq._ pp. 15–16.

Footnote 733:

_Monn. dans l’Antiq._ I. p. 110; cp. Babelon, _Origines_, pp. 39–40.

Footnote 734:

Cp. Babelon, _Origines_, p. 94, quoting Terrien de la Couperie, _Brit. Mus. Cat. Chinese Coins_, p. 4, on period before fourth century A.D. So also _ibid._ (_Cat. Chinese Coins_), p. xlviii. 5. Bonacossi, _La Chine et les Chinois_ (1847), pp. 172–3, says there is no government mint: the precious metals are formed into ingots by private bankers: these ingots bear the name of districts, bankers, etc. To the present day Chinese bankers stamp foreign coins with their own countermarks, Babelon, _Origines_, pp. 121–2.

Footnote 735:

Babelon, _Origines_, pp. 41, 42.

Footnote 736:

Babelon, _Origines_, p. 98.

Footnote 737:

E. Thomas, _Chron. Pathan Kings Delhi_, p. 344 (cp. E. Thomas, _Anc. Indian Weights_, p. 57, n. 4), goldsmiths and merchants struck coins in fourteenth century A.D.; J. Malcolm, _Mem. Central India_, II. 80, similar issues still in 1832 but with permit from central government; cp. Babelon, _Origines_, p. 95.

Footnote 738:

Babelon, _Origines_, p. 83, at Kieff and Novgorod in the Middle Ages ingots weighing rouble or multiple stamped, sometimes with name, by merchants, bankers or goldsmiths. This practice arose before the Russian government first struck coins. On Greek and Roman stamped ingots see Saglio, _Dict. d. Antiq._ s.v. Metalla, p. 1865; all appear to be centuries later than the invention of money, on which accordingly they throw no light.

Footnote 739:

Babelon, _Origines_, p. 100; _e.g._ Chalmers’ shillings struck by a goldsmith named Chalmers in 1783, numerous private issues in California, 1831–1851, with the legend “native gold” or “pure gold” and the name and sometimes address of the striker.

Footnote 740:

Jevons, _Money_^{23}, p. 65.

Footnote 741:

_Origines_, pp. 110 f.

Footnote 742:

_Ibid._ p. 123.

Footnote 743:

Head, _Hist. Num._^2 pp. lvii. and 644–5, dates private issues 687–610; P. Gardner, _Gold Coinage of Asia_, p. 9, attributes the first state coinage anywhere to Croesus, against which view see the whole of the present chapter. Gardner’s own objection to his own theory, based on the ϝαλϝει coins, is not cogent. Alyattes might, of course, have struck coins as a private venture. The late King George of Greece traded largely in wine grown on the royal estates, but the wine was in no sense a state beverage; cp. also Cruchon, _Banques dans l’Antiq._ pp. 11 f. For Babelon himself see further _Rev. Num._ 1895, pp. 332–3, on the early electrum coin, _obv._ stag, φανος ἐμι σεμα; _rev._ one oblong incuse between two square, which Babelon ascribes to Ephesus and suggests was issued by “one of those rich bankers who lent to kings and whose safes were filled with precious metals”; see Hdt. VII. 27–29; but cp. Macdonald, _Coin Types_, p. 51. Against Babelon’s view has been urged the fact that his supposed collections of private marks on such coins as our fig. 19. _a_ (p. 127) form in each case a single group all stamped together. But such a stereotyped grouping on the earliest extant specimens is no argument against his explanation of the origin of these curious marks, which on other very early coins occur in positions which show them to be counter-stamps: see _e.g._ that on the back of the tortoise of our fig. 20. _b_.

Footnote 744:

His accession is variously dated 716 B.C. (Hdt.), 708 (Euphorion), 698 (African.), 687 (Euseb. Arm. vers.); he was still alive after 660 B.C. and perhaps after 650 (Geo. Smith, _Assurbanipal_, pp. 64–68; cp. _ibid._ pp. 341–2, Winckler, _Altorient. Forsch._ VI. pp. 474 f., 494 f.).

Footnote 745:

The Γυγάδας χρυσός of Poll. III. 87 and VII. 98 was not, _pace_ Radet, _Lydie_, p. 162; _Rev. d. Univ. du Midi_, 1895, p. 119, necessarily or even probably coined, but the history of Croesus shows that a king who unquestionably coined might yet be famous for his uncoined gold. Archilochus calls Gyges “the golden.”

Footnote 746:

Hdt. I. 8, 91; cp. Xanthus, _ap._ Nic. Dam. _F.H.G._ III. fr. 49, p. 383 ἐκέλευσε (τὸν Γύγην) μετὰ τῶν δορυφόρων εἶναι.

Footnote 747:

_Könige von Lydien_, p. 30.

Footnote 748:

_Ibid._ p. 34; cp. Athen. VI. 231_e_, “The Delphian dedications of silver and gold were started by Gyges the king of the Lydians (ὑπὸ πρώτου Γύγου ... ἀνετέθη): before his reign the Pythia had neither silver nor gold, as is stated by Phanias the Ephesian and Theopompus,” and Hdt. I. 13, 14, “he won the throne and was confirmed on it by the Delphic oracle”.... “In this way the Mermnadae won the tyranny ... and Gyges, having become tyrant, sent offerings to Delphi not a few, but most of the silver offerings at Delphi are his, and besides the silver he offered vast sums of gold.”

Footnote 749:

“He is dedicating golden bricks to the Pythian as payment for his oracles,” Lucian, _Charon_, II; Hdt. I. 50 f.; “we may suppose that the liberality of Croesus was intended to secure the Lacedaemonian alliance through Delphic influence,” How and Wells, _Hdt._ I. 53 (doubtless in view of Xen. _Cyr._ VI. 2. 11 (news is brought to Cyrus) “that Croesus had sent to Sparta about an alliance”); μέγιστα θνατῶν ἐς ἀγαθέαν ἀνέπεμψε Πυθώ (Κροῖσος), Bacchyl. III. 61–62.

Footnote 750:

Smith, _Assurbanipal_, pp. 64–68.

Footnote 751:

_Lydie_, pp. 57 f.; cp. Plut. _Qu. Gr._ 45 (_Moral._ 302), “when Gyges revolted and made war on him (Candaules)”: cp. also Hdt. I. 13, “when the Lydians much resented the way Candaules was treated and took up arms.” But Herodotus goes on to say that the two factions came to an understanding to refer the dispute to Delphi.

Footnote 752:

Hdt. I. 14; _F.H.G._ III. Nic. Dam. fr. 62; IV. p. 401, fr. 6; Paus. IV. 21, 5; IX. 29, 4; Suid. s.v. Γύγης and Μάγνης.

Footnote 753:

Radet, _Lydie_, p. 214; cp. _ib._ 243 on the commercial necessities that drove Croesus to make war on Cyrus when the Persians, “who are accustomed to make no use of markets and have no market at all” (Hdt. I. 153), threatened the great trade routes of the East.

Footnote 754:

Radet, _Lydie_, p. 171; cp. Hdt. I. 17, on the way Sadyattes and Alyattes warred against Miletus, and also Ael. _V.H._ III. 26; Polyaen. VI. 50 on Croesus’ war with Ephesus.

Footnote 755:

Plut. _Qu. Gr._ 45 (_Moral._ 302_a_): ἦλθεν Ἄρσηλις ἐκ Μυλέων ἐπίκουρος τῷ Γύγῃ μετὰ δυνάμεως, καὶ τὸν Κανδαύλην ... διαφθείρει. This notice is “historisch wertlos,” Meyer, _G. d. A._ I. p. 547, following Duncker, _G. d. A._^5 I. p. 488, but cp. Gelzer, _Rhein. Mus._ XXXV. p. 528; Schubert, _Könige v. Lydien_, p. 33; Radet, _Lydie_, pp. 124 f., 133 f., 136, n. 2. It is more than a coincidence that Carian mercenaries become famous just at this time: cp. Archilochus. In Lydia, as in Egypt (pp. 89, 123), mercenaries, in great part Greek, play an important part throughout the period of the tyrant dynasty. Croesus raised a force of mercenaries before he became king, Nic. Dam. fr. 65, _F.H.G._ III. p. 397; mercenaries fought for Croesus against Cyrus, Hdt. I. 77; cp. Radet, _Lydie_, p. 261.

Footnote 756:

Nic. Dam. fr. 49; _F.H.G._ III. p. 385.

Footnote 757:

_Rep._ II. 359_d_; cp. Cic. _de Off._ III. 9 (38); Suid. s.v. Γύγου δακτύλιος.

Footnote 758:

Nic. Dam. _F.H.G._ III. p. 382; cp. Gelzer, _Rhein. Mus._ XXXV. pp. 515 f.; Radet, pp. 80 f.; cp. also Hdt. I. 8.

Footnote 759:

_Lydie_, pp. 89, 120.

Footnote 760:

Cp. below, pp. 149 f.

Footnote 761:

_Lydie_, p. 224. For Gyges’ invisibility Radet, p. 153, compared that of Deiokes the Mede who, when he became king, withdrew himself from the sight of his subjects, ὁρᾶσθαι βασιλέα ὑπὸ μηδενός, Hdt. I. 99.

Footnote 762:

_N.H._ XXXIII. 4.

Footnote 763:

Gelzer, _Rhein. Mus._ XXX. pp. 256 f. According to Eusebius Midas became king in B.C. 738.

Footnote 764:

Hammer, _Zeits. f. Num._ XXVI. 4; Midas himself worked the mines of Mt Bermion, Strabo XIV. 680. The fame of the Phrygians as metal workers went back to mythical times, see Schol. Ap. Rhod. I. 1129, with which cp. Diod. V. 64; Clem. Alex. _Strom._ I. p. 360 (132 edit. Sylburg.).

Footnote 765:

Note that Kelainai (the home of the rich Pythes, above, p. 140), which lies in East Phrygia near the source of the Maeander, occupied “a central point from which trade routes radiated in every direction. It became a commercial junction where goods arriving by caravan routes from the East were packed in chests to be forwarded to various sea ports.” These words (Head, _Hist. Num._^2 p. 666) refer to Apamea, which, from its occupation, was nicknamed Kibotos (Box), but Apamea was only a revised version of Kelainai, which lay on the heights above it and was supplanted by the lower city in the time of Antiochus I.

Footnote 766:

Ovid, _Met._ XI. 100 f.; Hyginus, fab. 191.

Footnote 767:

Poll. IX. 83; so Heraclides, _F.H.G._ II. p. 216; Radet, p. 160, acutely argues from the association here of Cyme and Phrygia that this account associates the invention of money with the great caravan route, of which Cyme was the main terminus before the rise of the Lydian Mermnadae, about which time it was replaced by Ephesus, the Greek city with which the Lydians maintained the most friendly terms; cp. Ramsay, _J.H.S._ IX. (1888), pp. 350 f., followed by S. Reinach, _Chroniques d’Orient_, I. p. 574, Radet, _Lydie_, p. 172.

Footnote 768:

Hdt. I. 14.

Footnote 769:

Polyaen. VII. 5 makes Midas secure his throne (Μίδαν τύραννον ἀνηγόρευσαν) “by pretending to celebrate by night rites in honour of the great gods.”

Footnote 770:

On Midas and the ring see also K. F. Smith, _Amer. Journ. Phil._ XXIII. p. 273.

Footnote 771:

Aristot. (?) _Mirab. Ausc._ 45, 47 (833_b_).

Footnote 772:

Strabo XIII. 591, XIV. 680. See also Radet, _Lydie_, p. 44, on Eurip. _Bacch._ 13.

Footnote 773:

Strabo XIII. 590–1, XIV. 680; cp. Xen. _Hell._ IV. viii. 37.

Footnote 774:

It is not known when the river was first exploited, but an early date may be safely assumed. The gold washings of the Phasis are said to have been the objective of the Argonauts (Strabo XI. 499; cp. Hammer, _Zeits. f. Num._ XXVI. p. 4). In Egypt “gold of the water,” _i.e._ river gold, is recorded about 1200 B.C. (Lepsius, _Abh. Berl. Akad._ 1871, p. 35). The Pactolus washings went back at least some generations beyond Croesus (Strabo XIII. 626; cp. Dio Chrys. _Orat._ 78, Teubner, p. 280).

Footnote 775:

_Don Juan_, XII. xii. For Gyges and Aladdin see K. F. Smith, _Amer. Journ. Phil._ XXIII. p. 271.

Footnote 776:

E. Meyer, _Ges. d. Alt._ I. p 580; cp. Regling _ap._ Pauly Wissowa s.v. Geld, p. 972.

Footnote 777:

Ridgeway, _Orig. Metallic Currency_, pp. 35 f., 44, 82, 128, 242, 399 f.; Babelon, _Origines_, chap. II. The rings appear not to have always a fixed weight, but the ring, especially if not closed, is a very convenient form for weighing, v. Bergmann, _Num. Zeits._ 1872, pp. 172–4.

Footnote 778:

Strabo XIII. 590, see above, p. 148.

Footnote 779:

Genesis XXIV. 22; cp. Job XLII. 11.

Footnote 780:

Macdonald, _Coin Types_, p. 52; cp. Brandis, _Zeits. f. Num._ I. p. 55.

Footnote 781:

Macdonald, _Coin Types_, p. 46.

Footnote 782:

Cp. Diog. Laert. I. 2. 9 (from a law of Solon’s), δακτυλιογλύφῳ μὴ ἐξεῖναι σφραγῖδα φυλάττειν τοῦ πραθέντος δακτυλίου.

Footnote 783:

See Macdonald, _Coin Types_, p. 45.

Footnote 784:

I incline to the view that the types are in part heraldic (_e.g._ the lion), but I see nothing in Macdonald’s arguments to invalidate Ridgeway’s illuminating explanation of many early coin types as indicating the previous unit of exchange (_e.g._ tunny fish or tortoise shell; cp. Ridgeway, _Cambridge Companion to Greek Studies_, § 503).

Footnote 785:

Xen. _de Vect._ IV. 21, referring to public slaves; Ael. _V.H._ II. 9 (Samian prisoners branded with an owl).

Footnote 786:

Photius, _F.H.G._ II. p. 483.

Footnote 787:

Plut. _Nikias_, 29, the captive Athenians in 413 were branded on the forehead with a horse, but after being branded they were sold as domestic slaves (οἰκέται), which makes it possible that the branding was an act of simple revenge.

Footnote 788:

_Timbres Amphoriques de Lindos_, Copenhagen, 1909.

Footnote 789:

_Cic. de Off._ III. 38; Lucian, _Nav._ 42, _Bis Acc._ 21; Philostratus, _Vit. Apoll._ III. 8; Plato, _Rep._ 612_b_. The version which makes the hero an ancestor of Gyges is found in Proclus, _Comm. in Remp._ 614_b_ (Teubner, II. p. 111).

Footnote 790:

Pollux III. 87, VII. 98.

Footnote 791:

Babelon, in his account of the origin of money, rightly points out (_Origines_, p. 167) that “in general the prince has at his disposal a greater quantity of precious metal than any banker or merchant.” This fact does not however affect our argument. As Babelon himself goes on to observe, the princes of this period, like modern monarchs in the East, “had in reserve in their treasuries enormous quantities of gold and silver ingots.” He cites Midas, Alyattes, Croesus and Darius as coining according to their various requirements from this reserve. But there is a point that Babelon does not touch. What started these monarchs coining? If, as Babelon assumes, it was simply the fact that the previous private coiners supplied bad coins, the position of coins is on a par with that of any other commodity. We might expect to hear of kings who became butchers and bakers to ensure their subjects good bread and good meat. It is therefore more than doubtful whether the initiative is likely to have come generally from the ruling sovereign. To imagine again a popular clamour for state control, as is done by Babelon, _ibid._ pp. 168–9, is probably an anachronism. The platform would be too constructive and original for a popular agitation. As a general rule constructive movements begin or at least take shape with outstanding individuals. Parallels from later periods, such as quoted by Babelon, p. 171, are dangerous. A populace can of course clamour for the restoration of lost rights and advantages, that of a state coinage among the rest. In the days that we are considering no precedents could be quoted for a state currency. On the other hand, the situation as conceived either by Babelon or myself implies outstanding individuals in the mercantile class. It is surely among these that it is most natural to look for the beginnings alike of a state coinage and of the new statesmanship that sprang up with it. This need not, of course, imply that occasionally a monarch of the old regime did not grasp the situation and himself institute a state coinage. Pheidon of Argos is a case in point.

Footnote 792:

Hdt. VI. 127.

Footnote 793:

See below, pp. 156–158.

Footnote 794:

Aristot. _Pol._ VII. (V.), 1310_b_.

Footnote 795:

_J.H.S._ XXVI. p. 140. Note that in later times Pheidon was regarded as a typical miser, οἱ λοιποὶ τῶν Ἀθήνησι νεοπλούτων Φείδωνός τε εἰσι καὶ Γνίφωνος μικροπρεπέστεροι, Alciphron, III. 34, where, however, the statement may be an inference from the name.

Footnote 796:

Strabo VIII. 376, “Ephorus says that in Aegina money was first coined by Pheidon”; _Marm. Par._ (Jacoby) under 895 B.C. “Pheidon the Argive ... made a silver coinage in Aegina (ἀφ’ οὗ Φείδων ὁ Ἀργεῖος ἐδήμευσε τὰ μέτρα καὶ σταθμὰ κατεσκεύασε καὶ νόμισμα ἀργυροῦν ἐν Αἰγίνῃ ἐποίησεν)”: _Et. Mag._ s.v. ὀβελίσκος, “the first of all men to strike a coinage was Pheidon the Argive in Aegina”; Eustath. _Comm. Iliad._ II. 562, “silver was first coined by Pheidias (_sic_) there (sc. in Aegina).” So, but with no mention of Aegina, and an implication of other metals besides silver, Strabo VIII. 358, “and he (sc. Pheidon) invented the measures called Pheidonian, and weights, and a stamped coinage, particularly that in silver,” and Pollux IX. 83, “whether Pheidon the Argive was first to strike money or Demodike of Cyme when married to Midas of Phrygia or Erichthonios and Lykos or the Lydians or the Naxians.” Aelian, _V.H._ XII. 10, in a list of Aeginetan achievements mentions their invention of money: he has no occasion to mention Pheidon but rather the reverse, so that no conclusion can be drawn from the omission of the name.

Footnote 797:

For Aegina as the first place in Greece to coin see Pindar, _Isthm._ IV. (V.), 1–3:

Μᾶτερ Ἀελίου πολυώνυμε Θεία σέο γ’ ἕκατι καὶ μεγασθενῆ νόμισαν χρυσὸν ἄνθρωποι περιώσιον ἄλλων.

The statement of the _Et. Mag._ s.v. Εὐβοικὸν νόμισμα that “Pheidon king of Argos struck a gold coinage in Euboea, a place in Argos,” is manifestly a hopeless confusion. For the Aeginetan tortoise as the coin of the Peloponnesus see Pollux IX. 74.

Footnote 798:

_Pace_ Macan, Hdt. IV.-VI., vol. I. p. 382. See _e.g._ Hill, _Hist. Greek Coins_, p. 4; Regling _ap._ Pauly Wissowa s.v. Geld, p. 975; about the middle of the seventh century, Head, _Hist. Num._^2 p. 394; rather after than before 650, Willers, _Roem. Kupferpräg._ pp. 8–9, Svoronos, _J. I. d’A. N._ V. p. 44; about 620 Earle Fox, _Corolla Num. B. V. Head_, pp. 40, 46; there is no specific evidence either way, but the earlier date seems much more probable, particularly since the discovery of the Cretan and Cyprian dumps and the coins from Ephesus discussed in the preceding chapter.

Footnote 799:

Satyrus, fr. 21, _F.H.G._ III. p. 165; Marm. Par. _F.H.G._ I. pp. 546–7. Theopompus (_ap._ Diod. VII. fr. 17 and Syncellus, _F.H.G._ I. p. 283) makes Pheidon sixth from Temenos, but this may be due to the accidental omission of a name. For fifth century pedigrees of the royal house of Macedon see Hdt. VIII. 137–9.

Footnote 800:

Busolt, _Gr. G._^2 I. p. 616.

Footnote 801:

On Karanos see also Justin VII. 1. How and Wells, _ad_ Hdt. VI. 127, refer wrongly to Theopompus as making Karanos a brother of Pheidon.

Footnote 802:

Hence the date 894 B.C. assigned to Pheidon by the Parian Marble.

Footnote 803:

Strabo VIII. 358; cp. Paus. II. 19. 2.

Footnote 804:

_Pindar, Nem._ p. 255.

Footnote 805:

See further Busolt, _Gr. G._ I.^2 p. 619, n. 2, and text. Long pedigrees are not in any case infallible material for arriving at a precise date. There is always _e.g._ the possibility that here and there a son who died before his father may have been left out of the list. A pedigree of the house of Hanover might easily omit Frederic the father of George III, as is in fact done by Thackeray, who, in