The fact that the Latins by virtue of the league enjoyed the privilege of isopolity, has likewise been preserved by Dionysius alone. If he had considered this as no more than the renewal of a previous mutual relation, it would not be very surprising that nothing appears about it in the articles of the treaty which he has recorded: but the omission is remarkable in so circumspect a writer, because he regards this isopolity as a new and high privilege conferred on the Latins. I am inclined to suspect that he did not find and insert his extract from the original instrument, till after he had written the passages just quoted and the others which even contradict it, nay till after he had publisht his work; and moreover that either nothing was said about isopolity in the few articles selected out of a great number by the Latin annalist from whom he took his account, because it was implied in the notion a league between equals, or that the annalist had retained the old lawterm, which the forein historian could not understand. In the other passages likewise he was treading in the footsteps of an annalist who had written in plain terms of certain civic rights having been granted: he was far too conscientious to interpolate a clause in his report of the treaty, for the purpose of justifying his assertions: and he may have neglected to correct the statements in other places which might now have struck him as erroneous.