I am most grateful to Miss S. Benton for suggesting to me this subject for study; to Mr. T. J. Dunbabin for continual advice and encouragement, and for reading and greatly improving the first draft of this paper; to Mr. J. M. Cook, for his advice and help while I was working at the British School at Athens; to Professor G. R. Manton and Mr. J. R. Hamilton of the University of Otago for various suggestions, and to Mr. E. S. G. Robinson and Professor F. W. Walbank for their advice.

The staff of the Library of the University of Otago have shown me the greatest kindness; it is in no way their fault that my references to the works of other scholars are so incomplete. I was assisted in the purchase of books by a research grant from the University of New Zealand.

¹ VIII 73.

² I 145.

³ V. infra.

⁴ Polybius II 41. Strabo VIII 7, 1. Pausanias VII 1 ff.

⁵ Iliad II 573–5.

⁶ VII 6, 2.

⁷ Munro, , JHS LIV 117.Google Scholar One might add that there were rivers called Selinus near Ajgion and near Ephesus (Strabo VIII 7, 5).

Wilamowitz, (S. B. Berl. 1906, 69, n. 2)Google Scholar suggests that the Peloponnesian Achaeans adopted their name when they combined into a League and sent out colonies. Hence the idea arose that their land was the true Achaea, the original home of the Greek settlers in Asia Minor, whom he supposes to have still called themselves Achaeans.

This does not explain the form the legend finally took; all versions are quite clear that Peloponnesian Achaea was not the true home of the Achaean race and was originally called Aigialos or Aigialia (Frazer, note on Pausanias VII 1,1) before taking its name from the people who drove the Ionians out, at the time of the Dorian invasions.

Moreover, if the Achaeans first adopted that name at the end of the eighth century, they would have been looked on as upstarts by the Ionians, even if the latter claimed to be Achaeans, and the evidence produced by Wilamowitz does not prove that they did.

Aristarchus (Etym. Magn. 547) connects Poseidon Helikonios with Helikon, not Helike, doubtless correctly.

⁸ Kyparisses, in PAE 1925–1926, 43–7 and 130–1Google Scholar; 1927, 52; 1928, 110–19; 1929, 86–91; 1930, 81–8; 1931, 71–3; 1932, 57–61; 1933, 90–3; 1934, 114–5; 1935, 70–1 1936, 95–9; 1937 84–93; 1938, 118–9; 1939, 103–6; 1940, 31. I have examined the vases from these excavations, which are now in the Museum at Patras, but am not qualified to give an opinion on them. A full study, properly illustrated, by some scholar who understands these matters is much to be desired.

⁹ Wilamowitz (op. cit. 69) considers that the Peloponnesian Achaeans were of the same stock as the Aetolians, Locrians, and Phocians. He adds (ibid., end of note 2) that ‘Der Achäemame ist genau so leer wie der Hellenenname, ausser in Phthia’. But a real connection between the Achaeans of Phthia and those of the Peloponnese seems quite possible. Buck (Greek Dialects 7) believes that the historic Achaeans spoke a West Greek dialect, that is, one related to the speech of Elis. But there is very little evidence, and what there is comes from Magna Graecia, not Achaea proper (ibid. 10 note).

I have been unable to obtain access to the Handbuch der griechischen Dialekte of Thumb and Kieckers (ed. 2, 1932, 226–34) cited by Callmer (Studien zur Geschichte Arkadiens 45) for the opinion that ‘in historischer Zeit spricht man hier (in Achaea) einen dorischen Dialekt. Aber man darf vermuten, dass es auch eine mit dem Arkadischen verwandte Mundart gab.’ Nobody regarded the Achaeans as true Dorians; note Pausanias's explanation (VII 6, 4) of their neutrality during the Persian wars. Strabo (VIII 1, 2) says that after the expulsion of the Ionians only members of the Dorian and Aeolian races were left in the Peloponnese, whose inhabitants, except for the Arcadians and people of Elis who spoke pure Aeolic, spoke a mixture of Doric and Aeolic. The Achaeans he calls an Aeolic tribe, so he regards them as speaking Aeolic with a Doric accent.

¹⁰ Pausanias VII 1, 8.

¹¹ Anabasis VI 2, 9 ff. Many of the Arcadians were near neighbours of Achaea, e.g. Agasias of Stymphalos, Sophainetos of Stymphalos, Kleanor of Orchomenos.

¹² Callmer, op. cit. 46; Pausanias VI 8, 5; see Frazer's note. Niese, , in Hermes XXXIV 549 ff.Google Scholar, discusses an inscription from Magnesia on the Maeander, dated 207–6 B.C. (Kern, Inschriften von Magnesia, no. 38; Dittenberger, Syll. II³ no. 559; I² no. 258) in which ‘Pellana’, Karyneia (= Keryneia), and Tritaia are numbered among ‘the other Arcadians’. Which-ever ‘Pellene’ may be the one referred to here, the mention of Keryneia and Tritaia shows that at this time there was not felt to be any great racial difference between the Achaeans and the Arcadians with whom they were united politically.

¹³ Apollodorus III 8, 1; Callmer, op. cit. 45 ff.

¹⁴ Alexandra 586 f.; Strabo XIV 6, 3; Callmer, op. cit. 33.

¹⁵ Herodotus I 195.

¹⁶ Strabo VIII 7, 4.

¹⁷ Polybius II 41, 7 (see Bölte, in RE XVII 2438 ff.Google Scholar).

¹⁸ Pausanias VII 6, 1.

¹⁹ Leake, (Travels in the Morea III 390 ff.)Google Scholar is certainly right in placing Aristonautai at Kamares, west of the Sythas, rather than at Xylokastro, which, being east of the river, is in Sicyonian territory, and has, moreover, no ancient remains to speak of, while those at Kamares are considerable. (Compare Frazer, note on Pausanias VII 26, 13.) The difficulty that Kamares lies less than 120 stades from the port of Aigeira is resolved by placing this port near the modern railway station of Aigeira, where there are ancient remains, including a considerable stretch of ancient foundation immediately south of the track, and tiles and potsherds in the fields. The open beach along this part of the coast might afford facilities for ancient navigation. Frazer (note on Pausanias VII 26, 1) follows Leake (op. cit. III 386 ff.) in placing the port of Aigeira rather farther east, at the promontory now called Mavra Litharia; here, too, there are ancient remains, but the distance from Bura to the west is too great and from Kamares to the east too small; moreover, the coast is rocky.

²⁰ A plan of Aigeira is included in the report on the Austrian excavations of the site (Walter, , Öjh XIX–XX (1919)Google Scholar, Beiblatt, cols. 5–42). See also Frazer's note on Pausanias VII 26, 1.

²¹ Pausanias (VII 25, 12), though he did not actually see the temple of Poseidon, believed that this was the Aigai of Iliad VIII 203. Strabo (VIII 7, 4) mentions the temple. On the coins of Aigai see Head (HN ² 412), who dates the series fromc. 500 to c. 370 B.C. Friedländer, (Zeitschrift für Numismatik V 5 ff.Google Scholar) attributes these coins to the Achaean Aigai because of the alphabetical form of their inscriptions and the style of their design.

²² VII 25, 12, Leake, op. cit. 175 and 394–6; Frazer, note on Pausanias VII 25, 11. The remains of antiquity observed by Leake near the ‘Khan of Akrata’ have now disappeared.

²³ Leake made this journey more than once: Travels in the Morea II 111 ff., III 397 ff.

²⁴ VII 25, 5–6.

²⁵ The site was first correctly identified by von Duhn, (AM III 66).Google Scholar Traces of walls, foundations of houses, and fragments of column drums were still to be seen in the summer of 1951, but the hill is now covered with vineyards, whose cultivation is fast obliterating the traces of antiquity.

²⁶ Cf. Pausanias VII 22, 10. It is hard to see why Herodotus (I 145) says that Tritaia is the only inland Achaean city. Pellene, Bura, and probably Rhypes must have possessed land on the coast; but Pharai lies well inland, and Dyme and Olenos seem to cut it off from all outlet to the sea.

²⁷ Polybius II 41, 1.

²⁸ Strabo VIII 7, 5; Plutarch, Pompeius XXVIII; Appian, , Mithridates 96.Google Scholar

²⁹ For a fuller discussion of topographical questions, see Frazer's notes to Pausanias, Book VII; Ernst Meyer, Pelopormesische Wanderungen 111 ff. Professor Meyer publishes plans of the existing remains of several Achaean cities, and has settled beyond doubt the problem of the positions of Dyme, Olenos, Keryneia, and Bura. (I would myself regard the question of the sites of Tritaia and Leontion as still open.)

³⁰ II 41. The phrase τῆς ᾿Αλεξὰνδρου καὶ φιλὶππου δυναοτεὶας seems a strange one. [Demosthenes] XVII 10 blames Alexander for the suppression of democracy in Pellene and the establishment of the wicked tyrant Chairon (on whom see Athenaeus XI 509). But there seems to be no authority in the manuscripts of Polybius for reading τοῦ φιλὶππου .

³¹ See also Larsen's, J. A. O. paper on the Early Achaean League (Studies Presented to D. M. Robinson I 797–815).Google Scholar

³² Larsen, op. cit. 797 n. 4.

³³ Many of my references are drawn from Freeman's History of Federal Government, Vol. I.

³⁴ Polybius II 38, 8.

³⁵ Polybius IV 18—polemarchs at Kynaitha. Plutarch, , Aratus XLIV 3Google Scholar: Aratus is chosen στρατηγὸς of Argos.

³⁶ Collitz-Bechtel, , SGDI II 1634Google Scholar (= IG V 2, 344).

³⁷ Aratus of Sicyon owned a house at Corinth (Plutarch, Aratus XLI, Cleomenes XIX).

³⁸ Pausanias VII 16, 9.

³⁹ Until 189 B.C.; Livy XXXVIII 29. Aymard, (‘Le rôle politique du sanctuaire fédéral achaien’, Mélanges Franz Cumont 17 ff.)Google Scholar holds that by this time the old sanctuary of Zeus (v. p. 80 and note 77 infra) had long been abandoned as a meeting-place, and that at the time when the double generalship was abolished the place of assembly was moved into the city of Aigion. Some such theory is necessary to support his view that the League originated as a religious body and later secularised itself.

⁴⁰ Polybius XXXVIII 11, 5.

⁴¹ Ibid. Kritolaos tells the Roman ambassadors that he can do nothing without the assembly. But obviously the degree of responsibility which a general was prepared to take on himself must have varied with the individual.

⁴² Plutarch, , Aratus XXXVIII 3.Google Scholar Polybius IV 60, 4 refers to τὰς κοινὰς εἰσφορὰς Note also that the various members of the league struck a federal coinage, though the individual mints put their own marks on their own products.

⁴³ Polybius II 43.

⁴⁴ Livy XXXI 25. ‘Non licere legibus Achaeorum de aliis rebus referre quam propter quas convocati essent.’

⁴⁵ Pausanias VII 9, 4.

⁴⁶ Dunbabin, , The Western Greeks 24 ff.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Strabo VI 1, 13.

⁴⁸ Strabo, Ibid. and VIII 7, 5; Herodotus I 145, Pausanias VII 25, 11 and VIII 15, 9.

⁴⁹ Aristotle, Pol. 1303^a 29.

⁵⁰ Dunbabin, op. cit. 26.

⁵¹ Diodorus VIII 17 and Strabo VI 1,12 supplement each other. Strabo names Antiochus as his source. The association of Myskellos with Archias, founder of Syracuse, is, as Dunbabin (op. cit. Appendix I 444) points out, a late invention.

⁵² Herodotus IV 155 ff.

⁵³ Ibid. Head, HN ² 97.

⁵⁴ Dunbabin, op. cit. 37 n. 8.

⁵⁵ Pausanias VI 3, 12; Dunbabin, op. cit. 27.

⁵⁶ Thucydides IV 120, 1.

⁵⁷ Op. cit. 798.

⁵⁸ Op. cit. 216. Theophrastus, , HP VIII 4, 4.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ Nem. X 45–8. Cf. Robinson, D. M. in AJA XLVI 172 ff.Google Scholar and Payne, NC 216, on a possible connection between Aigion and the Trebenischte bronzes; also the present writer's Excavations near Mamousia, BSA XLVIII 154–171.

⁶⁰ VIII 7, 5. There is some variation in the manuscripts. Strabo probably wrote ΑΙγὶου though μεταξὺ Αὶγῶν καὶ Πελλὴνης makes more sense, since to say that the village lay ‘between Aigion and Pellene’ would mean that it might be anywhere in eastern Achaea. Perhaps what Strabo really meant was that it lay between Pellene and Aigeira, but he does not appear to have visited the Achaean cities himself, and was undoubtedly confused by the similarity of their names. Thus later in the same paragraph he says of Aigai (or Aiga) that νῦν μὲν οὺκ οὶκεῑται, τὴν δὲ πὸλιν ε̆χουοιν Αὶγεῐς This is surely a mistake, of Strabo's own, not of the manuscript reading. Compare VIII 7, 4, where he says that Aigai was united with Aigeira; geographical considerations make it certain that this version is correct.

⁶¹ For full references, see Frazer's note on Pausanias VII 27, 4.

⁶² V. supra.

⁶³ Pausanias VII 27, 2.

⁶⁴ Polybius II 39, 4.

⁶⁵ Dunbabin, op. cit. 151, 262 n. 1. Mr. Dunbabin also calls my attention to the use of the Achaean alphabet in Ithaca in the seventh century (cf. MissJeffery, L. H. in BSA XLIII 82, 89).Google Scholar He points out that pottery found in Ithaca suggests that the island received a Corinthian colony at the time (cf. Robertson, M., BSA XLIII 122 f.)Google Scholar; at all events Corinth seems to have monopolised its trade such as it was. Ithaca may be an example of an outlying Achaean community, dependent upon Corinthian commerce, though Robertson does not think so.

⁶⁶ Cf. Dunbabin, op. cit. 75 ff. Compare also Ibid. 24, ‘Commerce (at Sybaris) must originally have been secondary to agriculture’, and 38, ‘Phokians and Lokrians seem, like the Akhaians, to have come west seeking somewhere to live, not to trade.’

⁶⁷ Polybius II 39; Strabo VIII 7, 1.

⁶⁸ Dunbabin, op. cit., especially 75, 83, 225 (note the absence of the Achaean cities from the table), 246.

From Achaea itself a few geometric vases are known. I have not seen those discovered by Mr. Zapheiropoulos at Lopesi near Pharai (Cook, , Archaeology in Greece 1932, 33Google Scholar (= JHS LXXIII 119)), but he kindly permitted me to study the contents of the grave excavated by him at Derveni below Mamousia (see JHS LXXII 99). The style of these vases certainly betrays backwardness and isolation, but they are, in my opinion at least, considerably earlier than the colonial period.

⁶⁹ Pausanias VII 18, 6. But see Frazer's note on the passage.

⁷⁰ Thucydides V 52.

⁷¹ VIII 7, 4.

⁷² VIII 7, 5.

⁷³ Pap. Oxy. XI 1365 (Jacoby, , FGrH 105Google Scholar, no. 2), also Pap. Oxy. X 1241, III 2 ff. The account given by Aelian, (Var. Hist. VI 1)Google Scholar of the capture of Pellene by Sicyon gives no clue to the date. Wilamowitz, (Hermes XLIV 474)Google Scholar, reading Πελλαναῑοι the corrupt ᾿Απελλαῑοι in Zenobius I 57, provides further evidence. (I owe these references to Meyer, Ernst (RE XIX 1, 367Google Scholar, s.v. ‘Pellene’).)

⁷⁴ Loc. cit. Pausanias VII 26, 2 and 13.

⁷⁵ Polybius II 39, 4, Strabo VIII 7, 1, Iamblichus, Vit. Pyth. 263, I formerly doubted this story, but have been converted to belief in it by Larsen (op. cit.) and comments (in private correspondence) by Dunbabin and Professor Walbank, for which I am most grateful.

⁷⁶ Perhaps about the middle of the fifth century. I have not seen von Fritz, , Pythagorean Politics in Southern Italy 72 ff.Google Scholar, or Minar, , Early Pythagorean Politics 73 ff.Google Scholar

^76a Iamblichus, , Vit. Pyth. 248–51.Google Scholar

⁷⁷ Called ‘Amarios’ in the oath of the people of Orchomenos already quoted (note 36 supra), ‘Homarios’ by Polybius and ‘Homagyrios’ by Pausanias (VII 24, 2). See also Farnell, , Cults of the Greek States I 43Google Scholar, especially Note c; Aymard, , Mélanges Octave Navarre 453 ff.Google Scholar Aymard points out that the various inscriptions do not determine whether the breathing was rough or smooth, and rejects the view that the god was originally Zeus Amarios, a god of the broad daylight. It is certainly easier to regard him as Hamarios or Homarios, a god ‘qui adapte, qui réunit ensemble’ (Ibid. 467).

⁷⁸ Strabo VIII 7, 373.

⁷⁹ E.g. Herodotus I 170, VI 7.

⁸⁰ Aymard, (Mélanges Cumont 8)Google Scholar believes that the League developed out of an amphictyony, but has to admit that it had become completely secularised by the time it appears in history (cf. Ibid. 21).

⁸¹ VII 7, 2.

⁸² So Strabo seems to imply (VIII 7, 5): Αὶγιὲων δ᾿ ὲστὶ καὶ ταῡτα καὶ ῾Ελὶη καὶ τὸ τοῦ Διὸς ἂλσος τὸ Αὶνὰριον (sic, read Αμάριον) ὸπου συνὴεσαν οὶ ᾿Αχαιοὶ But on the other hand the sanctuary of Homagyrian Zeus noted by Pausanias (VII 24,2) was certainly on the same bank of the Selinus as Aigion, and probably in or just below the city. And this seems to be the same as the grove mentioned by Strabo (cf. Frazer's note on the passage and Pausanias VII 24, 4).

⁸³ Polybius V 93, 10.

⁸⁴ Pausanias VII 25, 6. A date as late as 460 is possible but unlikely in my opinion (see Gomme, , Commentary on Thucydides I 409Google Scholar).

⁸⁵ Pausanias, loc. cit.

⁸⁶ Strabo VIII 7, 2.

⁸⁷ Pausanias could hardly have resisted telling the story if it had been. Moreover, the supposition that the hind came from Achaean Keryneia seems inconsistent with Apollodorus II 81.

⁸⁸ Thucydides I 108, 5. Dated 456–5 B.C. by Diodorus XI 84 and 456–5 by the scholiast on Aeschines II 75. See Gomme, op. cit. 320, also 401 ff. for a general chronological discussion. Diodorus gives Tolmides the credit for the capture of Naupaktos, but Gomme rejects this (op. cit. 304, on Thuc. I 103, 3). More probably Naupaktos was already in Athenian hands, whether the Messenians had been settled there or not. See also Larsen, op. cit. 799.

⁸⁹ Thucydides I 3, 2–3. Diodorus says that the fleet consisted of fifty triremes, the same figure that he gives for that of Tolmides (XI 84, 85). Probably the ships lay at Pagai all winter, while the crews came home on leave through the Megarid. Plutarch, (Pericles XIX 2)Google Scholar gives the fleet a hundred ships.

⁹⁰ Gomme, op. cit. 325, note on Thuc. I 112, 3.

⁹¹ Op. cit. 800, especially n. 17.

⁹² Per. XIX 3: εκ δ᾿ ᾿Αχαὶας φὶλης οῦσης στρατιὼτας ὰναλαβὼν εὶς τὰς τριν`ρεις The Athenians provided the ships, the Achaeans only the men.

⁹³ Larsen (op. cit. 801) supposes rather that Athens and Achaea were both trade rivals of Corinth, and co-operated to blockade the mouth of the Corinthian Gulf, Sicyon being drawn in on the Corinthian side ‘by subservience to Sparta and the Peloponnesian League’, Certainly the Athenian purpose was to secure the mouth of the Gulf (against both Corinth and Sicyon), but Larsen's opinion of the Achaeans' motives arises from his mistaken ideas about their colonies.

⁹⁴ Xenophon, , Hell. III 2, 26.Google Scholar

⁹⁵ Morgan, (Hesperia XXI 334)Google Scholar would date this statue about 472 B.C., but without adequate evidence. It seems to me that the image of Athena on the Acropolis, to which Pausanias refers here, is more probably the chryselephantine statue in the Parthenon than the bronze Athena Promachos.

⁹⁶ IV 25.

⁹⁷ Thucydides I 115, IV 21.

⁹⁸ Larsen, op. cit. 801.

⁹⁹ Cf. IG I² 1085+ (Tod, Greek Historical Inscriptions I, no. 41).

¹⁰⁰ Cf. IG I² 90+ (Tod, op. cit. no. 68, 19), the record of an alliance between Athens and the Bottiaeans in 422 B.C.

¹⁰¹ Thucydides II 9, 2.

¹⁰² Larsen, op. cit. 802.

¹⁰³ Ibid.

¹⁰⁴ Loc. cit. Τοὺτοις δὲ (i.e. Achaeans and Argives) ὲς ὰμφοτὲρους φιλὶα ὴν. φιλὶα must mean more than a vague feeling of benevolence, and the existence of a definite treaty between Argos and Sparta is quite certain (Thucydides V 14, 4).

¹⁰⁵ Thuc. II 83, 3.

¹⁰⁶ Thuc. II 84, 3–5.

¹⁰⁷ Thuc. II 9, 3. Compare II 80, 3, where it is said that the fleet ε̆κ τε Κοπὶνθου καὶ Σικυῶνος καὶ τῶν ταὺτη χωπὶων ὲν παρασκευῆ ῆν

¹⁰⁸ Thuc. II 86, 1.

¹⁰⁹ Thuc. II 92, 5.

¹¹⁰ Cf. Thuc. VI 44, 2.

¹¹¹ But see Larsen, op. cit. 803.

¹¹² Thuc. V 52, 2; Plutarch, , Alcibiades XV 3.Google Scholar

¹¹³ VII 6, 4.

¹¹⁴ Thuc. loc. cit., στρατηγὸς ῶν ᾿Αθηναὶων

¹¹⁵ Thuc. V 58, 4; 59, 3; 60, 3.

¹¹⁶ Thuc. V 82, 1.

¹¹⁷ The Achaean oligarchies are first mentioned in 367 B.C., Xenohon, , Hell. VII 1, 42–3Google Scholar; for the date see Diodorus XV 75, 2. But it seems probable that they were established in 417 (Larsen, op. cit. 804. Cf. Thucydides I 19: Aristotle Pol. 1307b20). The fact that the government of Patrai appears to have been democratic in 419 B.C. is a strong reason for supposing that western Achaea was not yet attached to the Peloponnesian League.

¹¹⁸ Xenophon (loc. cit.) says that ‘the best men’ were not a few.

¹¹⁹ MissLorimer, (Homer and the Monuments 165, 195)Google Scholar remarks on the use of the θύρεον among the Achaeans down to the time of Philopoemen (Pausanias VIII 50, 1) and suggests a survival of Homeric armour, But it is clear that in the late fifth and fourth centuries the usual hoplite equipment was used in Achaea. Xenophon, (Anabasis VI2, 16)Google Scholar expressly says that the Achaeans among the Ten Thousand were ὸπλὶται πὰντες These men were mercenaries serving abroad. But certainly the Achaeans who fought at the Nemea in 394 B.C., or by the side of the Spartans in 369, must have been equipped in the same way as the rest of the Spartan allies.

The army which Philopoemen reformed was hardly more Achaean (in the old sense of the word) than he was himself. I believe that Pausanias is wrong when he says that Philopoemen made his men use Argolic (i.e. hoplite) shields. Philopoemen seems to have organised a phalanx on the Macedonian model, as Cleomenes III had already done at Sparta. (The spear used was a σὰρισα Plutarch, , Philopoemen IV 2Google Scholar: cf. Polyaenus VI 4, 3: Plutarch, , Cleomenes XI2).Google Scholar The tactics and equipment of the Achaean army before the time of Philopoemen reflect the character of Aratus of Sicyon and were not inherited from the prehistoric past. The Achaean slingers who so distinguished themselves at the siege of Same in 189 B.C. (Livy XXXVIII 29) are quite unknown to earlier history. Yet Xenophon was in great need of light artillery on the retreat from Kunaxa.

¹²⁰ Anabasis VI 4, 8.

¹²¹ Larsen, op. cit. 797.

¹²² Diodorus XV 49, 2. Strabo VIII 7, 2.

¹²³ Wilhelm, , in Hermes XXIV110 ff.Google Scholar, discusses an Athenian inscription in favour of an Achaean named Lykon, who in return for past services to Athens is permitted to export goods by sea from Achaea. Wilhelm very convincingly connects this permission with the Athenian blockade of the Peloponnese at the time of the great expedition to Syracuse (Thucydides VII 17, 19, 31, 34). Lykon's home city is not named, which must mean that he was officially an Achaean, not a man of Patrai or Aigion or Dyme or wherever he lived, at least in respect of international affairs. For the extension of Achaean citizen ship to Galydon in or before 389 B.C. v. infra. The Achaeans mentioned in the Anabasis are called Achaeans, without their cities being named, but this is not necessarily significant, as the cities of many (but not all) of the Arcadians are not named either.

¹²⁴ Thucydides VIII 3, 2; ibid. 106, 3.

¹²⁵ Xenophon, , Hell. VI2, 3.Google Scholar

¹²⁶ Hell. IV 2, 18–20.

¹²⁷ Xenophon, , Hell. III 2, 11.Google Scholar

¹²⁸ Xenophon, , Hell. IV 6, 1 ff.Google Scholar, Agesilaus II 20, Plutarch Agesilaus XXII 5.

¹²⁹ Compare Larsen, op. cit. 804. There were Acarnanians on the Corinthian side at the Nemea in 394 B.C. (Xenophon, , Hell. IV 2, 17Google Scholar, following the MS. reading.)

¹³⁰ Xenophon, , Hell. III 2, 23, 26.Google Scholar

¹³¹ Diodorus XV 31, 2.

¹³² Hellenica V 2, 21.

¹³³ At least in Xenophon's, opinion (Hell. VI2, 16).Google Scholar

¹³⁴ Op. cit. 810 ff.

¹³⁵ Xenophon, , Hell. IV 6, 3.Google Scholar

¹³⁶ Xenophon, , Hell. V 2, 11 ff.Google Scholar

¹³⁷ Meteor. I 6, 343b19 ff.

¹³⁸ See Frazer's note on Pausanias VII 24, 6.

¹³⁹ VIII 7, 2.

¹⁴⁰ XV 49. Probably derived from Ephorus.

¹⁴¹ VIII 46.

¹⁴² Thucydides V 30, 1.

¹⁴³ Polybius II 12, 8.

¹⁴⁴ Diodorus XV 41–3.

¹⁴⁵ Aelian, , Nat. Anim. XI 19.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁶ Strabo, loc. cit. Diodorus XV 48, 2.

¹⁴⁷ XV 75, 2. The garrison in Calydon was probably established in or before 389 B.C. (Xenophon, , Hell. IV 6, 1)Google Scholar, but the word θρουρά, as used by Xenophon, often means an expedition rather than a fixed garrison (e.g. Hell. V 4, 47 πάλιν ἔφαινον φρουρὰν οἱ ἔφοροι εἰς τὰς θήβας) and so in this passage φρουρεῑν ὴναγκὰзοντο may mean ‘they were compelled to fight a campaign’ rather than ‘to keep a garrison’.

¹⁴⁸ Diodorus XIV 34, 2. See the discussion in Lerat, L., Les Locriens de l'Ouest II 44 f.Google Scholar, who concludes that there is no means of knowing when Naupaktos became Achaean (he thinks, after 389).

¹⁴⁹ Xenophon, , Hell. IV 6, 14.Google Scholar Larsen (op. cit. 807) supposes that Naupaktos was already in Achaean hands, and certainly Agesilaus may have deceived the Aetolians with false promises, or even planned to betray his allies in order to extricate his army.

¹⁵⁰ Demosthenes IX 34, Larsen, loc. cit., Strabo IX 4, 7, Roebuck, CPh XLIII 77Google Scholar, Lerat, op. cit. II 149.

¹⁵¹ Cf. Polybius IV 59 ff.

¹⁵² On the coinage of Aigai see Head, HN ² 412, on that of Helike, ibid. 414. I cannot agree with Weil (Zeitschrift für Numismatik VII 361) that the coinage of these cities shows that they had seceded from the League. Dyme also coined from about 350 B.C.(HN ² 414).

I note that a coinage of Arcadia was struck in the fifth century (HN ² 444, 447) at a time when the Arcadians made no pretence of federal unity.

¹⁵³ Xenophon, , Hell. VI 4, 18.Google Scholar Note the emphasis on the influence of the party of Stasippos at Tegea and the aristocrats of Mantinea in bringing their cities to the Spartan side.

¹⁵⁴ Compare Xenophon, , Hell. VI 51, 6 ff.Google Scholar, on the course of events at Tegea, also Diodorus XV 40, which seems to apply rather to the events of 370–69 B.C. (ibid. 59, Xenophon, loc. cit.) than to those of 375–4.

¹⁵⁵ Polybius II 39, 8–10; Strabo VIII 7, 1. We have only Polybius's word for this incident, but it may well be true. Cary, , CQ XIX 165 f.Google Scholar, cf. Larsen, op. cit. 805.

¹⁵⁶ Xenophon, , Hell. VI 5, 29Google Scholar; VII 2, 2.

¹⁵⁷ Xenophon, , Hell. VII1, 15–18.Google Scholar Sicyon was also attacked, and joined the Thebans according to Diodorus XV 68–9 (Diodorus does not mention Pellene). Larsen (ibid.) believes that Pellene also joined Thebes at this time.

¹⁵⁸ Xenophon, , Hell. VII 1, 41–43.Google ScholarCf. Diodorus XV 75, 2.

¹⁵⁹ Xenophon, , Hell. VII 2, 11 ff.Google Scholar

¹⁶⁰ Xenophon, , Hell. VII 1, 44.Google Scholar

¹⁶¹ XV 70, 3.

¹⁶² XV 75, 3.

¹⁶³ Xenophon, , Hell. VII 2, 18.Google Scholar

¹⁶⁴ Ibid. 4, 1.

¹⁶⁵ Diodorus XV 76, 1. Diodorus does not mention Chares in connection with this affair.

¹⁶⁶ Xenophon, , Hell. VII 4, 12 ff.Google Scholar, especially 17–18. Compare Diodorus XV 77, 1–4.

¹⁶⁷ Xenophon, , Hell. VII 4, 28.Google Scholar

¹⁶⁸ Ibid. 1, 18. Compare CIA II 57b. 112 (Dittenberger, Sylloge ³ 83); Diodorus XV 84, 4; 85, 2.

¹⁶⁹ Diodorus XVI 30, 4; 37, 3.

¹⁷⁰ Ibid. But a more noteable, and sadder, example of the attempts of the Spartans to turn their military reputation into hard cash is the last campaign of the aged Agesilaus.

¹⁷¹ Pausanias VII 6, 5. Compare Plutarch, , Demosthenes XVII 4.Google Scholar

¹⁷² Note 150 supra.

¹⁷³ Note 3 supra.

¹⁷⁴ Curtius VI 1–2. Cf. Diodorus XVII 62–3.

¹⁷⁵ Hypereides V (I) 18 mentions the common assemblies of the Achaeans.

¹⁷⁶ Mentioned by Sopater (Phot., Bibl. Cod. 161) (1550b16).

¹⁷⁷ Frag. 526 (1567b40 ff.). The existence of this separate work reflects the detachment of Pellene from the League during so much of its history.