In 'AΘΠ. 22. I Aristotle made the judgement that Cleisthenes' reform gave a constitution to Athens far more democratic than Solon's, and to prove it he marked as Cleisthenic the law about ostracism. As the ostracism was considered a typically democratic institution, it was both persuasive and credible to connect Cleisthenes with a measure so admirably symptomatic of the adjudged new order.

Aristophanes speaks in Equites 225 f. of the rancour borne Cleon by the cavalry: The scholiast at verse 226 cites Theopompus for the explanation: The curious words were explained by Gilbert, Beitrdge, 133, as referring to Cleon's alleged entrance into the Boule of 428/7 so as to prosecute the cavalry en masse for desertion. This explanation was accepted by Jacoby in his commentary. Nevertheless, the best that can be said for it is that it is an apparently necessary means of (...) imparting some sort of meaning to an inconsequential sentence. It makes no sense to say, on the face of it, that because Cleon was angered by the cavalry ‘he attacked the constitution’ or, worse still, ‘applied himself to the politeia’. What is needed is the assertion that Cleon attacked the cavalry in some manner or other. (shrink)

In 'AΘΠ. 22. I Aristotle made the judgement that Cleisthenes' reform gave a constitution to Athens far more democratic than Solon's, and to prove it he marked as Cleisthenic the law about ostracism. As the ostracism was considered a typically democratic institution, it was both persuasive and credible to connect Cleisthenes with a measure so admirably symptomatic of the adjudged new order.

Our more distinct knowledge of the career of Eunapius of Sardis is confined to its first stage, when he resided in Athens and studied under Proaeresius, the Christian from Armenia. Common agreement holds that Eunapius reached Athens c. 362, when he was sixteen, and that he remained there for five years, returning to Lydia c. 367 when he was twenty. These conclusions derive from two passages in the V. Soph. in which Eunapius first described the unusual circumstances attendant on his (...) arrival in Athens and then alluded to his departure therefrom . But though the first passage is unproblematical enough, the second is less so; as will appear, the very context which includes within it the datum of the five-year-long residence in Athens carries implications which are inimical to it. Reexamination, therefore, may be profitable. (shrink)

Our more distinct knowledge of the career of Eunapius of Sardis is confined to its first stage, when he resided in Athens and studied under Proaeresius, the Christian from Armenia. Common agreement holds that Eunapius reached Athens c. 362, when he was sixteen, and that he remained there for five years, returning to Lydia c. 367 when he was twenty. These conclusions derive from two passages in the V. Soph. in which Eunapius first described the unusual circumstances attendant on his (...) arrival in Athens and then alluded to his departure therefrom. But though the first passage is unproblematical enough, the second is less so; as will appear, the very context which includes within it the datum of the five-year-long residence in Athens carries implications which are inimical to it. Reexamination, therefore, may be profitable. (shrink)

Aristophanes speaks in Equites 225 f. of the rancour borne Cleon by the cavalry: The scholiast at verse 226 cites Theopompus for the explanation: The curious words were explained by Gilbert, Beitrdge, 133, as referring to Cleon's alleged entrance into the Boule of 428/7 so as to prosecute the cavalry en masse for desertion. This explanation was accepted by Jacoby in his commentary. Nevertheless, the best that can be said for it is that it is an apparently necessary means of (...) imparting some sort of meaning to an inconsequential sentence. It makes no sense to say, on the face of it, that because Cleon was angered by the cavalry ‘he attacked the constitution’ or, worse still, ‘applied himself to the politeia’. What is needed is the assertion that Cleon attacked the cavalry in some manner or other. (shrink)

Publication by Eugene Vanderpool of the ostrakon with the name vindicates an inference made by Gustav Gilbert, Beiträge zur innern Geschichte Athens, 144 f. There he claimed that Nicostratus son of Dieitrephes and Nicostratus , who is mentioned by Aristophanes, Wasps 81 f, were identical. Gilbert supposed that the qualities implied of Nicostratus in that passage were of the type to endear him to Nicias.

The Phaselis decree is our chief piece of evidence for the manner in which the Athenians regulated civil-suits arising between themselves and the allies in the mid-fifth century. It reads as follows.