¹ So Treu, M., ‘Ps.-Xenophon Πολιτεία 'Αθηναίων’, REIX A2 (1967): 1979–80Google Scholar.

² Frisch, H., The Constitution of the Athenians (Copenhagen, 1942), p. 25 with pp. 148, 255Google Scholar.

³ Serra, G., ‘La Costituzione degli Ateniesi dello pseudo-Senofonte’, Bollettino dell' Istituto di Filologia Grece, Universitá di Padova, Supplemento 4 (1979)Google Scholar.

⁴ See now Garland, R., Introducing New Gods (London, 1992), pp. 99–135Google Scholar; note especially his remark that, by the middle of the 5th century, ‘the Demos had arrogated to itself outright control over the introduction of new gods’ (p. 115).

⁵ The temenos was the most essential feature of the sanctuary (Burkert, W., Greek Religion [Oxford, 1985], 84–7)Google Scholar; hence the Athenian acceptance of Citian Aphrodite is signalled by a grant of γς ἔγκτησις (Tod, M. N., Greek Historical Inscriptions [Oxford, 1948], 189. 33–45)Google Scholar. Not every temenos contained a temple (Burkert, op. cit., 50, 88) and indeed the temple of Asclepios at Athens was only built a generation after the acceptance of the cult (Garland [n. 4], 118–21, 126–8).

⁶ With the exception of building on public property: in the fourth century, at least, this came under the jurisdiction of the ẚστυνόμοι([Arist.] Ath. Pol. 50.2), which makes it sit oddly here, the more so since the author regards it as recurring annually; it may be that the fifth century practice involved the demos directly (perhaps at a specified meeting of the assembly?).

⁷ The bulk of δοκιμαοίαι seem to have fallen to the Boule (Rhodes, P. J., The Athenian Boule [Oxford, 1972], pp. 171–8)Google Scholar, and one might expect orphans to come under their scrutiny, like δύνατοι or, more generally, ephebes; ‘guards of prisoners’ is problematic, since the Eleven were chosen by sortition ([Arist.] Ath. Pol. 52.1), but the reference might be to their subordinates, whether slave or free.

⁸ The manuscripts have διαδικάσαι but when applied to judges or juries at Athens, this (and the cognate noun denoting the procedure, διαδικάσαι) always otherwise refer to adjudication between rival disputants or claims; no such procedure is attested in the military field, and it is difficult to envisage one (particularly where στρατεία is concerned). It makes better sense to assume that the simple δικάσαι has been assimilated to the (correct) use ofδιαδικάσαι in the previous section.

⁹ It is conceivable that the corruption runs deeper; however, all the manuscripts have -στρατ-, which is difficult to accommodate except in a word with a military reference (there seems to be no alternative in the classical historians or orators, at any rate). Aristotle begins his criticism of the communism of property in Plato's Republic ¹ with the following (which I have divided into two sections for convenient reference):

(i)τέρων μ ν οủν ντων τν γεωργούντων ἂλλος ἃν εἴη τρόπος καί ṕάων, αὐτν ς' αὐτοîς διαπονούντων τ περί τς κτήσεις πλείους ἂν παρέχοι ςυσκολίας. (ii) καί γάρ ν ταîς

¹⁰ For the provision for appeal by allied states against their tribute assessments, see Meiggs, R. and Lewis, D. M., A Selection of Greek Historical Inscriptions ² (Oxford, 1988) 69. 12–15Google Scholar with commentary, Antiphon frr. 25–33, 49–56 Thalheim.

¹¹ Technically, στρατεία and related offences were not tried by a regular court, but by a jury of the soldiers involved (MacDowell, D. M., The Law in Classical Athens [London, 1978], p. 160)Google Scholar, though this might still have been considered representative of the demos as a whole.

¹² Kalinka, E.Die pseudoxenophontische ΑΘΗΝΑΙΩΝ ΠοΛΙΤΕΙΑ (Leipzig and Berlin, 1913)Google Scholar ad loc. made some of these points, but responded with the neologism παραστρατηγίας Lipsius' suggestion is both more elegant and closer to the reading of the manuscripts.

¹³ See Hansen, M. H., Eisangelia (Odense, 1975)Google Scholar, for the procedure and a register of cases (esp. nos. 6–10); on prosecutions of generals, n.b. Pritchett, W.K., The Greek State at War II (Berkeley, 1974), pp. 4–33Google Scholar.

¹⁴ For the formula in full cf. Dem. 35.46, Arist. Pol. 1275 b8–ll.