NOTES, BOOK ZZ. 12. '03
go~py %~rp1130v~c iv ~[y, quoted by Oncken, Staatslehre des Aristo-
teles, ii. p. 346).
+'vfro 82 ai 9rXdXaos 6 KopLdros. la. 8.
The 6; is not opposed to p2u at the end of the last sentence, dXXh
ra;ra pi^ X~YOVVLV K.T.A., but is a resumption of the 82 at the begin-
ning of the previous sentence, mipfvrac %<. The story, if any reason
is required for the introduction of it, may be intended to explain
how Philolaus a Corinthian gave laws for Thebes.Of Onomacritus, Philolaus, Androdamas, nothing more is known: 12. I I.
of Zaleucus not much more. A good saying attributed to him has
been preserved in Stobaeus xlv. p. 304, &~XEVKO~,^6 T&U AOK~~V
uopoe~,,,s, roirs vdpovs &#~(TE rois dpaxviois ~~OL'OUS &L* &mcp ydp 2s
i~ci~a idu piu +&on pia 4 K&UO+, KarLxcrai, ;hu 82 o+$t 4 p;Xt~ra,
Sio@j[aoa ci~$lmarar, ozro KaI cis ~03s vdpous &v pi.;. ip~xiq niqs,
CZIVCXCT~C idu 82 nXoiuios $ 8vvarbs Xiyciu, 8ra,3$&7s daorpLxtt, an
apophthegm which in Aristotle's phraseology (i. 11. 5 IO) may be
truly said 'to be of general application,' Stobaeus has also pre-
served (xliv. p. 289) numerous laws which are attributed to
Charondas and Zaleucus. They are full of excellent religious
sentiments, but are evidently of a late Neo-Pythagorean origin.
The same remark applies still more strongly to the citations in
Diodoms xii. c. 12 ff.'
'
nwOvos 8' rf riiv pVU4KrjU Kal lrai~av Kai + o~uiar KotvdVs Koi la. 12.
rc+ wotrirca r~v puatK&v, Zrr 8' 6 mpi n)u p8qv udpos, ~b TOAS vi+owas
wwoorapxciu, K~I Ti)v iv Tois ~~h~pt~ois ~UK~ULV Cos dp+tBc'&o~ yivowar
mc+ riv pfxiqv, &S %iou pi T~V piv xp+npov cLar roiu xcpoiv riu 82
~X.D~oTOV.
The reference to Plato's communism in contrast with Phaleas'
Proposal of equality is not unnatural; but the allusion to three
unconnected, two of them very trivial, points in the 'Laws,' is
strange, and looks like the addition of a later hand. This whole
chapter has been often suspected. It consists of miscellaneous
jottings not worked up, some of them on matters already discussed.
But mere irregularity and feebleness are no sufficient ground for
doubting the genuineness of any passage in the sense in which