I think the case of Thucydides to be closely analogous to that of Aristotle. On all historical matters within the reach of proper inquiry, I hold him to have been thoroughly critical. But when we go back to the legends such as the Siege of Troy, or the story of Tereus and Procne, I think he laid aside all this caution, and contented himself with a very modest rationalism in interpreting the myths. He is most particular about the _Pentekontaetia_, and Hellanicus' mistakes, but tells us calmly of events sixty years after the Trojan War, or 300 years before the Greeks went to Sicily. These matters stood with him on a different footing from that of his researches, just as our Bible history is honestly accepted by many scientific men of very sceptical turn in their special studies. They acquiesce in Scriptural evidence as a matter of general consent. Neither critic ever seems to suspect fabrication of legends and lists; and yet fabrication there certainly was. In discussing the lists of the Argive priestesses, the kings of Sparta, and others, Max Duncker comes to the deliberate conclusion (vol. i. pp. 130-1 Eng. ed.) that the early part of these lists is fabricated. He classes all the names before 800 B.C. as imaginary; applying critical principles more consistently, and accepting nothing upon the evidence of one unconfirmed witness, I have now shown reasons why we may suspect many of them down to 650 B.C. FOOTNOTES: [217:1] I gladly acknowledge some valuable hints and corrections from Dr. Hirschfeld of Königsberg, and Dr. Th. Kock of Weimar; both of whom expressed agreement with my main results. [218:1] Cf. below, p. 238, for the remaining fragment. [219:1] [Greek: anêge], as if they were no longer extant; but see below, p. 229. [220:1] I can find no evidence that these discuses were identical, as is universally assumed. Pausanias would surely have mentioned Lycurgus' name, had he seen it. [222:1] Cf. Plutarch, _Lycurgus_, § 1, to whom we owe the information. In the extant works of Aristotle there is no allusion whatever to the Register as a chronological standard. Cf. below, p. 238. [227:1] By the Eleians the 8th, the 34th, and the 104th were called by this name, probably used in Hippias' work, because these feasts were celebrated by invaders, who had no legal right to do so. [230:1] The recent excavations have refuted this very early date for the treasure-house. [232:1] Cf. the case of Œbotas, supposed to have won the 6th Ol., but also asserted to have fought in Platæa in Ol. 75. His statue and epigram, be it observed, dated from about Ol. 80.--Paus. vi. 3, 8; vii. 17, 13. [234:1] Hippias' false epigram on the Sicilian Messenians (above mentioned) implies that the Messenians exiled from Messene were eligible. TRANSCRIBER'S NOTES: The abbreviations B.C. and A.D. are unspaced throughout for consistency. The following corrections have been made to the text: