827 Thucyd. II. 27. IV. 56. 828 Xenoph. Hell. V. 2. 3. 829 Thucyd. III. 54. 830 Aristoph. Lysistr. 1138. The 4000 hoplitæ, here mentioned by Aristophanes, were about the third part of the disposable forces of Athens (Thuc. II. 13); and since the Platæans likewise sent τὸ τρίτον μέρος of their numbers to the assistance of the Spartans (ib. III. 54. ἰδιᾳ as opposed to the rest of Bœotia), this was probably a contingent fixed for such cases. Platæa, it should be observed, had been on friendly terms with Sparta after the time of Pausanias, and been connected with that state by προξενίαι, to which the son of the Platæan general Arimnestus owed his name of Lacon, Thuc. III. 52, where we should read Ἀριμνήστου, or _vice versâ_ in Plutarch Aristid. 11. and 19. Ἀείμνηστος should be read for Ἀρίμνηστος. 831 Thucyd. Compare Manso, Sparta, vol. I. p. 377. They must also at that time have been angry with the Athenians on account of Thasos. 832 These συνθῆκαι may, I believe, be safely referred to this time; from which Aristotle, quoted in Plutarch, Qu. Rom. 52. p. 343. and Qu. Gr. 5. p. 380. cites the passages in the text on account of the expression χρηστὸν ποιεῖν, for “to kill.” Compare Hesychius: χρηστοὶ οἱ καταδεδικασμένοι. That the Arcadians in a certain manner carried on war for the Helots is also implied in Zenobius Prov. I. 59. 833 Thucyd. III. 112. IV. 3. cf. VII. 57. οἱ Μεσσήνιοι νῦν καλούμενοι. 834 Thucyd. I. 102. The σπονδαὶ Παυσανίου still, however, remained in force (the συνθῆκαι in cap. 144). 835 Æginetica, p. 179. and see Boeckh ad Pind. Pyth. VIII. Dissen ad Nem. VIII. 15. 836 See the excellent explanation of Boeckh ad Pind. Isthm. VI. p. 532. 837 On the oligarchical troubles in Olymp. 80. 4. (457 B.C.) and the probable share of Cimon in them, see the accurate discussion in Meier’s Historia Juris Attici de Bonis damnatis, p. 4. n. 11. 838 Thuc. I. 118. τὸ δέ τι καὶ πολέμοις οἰκείοις ἐξειργόμενοι. 839 See Boeckh’s Public Economy of Athens, vol. II. p. 396, note. 840 Thucyd. I. 115. Νίσαιαν καὶ Πηγὰς καὶ Τροιζῆνα καὶ Ἀχαΐαν; for in this order the words should be read. Achaia therefore is the district on the north of Peloponnesus, which indeed did not _belong_ to Athens, but was enumerated in the lists of the contending parties as belonging to the Athenian side (concerning these lists see Thucyd. I. 31, 40.), and at this time passed over to that of the Lacedæmonians. See Thucyd. IV. 21. Compare the very confused account in Andocides Περὶ εἰρένης, and that of Æschines borrowed from it. 841 Thucyd. I. 40. See above, p. 200. note e. [Transcriber’s Note: This is the footnote to “strong opposition,” starting “Thucyd. I. 125.”]