Notes on the current edition
The Attic Orators from Antiphon to Isaeos
1.
[Plut.]
Vit. Lys.
ὡς δέ τινες, ἐκπεσόντα τῶν Συρακουσῶν ἡνίκα ὑπὸ Γέλωνος ἐτυραννοῦντο.
2.
Dionys.
Lys. c. 1 says that in the archonship of Kallias (412 B.C.) Lysias was forty-seven,
as one might conjecture
—
ὡς ἄν τις εἰκάσειεν. Again in c. 12 he
supposes that Lysias may have died in 379 at the age of 80. The pseudo-Plutarch
Vit. Lys. says boldly:—
γενόμενος Ἀθήνησιν ἐπὶ Φιλοκλέους ἄρχοντος τοῦ μετὰ Φρασικλῆ, κατὰ τὸ δεύτερον ἔτος τῆς ὀγδοηκοστῆς Ὀλυμπιάδος.
3.
Dionys.
Lys. c. 12: [Plut.]
Vit. Lys.
4.
The speech
Against Evandros (382 B.C.), and that
For Pherenikos, of which a fragment remains, (381 or 380 B.C.)—are his latest known works. The two lost speeches
For Iphikrates (Sauppe,
Frag. XVIII. and LXV,
Att. Or. II. pp. 178, 190) belonged respectively to the years 371 and 354; but the judgment of Dionysios in rejecting them (
Lys. c. 12) has been generally confirmed by modern writers.
5.
τοῦ πατρὸς ἤδη τετελευτηκότος: pseudo-Plut.
Vit. Lys.
6.
Gesammelte Abhandlungen, p. 15.
7.
Uebersetzung d. Reden d. Lys. pp. 5 ff.—Blass,
Attisch. Bereds. p. 333.
8.
A dialogue of Plato can seldom be safely cited to prove that one of the persons of the imaginary conversation was, or was not, alive at a given time long before. But when, in such a dialogue, one of two persons contemporary with Plato is represented as very decidedly older than the other, it must be assumed that this was the case. To infer from the
Republic that Kephalos was alive in 430 B.C. would be rash. But it is perfectly safe to infer from the
Phaedros (p.
278 E
, &c.) that Lysias was an orator of matured powers when Isokrates was a boy.
9.
Blass distinctly admits this:— ‘Starb also Lysias bald nach diesem Jahre, so sind freilieh jene Angaben über das Alter, welches er erreichte, vollig aufzugeben.’
Att. Bereds. p. 336.
10.
Stallbaum, in his
Lysiaca ad illustrandas Phaedri Platonici origines (Leipzig, 1851) pp. 6 f, takes the following dates: Birth of Lysias, 459: Foundation of Thurii, 446: Kephalos comes to Athens, 444: Lysias goes to Thurii, 443: Death of Lysias, 378.
11.
Plato (
Rep. p. 328 B) mentions Lysias and Euthydêmos as the brothers of Polemarehos. Dionysios (
Lys. 1) speaks of
two brothers of Lysias. But the pseudo-Plutarch gives him three — Polemarchos, Eudidos (Euthydêmos), and Brachyllos. Blass seems right in concluding from Demosth.
Neaer. § 22 that Brachyllos was not brother, but brother-in-law, of Lysias. It is there said that Lysias married the daughter of Brachyllos, his own nieee (
ἀδελφιδῆ.) Hence, probably, the mistake of the so-called Plutarch.
12.
Plat.
Rep. p. 328 D.
13.
Dionys.
Lys. 1:
συνεπαιδεύθη τοῖς ἐπιφανεστάτοις Ἀθηναίων. The pseudo-Plut. repeats the words:
τὸ μὲν πρῶτον συνεπαιδεύετο τοῖς ἐπιφ. Ἀθην.
14.
Dionys.
Lys. 1.
15.
[Plut.]
Vit. Lys.
16.
Dionysios (l. c.) says
σὺν ἀδελφοῖς δυσί: the pseudo-Plut. mentions Polemarchos only.
17.
The pseudo-Plut. says
παιδευόμενος παρὰ Τισίᾳ καὶ Νικίᾳ τοῖς Συρακουσίοις. Blass thinks that the name of the unknown Nikias arose out of
Τισίᾳ by a dittography.
18.
Ἀττικισμὸν ἐγκληθεῖσι, Dionys.
Lys. 1.
19.
Dionysios and the pseudoPlut. both mark the date by the archonship of Kallias.
20.
See the short fragment of this speech
ὑπὲρ Νικίου in Sauppe
O. A. II. p. 199. Dionysios unliesitatingly rejeeted it, and the few remaining words suffiee in themselves to betray a vulgar rhetorician:—
κλαίω τὸν ἀμάχητον καὶ ἀναυμάχητον ὄλεθρον, κ.τ.λ. But it must have been at least as old as the latter part of the fourth century B C, since Theophrastos quoted it (Dionys.
Lys. 14).
21.
This follows from
Lys.
In Eratosth. § 16
.
22.
In Eratosth. § 4.
23.
Cf.
In Eratosth. § 20, where Lysias speaks of himself and his brother as
πάσας τὰς χορηγίας χορηγήσαντας—and, in contrast with the Thirty,
οὐχὁμοίωσμετοικοῦντας ὥσπερ αὐτοὶ ἐπολιτεύοντο.
24.
Boeckh,
Publ. Econ. Bk. I. c. 24. A resident-alien could under no circumstances be an owner of land; and only an isoteles could be owner of a house.
25.
Cic.
Brut. c. 48:
nam Lysiam primo profiteri solitum artem dicendi, deinde, quod Theodorus esset in arte subtilior, in orationibus ieiunior, orationes eum scribere aliis coepisse, artem removisse
.
26.
In Eratosth. § 16,
τριῶν δὲ θυρῶν οὐσῶν ἃς ἔδει με διελθεῖν ἅπασαι ἀνεῳγμέναι ἔτυχον. The first of these must have been the
μέταυλος θύρα, leading from the outer to the inner
αὐλή.
27.
τὸ ὑπ’ ἐκείνων εἰθισμένον παράγγελμα, πίνειν κώνειον:
In Eratosth. § 17.
28.
In Eratosth. § 19. For the whole account of the arrest, see that speech, §§ 6—20.
29.
[Plut.]
Vit. Lys. The facts mentioned there may have been taken from the speech of Lysias on the motion of Archînos (
ib. § 11), and also from that
περὶ τῶν ἰδίων εὐεργεσιῶν, (quoted by Harpokration s. vv.
Κεῖοι, Φηγαιεῦσι, μεταπύργιον,) if indeed this was distinct from the former.
30.
Ἑρμᾶνι in the
Vit. Lys. § 7 ought probably to be
Ἕρμωνι, as Blass assumes,
Att. Bereds. p. 340.
31.
[Plut.]
Vit. Lys. Cf.
Xen.
Hellen. III. 2. 27
.
32.
This appears from the statement of the pseudo-Plut.
Vit. Lys. § 8, that the proposal was made
μετὰ τὴν κάθοδον ἐπ’ ἀναρχίας τῆς πρὸ Εὐκλείδου, that is, immediately after the return in the spring of the year 403. Later in the same year Eukleides became archon; and with the revival of the constitutional forms which commenced in his archonship the
ἀναρχία was held to have ended
33.
[Plut.]
Vit. Lys.
ὁ μὲν δῆμος ἐκύρωσε τὴν δωρεάν, ἀπενεγκαμένου δὲ Ἀρχίνου γραφὴν παρανόμων διὰ τὸ ἀπροβούλευτον εἰσαχθῆναι ἑάλω τὸ ψήφισμα.
34.
As by Scheibe (Blass, p 340), who thinks that the biographer assumed it from the vague allusion in Aeschin
in Ctes § 195:
Ἀρχῖνος γὰρ ὁ ἐκ Κοίλης ἐγράψατο παρανόμων Θρασύβουλον τὸν Στειριέα γράψαντά τι παρὰ τοὺς νόμους, ἕνα τῶν συγκατελθόντων αὐτῷ ἀπὸ Φύλης, καὶ εἷλε. This says only,
τι.
35.
ἔστι δ’ αὐτοῦ καὶ ὁ ὑπὲρ τοῦ ψηφίσματος (
λόγος)
ὃ ἐγράψατο Ἀρχῖνος, τὴν πολίτειαν αὐτοῦ περιελών:
Vit. Lys. § 11.
36.
See p. 151,
note 1.
37.
De Lys. c. 17.
38.
Even including doubtful speeches, as Blass observes,
Att. Bereds. p. 344.
39.
The impeachment of Eratosthenes.
40.
Lysias and Sokrates.
41.
Diog. Laert. II. 40: [Plut.]
Vit. Lys:
Cic.
de Orat. I. 54 § 231
: Quint. II. 15 § 30, XI. 1 § 9: Valer. Max. VI. 4. 2: Stob.
Flor. VII. 56.
42.
The
κατηγορία Σωκράτους of Polykrates is mcntioned by Suidas s. v.
Πολυκράτης: Isokr.
Bus. §§ 3, 5, and auctor | Argum.: Aelian
V. H. XI. 10: Quint. II. 17, ef. III. 1: Diog. Laert. II. 38. Diogenes notices, from Favorinus, that Polykrates had referred to the rebuilding of the walls by Konon: therefore, as Bentley first pointed out (
de Epist. Socr. § 6, p. 51), the speech cannot have been written before 392 B.C.
43.
Schol. ad Aristid. p. 113. 16 (vol. III. p. 480 Dind.),
οἶδε τὸν Σωκράτην πρὸς τοὺς νέους ἀεὶ τὸν Ὀδυσσέα θαυμάζοντα...ὡς Πολυκράτης ἐν τῷ κατ’ αὐτοῦ λόγῳ φησὶ καὶ Λυσίας ἐν τῷ πρὸς Πολυκράτην ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ. The title of the speech probably was
Ὑπὲρ Σωκράτους πρὸς Πολυκράτην.
44.
Dr L. Hölscher (
Quaestiunculae Lysiacae, Herford, 1857, pp. 4 ff.) defends the ordinary account, believing that Lysias really composed a defence which Sokrates declined to use. He thinks that the
ἀπολογία Σωκράτους mentioned among the works of Lysias by Phot.
Cod. 262, Antiatt. in Bekker
Anecd. p. 115. 8, Schol. ad Plat.
Gorg. p. 331 B, and [Plut.]
Vit. Lys, was distinct from the speech
ὑπὲρ Σωκράτους written in reply to Polykrates, and cited by the scholiast on Aristides. He remarks that in the Plutarchic life the Apologia is described as
ἐστοχασμένη τῶν δικαστῶν—which is meant, he thinks, to mark that it was more practical, more forcnsic, than Plato's Apologia Socratis. He observes also that the scholiast on the
Gorgias (l. c.) notices the speech of Lysias as having contained matter about Anytos and Melêtos. But neither of these references affords any good ground for assuming that there was an
Ἀπολογία Σωκράτους by Lysias distinct from his reply to Polykrates. The latter had been read by the scholiast on Aristides. Sauppe shows that the supposed Apologia was at all events not extant in antiquity (
O. A. II. p. 203).
45.
Lysias at Olympia.
46.
Lys.
de bonis Aristoph. § 19,
βουλομένου Κόνωνος πέμπειν τινὰ εἰς Σικελίαν [Ἀριστοφάνης] ᾤχετο ὑποστὰς μετὰ Εὐνόμου καὶ Λυσίου, φίλου ὄντος καὶ ξένου, τὸ πλῆθος τὸ ὑμέτερον πλεῖστα ἀγαθὰ πεποιηκότος, κ.τ.λ. Sauppe substitutes
Διονυσίου for the words
καὶ Λυσίου. Obviously the words
φίλου ὄντος καὶ ξένου require to be defined by the mention of the person whose friend he was. Kayser proposed to insert
Διονυσίῳ between
Λυσίου and
φίλου. Sauppe's remedy is, as Blass says, simpler and better.
47.
Dionys.
Lys. c. 29: Diod. XIV. 109.
48.
See Sauppe,
O. A. II. p. 178, 190.
49.
Dionys.
Lys. c. 12.
50.
[Plut.]
Vit. Lys.
ἐτελεύτησεν ὀγδοήκοντα ἔτη βιούς, ἢ ὥς τινες ἓξ καὶ ἑβδομήκοντα, ἢ ὥς τινες ὑπὲρ ὀγδοήκοντα, ἰδὼν Δημοσθένην μειράκιον ὄντα [Schafer places the birth of Demosthenes in 384]. Dionys.
Lys. c. 12
εἰ γὰρ ὀγδοήκοντα ἔτη γενόμενον θήσει τις τελευτῆσαι Λυσίαν, κ.τ.λ.
51.
The expression is his own: he claims to give counsel as a good
citizen (
Olymp. § 3)—with the thought in his mind, perhaps, that if he was still but a
μέτοικος of Athens he was at least a
πολίτης of Hellas.
52.
Athenaeos XIII. pp. 603 E—604 D.