g the
Athenian possessions in the latter passage. On the other hand, the
foreign possessions of Athens are limited to Lemnos, Imbros, Scyros,
Delos and Samos. This could only apply to the period after Chaeronea
(338 B.C.). In c. 61. 1, again, mention is made of a special Strategus
[Greek: epi tas symmorias]; but it can be proved from inscriptions that
down to the year 334 the generals were _collectively_ concerned with the
symmories. Finally, in c. 54. 7 an event is dated by the archonship of
Cephisophon (329). We thus get the years 329 and 322 as fixing the
limits of the period to which the composition of the work must be
assigned. It follows that, whether it is by Aristotle or not, its date
is later than that of the _Politics_, in which there is no reference to
any event subsequent to the death of Philip in 336.

The only question as to authorship that can fairly be raised is the
question whether it is by Aristotle or by a pupil; i.e. as to the sense
in which it is "Aristotelian." The argument on the two sides may be
summarized as follows:--

_Against._--(i.) The occurrence of non-Aristotelian words and phrases
and the absence of turns of expression characteristic of the undisputed
writings of Aristotle. (ii.) The occurrence of statements contradictory
of views found in the _Politics_; e.g. c. 4 (Constitution of Draco)
compared with _Pol._ 1274 b 15 ([Greek: Drakontos nomoi men eisi,
politeia d' hyparchouse tous nomous etheken]); c. 8. 1 (the archons
appointed by lot out of selected candidates) compared with _Pol._ 1274 a
17, and 1281 b 31 (the archons elected by the _demos_); c. 17. 1 (total
length of Peisistratus' reign, 19 years) compared with _Pol._ 1315 b 32
(total length, 17 years); c. 21. 6 (Cleisthenes left the clan and
phratries unaltered) compared with _Pol._ 1319 b 20 (Cleisthenes
increased the number of the phratries); c. 21. 2 and 4 compared with
_Pol._ 1275 b 37 (different views as to the class admitted to
citizenship by Cleisthenes). It will be observed that the instances
quoted relate to the most famous names in the early history of Athens,
viz. Draco, Solon, Peisistratus and Cleisthenes. (iii.) Arguments drawn
from the style, composition and general character of the work, which are
alleged to be unworthy of the author of the undoubtedly genuine
writings. There is no sense of proportion (contrast the space devoted to
Peisistratus and his sons, or to the Four Hundred and the Thirty, with
the inadequat