^{page 37 note 1} A first version of this paper was read to the Cambridge Philological Society early in 1965. I am indebted also to Professor K. J. Dover and to Mr R. Littman.

^{page 37 note 2} There are several reasons for thinking this, (i) Cor. and Alc. are warning examples; the decision to write one or two such συзυγίαι is announced as an innovation in Demetr. 1; (ii) it might have been more natural to couple Coriolanus with Themistocles (cf. Cic. Brutus 41–3), but this could not be done if Themistocles had already been used; (iii) Nietas and Lysander, the overlapping Lives, are probably earlier: so, with reservations, Stoltz, C., Zur relativen chronologie der Parallelbiographien Plutarcos, 16 ff.Google Scholar; it may be added that the cross-reference to Alc. in Nic. II.2 may be seen to be an interpolation from the fact that it refers not to the corresponding passage of Alc. (13), but to a somewhat later situation (16.2).

^{page 37 note 3} Dippel, R., Quae ratio intercedat inter Xenophontis historiam Graecam et Plutarchi vitas quaeritur (Gressen, 1898)Google Scholar.

^{page 37 note 4} Plutarch's direct reading of comedy was not extensive: Schläpfer, H., Plutarch und die klassischen Dichter (Zürich, 1950), 57 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 37 note 5} There is no good reason for thinking that Satyrus' anecdotes about Alcibiades (Athenaeus 534) come from a formal Life.

^{page 38 note 1} Nepos 6.2, Plu. 32.4 ff.

^{page 38 note 2} Nepos 7.1, Plu. 34.1.

^{page 38 note 3} It is unusual for the Roman to come first, but the reason is presumably chronology: cf. Demosth. 3.5 λεκτέον δὲ περὶ τοῦ πρεσβυτέρου πρότερον.

^{page 38 note 4} Herod. 8.17. If we adopt Vanderpool's, E. stemma (Hesperia XXI, 5 ffGoogle Scholar.), he would be the greatgrandfather. Anyway, Plutarch's version is unacceptable (ibid. n. 9).

^{page 38 note 5} Leo, F., Die griechisch-römische Biographie, 180 ff.Google Scholar, attempts to enumerate the variant orders; he is too schematic.

^{page 38 note 6} Cf. Per. 38.2, Sert. 10, Sulla 30.5.1 discuss briefly the problem of Plutarch's view of character-change in a forthcoming article On Reading Plutarch's Lives' in Greece and Rome, 1966.

^{page 39 note 1} Cf. Cato Minor 1.3–6 εὐθὐς ἐκ παιδίου…ὣς οῦν εἰς τὸ μανθάνειν ἦκε.

^{page 39 note 2} (i) To Ziegler's references for the flute anecdote add Proclus on Alc. I, p. 91 Westerink. (ii) τoῖς Άθηναίοις (228.26 Ziegler) should probably be deleted as a gloss: cf. Pericles 38.4.

^{page 39 note 3} For 4.4 and Eroticus 762 E, see Flacelière ad loc. To his references add that the slightly unexpected τὸ Σωκράτους πρᾶγμα (230.11 Ziegler) is from Alc. I 104D 4.

^{page 39 note 4} Athen. 5 34E ff.: see above, p. 37, n. 5, Uxkull-Gyllenband, , Plutarch und die griechische Biographie (Stuttgart, 1927), 30 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 40 note 1} Cf. Andoc. de mysteriis 134 ff., where A. takes credit for bidding 36 talents for the taxes when the regular τελῶναι had expectations of getting them for the usual sum of 30.

^{page 40 note 2} Note the pairs γελάσας καὶ ἡσθείς…ἑστιασας καὶ φιλοφρονηθείς…συστρεφόμενοι καὶ ἀγανακτοῦντες….

^{page 40 note 3} In a favourite simile, found at least seven times in the Moralia: see Wyttenbach on de adulatore et amico 73 c.

^{page 40 note 4} See Dover, K. J., Thucydides Book VI, 1965, pp. 23–4Google Scholar.

^{page 41 note 1} Sympos. 220 E.

^{page 41 note 2} Plato's word, and cf. Thuc. 5.43.2: άξιώματι προγόνων.

^{page 41 note 3} We cannot disprove these statements. The allusion to Callias in the κόλακες of 421 as newly inheriting does not exclude the possibility that he may have inherited two or three years before ( Burn, A. R., C.Q. n.s. IV (1954), 139 Google Scholar; Macdowell, D. M., C.Q. n.s. XV (1965), 42 n. 1Google Scholar).

^{page 41 note 4} ἐντρυφῶντος, a favourite word; cf. 23.8, 32.2, 36.2; Holden on Themistocles 18.4.

^{page 41 note 5} Cf. praecepta coniugalia 144A; Goessler, L., Plutarchs Gedanke über die Ehe (Zürich, 1962), p. 75 Google Scholar.

^{page 41 note 6} See Jones, J. W., Law and Legal Theory of the Greeks, p. 182 Google Scholar; evidence is Demosthenes 30.17 and 26.

^{page 42 note 1} The problem of ps.-And. 4 has been often handled; see especially A. R. Burn, C.Q. loc. cit.

^{page 42 note 2} Cf. Mor. 186D.

^{page 43 note 1} Cf. Nepos 1.2. We do not know from what work of Theophrastus the point about Alcibiades' hesitant delivery is taken; perhaps περὶ ὑποκρίσεως.

^{page 44 note 1} On Plutarch's use of comedy and its commentators, see Uxkull-Gyllenband, op. cit. 17–30, esp. 22–3.

^{page 44 note 2} Contrast the judgement of Grote, also a moralist in his way: ‘an unblushing combination of impudence and fraud…in the vein of Fielding's Jonathan Wild’.

^{page 45 note 1} See Tod, , G.H.I., II, pp. 303 ffGoogle Scholar. and references.

^{page 45 note 2} De republica 3.15. For a kindred τόπος, see Plu. de exilio 601 A.

^{page 45 note 3} ‘Longinus’ 23.

^{page 46 note 1} Cf. praec. ger. r.p. 799 c: the Athenians welcome τῶν λόγων τοὺς παιγνιώδεις καὶ γελοίους.

^{page 46 note 2} 21. 147.

^{page 46 note 3} Cf. Alcibiades' own predicament, 28.1.

^{page 46 note 4} τούτοις (p. 243.5 Ziegler) ought to refer either to more than one fact or at least to some vaguer circumstances; Plutarch may have in mind, but have failed to record, the other picture mentioned in Athenaeus—that of Olympias and Pythias garlanding Alcibiades.

^{page 46 note 5} From Theophrastus; see Lysander 19.

^{page 46 note 6} Cf. Antony 70.

^{page 47 note 1} New paragraphs, besides those in Ziegler, seem appropriate in eleven places: 2.2 2.3 ἔτι δέ 2.5, 7.3, 7.6, 15.4, 15.6, 15.7, 16.7, 16.8, 16.9.