e treatment of the period between the Persian and
Peloponnesian Wars); there is a lack of historical insight and an
uncritical acceptance of erroneous views; and the anecdotic element is
unduly prominent. These considerations led several of the earlier
critics to deny the Aristotelian authorship, e.g. the editors of the
Dutch edition of the text, van Herwerden and van Leeuwen; Ruehl, Cauer
and Schvarcz in Germany; H. Richards and others in England.

_For._--(i.) The consensus of antiquity. Every ancient writer who
mentions the _Constitution_ attributes it to Aristotle, while no writer
is known to have questioned its genuineness. (ii.) The coincidence of
the date assigned to its composition on internal grounds with the date
of Aristotle's second residence in Athens. (iii.) Parallelisms of
thought or expression with passages in the _Politics_; e.g. c. 16. 2 and
3 compared with _Pol._ 1318 b 14 and 1319 a 30; the general view of
Solon's legislation compared with _Pol._ 1296 b 1; c. 27. 3 compared
with _Pol._ 1274 a 9. To argument (i.) against the authorship, it is
replied that the _Constitution_ is an historical work, intended for
popular use; differences in style and terminology from those of a
philosophical treatise, such as the _Politics_, are to be expected. To
argument (ii.) it is replied that, as the _Constitution_ is a later work
than the _Politics_, a change of view upon particular points is not
surprising. These considerations have led the great majority of writers
upon the subject to attribute the work to Aristotle himself. On this
side are found Kenyon and Sandys among English scholars, and in Germany,
Wilamowitz, Blass, Gilbert, Bauer, Bruno Keil, Busolt, E. Meyer, and
many others. On the whole, it can hardly be doubted that the view which
is supported by so great a weight of authority is the correct one. The
arguments advanced on the other side are not to be lightly set aside,
but they can scarcely outweigh the combination of external and internal
evidence in favour of the attribution to Aristotle. An attentive study
of the parallel passages in the _Politics_ will go a long way towards
carrying conviction. It is true that a series such as the
_Constitutions_ might well be entrusted to pupils working under the
direction of their master. It is also true, however, that the
_Constitution of Athens_ must have been incomparably the most important
of the series and the one that would be most naturally reserved for the