Nicolaus Damascenus (fr. 52, F. H. G. iii. 387) follows H., but Plutarch (Mor. 260) and Polyaenus (viii. 41) make the murder of Arcesilaus a political one, while Plutarch adds that Laarchus had been supported by Amasis, and that the conspirators against him submitted to the king of Egypt in order to avoid punishment. This can be reconciled with the story in ii. 181, and is probably a fact, though H.'s Cyrenaean informants concealed the part played by Egypt out of patriotism. There are other discrepancies, e. g. Learchus is Laarchus in Plutarch and Polyaenus, who make him ‘friend’, and not ‘brother’, of Arcesilaus; cf. Maspero, iii. 645 n.
