^{page 52 note 2} Thuc. III. 86, 88, 90, 99, 103, 115; IV. 1, 24, 25, 58.

^{page 52 note 3} Thuc. III. 115, sect. 3: οἱ ἐν Σικελίᾳ ξὑμμαχοι sent to Athens to complain of the inadequacy of the expedition.

^{page 52 note 4} Thuc. III. 86.

^{page 52 note 5} Plat, . Hipp. mai. 282BGoogle Scholar; Diod. XII. 53; Timaeus fr. 95, apud Dion. Hal. de Lys. 3. Cf. Ed. Meyer, , Geschichte des Alterthums, Vol. IV., p. 359Google Scholar.

^{page 52 note 6} Ar. Ach. 633 sqq.

^{page 53 note 1} The Acharnians of Aristophanes, Introd., p. xxi.

^{page 53 note 2} As a matter of fact there are two fragments of the Banqueters which might be held to point to an interest in western affairs. In fr. 216 there are references to western luxuries, συρακοσίαν τράπεζαν Συβαρίτιδάς τ' εὑωχίας: and in fr. 242 τὸν ὸρτυγοκὸμον (which is certainly corrupt; Fritzsche reads ὸρτγοκόπον, ‘ex pravo scribendi usu, ὸρτυγοκόμπον, ortum esse monens’; but possibly ὸρτυγοκόμπον, ‘boasting of quails,’ is right) may possibly refer to Ortygia. But it would be worse than imprudent to base anything on this.

^{page 54 note 1} Frs. 222–227 could, metrically, be assigned to the parabasis. But, of these, frs. 222, 223, 225 and 226 are fairly obviously fragments of dialogue; and frs. 224 and 227, even if they do belong to the parabasis, give no clue to its contents.

^{page 54 note 2} Cf. Kock, , Com. Att. Fragm. I., pp. 407 sq., ‘de argumento cf. Ach. 630–642. Inridebat Atheniensium credulitatem, qui peregrinorum legatorum mendaciis facillime deciperentur, criminabatur populi in socios potissimum insulanos iniurias, homines populares qui tum valebant vehementissime accusabat.’ Professor Norwood, in a recent number of Classical Philology, has put forward quite another view of the contents of the Babylonians.Google Scholar

^{page 54 note 3} Thuc. VI. 13, sect. 1 (speech of Nicias), καὶ τοῖς πρεσβυτέροις ἀντιπαρακελεὑομαι μή καταιαχυνθῆναι, εἴ τᾡ τις παρακὰθηται τῶνδε, δπως μή δόξει, ὲὲν μή ψηφίζηται πολεμεῖν, μαλακὐς εἱναι. And Thuc. VI. 18, sect. 6 (speech of Alcibiades), καὶ μή ὐμᾶς ὴ Nικιου τῶν λόγων άπραγμοσὑνη καὶ διάστασις τοῖς ὲοις ὲς τοὐς πρεσβυτέρους ὰποτρὲψῃ, κ.τ.λ.

^{page 54 note 4} Plato, Hipp. Mai., l.c.

^{page 55 note 1} Thuc. III. 86, sect. 1.

^{page 55 note 2} It is clear that the teaching of Gorgias took place before the decision to send the expedition: both from the probability that he would return to announce the result of his mission directly it was apparent, and also from the words of Diodorus (XII. 53, sect. 5).

^{page 55 note 3} The earliest possible date for the Banqueters: it may have been produced in March at the Great Dionysia. Vide Geissler, Chronologie der altattischen Komödie, p. 32.

^{page 56 note 1} It is probable that history repeated itself in the following year, when discussion must have taken place over the sending of reinforcements to Sicily. Thucydides (III. 115, sect. 4) tells us that the Athenians sent them ἅμα μὲν ήγοὑμενοι θᾶσσον τὸν ὲκεῖ πόλυθὴσεσθαι, ἅμα δὲ βουλόμενοι μελέτην τοῦ ποιεῖσθαι. The second reason sounds like an excuse made by the conservatives to cover up their defeat in the Ecclesia.