^{page 63 note 1} Dover, K. J., C.Q. IV (1954), 81Google Scholar, shows conclusively that ἐψευσμένοι, the reading of E, is to be preferred to ἐψευσμένοις.

^{page 63 note 2} Patzer, H., Das Problem der Gesckichtsschreibung des Thukydides (1937), p. 105Google Scholar; Finley, J. H., Harv. Stud., Suppl. I (1940), 272, cf. p. 279Google Scholar; de Romilly, J., Thucydide et l'impérialisme athénien (1947), p. 46, cf. p. 190Google Scholar; Schmid, W., Gesch. der griech. Lit. I, 5 (1948), 132Google Scholar.

^{page 64 note 1} Cf. Patzer, loc. cit.

^{page 64 note 2} J.H.S. LXXI (1951), 73Google Scholar, cf. Historical Commentary on Thucydides, III (1956), 582Google Scholar.

^{page 64 note 3} J.H.S. loc. cit., cf. Hist. Com. loc. cit. (note on 108, 4).

^{page 64 note 4} Hist. Com. loc. cit. (note on 108, 2–6).

^{page 64 note 5} Hist. Com. loc. cit. (note on 108, 4). He finds support for this suggestion by arguing that ‘there is perhaps a slight inconsistency’ between (3) and ἄδεια (4). If so, there is surely a more marked inconsistency between the former phrase and ἐπίστευον (5).

^{page 64 note 6} J.H.S. loc. cit. His ‘other passages’ are those discussed in his article (ibid. pp. 70–4), which are all ‘comment on the effect of prominent individuals on the course of the war’ (ibid. p. 70).

^{page 64 note 7} His forecast that the war would prove the greatest of all time (1, 1, 1) is one of these, unless he is deceiving his readers in claiming that he made this forecast at the beginning of the war.

^{page 65 note 1} Hude deletes the last four words, perhaps rightly.

^{page 65 note 2} The πόλεις in 108, 3 are to be identified with the πόλεις in 108, 6 (), which are those immediately threatened by Brasidas, such as Torone (IV, 110, 2). In IV, 81, 2 ἕς τὰς πόλεις is shown by the context to be limited to the cities of the same area.

^{page 65 note 3} Cf. Poppo–Stahl, n. ad loc.; Shilleto quoted by Spratt, n. ad loc.

^{page 65 note 4} Cf. C.R. LXII (1948), 2–5Google Scholar on VII, 28, 1. This is a feature of Thucydidean style criticized by Hal., Dion.De Thuc. 24, 51Google Scholar.

^{page 65 note 5} For the use of ὕστερον when the interval envisaged is quite brief, cf. I, 64, 2; II, 49, 6; III, 85, 3; VII, 26, 3 and 85, 4.

^{page 66 note 1} Two of these appear in the assessment of 421 (A.T.L. II, A 10Google Scholar) and a third is described by Thucydides as an ally of Athens in the same year (V, 35, 1).

^{page 66 note 2} Gomme, , Hist. Com. III, p. 671Google Scholar. The assessment of 421 (A 10), as well as clauses in the Peace of Nicias, suggests that revolts not mentioned by Thucydides at some other places in this area had been suppressed before the conclusion of the Peace, cf. West, A. B. and Meritt, B. D., A.J.A. XXIX (1925), 54–69Google Scholar, and Woodhead, A. G., Mnemos. XIII (1960), 304–6Google Scholar.

^{page 66 note 3} Hdt. V, 11, 2; Thuc. IV, 107, 3. It was never a member of Confederacy. Its later history is unknown.

^{page 66 note 4} Woodhead, loc. cit.

^{page 67 note 1} Thucydides naturally gives more prominence to Athenian feeling than to allied feeling in a single area because the former had much more influence upon the general trend of events.

^{page 67 note 2} Numbers: IV, 129, 2 (Nicias and Nicostratus); V, 2, 1 (Cleon). Quality (recognized even by Brasidas): V, 8, 2.

^{page 67 note 3} Nicias and Nicostratus both suffered tactical reverses at Mende (IV, 129, 4). The generalship of Cleon is fully discussed by Gomme, , Ἑλληνικά, XIII (1954), 1–10Google Scholar, cf. Woodhead, op. cit. pp. 306–10.

^{page 67 note 4} In thought and language 108, 4 is similar to the rest of the passage (cf. especially , ibid. 6), though such similarities are not wholly reliable criteria.

^{page 67 note 5} There are obvious dangers in relying upon the evidence of single sentences to date the composition of long passages (cf. C.Q. V (1955), 53Google Scholar), but here the single sentence would be unintelligible if torn from its context.

^{page 67 note 6} Cf. Gomme, cited above, p. 64, n. 4.