1. On this, see chapter 4 above.

2. Most recently, Pelling 1991.

3. Wassermann 1953, 194–195.

4. Connor 1984, 38.

5. Stahl 1966, 54.

6. Westlake 1968, 125.

7. Bloedow 1981, 135; for additional references praising Archidamos, see Pelling 1991, 122.

8. Cartledge 1987, 408.

9. Connor 1984, 38.

10. Finley 1942, 135–136; Stahl 1966, 57: “Sparta entscheidet sich gegen die Vernunft”; Immerwahr 1973, 24; Bloedow 1981, 142–143; Bloedow 1987, 66.

11. Stahl 1966, 56: “ein Musterstück raffinierter Rhetorik”; Allison 1984 explores the rhetorical effectiveness of the speech.

12. Kallet-Marx 1993a, 86.

13. Allison 1984, 14.

14. Kagan 1969, 304.

15. Allison 1989, 30–38.

16. For these and other figures, see the table on p. 29 in Allison 1989.

17. Kurke 1991, 240–256.

18. See Hornblower’s (1991) notes ad loc. on ἐλευθέραν and εὐδοξοτάτην

19. On this, see Flower 1991.

20. On the precise meaning of this passage, see Hornblower (1991, ad loc.), who agrees with the interpretation of Nussbaum 1986, 508 n. 24.

21. Gomme on 1.85.2.

22. So Tompkins 1993a, 110.

23. Westlake 1968, 124.

24. Hornblower 1991, 125, citing Hussey 1985.

25. On this, see Lattimore 1939.

26. On the traditional foundations for many sophistic mannerisms, see still Finley 1967, 55–117.

27. Hussey 1985, 123.

28. Pelling 1991, 123.

29. Contrast, however, Kagan 1969, 304–306.

30. Sthenelaidas may hint at such an interpretation when he argues that the Spartans have “good allies whom we must not hand over to the Athenians” (1.86.3); Ste. Croix 1972, 59–60.

31. See, for example, Pelling 1991, 125: “It is hard to believe that the Corinthians would go over to the Athenians, whatever else they may do”; also Kagan 1969, 292; Gomme mentions only the scholiast’s suggestion of an Argive alliance; Salmon (1984, 299) simply alludes to the “threat to join a different alliance” and does not speculate about the possible new allies.

32. Cogan 1981a, 32.

33. A resemblance noted elsewhere: e.g., Pelling 1991, 125; Finley (1975, 170) sees a general similarity between the Spartan assembly and Homeric debate: “My guess is that the Spartan assembly was much closer to the Homeric than to the Athenian in function and psychology. Archidamus and Sthenelaidas harangued each other before the assembled people as Agamemnon and Achilles did.”

34. Westlake 1968, 126.

35. Allison 1989, 55–56.

36. On this, see Pelling 1991, 126; Schwartz (1929, 135–136) felt that the inconsistency was due to differing and unreconciled stages of composition.

37. Pelling 1991, 128.

38. For a detailed analysis of the precision with which Archidamos anticipates Athenian reactions, see Hunter 1973, 11–21, esp. 12–13. Hunter argues that Archidamos’s insights are so precise that they must have been deduced after the fact.

39. Hanson 1983.

40. See Stahl 1966, 76.

41. Edmunds 1975a.

42. On the problematic nature of suicide, see Dover 1974, 167–168.

43. See, for example, Lykos’s speech at Eur. HF 140–169.

44. Bourdieu 1977, 12.

45. On this anecdote, see Edmunds 1975a, 102–109.