[457] Thucyd. vii, 48. τρίβειν οὖν ἔφη χρῆναι προσκαθημένους, etc.
[458] Thucyd. vii, 49. Ὁ δὲ Δημοσθένης περὶ μὲν τοῦ προσκαθῆσθαι οὐδ’ ὁπωσοῦν ἐνεδέχετο—τὸ δὲ ξύμπαν εἰπεῖν, οὐδενὶ τρόπῳ οἱ ἔφη ἀρέσκειν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ ἔτι μένειν, ἀλλ’ ὅτι τάχιστα ἤδη καὶ μὴ μέλλειν ἐξανίστασθαι. Καὶ ὁ Εὐρυμέδων αὐτῷ ταῦτα ξυνηγόρευεν.
[459] Thucyd. vii, 69; Diodor. xiii, 12.
[460] Thucyd. vii, 48. Ἃ ἐπιστάμενος, τῷ μὲν ἔργῳ ἔτι ἐπ’ ἀμφότερα ἔχων καὶ διασκοπῶν ἀνεῖχε, τῷ δ’ ἐμφανεῖ τότε λόγῳ οὐκ ἔφη ἀπάξειν τὴν στρατιάν.
The insignificance of the party in Syracuse which corresponded with Nikias may be reasonably inferred from Thucyd. vii, 55. It consisted in part of those Leontines who had been incorporated into the Syracusan citizenship (Diodor. xiii, 18).
Polyænus (i, 43, 1) has a tale respecting a revolt of the slaves or villeins (οἰκέται) at Syracuse during the Athenian siege, under a leader named Sosikratês, a revolt suppressed by the stratagem of Hermokratês. That various attempts of this sort took place at Syracuse during these two trying years, is by no means improbable. In fact, it is difficult to understand how the numerous predial slaves were kept in order during the great pressure and danger, prior to the coming of Gylippus.
[461] Thucyd. vii, 49. Ἀντιλέγοντος δὲ τοῦ Νικίου, ὄκνος τις καὶ μέλλησις ἐνεγένετο, καὶ ἅμα ὑπόνοια μή τι καὶ πλέον εἰδὼς ὁ Νικίας ἰσχυρίζηται.
The language of Justin respecting this proceeding is just and discriminating: “Nicias, seu pudore male actæ rei, seu metu destitutæ spei civium, seu impellente fato, manere contendit.” (Justin, iv, 5.)
[462] This interval may be inferred (see Dodwell, Ann. Thucyd. vii, 50) from the state of the moon at the time of the battle of Epipolæ, compared with the subsequent eclipse.
[463] Thucyd. vii, 50. ὡς αὐτοῖς οὐδὲ ὁ Νικίας ἔτι ὁμοίως ἠναντιοῦτο, etc. Diodor. xiii, 12. Ὁ Νικίας ἠναγκάσθη συγχωρῆσαι, etc.