Aristotle, Ἀθηναίων πολιτεία, ap. Harpokration, v. Δεκάζων, and in the Collection of Fragment. Aristotel. no. 72, ed. Didot (Fragment. Historic. Græc. vol. ii, p. 127).
[188] Diodor. xiii, 65.
[189] Xenoph. Hellen. i, 1, 36.
[190] Polyb. iv, 44-45.
[191] Xenoph. Hellen. i, 3, 5-7; Diodor. xiii, 66.
[192] Xenoph. Hellen. i, 3, 9. Ὑποτελεῖν τὸν φόρον Καλχηδονίους Ἀθηναίοις ὅσονπερ εἰώθεσαν, καὶ τὰ ὀφειλόμενα χρήματα ἀποδοῦναι· Ἀθηναίους δὲ μὴ πολεμεῖν Καλχηδονίοις, ἕως ἂν οἱ παρὰ βασιλέα πρέσβεις ἔλθωσιν.
This passage strengthens the doubts which I threw out in a former chapter, whether the Athenians ever did or could realize their project of commuting the tribute, imposed upon the dependent allies, for an ad valorem duty of five per cent. on imports and exports, which project is mentioned by Thucydidês (vii, 28) as having been resolved upon at least, if not carried out, in the summer of 413 B.C. In the bargain here made with the Chalkêdonians, it seems implied that the payment of tribute was the last arrangement subsisting between Athens and Chalkêdon, at the time of the revolt of the latter.
Next, I agree with the remark made by Schneider, in his note upon the passage, Ἀθηναίους δὲ μὴ πολεμεῖν Καλχηδονίοις. He notices the tenor of the covenant as it stands in Plutarch, τὴν Φαρναβάζου δὲ χώραν μὴ ἀδικεῖν (Alkib. c. 31), which is certainly far more suitable to the circumstances. Instead of Καλχηδονίοις, he proposes to read Φαρναβάζῳ. At any rate, this is the meaning.
[193] Xenoph. Hellen. i, 3, 15-22; Diodor. xiii, 67; Plutarch, Alkib. c. 31.
The account given by Xenophon of the surrender of Byzantium, which I have followed in the text, is perfectly plain and probable. It does not consist with the complicated stratagem described in Diodorus and Plutarch, as well as in Frontinus, iii, xi, 3; alluded to also in Polyænus, i, 48, 2.