Beside the extant speeches of Andokides, the titles of four others have been preserved. (1) Plutarch quotes an address ‘To the Associates,’ or members ¹ of the oligarchical clubs, as authority for a statement that the remains of Themistokles had been dishonoured at Athens; but adds that the statement was made by Andokides merely for the purpose of exasperating the oligarchs against the people ² . Ruhnken ³ , with whom Sauppe ⁴ agrees, thought that this Address was a letter written by Andokides, then in exile, to the fellow-conspirators of Peisandros in 411. But the breach of Andokides with the oligarchical party, after his informations in 415, was decisive and final; when he returned to Athens in 411 he was at once denounced by Peisandros and imprisoned. It seems better, then, with Kirchhoff ⁵ and Blass ⁶ , to refer this Address to an earlier time than 415: perhaps to the years 420—418, a period of keen struggle between the oligarchical and popular ⁷ parties at Athens ⁸ . (2) The ‘Deliberative Speech’ quoted by the lexicographers ⁹ is identified by Kirchhoff with the last-mentioned. Its title seems, however, to show plainly that it was of a different kind, and was either spoken, or supposed to be spoken, in ¹⁰ debate in the ekklesia. (3) Harpokration once quotes a ‘Speech On the Information’ ( περὶ τῆς ἐνδείξεως) for the word ζητητής, which occurs twice in the speech On the Mysteries ¹¹ . Hence the two speeches have sometimes been identified. But the pseudo-Plutarch expressly distinguishes them ¹² . And the author of the speech against Andokides states that two informations had been laid against him in the same year ¹³ . It is true that there is no proof of the earlier information having resulted in a trial; and that the title of the lost speech, if really distinct from the De Mysteriis, was ill-chosen. But it is difficult to suppose that the biographer could have made such a blunder as to quote the same speech by two different titles in the same sentence. On the whole, Sauppe's ¹⁴ view, that the speech On the Mysteries and the speech On the Information were distinct, appears most probable. If the lost speech referred, like the De Mysteriis, to the Hermae case, it must have contained the word which Harpokration quotes; and it would have been natural for him to quote it from the earlier of the two compositions in which it occurred. (4) The ‘Reply to Phaeax’ is ¹⁵ known only from the pseudo-Plutarch, who does not name the speech ‘Against Alkibiades’ ¹⁶ . It has been shown that the latter is probably the work of a late sophist; and it is likely that Phaeax, rather than Andokides, was intended to be the speaker. If, then, it could be assumed that ‘Reply to Phaeax’ is an inaccurate quotation of the title, which ought to have been cited as ‘Reply for Phaeax,’ there is no difficulty in supposing the identity of this work with the extant speech Against Alkibiades.

Besides the names of these four speeches, two ¹⁷ fragments of unknown context have been preserved ¹⁸ . One of them expresses the hope that Athens may not ‘again’ see the country people thronging in to seek shelter within the walls. This seems to refer to the invasion by Archidamos in 431. If this be so, the speech to which the fragment belonged was probably older than 413, when Agis occupied Dekeleia, and when the scenes of 431 must have been to some extent repeated. Such a passage might have found place either in the address To the Associates or in the Deliberative Speech ¹⁹ . The other fragment speaks of Hyperbolos as then at Athens; and is therefore older, at least, than 417 ²⁰ .