Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T16:01:44.808Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Pylos 425 B.C: The Spartan Plan to Block The Entrances

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

John Wilson  and
Tim Beardsworth
John Wilson
Affiliation:
The Farmington TrustResearch Unit, Oxford
Tim Beardsworth
Affiliation:
The Farmington TrustResearch Unit, Oxford
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The whole of the Pylos campaign is intimately connected with the local topography. Pritchett has shown beyond reasonable doubt that the land in this area has sunk (rather than risen, as commentators have assumed) since classical times, and hence there is much about the campaign that needs re-examination. We confine ourselves here to a consideration of the Spartan plan to block the entrances, as given in Thucydides. Some points relevant to this turn on a more detailed examination of the site itself, which we were able to conduct in the summers of 1967 and 1968.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 20 , Issue 1 , May 1970 , pp. 42 - 52
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1970

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 42 note 1 Pritchett, W. K., Studies in Greek Topography, 6–16.Google Scholar

page 42 note 2 Thucydides, 4. 8. 4–8.Google Scholar

page 42 note 3 Gomme, A. W., A Historical Commentary on Thucydides, iii. 444.Google Scholar

page 42 note 4 Ibid. 443.

page 42 note 5 See references in Gomme, ibid.

page 42 note 6 Ibid.

page 43 note 1 Pritchett, W. K.Studies in Greek Topography, 6–16Google Scholar

page 43 note 2 Thucydides, 7. 59 et seq.Google Scholar

page 43 note 3 Thucydides, 4. 8. 6.Google Scholar

page 43 note 4 Breadth with outriggers about 16 ft. 6 in., and oars projecting perhaps 10 ft. on either side, make up 36 ft. 6 in.: and we may allow 4 ft. 3 in. on either side for a safety margin to make up a round figure of 45 ft. Of course all of this is approximate and some of it guesswork: but the distance is unlikely to have been much less than 40 ft., or much more than 50 ft. The argument would not be affected by any reasonable variations. See J. S. Morrison and R. Williams, Greek Oared Ships (C.U.P.), ad loc.

page 43 note 5 Ibid. s Ibid.

page 43 note 6 Ibid.

page 43 note 7 Ibid., facing p. 486.

page 45 note 1

page 45 note 2 Pritchett, loc. cit. The Osmin Aga lagoon was then, as now, dry land.

page 48 note 1 Not ‘landing-place’: there were places to land, but no chance of landing (because of the Spartan troops).

page 48 note 2 Some may be misled here by Leake's description of Voidokoilia (quoted by Gomme, , p. 484) as a bay with 'a narrow entrance; it is nevertheless bad, exposed to a continual surf, and capable only of admitting boats'. ButGoogle Scholar

(1) the entrance is wider than the Sikia channel (see map);

(2) it is usually calm, and its beach is exposed to surf only in strong northerly or westerly winds (certainly not to continual surf);

(3) whatever Leake means by ‘boats§ 6 above in the text.

page 50 note 1 Not, with Gomme, ‘stopping their attacks by land’: possible Greek (though unlikely because of the ), but the sense is irrelevant to the context.