No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 October 2009
page 1 note 1 I am sorry not to be able in any way to keep to the heads of Mr. Grundy's paper in the C.R. But by inadvertence he has made a misarrangement. His 4D, 4E, &c, ought to be 5, 6, &c, as they are not sections of the fortifications of Pylos. It is not worth while perpetuating this.
page 1 note 2 J.H.S., p. 41.
page 1 note 3 Thuc. IV., 35, 4, 
. MrGrundy, , J.H.S., pp. 39, 40Google Scholar, does not bring this fact out clearly.
page 2 note 1 See J.H.S. p. 61.
page 2 note 2 C.R. p. 371.
page 2 note 3 J.H.S., p. 49.
page 2 note 4 C.R., p. 372.
page 2 note 5 J.H.S., p. 64.
page 2 note 6 It is useless for Mr. Grundy to quote against me J.H.S., Plate VIII.; Fig. 1. The drawing of the senth-east corner as I before remarked, J.H.S. p. 55, is net in the least accurate. The sandbar too is apparently regarded as non-existent. J.H.S., p. 69.
page 3 note 2 Ibid. Plate II.
page 3 note 3 C.R., p. 373.
page 3 note 4 J.H.S., p. 65.
page 3 note 5 J.H.S., p. 69, note 53.
page 3 note 6 Ibid. p. 64.
page 3 note 7 Thuc. IV., 9,2 and J.H.S. p. 65, note 36; see also this paper, p. 5.
page 3 note 8 J.H.S., p. 67.
page 4 note 1 J.H.S., Plate II.
page 4 note 2 I stated this more unreservedly, J.H.S., p. 69.
page 4 note 3 J.H.S. pp. 17 and 25.
page 4 note 4 Thuc. IV., 13, 1.
page 4 note 5 Ibid. 9, 2.
page 5 note 1 See above, page 3.
page 5 note 2 C.R., p. 372.
page 6 note 1 J.H.S., p. 18, note 23.
page 6 note 2 C.R., p. 373.
page 6 note 3 His original statement, J.E.S., pp. 7–13, earefully avoids such attempts at dating.
page 6 note 4 J.H.S., p. 70.
page 7 note 1 J.H.S., pp. 68–72.
page 7 note 2 Page 4 of this paper.
page 7 note 3 Thuc. IV., 8, 5–7; 13, 4; 14, 1; 31, 1.
page 7 note 4 J.H.S., p. 21.
page 8 note 1 J.H.S., p. 18. Not only would the channel be navigable on Arnold's Theory, but it would be made narrow by ‘Sphacteria.’ According to Mr. Grundy's identification of Sphacteria the island would have nothing to do with the entrance, which would make Thucydides guilty of a still further blunder.
page 8 note 2 J.H.S., p. 22.
page 8 note 3 This they could easily have done, with no enemy to oppose them.
page 8 note 4 J.H.S., Plate II.
page 8 note 5 J.H.S., p. 71.
page 9 note 1 J.H.S., Plate II.
page 9 note 2 Ibid. pp. 73–76
page 9 note 3 Thuc. IV., 13, 3. MrGrundy, , J.H.S., pp. 30–32Google Scholar, apparently thinks 
refers to the ships blocking the eastern of the two channels. Here, then, even the first informant used λιμ⋯ν in a double sense! For these ships were not in the inner harbour.
page 10 note 1 It is not certain where the Athenians landed. It is impossible to learn in which direction they had to move to reach this first outpost.