^{page 28 note 1} See note on line 1007 above.

^{page 28 note 2} SeeGerkan, A. von, Griechische Städtianlagen, p. 52Google Scholar.

^{page 28 note 3} SeeHaverfield, F., Ancient Town Planning, p. 14Google Scholar.

^{page 28 note 4} Von Gerkan, pp. 40, 41.

^{page 28 note 5} Von Gerkan, pp. 95, 96.

^{page 28 note 6} Judeich, W., Topographic von Athen, pp. 76Google Scholar and 430 (second edition); von Gerkan, pp. 54–56.

^{page 28 note 7} Von Gerkan, pp. 95, 96.

^{page 28 note 8} See Haverfield, p. 31.

^{page 28 note 9} Strabo, 14. 2. 9; see Haverfield, p. 31, and von Gerkan, pp. 43–46.

^{page 28 note 10} Pausanias, I. 1. § 3.

^{page 28 note 11} P. 52.

^{page 29 note 1} See von Gerkan, P1. 6 and P1. 9.

^{page 29 note 2} Von Gerkan, pp. 114–118.

^{page 29 note 3} See Pausanias, III. 11. § 9; 12. § 1, §10; 14. § 1; and Annual of British School at Athens, XII. pp. 431 ff.

^{page 29 note 4} See Pausanias, II. 2. § 6; 3. § 2, § 6; 4. § 6 andFowler, H. N. and Stillwell, R.. Corinth, I, Introduction, Topography and Architecture, pp. 84Google Scholar, 85, 86 and 135.

^{page 29 note 5} See Pausanias, I. 2. § 4; 18. § 4; 20. § 1; Judeich, , Topographie, pp. 179Google Scholar, 181, 184; little evidence is furnished by the American excavation, but see Hesperia, IV, Seventh Report, pp. 328, 355, 358.

^{page 30 note 1} See Judeich, p. 184; sources quoted in notes 2, 3 and 5 on that page.

^{page 30 note 2} Pp. 64 and 350.

^{page 30 note 3} See Hesperia, IV, Seventh Report, pp. 355–358.

^{page 30 note 4} Laws, 778c.

^{page 30 note 5} Critias, 115c ff.; see for planFriedländer, P., Platon, I, Pl. IIIGoogle Scholar. Friedländer on p. 271 mentions but rejects the assumption that there were more bridges crossing the rings of water, giving the inner city a radial form. He sees something oriental in Plato's Atlantis, and finds oriental apoloparallels for its regular circular form.

I have confined myself above to Greek authors, may be reminded of Vitruvius (I. vi). His street-plan is radial, and he was a practical man. Vitruvius may have been thoroughly practical on architecture in the more limited sense, but the scheme he gives here is hardly practical town-planning, and was certainly not followed as a rule by either Greek or Roman builders. It is based on the assumption that the winds must be excluded from the streets for health's sake; which is doubtful and not in agreement with Greek medical authors.Hippocrates, (Airs, Waters and Places, iii–vi)Google Scholar, while not concerning himself with the orientation of streets, thinks that cities exposed to the north, south, and west winds are unhealthy, but approves of a situation facing east; Oreibasius (ed. Bussemaker-Daremberg, II. 318 ff.; quoted byWiegand, T. in Prime, p. 46)Google Scholar in flat contradiction of Vitrnvius thinks it healthy that the winds should be allowed a straight and unobstructed passage along the streets, and approves of a system of parallel straight streets running north to south and east to west.

The method by which Vitruvius proposes to secure his object depends on the idea that there are precisely eight winds, blowing along fairly definite lines; an arbitrary though common assumption, for which the author himself apologizes obscurely. Vitruvius too, I would say, shows no acquaintance with Hippodamus; his too is a fanciful scheme divorced from the practice of the ancients.

^{page 30 note 6} See von Gerkan, p. 96. I have looked at the principles of town-planning chiefly from the ancient point of view. Some modern planners, facing very different circumstances and problems, find more reason to favour the radial scheme. For traffic and communications in a great modern city this has advantages. Compact chess-board planning in large industrial towns has given rise to great evils. The reaction from this is towards methods more spacious and more pleasing aesthetically, which the ancient planner, housing a comparatively small population in a compact and defensible area, need not and could not adopt.