^{page 172 note 1} Pour I‘histoire de la science hellène (Paris, 1930), chapter x.Google Scholar

^{page 172 note 2} Plato and Parmenides (London, 1939), pp. 58–59Google Scholar; C.Q. xvi (1922) and xvii (1923). More recently a modification has been put forward by Raven (The Presocratic Philosophers [Cambridge, 1957], p. 247 n. 1), who claims that the Pythagoreans only tacitly assumed rather than explicitly asserted that the units were spatially extended.

^{page 172 note 3} Notably Calogero, Heidel, van der Waerden, Fraenkel, and Vlastos.

^{page 172 note 4} Viz. Aetius i. 3. 19 (D.–K. 51A2), which implies that the tradition did not regard number-atomism as an original feature of Pythagorean thought.

^{page 172 note 5} Owen, G. E. L., ‘Zeno and the Mathematicians’, P.A.S. x (1958), 212.Google Scholar

^{page 173 note 1} It must be acknowledged, however, that the interpretation of this text is controversial.

^{page 174 note 1} For evidence of this practice cf. Aristotle De Gen. An. 780^b 19ff. and Pliny N.H. ii. 14 (11). See, further, A. von Humbolt, Cosmos (translated from the German by E. C. Otté), vol. iii (London, 1851), p. 72, n. 20

^{page 174 note 2} Whether or not apocryphal.