¹ To the list in ed. 2 of the Oxford Iliad I may now add Matritensis 4560, where, as in M 10, the Catalogue is added at the end. No tradition exists of the omission, and the reason for it is conjectural.

² Nilsson, M. P., Κατάπλοι Bh. Mus. lx. 161Google Scholarsq. developes Niese's ideas to still more amusing excesses (the Trojan catalogue was made by the Dorians of Rhodes !).

³ On the Homeric side I have no acknowledgments to make. Among geographers and explorers, Monsieur V. Bérard, Mr. Hogarth, and Professor Garstang have supplied me with ideas and information.

⁴ Θ 222, Δ 5, 805 sq. Ajax and Achilles were at the wings, Ulysses in the middle; in the middle were the altars and the ἀγορά The Epipolesis (Δ 250) gives the order in the field.

⁵ Similar practical reasons may account also for the inhabitants of the old Ionic dodecapolis in N. Peloponnesus taking ship at Athens.

⁶ The catalogue of the Iph. Aul. gives the Argives.50 ships, the Athenians 60, Gouneus 12 instead of 22 in which Pap. Oxyrynchus 22 agrees; Ajax in some accounts brought 13 not 12; C.R. 1901, 346 sq. Diodorus v. 79, raises the Cretan contingent to 90.

⁷ I mean that Δωρίς and Δώριον were both known by these names before the Return of the Heraclidae. What the root meant I venture to think is unknown: the derivation from δρῦς δοίος etc. (Fiek, , B.B. 24. 299Google Scholar, Kretschmer, , K.Z. 36, 267Google Scholar, Glotta i. 15), does not seem more convincing than that produced by Mr.Murray, (Rise of Greek Epic, p. 40)Google Scholar I do not know from where, which connects the word with the latter part of ἐκκαιδεκάδωρα etc.

⁸ Thyreae, and ἡ μέχρι Μαλεέων πρὸς ἐσπέρην was separate from Sparta in the early post Dorian period, as were Cythera and ‘the other islands,’ Herod, i. 82

⁹ Bérard, V., Les Phéniciens el l'Odyssée, i. pp. 61Google Scholarsqq. Dörpfeld, W., Atth. Mitt. 1907, vi.–xvi. 1908, 295Google Scholarsq. and 320 sq.

¹⁰ To the vv. 11. in my note on 0 297 add Galen xvii. pt. 2. 38 K. and Xen., Hell. iii. 2Google Scholar. 30 where φεάς is a necessary emendation for σφέας

^10a Ptolemy iii. 14.39 has Κορύνη or Κορήνη(?) ῾Γπάνεια, Λέπρεον, Τυπάνεια as inland towns.

¹¹ Again, how absurd it is to make Thamyris come from Andania, a few miles up the valley from Dorion, and in the barony of Diocles!

¹² Schools of poetry in the heroic age seem implied by Phemius' statement χ 347, αἰτοδί δακτος δ᾿ εἰμί The others were ἀλλοδίδοκτοι premiers prix.

^12a See note p. 322.

¹³ Ath. Mitth. 1908, 185 sqq. ‘Olympia in prähistorischer Zeit’.

¹⁴ They had a kind of ἐπινομία on which Seymour, p. 240 is instructive.

¹⁵ The tombs of the Mycenaean, Cephallenians have been recently discovered, J.H.S. 1909, p. 357Google Scholar. Mycenaean objects in Cefalonia, , Rev. Arckéol. 38. 128Google Scholar.

¹⁶ A considerable literature not all of equal importance is in existence on the subject. I mention what I have lead: Dörpfeld, , ‘Das homerische Ithaka’ in the Mélanges Perrot, 1903, p. 79Google Scholar: the same reprinted with a reply to Wilamowitz, as ‘Leukas: zwei Aufsätze über das homerische Ithaka,’ 1905Google Scholar; Bérard, V., Les Phéniciens et l'Odyssée ii. pp. 405Google Scholarsq.; Michael, H., Das homerische und das heutige Ithaka, 1902Google Scholar, Die Heimat des Odysseus, 1905; Gössler, P.Leukas-Ithaka, 1904Google Scholar; Gröschel, J.Dörpfelds Leukas-Ithaka Hypothese, 1907Google Scholar (this gives the literature to date): Von Marées, ‘Die Ithaka-legende auf Thiaki’ Neue Jahrbb. 1906, xvii. 233Google Scholar sq. Vollgraff, , ‘Fouilles ď Ithaque’ B.C.H. 1905, 145–168Google Scholar, ‘Dulichium—Leukas’ Neue Jahrbb. 1907. A good sketch is to be found in the late Seymour, T. D.'s Life in the Homeric Age, pp. 45Google Scholarsq.

¹⁷ The smallness is not only recognised but insisted upon. Menelaus δ 174 offers Ulysses one town in Lacedaemon as an equivalent for his ‘royaume.’

¹⁸ Πανυπερτἁτη does not denote a point of the compass, it means ‘furthest out to sea.’ As Syrie o 404 is ῾ Ορτυγίης καθύπερθεν ‘off Ortygia, au large de l' Ortygie,’ Ithaca is ‘furthest out,’ which is plainly contrary to fact.

¹⁹ Elis also serves to define the position of Cefalonia and Zante φ 347.

²⁰ Not wholly unlike either Δάλμιον, Δέλ μινον, Δελμίνιον Δαλμάται Δελματεῖς Οὐλ κίνιον Doclea, Dalluntum. In the case of place-names passing through several languages these distant rapprochements seem permissible.

²¹ My conclusion had been arrived at, and this article completed before (May 21, 1910) I read the article ‘Duliehium-Leukas’ by Vollgraff, Wilhelm in the Neue Jahrbücher für Philologie und Pädagogik, 1907Google Scholar, a journal which owing to its changed shape is somewhat hard to find in our libraries. I hasten to give Herr Vollgraff his place between Bunbury and myself. I am heartily glad that conclusions which seem to me almost self-evident have occurred to an experienced excavator who is conversant with the localities.

²² I may note that it seems a curious canon of historical criticism, the equating of ‘Heracles’ and ‘Dorian.’ If the Dorians are Sons of Heracles, it might he hence infened that Heracles was prae-Dorian. In Homer the woid generally connotes ‘prae-Achaean.’

²³ Bérard i. 82 and Murray following him think Troy commanded a trade-route. But was there any trade with the Euxine at this time, or until the Milesian factories were established centuries later? Asiatic trade, e.g. in silver and mules, would come overland. Hence perhaps in the Trojan Catalogue the omission of any reference to the Bosporus, a new sea (the Pontus) or Bithynia.

²⁴ Cf. Hogarth, , Ionia, p. 59Google Scholar.

²⁵ Hogarth, l.c. p. 47 ‘the other great islands near the Ionian coast, Samos, Chios, and Mytilene have yet to produce a single well attested Aegean object.’

²⁶ The coincidence of the τροπαὶ ἠελίοιο of Syrie with Pherecydes' ἡλιοτρόπιον in Syra (Diog. Laert. I. ii) is enough to assure the identification. Acave(Eust. 1787. 15) accidentally provided a dial on its floor, as may be seen in some mediaeval cathedrals. Pherecydes embodied the principle in an instrument.

²⁷ The right form, as it is now proved to be, lasted in a few MSS. and in Stephanus. The Homeric vulgate altered it either to suit Φεραί (Φηρίῃ Macrobins and four minuscule MSS. including Escorial Ω i. 12) or ludicrously in the direction of Πιερία

²⁸ ‘We have…the junction of the Sala-myria [Penens] with a stream of almost equal magnitude flowing from the Northward, and from the Trikaline sub-district of Krátzova.’ Leake, , Northern Greece i. p. 418Google Scholar. It is called Mourgani on the map in Murray's Greece.

²⁹ The article is very confused, and the statement ἀπὸ Γουνέως . . . τοῦ ἀπογόνου Κύφου οὕτως φησὶν Ομηρος is a gross misapprehension of ἐκ Κύφου

³⁰ Rivers of Maeonia Γ 385, ‘Niobe’ on Sipylus Ω 615, the Chimaera Z 179 Π 328, volcano εἰν ᾿ Αρίμοις B 783; Asian meadow B 461, details of Troad Ξ 285; small towns on south of Aeolio peninsula (Thebe, Lyrnessus, Pedasos) B 689, Π 153, T 60, Γ 92, 191; Leleges and Caueones K 429, Φ 86.

³¹ e.g. Monro, D. B., Odyssey xiii.–xxiv. p. 351Google Scholar.

³² Sestos and Abydos between them commanded the strait and the commerce, if there was any. It is worth while to notice Niese's reckless conclusion, Sestos ‘must’ have belonged to the Thracians, becauses Mr. Leaf reproduces it. On as good grounds Calais can never have belonged to the English.

^32a Published by Lehmann, , Sbr. d. k. preuss. Ak. 1900, xxix. p. 625Google Scholar.

³³ Pindar fr. 173, ap. Strab. 544 connects them with the Σύριοι Σύριον εὐρυαίχμαν δίεπον στρατόν) a passage I owe to Mr. Garstang.

³⁴ Kretschmer, Einleitung, p. 229Google Scholar, Fick, , Beiträge z. Kunde d. indogermanischen Sprachen xxix. 238Google Scholar, ‘the Berecyntian.’

³⁵ It is a variant Ξ 512 of the Μυσοί Equivalent is ἀγριόφωνοι of the Sinties or native population of Lemnos (their name persisted, Myres, , J.H.S. xxvii. 205)Google Scholar. The settlers under Euneus were struck with their speech. The Italians α 183 are ἀλλόθροοι (p. 303). Herodotus uses ἀλλόθροοι and ἀλλόγλωσσοι

³⁶ For what follows cf. C.Q. 1908, 85, C.R. 1907. 18.

³⁷ I use these expressions advisedly, since I do not hold that the list taken down at Aulis of princes, their homes, and their forces has passed verbatim et litteratim into the Iliad. That Homer respected the names, places, and numbers I maintain, but it is as plain that he added to the information, mainly by what we should call anecdotes. We may discern:

588–590 the feelings of Menelaus.

686–694 the feelings of Achilles and consequent attitude of his troops. This was long posterior to the muster at Aulis (ath. Zen.).

699–709 death of Protesilaus. Also posterior.

721–728 illness and absence of Philoctetes. The same remark applies. By these additions the poet qualified the Catalogue to take the place he gave it, i.e. in his Book II.

³⁸ I do not wish to treat all the questions connected with the Catalogue, but I will remark that another so-called discrepancy, which has troubled the historians, is set at rest by this hypothesis. I mean the fact that of the chiefs enumerated in the Catalogue not all are mentioned in the body of the poem. It will I think be plain that in choosing a few days' events from the chronicle and adapting them to serve the glorification of Achilles Homer dealt well with the Greek generals: out of 43 on the roll he gave 35 a mention. More could hardly be demanded of an artist who had any regard for the probable. Eight only: Epistrophus, Agapenor, Thalpius, Polyxeinus, Ninus, Antiphus, Gouneus and Prothoos failed to illustrate themselves during the brief duration of Achilles' Wrath.