General Introduction
Albert D. Pionke
The University of Alabama
At twelve volumes and over 7000 pages, George Grote’s History of Greece is the longest and physically bulkiest work in the John Stuart Mill Library, “the largest ever to appear on the subject in English by a single author,” and “one of the chief monuments of mid-Victorian intellectual life” (Demetriou, “In Defence of the British Constitution” 293; Turner 213). Appearing in two-volume installments roughly every two years between 1846 and 1856, it greatly overshadowed fellow liberal Connop Thirlwall’s eight-volume History of Greece (1835-1844) and entirely demolished the authority of conservative William Mitford’s The History of Greece (1784-1818), which Mill had read “continuously” as a boy, his sympathies “always on the contrary side to those of the author” (CW 1.15). Grote’s revisionist account of the virtues of Athenian democracy, implicitly both the forerunner of and model for modern British liberal society, “spurred a new appreciation for classical republicanism that transformed the field of ancient Greek historiography from its roots,” quickly becoming “the standard textbook for Greek history” at Cambridge, as well as a frequent authoritative reference “in the political debates of the period” (Demetriou, Brill’s Companion 7-8, 2; Kumar 88). Even now, “students of Greece are not likely to go back any farther than Grote’s History in their secondary research” (Roberts 208).
Students of the History itself most often return to Grote’s close imbrication with the Mill family to account for the ideological thrust of his enduring interest in classical Greece. An advanced intellectual disciple of James Mill since 1819, Grote hosted John Stuart Mill and his coterie, including regular meetings of both the Utilitarian Society and the Society for Students of Mental Philosophy, at the house on Threadneedle Street he had begun to occupy after his marriage to Harriet Lewin in 1820. As recalled in the early draft of Mill’s Autobiography, “The head quarters of me and my associates was not my father’s house but Grote’s, which I very much frequented. Every new proselyte and every one whom I hoped to make a proselyte, I took there to be indoctrinated. Grote’s opinions were at that time very much the same both in their strong and their weak points as those of us younger people, but he was of course very much more formed, and incomparably the superior of all of us in knowledge and present abilities” (CW 1.110). The conversation of these like-minded young men turned frequently to “Grecian history,” then unsatisfactorily interpreted by Mitford (H. Grote 49).
Whether one believes John Stuart Mill—who claims it “had been commenced at my father’s instigation” (CW I.98)—or Harriet Grote—who writes that, in “the autumn of the year 1823,” she suggested to her husband that he “write a new History of Greece himself” and that his “studies became chiefly directed towards it from that time forward” (49)—George Grote’s History of Greece was first conceived in this heady intellectual ferment of the early 1820s. By April 1826, Grote’s research had progressed far enough to allow him to publish what Mill would describe as “a very complete exposure and castigation of Mitford,” in the form of “Institutions of Ancient Greece” for the Westminster Review (CW 1.99). And by February 1831, the History had become such a central fixture in the intellectual life of the Grote home that Mill had begun to refer to it as his friend’s “opus magnum” and Harriet had projected that it would, by itself, “create” her husband’s “reputation” (67).
However, the passage of the First Reform Bill, Grote’s successful campaign to serve as Radical MP for the City of London—a position he retained through 1841—and his directorial responsibilities at the family banking-house, meant that Grote’s scholarly reputation would have to wait for at least a decade. By 1842, according to Harriet, he was once again “closely employed upon the first volume of his ‘History of Greece,’” and in 1843 he retired from Grote, Prescott & Company in order “to devote his time and faculties to the opus magnum that all other considerations, pecuniary ones included, became secondary, as well in his wife’s view as his own, to this main object” (153). It seems telling that even after a decade of deferral the project retained Mill’s Latinate moniker, suggesting perhaps his continued interest and encouragement.
Certainly, once it began to appear, Mill was a dedicated reader of and publicist for Grote’s History. As will be detailed in the following sections, he reviewed each of the first four pairs of volumes upon publication, writing with the advantage of freshly printed, then inscribed first-edition copies presented to him by Grote; additionally, he reviewed volumes nine, ten, and eleven together in a single longer essay. Mill also added his own contributions, in the form of nearly 1200 examples of marginalia, of which roughly two-thirds are verbal annotations. These notes range in length from a single letter, indicating an error of orthography, to one or more sentences, sometimes agreeing with but more often challenging whatever conclusions appear on the corresponding printed page. As will be documented below, slightly more than 150 of these annotations had a perceptible effect on subsequent editions of Grote’s History, meaning that they not only were made for Mill’s own gratification as a reader but also were shared with the author in the interests of copyediting, factchecking, rephrasing, rendering more accurate with respect to then-current scholarship, and otherwise improving the “opus magnum” in which both had been invested for decades. Documenting the effects of Mill’s marginalia on Grote’s text has required a painstaking comparison of each marginally annotated page in Mill’s personal copy of the first edition with the corresponding page in each subsequent edition. Tables recording Mill’s annotations, Grote’s original and revised text, and relevant excerpts from Mill’s letters, which sometimes allow the date at which the annotations were made to be approximated, are presented at the end of each volume-pair-specific introduction.
Volumes IX, X, XI and XII Introduction
Albert D. Pionke and Riley Hines
The University of Alabama
As had previous parts of Grote’s History, volumes nine and ten appeared together in February, 1852; however, volumes eleven and twelve were published separately, in April 1853 and March 1856, respectively, the latter timed to coincide with the last revised edition of all earlier volumes in their original twelve-volume format. Three of these last four books bear Grote’s inscriptions—“With the Author’s Best regards” (IX), “With the Author’s best regards” (XI), “With the Author’s Compl.ts” (XII)—although none identify Mill as the specific recipient, a symptom, perhaps, of the cooling of their friendship in the mid-1850s. In a departure from his previous practice, although Mill had originally committed to reviewing volumes nine and ten for the Spectator, he did not do so, writing to George Cornewall Lewis on May 4, 1853 “that they hardly afforded sufficient material” on their own (CW XIV.104). Once volume eleven was in print, however, he committed himself, in the same letter, to a full article reviewing all three new volumes for the Edinburgh Review. Published in October, 1853, Mill’s final public judgment of Grote’s opus magnum was that “in the rapid succession of animating incidents, and the living display of interesting individual characters, these volumes are not inferior to any of the preceding” and that “no modern writer has made the reader enter into the religious feelings of the Greeks as Mr. Grote does” (CW XI.311, 332).
In between these two encomia, Mill first offers a brief summary of the principal events in the “decay and death” of “Grecian greatness” narrated in volumes nine through eleven (CW XI.313). These include the “short-live Lacedæmonian ascendency,” the “resurrection of Athens and her reattainment, in diminished measure for a brief period, of something like imperial dignity,” the history of the Greeks in Sicily, including an illustration of, “by the conduct and fortunes of the elder Dionysius, the successive stages of the ‘despot’s progress,’” and the eclipse of the Greeks by the Macedonians under Philip (CW XI.311-12). He then shifts to a summative overview of the most significant topics covered in Grote’s History, punctuating his remarks by comparisons between ancient Greece and modern Britain, rarely to the latter’s benefit—for instance, “we greatly doubt if most of the positive virtues were not better conceived, and more highly prized, by the public opinion of Greece than by that of Great Britain” (CW XI.314)—and by at times extensive borrowings from his earlier Spectator reviews, especially those of volumes five and six.
Judged on the basis of space set aside within the review, Mill assigns greatest significance to Grote’s explanation of the Greek approach to empire-building and to ancient Greek society’s commitment to democracy. Regarding the former, although he judges it a “blemish, when judged by the universal standard of right,” Mill also asserts that there “was scarcely a possibility of permanent improvement for mankind, until intellect had first asserted its superiority, even in a military sense, over brute force” (CW XI.321). Writing, perhaps, from the perspective of his work at the East India Company, Mill later notes that however “unpopular the dominion of Athens may have been among her subjects, though it appears to have been so with the leading men rather than with the majority, they had reason enough to regret it after it was at an end; for . . . many of them only exchanged Greek dominion for that of the barbarians” (CW XI.323).
The story of Athenian democracy Mill views as “an epic, of which Athens, as a collective personality, may be called the hero” (CW XI.316). Even if marred by the presence of slavery—itself worthy of “not inconsiderable palliations” and “a very different thing from American or West Indian slavery” (CW XI.314)—ancient Greek democracy “was a government of boundless publicity and freedom of speech” whose “liberty of the bema, of the dicastery, the portico, the palæstra, and the stage” was “a full equivalent for the liberty of the press” (CW XI.324). Led by “a succession of eminent men,” including Solon, Cleisthenes, Pericles, and Epihialtes, Athens violated both the spirit and the letter of its own constitution only when overtaken by “the rancorous hatred of the oligarchical party,” represented by Peisander, Antiphon, and Critian (CW XI.326, 327). Truly, Mill opines, his eye firmly on his contemporaries, “Athens was in more danger from these men than from the demagogues . . . These men ought always to be present to the mind, not mere as a dark background . . . but as an active power” (CW XI.327-28).
Mill also highlights Grote’s defense of the Sophists and praises his “conscientious scrupulousness” with respect to providing evidence for all of his historical and argumentative conclusions (CW XI.330). Especially on this second point, Grote deserves to be compared favorably with the father of German historiography, Barthold Georg Niebuhr, whose Lectures on Ancient History “carried his characteristic liveliness of conception into the representation of the leading characters of Greek history, depicting them, often we fear with insufficient warrant . . . for clearness and correctness in conceiving the surrounding circumstances, and the posture of affairs at each particular moment, we do not think him at all comparable to Mr. Grote” (CW XI.331).
Mill’s final paragraph, which was excised when he republished the review in volume two of Dissertations and Discussions (1867), expresses incredulity that Grote will be able to complete the History as projected in a single additional volume. Not only must he cover the “conquests of the great Macedonian,” Alexander the Great, but, and “above all,” he has yet to provide “an historical and philosophical estimate of Plato and Aristotle . . . as thorough and satisfactory as that already given of Socrates” in volume eight (CW XI.336). These comments may explain why Grote ultimately reserved his full treatment of these two foundational figures in Western intellectual history for their own works, the three-volume Plato and the Other Companions of Socrates (1865) and the two-volume Aristotle (1872), still incomplete at Grote’s death and edited posthumously by Alexander Bain and George Croom Robertson. By these later dates, Mill and Grote’s friendship had been fully restored, and Mill’s lengthy review essays on both volumes are leavened with fulsome praise (see CW XI.375-440 and 475-510).
As did his somewhat ambivalent letter to Lewis, Mill’s marginalia hints at a cooling of his enthusiasm for the later volumes of Grote’s History. None contains as much evidence of readerly engagement as the previous eight volumes and there is a steady decline in the total number of marks and annotations: volume nine contains 85 examples of marginalia, 51 (60%) verbal annotations and 34 (40%) nonverbal marks; volume ten holds 64 instances, of which 52 (81%) are verbal and 12 (19%) are nonverbal; volume eleven has 55 marginal additions, broken down to 39 (71%) annotations and 16 (29%) marks; and volume twelve prompted Mill to add marginalia only 36 times, with a split of 31 annotations (86%) and 5 (14%) marks. The briefest of the annotations consists of a single letter—in Greek and indicating a misprint—and the longest stretches to 54 words recalling a rhetorical exercise of Lucian.
A much smaller percentage of these marginal annotations resulted in revision than in previous volumes. Of the combined 173 annotations in volumes nine through twelve, only six (roughly 3.5%) correspond to changes Grote made to subsequent editions; moreover, all were minor editorial corrections made in time for the 1856 edition. Thus, four misspellings are fixed, the number of triremes in Cyrus’s Persian fleet increased from 50 to 60, and a parenthetical featuring a mistake in Greek geography silently excised. The 1862 new edition does not appear to have changed any further passages in response to Mill’s 167 other marginal comments.
At least nineteen of Mill’s annotations display a personal knowledge of Greek and Italian geography strongly suggesting that they were made after his 1854-55 trip to both countries (see IX.244, IX.478, X.240, X.297, X.309, X.310, X.479, X.554, X.587, X.588, X.594, X.622, X.657, XI.249, XI.653, XI.517). Of these, six correspond closely with passages from Mill’s letters home. Thus, page 297 of volume ten features a footnote in which Grote reproduces modern scholars’ speculations about the location of ancient Sellasia, to which Mill responds “it is said in Greece that ruins exist on the hills behind Vurlia,” a location that he recorded visiting on May 22, 1855: “I was well rewarded at the last by the very finest view of Greece, at least made so by the lights of sunset, but it must always be one of the finest. This was in the descent to this village of Vurlia, (near the site of Sellasia) which is itself very high up in the mountains on the east side of the magnificent green valley of Sparta” (CW XIV.459). Later in that same volume, Grote’s narrative relocates to ancient Syracuse, in modern Sicily, where he recounts the failed Carthaginian invasion. On page 622, he describes Dionysius’s counterattack at Gela, a site now occupied by modern Terranova. Mill’s skeptical annotation at the bottom of the page reads “I cannot reconcile these accounts with the typography of Gela a town on a steep sandhill just over the sea,” echoing his letter of March 18, 1855, in which he tells Harriet that “Terranova is built on one of the sandhills (though it is clay at the base next to the sea) & this being very steep & tolerably high the town looks down over the green plain, an unusually large one, to the amphitheatre of low mountains which bounds it.” (CW XIV.379).
Still describing the Carthaginian invasion in volume eleven, Grote writes, on page 249, that in one battle “the ground presently became so muddy that they [the Carthaginians] could not keep their footing; and where once they slipped, the weight of their equipment forbade all recovery.” Ruefully, Mill has written “I know well what the mud of that country is”; indeed, the mud made such an impression that on March 9, 1855, he wrote home to Harriet, “Everything here which is not limestone is clay & the soft limestone of this country crumbles into a powder which makes a mud as heavy and adhesive as clay” (CW XIV.366). Even when Mill’s annotations do not directly reproduce passages from the letters, one can at times pinpoint the day on which he likely gained his first-hand geographical knowledge, as is the case with his five comments on pages 587 and 588 of volume ten responding to Grote’s description of Agrigentum, now Girgenti, which he visited on March 14, 1855 (see CW XIV.373-74). None of these annotations—even those offering clarifications or corrections, as do the two cited in the previous paragraph—prompted Grote to revise, suggesting that he may not have seen them.
The table below features all of Mill’s annotations and Grote’s few revisions to volumes nine through twelve. The left column lists the volume and page on which each annotation appears. The second column from left features Grote’s original text, if that text was subsequently revised; it is otherwise left blank. Mill’s annotations appear in the third column from left. The middle columns, in this case columns four and five from left, record whether or not a revision occurred in the passage already quoted and in which edition; the new volume and page number of the revised text are provided if different from that cited at left. Grote’s revised text appears in the second column from right, and relevant passages from Mill’s letters, if extant, appear in the rightmost column. Of course, individual page images featuring Grote’s printed text and Mill’s marginalia, along with transcriptions and closeup photos, remain available for viewing via the regular user interface of Mill Marginalia Online.
| Volume.Page in 1st ed. | Grote’s original text | Mill’s annotation | Revision evident in 4th ed, 1856 (Y or N) | Revision evident in new ed, 1862 (Y or N) | Grote’s revised text (if any) | Relevant References in Mill’s Collected Works (vol.pg; date) |
| IX.xvii | 38 | |||||
| IX.11 | already mentioned | N | N | |||
| IX.24 | a palankeen on wheels? | N | N | |||
| IX.30 | is there not some mistake here? | N | N | |||
| IX.35 | …Cyrus was joined by his fleet of 50 triremes… | 60? | Y, IX.35 | now, VI.206 | …Cyrus was joined by his fleet of 60 triremes… | |
| IX.49 | mentioned before p. 14 | N | N | |||
| IX.70 | Xenophon himself (probably) | N | N | |||
| IX.87 | Xenophon again (probably) | N | N | |||
| IX.104 | He was no doubt the “young Athenian” twice mentioned. | N | N | |||
| IX.107 | qu this translation πάλιν surely relates to πείθειν not to κελεύεις | N | N | |||
| IX.108 | five | N | N | |||
| IX.116 | Masidas might | N | N | |||
| IX.124 | There seem to have been no ἰατρος attached to a Greek army. | N | N | |||
| IX.127 | not ingenious but very common. an example at p. 93. | N | N | |||
| IX.128 | They are still called Kurds and their country Kurdistan. | N | N | |||
| IX.160 | frozen more probably. | N | N | |||
| IX.227 | that it might be done before Aristarchus arrived. | N | N | |||
| IX.236 | x or to flatter him with the attribute of merciful in order to induce him to exhibit himself as such. , | N | N | |||
| IX.240 | The price of a horse could not go far to enrich him | N | N | |||
| IX.244 | It is in the midst of what is now the richest and most verdant country in Greece. | N | N | |||
| IX.253 | ἀναρχία (no proper archon) | N | N | |||
| IX.266 | ἔκπεμφίς | ψ [slash] | Y, IX.266 | now, VI.355 | ἔκπεμψίς | |
| IX.298 | [plus sign] but it would hardly be paid to them in advance. | N | N | |||
| IX.312 | why? | N | N | |||
| IX.319 | Battle of Knidos. | N | N | |||
| IX.358 | But he himself, with one division, touched in his way at Geraestus, the southern point of Euboea; wishing to cross from thence and sacrifice at Aulis, (the port of Boeotia nearly opposite to Geraestus on the other side of the strait) where Agamemnon had offered his memorable sacrifice immediately previous to departure for Troy. | strange mistake Aulis is nearly opposite to the centre of Euboea. | Y, IX.358 | now, VI.414 | But he himself, with one division, touched in his way at Geraestus, the southern point of Euboea; wishing to cross from thence and sacrifice at Aulis, the port of Boeotia where Agamemnon had offered his memorable sacrifice immediately previous to departure for Troy. | |
| IX.365 | like “corsaire”. | N | N | |||
| IX.367 | doubtful interpretation of πίστιος πάσης | N | N | |||
| IX.400 | Lysandis | N | N | |||
| IX.400 | 50 talents would not go far in the expenses of a war. | N | N | |||
| IX.413 | surely the Spartans must have known the truth about this | N | N | |||
| IX.420 | It is questionable if μεγαλοπράγμων means any thing more than simply “ambitious.” | N | N | |||
| IX.431 | But this defeat had not yet occurred. | N | N | |||
| IX.471 | perhaps Pollis was a [remaining text unreadable] | N | N | |||
| IX.478 | it actually touches the mountain. | N | N | |||
| IX.498 | in | N | N | |||
| IX.529 | all my eye | N | N | |||
| IX.535 | It agrees also with the Behistun inscriptions which begin “Says Darius the King.” | N | N | |||
| IX.er | 113-8. Xenophon’s Athenian training. also 195 + 222. 147-8. 277 Athenian + Spartan empires compared. 326 Spartan character how corrupted by power. 379 Points illustrated by the fate of Derieus. 400 Questionable reasoning respecting the 50 talents sent from Persia | |||||
| X.xvii | 3 | N | N | |||
| X.10 | peace of Antalkidas! | N | N | |||
| X.17 | Handstern-Periode | u | Y, X.17 | now, VII.11 | Hundstern-Periode | |
| X.41 | why? | N | N | |||
| X.87 | there was all the difference between ἲδιᾳ + κοίνῆ not to mention that between allying himself with Persia to make war + doing the same thing to make peace. | N | N | |||
| X.125 | still they might have pleaded this as a merit. | N | N | |||
| X.133 | long walls? | N | N | |||
| X.134 | very strange that any one should have thought such a march possible | N | N | |||
| X.137 | the passage below does not seem to be his vote but his private conversation. | N | N | |||
| X.169 | ambitious or aspiring man. | N | N | |||
| X.175 | bed? | N | N | |||
| X.187 | magnificent. | N | N | |||
| X.194 | lauded | n | Y, X.194 | now, VII.125 | landed | |
| X.208 | very likely, as Timotheus was short of money ever after his peaceful preliminary cruise. | N | N | |||
| X.240 | Leuctra though a slight hill is quite in the midst of the plain + very far from Helicon. | N | N | |||
| X.253 | The Spartans had not this to fear. | N | N | |||
| X.289 | I think I know its position | N | N | “we rode at full speed from Mantinea to Tripolizza rounding by the way a prominent point of the mountains on the west side of the valley which point bore a conspicuous part in the battle of Mantinea in which Epaminondas received his death wound.” (XIV.458; May 22, 1855) | ||
| X.297 | it is said in Greece that the ruins exist on the hills behind Vurlia. | N | N | “I was well rewarded at the last by the very finest view of Greece, at least made so by the lights of sunset, but it must always be one of the finest. This was in the descent to this village of Vurlia, (near the site of Sellasia) which is itself very high up in the mountains on the east side of the magnificent green valley of Sparta.” (XIV.459; May 22, 1855) | ||
| X.303 | I should not have thought to. | N | N | |||
| X.303 | it seems to me quite clear + that the interpretation given is the only possible one. | N | N | |||
| X.308 | for the sake of the water. | N | N | |||
| X.309 | the walls go quite round Ithome, inclose a vast space of valley west of the mountain + climb to the top of the lower hills beyond. | N | N | “we reached the top of a low pass on the shoulder of Ithome, connecting it with the heights which bound the basin on the side towards Arcadia. Here the walls of Epamninondas met our sight, & are one of the very finest things in Greece—the splendid Hellenic masonry, the finest in the world . . . This was the northern entrance of the city but the enceinte was immense—it went quite round the bulky mountain of Ithome & juts out into the plain—then crosses the valley to the top of the heights on the opposite site & goes along these till it returns to gateway by which we entered & which is a circular corps de garde in excellent preservation.” (XIV.462; May 25, 1855) | ||
| X.310 | even in our days they are quite the most wonderful thing in Greece. | N | N | |||
| X.426 | the title of this chapter does not express correctly its contents. | N | N | |||
| X.466 | they could not see him till he turned the bend of the valley. (at Skope. see map.) | N | N | |||
| X.479 | this nonsense is repeated still, but with variations as to the place. | N | N | |||
| X.487 | this seems to have been too common to deserve such a high euloguism | N | N | |||
| X.493 | The chapter ought to end here. | N | N | |||
| X.511 | probably therefore found guilty but not sentenced to death | N | N | |||
| X.533 | qu. this translation | N | N | |||
| X.544 | metayers | N | N | |||
| X.554 | it is at a considerable distance inland, + quite shut out from the sea. | N | N | |||
| X.565 | conf. 571 | N | N | |||
| X.571 | conf. 565 | N | N | |||
| X.587 | two lines of hill. | N | N | |||
| X.587 | one principal valley | N | N | |||
| X.587 | [plus sign] containing catacombs | N | N | |||
| X.588 | in the wall itself also. | N | N | |||
| X.588 | It is thought that the citadel was on the hill on the side of which the modern town stands – but it never can have been true that to this there was but one steep access. | N | N | |||
| X.590 | If the camp was at the Campo Cartaginese, the Agrigentines when they fled to Gela must have passed exactly under it. Daphnaeus had perhaps driven the Carthaginians from that position. | N | N | |||
| X.594 | December is warm enough at Agrigentum. | N | N | |||
| X.622 | northern | N | N | |||
| X.622 | I cannot reconcile these accounts with the typography of Gela a town on a steep sandhill just over the sea. | N | N | “Terranova is built on one of the sandhills (though it is clay at the base next to the sea) & this being very steep & tolerably high the town looks down over the green plain, an unusually large one, to the amphitheatre of low mountains which bounds it.” (XIV.379; March 18, 1855) | ||
| X.647 | This seems to have been a trick of these Mamertines always. | N | N | |||
| X.653 | [plus sign] not much more in their highest. | N | N | |||
| X.657 | [plus sign] now nothing of them except the remains of the fort of Euryalus | N | N | |||
| X.668 | Scarcely any seem to have been left, except at Syracuse, or scattered in the Sikel districts. Messene was the only Greek town remaining. | N | N | |||
| X.670 | four | N | N | |||
| X.685 | [plus sign] was it not rather Therma? | N | N | |||
| X.689 | his money was probably nearly exhausted. | N | N | |||
| X.708 | Fonte Ciane the famous papyrus spring. | N | N | |||
| XI.xvii | 31 | N | N | |||
| XI.62 | Drepanum? | N | N | |||
| XI.122 | only 51. | N | N | |||
| XI.186 | see below | N | N | |||
| XI.186 | conf. above | N | N | |||
| XI.222 | The tombs are catacombs. | N | N | |||
| XI.240 | probably for compensation to the dispossessed holders. | N | N | |||
| XI.240 | royal or public demesne? | N | N | |||
| XI.249 | I know well what the mud of that country is. | N | N | “Everything here which is not limestone is clay & the soft limestone of this country crumbles into a powder which makes a mud as heavy and adhesive as clay.” (XIV.366; March 9, 1855) | ||
| XI.259 | owing doubtless to the name. | N | N | |||
| XI.303 | but | N | N | |||
| XI.312 | slave traders | N | N | |||
| XI.323 | £23000! | N | N | |||
| XI.374 | Probably ῥώμη here means military prowess. including even generalship. | N | N | |||
| XI.378 | Had the Greeks looking glasses? | N | N | |||
| XI.379 | Delivery not gesture. | N | N | |||
| XI.381 | many of his private notions were written to be spoken by Apollodorus. | N | N | |||
| XI.381 | not fair to Demosthenes | N | N | |||
| XI.387 | because he was Chancellor of the Exchequer | N | N | |||
| XI.389 | how? | N | N | |||
| XI.391 | This, above all, I suspect, was the true cause – Athens was imbued with what is now called the Manchester spirit. | N | N | |||
| XI.402 | wrongly translated I think. | N | N | |||
| XI.402 | to be a friend to the other by being an enemy to us. | N | N | |||
| XI.407 | The exact parallels in Italian history during the century preceding the inroad of Charlus VIII. | N | N | |||
| XI.435 | wrong again? that cannot be the meaning of οἱ ταχὺ καί τήμερον εϊποντες. | N | N | |||
| XI.452 | conf. 488 | N | N | |||
| XI.485 | impreached | [“impreached” changed to “impeached”] | Y, XI.485 | now, VIII.94 | impeached | |
| XI.488 | conf. 452 + 490. | N | N | |||
| XI.490 | conf. 488 | N | N | |||
| XI.496 | All prudent governments before the era of loans. | N | N | |||
| XI.530 | His constitutional shyness is one of the attested facts of his earlier career. | N | N | |||
| XI.560 | were they not to be released? | N | N | |||
| XI.606 | why Phokion? | N | N | |||
| XI.618 | According to Kispert’s map Halonnesus is Skopelos the longest island of the group | N | N | |||
| XI.647 | western | N | N | |||
| XI.653 | certainly not throughout if the assembly was at Delphi. But it may have been south of Delphi on the higher slopes of the ravine. | N | N | |||
| XI.663 | Thebes would not act against her Locrian allies | N | N | |||
| XI.702 | may not this be the second Philip? | N | N | |||
| XII.xv | 4 | N/A | N | |||
| XII.102 | conf. 324 note | N/A | N | |||
| XII.115 | It is a remarkable fact that military honour was at so high a pitch in condottieri who had no country. | N/A | N | |||
| XII.203 | not mentioned in the text | N/A | N | |||
| XII.211 | see page 307 | N/A | N | |||
| XII.265 | not so – see Curtius at foot. | N/A | N | |||
| XII.270 | Kabul is in Afghanistan. | N/A | N | |||
| XII.305 | Masson thought he had identified Aornos. | N/A | N | |||
| XII.307 | see page 211 | N/A | N | |||
| XII.308 | It is thought to be the very site of the battle of Goojrat in 1849 | N/A | N | |||
| XII.314 | Ten lunar months | N/A | N | |||
| XII.316 | This was to reascend into Afghanistan. | N/A | N | |||
| XII.324 | conf. 102. | N/A | N | |||
| XII.337 | conf. 368 | N/A | N | |||
| XII.344 | τῷ κρατίςῳ is hardly ‘to the strongest.’ | N/A | N | |||
| XII.350 | It was the age (though the old age) of Papirius Caesor + the first Fabius Maximus. The Romans defeated Pyrrhus a few years later – who was not so much inferior to Alexander. | N/A | N | |||
| XII.352 | This would perhaps have thwarted him | N/A | N | |||
| XII.368 | conf. 337 note | N/A | N | |||
| XII.392 | This period offered him no opportunity of recrimination against Æschines. Here too he must have invoked reminiscences uncomplimentary to his audience. In the period he selected, he could stand forth as defending their conduct equally with his own. | N/A | N | |||
| XII.394 | conf. 406. | N/A | N | |||
| XII.400 | 700 after having [unreadable] all his [intervening text unreadable] in fact | N/A | N | |||
| XII.420 | Leosthenes may have got hold of them at Tænarus. | N/A | N | |||
| XII.441 | perhaps Archias shewed spite + insolence. There is a speculation of Lucian, in one of his rhetorical exercises that Antipater had so high an opinion of the talents of Demosthenes, that he intended to spare him + endeavour to use him as an advisor: that he put Hyperides to death because He was a worthless fellow. | N/A | N | |||
| XII.492 | Have we not been speaking for 30 pages back of these returned exiles? | N/A | N | |||
| XII.509 | [plus sign] many more doubtless did not return after deportation. | N/A | N | |||
| XII.517 | It remains one on a lofty eminence, commanding a noble view over the Gulph + Northern Greece | N/A | N | |||
| XII.652 | [beginning text unreadable] explained why | N/A | N | |||
| XII.a11 | 160,000 220 | |||||
| XII.a30 | 39 20 13 | |||||
| XII.a30 | 10.4 22.6 96 ____ 128.10 | |||||
| XII.a32 | 16 |
Works Cited
Demetriou, Kyriakos N., ed. Brill’s Companion to George Grote and the Classical Tradition. Leiden: Brill, 2014.
Demetriou, Kyrlacos. “In Defence of the British Constitution: Theoretical Implications of the Debate over Athenian Democracy in Britain, 1770-1850.” History of Political Thought 17.2 (Summer 1996): 280-97.
Grote, George. A History of Greece. 12 vols. London: John Murray, 1846-1856 [revised edition, 8 volumes, 1862].
Grote, Harriet. The Personal Life of George Grote: Compiled from Family Documents, Private Memoranda, and Original Letters to and from Various Friends. London: John Murray, 1873.
Mill, John Stuart. The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill. Ed. John Robson, et. al. 33 vols. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1963-1991.
Roberts, Jennifer Tolbert. Athens on Trial: The Antidemocratic Tradition in Western Thought. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1994.
Turner, Frank M. “The Debate over the Athenian Constitution.” Greek Heritage in Victorian Britain. New Haven: Yale UP, 1981. 213-63.
Frank M. Turner. “The Triumph of Idealism in Classical Studies.” Contesting Cultural Authority: Essays in Victorian Intellectual Life (Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1993), pp. 322-61.