^{page 233 note 1} Prof. Burrows on p. 149 of his article has quoted a long passage from a previous paper of mine, in which occur the words: ‘at this south end of the east cliff, the summit of the cliff rises to a vertical height of sixty feet above its eastern foot, which is only at a horizontal distance of eighty-one feet from that summit.’ Professor Burrows disposes of this remark by an appeal to the photograph, and says ‘Comment is needless.’ The effect of this criticism is unfortunately negatived by the fact that though he has quoted my actual words, he has misread them. He says the photograph shows in profile the slope to which I refer. It does not. It shows in profile the slope to the southern, not the eastern foot. To this southern slope I referred in the Classical Review of Nov. 1896 in the words ‘The cliff is sixty feet high within fifty yards of the Sikia.’ But it is the east slope which is of importance to the question between us. As to comment we are in agreement.