Dickson's History of the Theory of Numbers

ON page 130 of my review of Dickson's History I speak of two pages of titles at the end of Chapter XII as "not reported on." This is an error. With the exception of certain ones marked with an asterisk which give papers not obtainable by the author the content of the papers is sufficiently indicated, the papers not being of importance to warrant more detailed report. The phrase "list of references," on the top of page 132, is perhaps misleading. Of course the book is in no sense to be compared with the useless lists of titles of papers which the compiler may or may not have glanced at. My intention in the paragraph was to bring out the distinction which modern historians seem to make between a list of events and the relations and connections between events.