These sarcophagi were brought to light by accident in the summer of 1882, by peasants digging in the fields. Hearing of the discovery I made an attempt to purchase them, but before my negotiations were completed, the Ottoman authorities stepped in and appropriated the monuments, which are now lying in a porch of the Governor General's palace, much injured by the rough handling they have received in their transport to Smyrna.

These sarcophagi possess a peculiar interest as presenting to us the only specimens of local pictorial art of an early Greek period as yet discovered on the coast of Asia Minor. It is a singular fact that no figured vases, so far as I can learn, have been disinterred on this coast, save a few of small size and insignificant character found in the Troad, and two amphorae of a late period discovered by Mr. Newton in the necropolis of Halicarnassus (Discoveries in the Levant, vol. ii. p. 63). The scarcity of such vases seems to suggest that these exceptions had probably been imported, as we know that Greek vases were articles of commerce in ancient times (Plin. H. N. xxxv. 46); but these sarcophagi from their size, weight, and material cannot have been other than of local manufacture and adornment, and are the only monuments which afford us a knowledge of Ionian pictorial art at a period before Herodotus wrote or Pindar sung, and, it may be, before Anacreon fled from the neighbouring city of Teos to sing the praises of love and wine at the court of Polycrates.

1. On June 3, 1882, while travelling from Apollonia to Antioch of Pisidia, we observed a long inscription in a cemetery by the roadside, about eleven or twelve miles west of the latter town, and close to the village of Gondáne. It was engraved on a pillar of peculiar shape, commonly used in Roman and Byzantine times: a horizontal section of the column would give the annexed figure.

A short inspection showed that the inscription was important, and Sir C. Wilson delayed the march for a day to allow me to copy it. I was exceedingly anxious to get an impression, but a strong and bitterly cold north wind, accompanied by frequent heavy showers, frustrated our attempts. At last, by laying my coat over the impression-paper on the stone, I got a squeeze of a small part. The inscription has been engraved by an unskilful workman: the lines are very uneven, the letters are unequal in size and various in form, sometimes deeply and clearly cut, sometimes merely scratched, ligatures are frequent, and often three, or even four, letters are united. In some cases it was impossible to tell, except from the meaning, whether a group of letters belonged to one line or another. In the heavy rain the only way of copying the inscription was to learn half a line by heart, and get into some shelter where I could write it out in my notebook. In this way I made a complete copy during the day: at night I wrote out lists of the proper names, compared the different forms together, and made a note of the places where difficulties struck me. Next morning the rest of the party went on to Antioch: I waited behind, revised the whole of the inscription, and carefully observed every difficulty that I had noted. A few other difficulties have occurred to me in subsequent study of the inscription; but in the great majority of cases where I remark on an uncertainty, the difficulty was distinctly present in my mind when comparing the copy with the stone.

The marble statue of a youthful male figure holding in his left hand a snake-encircled staff, which is reproduced in the accompanying plate, was found by Smith and Porcher at Cyrene, and is now in the collection of the British Museum. By its original discoverers this figure was named Aristaeus: an attribution which has been adopted, though with some hesitation, in the Museum Guide to the Graeco-Roman Sculptures. As, however, this attribution seems more than doubtful, it may be well to lay before the readers of the Hellenic Journal some additional remarks upon the subject, and to direct special attention to a statue which is not among those photographed in the History of Discoveries at Cyrene, and which has not, hitherto, been figured elsewhere.

The statue now to be described is four feet five and a half inches in height, and represents a young and beardless male figure standing facing. His right hand rests upon his hip, and under his left arm is a staff round which is coiled a serpent. The lower half of the body is wrapt in a himation, the end of which falls over the left shoulder, leaving the chest and the right arm uncovered. The hair is wavy and carefully composed, but does not fall lower than the neck: around the head is a plain band, above which has been some kind of crown or upright headdress: the top of the head has been worked flat. On the feet are sandals, and at the side of the left foot is a conical object which has been called a rude representation of the omphalos, but which is, in all probability, a mere support.

It may not be unsuitable to the purpose of this Journal to depart for once from the strictly scientific method, and describe shortly the problem of a ‘Lost Phrygian City,’ as it presents itself to the explorer both in its relation to ancient literature and in its actual modern features. I take the example of a city which played no part in ancient history, which is mentioned only twice or thrice incidentally in classical literature, where no known event took place and no person known to fame was born, which, in short, is about as insignificant as a city could well be, and I hope to show that the discovery even of such a little city may have interest and value for classical scholars.

The passage in which Livy describes the march of the consul Manlius on his piratical raid through Asia Minor is one of peculiar interest on many grounds, apart from its value for students of geography. There is no passage in the whole of Livy which is more obviously translated from a Greek original: it is therefore of great importance in the question of his relation to his authorities and of his trustworthiness in using them. Beyond the mere resolution of the true scholar to understand his author, there is the further incentive to study this particular passage that the author's historical character is to some extent dependent on it. Now the third recorded stage beyond Sagalassos in Manlius's march is the Metropolitanus Campus. Where in wide Phrygia was the Metropolitanus Campus?

When Pandaros treacherously shoots at Menelaos (Δ 132 sq.), the arrow lights—

ὅθι ζωστῆρος ὀχῆες
χρύσειοι σύνεχον καὶ διπλόος ἤντετο θώρνξ·
ἐν δ᾿ ἔπεσε ζωστῆρι ἀρηρότι πικρὸς ὀιστός·
διὰ μὲν ἂρ ζωστῆρος ἐλήλατο δαιδαλέοιο,
καὶ διὰ θώρηκος πολυδαιδάλου ἠρήρειστο
μίτρης θ᾿ ἣν ἐφόρει ἔρυμα χροός, ἕρκος ἀκόντων,
ἥ οἱ πλεῖστον ἕρυτο· διαπρὸ δὲ εἴσατο καὶ τῆς.

A little later, Menelaos says of the same wound (Δ 185-187):

οὐκ ἐν καιρίῳ ὀξὺ πάγη βέλος, ἀλλὰ πάροιθεν
εἰρύσατο ζωστήρ τε παναίολος, ἠδ᾿ ὑπένερθεν
ζῶμά τε καὶ μίτρη τὴν χαλκῆες κάμον ἄνδρες

And Machaon, after drawing the arrow out (Δ 215-6),

λῦσε δέ οἱ ζωστῆρα παναίολον, ἠδ᾿ ὑπένερθεν
ζῶμά τε καὶ μίτρην τὴν χαλκῆες κάμον ἄνδρες.

The word ζῶμα occurs again only in ξ 482, a passage which we will postpone for the moment, and in Ψ 683 of the boxer's girdle, which does not require further consideration.

Comparing the second and third of the passages quoted with the first, it seems perfectly clear that the ζῶμα was a part of the θώρηξ, and not an appendage to it. The word, in fact, stands as a passive to the active correlative ζωστήρ, and means the part of the θώρηξ which was fastened down by the girdle. It is quite clear from the oldest vase paintings that the lower part of the θώρηξ was bent outwards into a sort of ridge all round, in order to make a hollow which should be capable of holding the ζωστηρ in its place. This is very well shown in the woodcut, which is taken from Conze's Melische Thongefässe, Leipzig, 1877. The is expressed by the parallel lines at the bottom of the thorax; this is clear from the Kameiros pinax, where the lines are diagonal, and therefore do not indicate anything in the nature of such a πτερύγιον as we shall presently have to discuss.

Since such works as Beulé's L'Acropole, d'Athènes, the Count De Laborde's Athènes au xv.e, xvi.e, et xvii.eSiècles, and Michaelis's Parthenon have appeared, the history of the Acropolis and its buildings has been made widely known, or at least the ascertainment of exact information has been made easy for all interested in these subjects. The more complete the list of records, the more importance do we attach to any new document referring directly to the Acropolis or the Parthenon. The two drawings in the library of the late Sir Thomas Phillipps at Thirlstane House, Cheltenham, here published, give views of the Acropolis in 1687.

The main points in the history of the Parthenon (for this ever remains the centre of interest on the Acropolis of Athens), are the following: After its completion in 438 B.C. it appears to have remained in its original condition until it was turned into a Christian church about the middle of the fifth century or the middle of the sixth, and by peculiar persistency of its original dedication to the virgin goddess of wisdom, it appears to have been at first converted into a church of St. Sophia and then of the Virgin Mary. The alterations made chiefly affected the interior of the temple.

Upon the discovery of any great monument of ancient art, a series of objects of minor importance which had hitherto been awaiting identification are immediately seen to connect themselves more or less closely with the newly discovered work. Whence it comes that the course of historical development of ancient art is continually being exhibited with a nearer approach to completeness. The present article is an attempt to add another minor work to the list of statues and reliefs which group themselves round the frieze of the Great Altar of Pergamon.

The plate represents a somewhat mutilated work, No. 679 in the gallery of bronzes in the Museo Kircheriano at Rome. The subject is Athene engaged in no uncertain combat with her constant antagonist the giant Enceladus. The goddess has drawn back a little from herenemy: and whilst herself protected by the shield with its gorgoneion which she carries on her left arm, she is on the point of delivering the final thrust with the weapon she holds in her right hand. Enceladus, on his part, is at the same time recoiling somewhat from Athene, and collecting all his force for a blow.

In the Catalogue of Vases in the British Museum a red-figured amphora is described in the following terms:—

Cat. 864.—Amphora. Height 1 ft. in., red figures on black ground, outlines in black, inner markings faintly traced in red.

“1. Herakles pursuing the robber Cacus: the hero is bearded, the lion's skin covers his head and hangs down his back behind: in his left hand he holds his club: he stretches out his right hand towards the robber, who flies, looking back and stretching out both his hands towards him: the beard and hair of Cacus are white and squalid, drapery is twisted round his loins, but the figure has been retouched in these places, as has also the figure of Herakles: between them [Ch]armides Kalos; 2. rev. a youthful beardless figure clad in a mantle which envelops his head and arms: he leans on his staff.”—H.

The ancient building which I propose to describe, one of the most interesting of its kind in Cyprus and the East, has been casually mentioned by A. P. di Cesnola (Salaminia, p. 2, 1882) as a wall; ‘perhaps a part of the ancient wall bounding the interior area of the harbour :’ an architectural, topographical, and geological impossibility. By R. H. Lang (Cyprus 1875, p. 25) as ‘a Cyclopean ruin.’ By Unger and Kotschky, who add to an insufficient account an indifferent drawing (Die Insel Cypern, Wien, 1865, p. 533), but, with greater judgment, describe it as a Cyclopean well temple. L. Ross (Denkmäler u. Forschungen, Arch. Zeitung, April 1851, p. 328) calls it a Phoenician tomb, cp. L. P. di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 171, German edit. R. Pocock (1745, II. 217) speaks of it as ‘a chapel built of three stones, the four sides consisting only of two stones, and it is covered with a third, which is angular at the top. If I mistake not, I may say, this Saint (Catherine) was buried in this chapel, and there seems to have been a tomb in it.’ I begin by explaining my drawings, made with great care on the spot; every stone was measured, and reduced to scale. R denotes rock, M masonry. See Pl. XXXIII.

The four antefixes from Tarentum, shown in Plate XXXII., where they are reduced in size to about half the actual diameter, are only specimens selected from the not inconsiderable number of types found in recent excavations. All that I have seen are marked by great breadth and freedom of execution. Even those which seem to have been originally cast, in the rough, in the same mould have undergone such subsequent touching up and remodelling as makes them distinct works of art. Identical types sometimes occur in slightly varying sizes which implies successive moulds imitative of some established original. The faces when found are covered with a hard and rough lime-deposit, but the removal of this often reveals traces of colour laid as usual on a white priming. The Medusa, head in the plate appears to have been coloured to the life—cheeks pink, lips red, and not only the pupil, but even the iris of the eye painted. The colour of eyebrows and lashes is dark, that of the hair now a dirty brownish-yellow—like the tint of the common yellow lichen—probably modified by time or by the action of the acid used to remove the lime accretion. The modelling of the lips shows that fleshy and life-like firmness which is peculiar to the best time of Greek art. Under the chin of this, or a similar head I notice the marks of the moulder's finger, but instruments seem to have been used also. The lines of the hair, though fine in the plate, lose considerably by the absence of the part by the cheeks, where over each ear there rises a snake curved like a flattened S. The specimens which show these do not come up in features to the one figured. The colour on the snakes is blue-green. The small button above the centre of the brow is a curious feature.

The description of the larger frieze cannot at present be completely methodical, as the task of arrangement and reconstruction is not yet near its end, and skill or accident may discover the relative position in the whole work of many fragments and slabs that are at present isolated, and through their isolation lose much of their significance. It is certain at least that the artists have been guided in their grouping of the figures bya higher principle than that of mere decoration. The natural affinity of personages has been to some extent respected: thus there is reason to believe, as has been shown, that Heracles stands near to Zeus; and we see engaged in one common action a family of deities that belong to the nether world; we see a group of sea-divinities, and around Cybele the nymphs that are attached to the Magna Dea, while before the Sungod the goddess of the dawnis riding. Yet such connections as one might suggest will not give a certain clue in the arrangement of the slabs. Thus the fragment upon which the figure of Dionysos is preserved might be supposed to belong to the part of the frieze containing Hekate; to whom, because of his Chthonian character, his affinity in myth is close. The tradition and probably also the art of the sixth century B.C. had taken notice of this aspect of the many-natured god, for in many of the black-figured vases published by Gerhard we see Dionysos in close connection with Persephone, prominent in the representations of her return to the upper world: and an allusion is conveyed of their mysterious marriage: while according to more than one authority Hades and Dionysos had been identified by Heraclitus.

Mr. Albert Biliotti, the British Pro-Consul at Rhodes, who in conjunction with his brother has been carrying on excavations in that island for some years, has sent me the following eight inscriptions which he has noted from time to time and which, so far as I know, are unpublished. He has very kindly placed at my disposal his copies and, where they could be procured, paper impressions.

1. On a fragment of marble, 5 inches high by 7½ inches broad, discovered in the course of excavations on the Akropolis of Kamiros: complete on the upper and left-hand sides: from a paper impression.

In Professor Jebb's article on ‘The Ruins at Hissarlik,’ published in the last number of the Journal of Hellenic Studies (III. 2), I find a statement attributed to me (p. 191), which I must beg leave to disclaim. Professor Jebb there makes me declare ‘that “any one, however inexperienced in questions of archaeology,” must see that all traces of the Aeolic Ilium cease at six feet below the surface of Hissarlik.’ A reference however, to my letter in the Academy of November 12th, 1881 (not November 5th, as Professor Jebb says), will show that he has altogether misapprehended my meaning, and that my letter speaks only of objects found at Hissarlik and figured in Ilios, and contains no allusion either to walls or to any other kind of building. My words, therefore, can have no relation to ‘the architectural epochs which Dr. Dörpfeld recognises at Hissarlik.’ Consequently there is no opposition between my views and those of Professor Goodwin, as quoted by Professor Jebb. On the contrary, like Dr. Schliemann and, I believe, Professor Jebb himself, I thoroughly agree with Professor Goodwin that there have been ‘only two important settlements’ at Hissarlik, the second prehistoric city namely, and the Greek Ilion. The first, third, fourth, fifth, and (if we accept Dr. Schliemann's views) sixth cities were all poor villages which (with, perhaps, one exception) did not extend beyond the castle-hill itself. In referring to Professor Goodwin, Professor Jebb has overlooked the fact that he does not say there have been only two cities at Hissarlik, but, what is very different, ‘only two important’ ones.

Among the objects brought from Tarentum by the Rev. G. J. Chester are certain disks of clay of some interest, though not of artistic value. They are circular and flat or cheese-like in form, with a diameter of 3½ to 3¾ inches, and a thickness of about ¾ of an inch. The inscriptions are impressed in the clay by means of a stamp, and run thus:

The order in date is that followed in the list. No. 1 is oldest, and the shape of the м seems to indicate that it may date from the fourth century B.C.; the other three are probably not earlier than the third century. Later they can scarcely be, for after that time the obol gave way to the Roman denarius and sestertius as a measure of value at Tarentum.

The Rev. Greville J. Chester has presented to the British Museum an object of some interest which he lately found himself in the cutting near the Ramleh railway station. It consists of a circular cake of gypsum, or what we should call rough plaster of Paris, which was discovered within the neck of an amphora for which it had evidently served as the stopper. It presents the appearance of having been poured in in a liquid condition upon the contents of the amphora, a rough impression of which is consequently preserved in the uneven surface of the under side: the upper side bears the impression of a stamp, thus:

Since the publication of my article on Telesphoros in the last number of the Journal of Hellenic Studies (Vol. III. pp. 283–300) my attention has been drawn to certain coins of Dionysopolis in Phrygia which seem to indicate the existence of a cultus of Telesphoros at that place. Two of these coins are in the British Museum, and the third will probably be acquired in a short time for the same collection:—

1. Obv. ΔΗΜΟС Youthful head of Demos r.

In the Leake collection of gems now in the Fitzwilliam Museum at Cambridge, there is a very curious silver ring brought from Thessaly by Colonel Leake (he has himself engraved Thessaly on the inside) with raised gold letters soldered on the field. The second letter is destroyed in the lower part, and thus the inscription has been read as ΑΣΤϒΛΑΣ. Upon close examination, however, and as will be seen from the accompanying facsimile, we find that in no case could the second letter have been a Σ, of which there is a specimen in the last letter, and that it undoubtedly was a Τ, for there is just a remnant of the gold of the perpendicular stroke under the middle of the horizontal bar.