^{page 20 note 1} The General Plan appeared in B.S.A. xii, Pl. VII, and B.S.A. xiii, Pl. I. For the description of the site see Bosanquet, , B.S.A. xii, pp. 303Google Scholarsqq.

^{page 21 note 1} B.S.A. xii, p. 304, Fig. I.

^{page 24 note 1} This layer appears in the section on line G-H in Pl. V.

^{page 25 note 1} The section on the line C-D was published in B.S.A. xiii, Pl. III, and that on line G-H, first in B.S.A. xiv, Pl. II, and in a corrected form in B.S.A. xv, Pl. II, from which it is now republished in Pl. V, B, at the end of this volume.

^{page 25 note 2} The remains of this temple were fully described and figured in B.S.A. xiv, pp. 17 sqq., with Figs. 5, 6 and 7. Fig. 5 in the text is from one of these photographs.

^{page 26 note 1} For the terracotta figurines v. Farrell, , B.S.A. xiv, pp. 48–73Google Scholar; for the bronzes, Droop, , B.S.A. xiii, pp. 107–117Google Scholar; for the pottery, Droop, , B.S.A. viii, pp. 118–136Google Scholar; xiv, pp. 30–47; xv, PP. 23–39; for the ivories, Dawkins, , B.S.A. xiii, pp. 77–108.Google Scholar

^{page 27 note 1} This difference in the thickness of the deposit on the two sides of the altar is shewn in the section on the line G-H (PI. V, B). It is interesting to contrast the altar, whose priority to the deposits round it is proved by its affecting their level in this way, with the walls of the temple, on both sides of which the deposits, being earlier, continue at the same level. See section on line E-F (Pl. V, A).

^{page 28 note 1} The redness of the remains of the brick-work might suggest that it was destroyed by fire, but there are no signs of charring on the objects, and the ivories especially would not have survived a fire. Nor would this supply any motive for raising the level of the sanctuary.

^{page 28 note 2} This transcription does not of course represent the actual lettering of the inscriptions, which have not yet been published. Specimens of these carvings have appeared in B.S.A. xii, p. 334, P. 335. Figs. 2 and 3; p. 337, Fig. 4: B.S.A. xiii, p. 60, Fig. 8: B.S.A. xiv, p. 25, Fig. 10.

^{page 29 note 1} For MrDroop's, arguments v. B.S.A. xiv, p. 46.Google Scholar For the Daphnai sherd v. Petrie, , Tanis, ii, Pl. XXXII, 3Google Scholar, and pp. 52 and 59.

^{page 30 note 1} Each section of the deposit was dug separately and divided into several layers. The finds from each layer were put into separate trays. Of the sixty-three trays which contained Proto-Corinthian sherds, in thirty-two it was accompanied by only Geometric, in twenty-four by Geometric and Laconian I, and in seven by Laconian I pottery only. From these figures the percentages in the text are calculated. Cf. MrDroop's, report in B.S.A. xiii, p. 127.Google Scholar

^{page 30 note 2} The initial date for Proto-Corinthian pottery used in this argument rests upon the testimony of the vases found at Syracuse, and its foundation date of 745 B. C., and in this way a good piece of external evidence is obtained for the general correctness of our chronology. A few more pieces of Corinthian ware have been found since Mr. Droop wrote his paper in B.S.A. xiii.

^{page 31 note 1} This gem was published in B.S.A. xiii, p. 76, Fig. 16, J.

^{page 31 note 2} For these varieties of Geometric v. B.S.A. xiii, pp. 119 sqq. At the Orthia only 7 per cent. of the Geometric pottery was of the older slipless variety, and at the Chalkioikos more than 80 per cent.

^{page 31 note 3} Four Proto-Corinthian sherds found with the Geometric pottery below the cobble pavement are too isolated to upset the general result. They are clearly out of place, possibly owing to some mistake in the processes of cleaning and sorting.

^{page 33 note 1} The profile of this capital is given in B.S.A. xiv, p. 7, Fig. 1. The fragment is a quarter of the capital carefully cut down for some other purpose. It had therefore ceased to be in use as a capital some time before the builders of the theatre used it as rubble. If we could be quite positive that it belonged to the sixth-century temple, this would be a further argument for its having been completely rebuilt before the Roman period. The fragment of column is ·6o m. long and preserves parts of three flutes. The original number can be computed by measuring the angle formed by three successive ridges. The work is, however, poor, and the number of flutes is no proof of early date.

^{page 34 note 1} The one found in the sand, the uppermost in Fig. 7, was published in B.S.A. xiii, p. 60, Fig. 8. Its length is ·25 m.

^{page 34 note 2} That these two groups have some architectural significance is rendered the more probable by the fact that several of these reliefs, all dating from the same period, represent parts of buildings. Thus two give a Doric architrave and metopes, another a Doric capital, and two more what seems to be a piece of architectural ornament.

^{page 36 note 1} B.S.A. xiii, pp. 62, sqq. A photograph, reproduced here in Fig 13, and full drawings are given ibid. Figs. 10, 11.

^{page 37 note 1} These figures are due to Mr. Wace.

^{page 39 note 1} For these inscriptions v. B.S.A. xiv, pp. 10 sqq. On Laconian VI sherds the name of the goddess occurred in painted letters, and several black-glazed Hellenistic vessels bore, complete or in part, the incised inscription, Mr. Wace suggests that this Chilonis may be either the daughter of Leotychides or of Leonidas II, both of whom belong to the third century.

^{page 39 note 2} In Fig. I, p. 16 above.

^{page 39 note 3} B.S.A. xv, pp. 15–19.

^{page 39 note 4} For the evidence of the French plan as to the possibility of the actual contact of the city wall with the theatre, see below, p. 47, note.

^{page 40 note 1} For the evidence as to the rebuilding of the foundation of the temple, v. B.S.A. xiii, pp. 57 sqq.

^{page 41 note 1} They have been published in facsimile by MrWace, in B.S.A. xiii, p. 38Google Scholar, Fig. 6, A, B, from which Fig. 10 is reproduced. A third type, was rare and from its lettering seems to date from the imperial period. All the examples were found at the Roman level, and Mr. Wace suggests that probably only a few such tiles were made for later repairs.

^{page 41 note 2} The inscription, No. 47 (2161), has been published in B.S.A. xiv, p. 95.

^{page 43 note 1} For a list of these inscriptions arranged chronologically v. U.S.A. xv, p. 73.

^{page 43 note 2} Published in B.S.A. xiv, p. 110.

^{page 43 note 3} S.M.C. p. 50, No. 252.

^{page 43 note 4} Published in this volume pp. 54 sqq., the numbers being 2720 and 2721, and Pl. VI.

^{page 43 note 5} Of these stelai set up by Bomonikai only one fragment has been preserved. It is published in B.S.A. xii, p. 368 (No. 20, 2163). Cf. also Professor Bosanquet, ibid., pp. 314 sqq.

^{page 44 note 1} For the publication of this seat with the photograph reproduced above, v. B.S.A. xiv, pp. 103 sqq.

^{page 45 note 1} B.S.A. xii, pp. 305 sqq.

^{page 46 note 1} B.S.A. xiii, p. 62, Fig. 10. A plan and elevation are given ibid., p. 63, Fig. 11.

^{page 46 note 2} Its plan in B.S.A. xiii, pp. 45–55, and the method of construction of the foundation in B.S.A. xiv, p. 6.

^{page 46 note 3} B.S.A. xiii, Pl. II, to which reference should be made for the details in the following paragraphs.

^{page 47 note 1} From the plan given by the French Expedition to the Morea, it appears that there was a second similar entrance in a corresponding position to the north. This plan has been reproduced, with the insertion of the temple, in B.S.A. xii, p. 309, Fig. 4, and again in B.S.A, xiii, p. 51, Fig. 4. The original is in Expédition Scientifique de Marée, ii, Pl. 48, Fig. I.

^{page 48 note 1} For this plan see the note on p. 47 above. I doubt, however, if its accuracy is sufficient to make such inferences at all certain.

^{page 48 note 2} The pavement appears in the plan in B.S.A. xiii, Pl. II, and in the photograph in ibid. p. 56, Fig. 5. The inscriptions are No. 40 (2482), v. B.S.A. xii, p. 376; No. 56 (2562), v. ibid. xiii, p. 185; No. 62 (2561), v. ibid. p. 188. They all date to the first century A.D. (ibid. xv, p. 73).

^{page 49 note 1} The discovery of slabs in front of the temple is against their having served merely to mark the point at which the theatre was to be cut orf, as seemed possible when only the slabs at the sides were known. Nor would such marking be necessary. Cf. ProfessorBosanquet, , B.S.A. xii, p. 311.Google Scholar

^{page 49 note 2} For examples see B.S.A. xii, p. 314, note 2.

^{page 49 note 3} For these figurines see Bosanquet, , B.S.A. xii, p. 313Google Scholar, and footnote.

^{page 50 note 1} B.S.A. xiii, Pl. II.

^{page 51 note 1} In the plan in B.S.A. xii, Pl. VIII.

^{page 53 note 1} B.S. A. xiv, pp. 45 sqq.

^{page 53 note 2} B.S. A. xiii, p. 61, Fig. 9. The revision of the date is discussed in B.S.A. xiv, pp. 15 and 26.

^{page 53 note 3} These stamps have been published by MrWace, , B.S.A. xiii, p. 38Google Scholar, Fig. 6, D, E.

^{page 53 note 4} The figurine with the birth-daemons was originally published in B.S.A. xiv, p. 53, Fig. 2, 1. For the Eileithyia Sanctuary and such figurines of women and birth-daemons, v. B.S.A. xv, p. 21.