¹ The word ideal is used throughout as equivalent to imaginary, not as the opposite of realistic; thus the Hellenistic portraits of Homer are treated as ideal when in the artistic sense they are more realistic than many actual portraits of earlier date.

² H.N. xxxiv. 71. I adopt Mrs. Strong's emendation of Alcman poeta for the Alcamen et and alchimena of the MSS.; if the name is corrupt, the argument is unaffected.

³ Anth. Pal xvi. 306–8.

⁴

⁵ B.M.C. Ionia, Pl. XXX. 16; Arndt, Glyptothèque Ny-Carlsberg, text to Pl. 26–28.

⁶ Bürchner, , in Zeitschr. für Numismatik, ix. Pl. IV., 11Google Scholar; Visconti, , Icon, greeque, i. Pl. 3, 6Google Scholar; Jahn, , Darst. Gr. Dicht. Pl. VIII. 8Google Scholar; Bernoulli, , Münztaf. i. 15Google Scholar.

⁷ Overbeck, S.Q. 1430–31Google Scholar.

⁸ The later bronze coins of this type are attributed in B.M.C. Ionia pp. 239 seqq. to the second and first centuries B.C.; in Hist. Num.² Dr. Head puts them among autonomous and quasi-imperial types (p. 593) quoting the famous passage of Strabo.

⁹ Num. Comm. on Paus. Y. xviii–xxii.

¹⁰ cf. Bernoulli, i. p. 5.

¹¹ B.M.C. Sculpture iii. No. 2191, where literature.

^11a Clarac, Musée du Louvre, Pl. 226.

¹² Bernoulli, i. fig. 1; Inghirami, Gall. Omerica, I, Pl. IV.

¹³ M.d.I. x. Pl. 35. 2. The figure of Homer appears to be derived from that on the Homereia of Smyrna.

¹⁴ ii. Pl. CXXXI bis, No. 547; Jahn, , Bilderchronik, p. 59Google Scholar.

¹⁵ Ant. Denkm. i. Pl. 48, 11.

¹⁶ Tischbein, op. cit. Pl. III. Inghirami, op. cit. i. Pl. XVI.; Overbeck-Mau, , Pompeii, p. 624Google Scholar. The ‘Homers'’ of the reliefs in Welcker, , A.D. Pl. 18 and 19Google Scholar, have nothing to do with the poet, and I. de Bisschop's Homer (Icones signorum veterum, Pl. 71–2; Reinach, , Répertoire, p. 570Google Scholar) is scarcely antique.

¹⁷ Beschr. der geschn. Steine, No. 8683.

^17a These last gems, like ethers in the above list, are not mentioned by Bernoulli.

¹⁸ These heads differ from each other in details, but are marked by a unity of conception and general character which makes it convenient to class them together here, with the exception of No. 5, which is a replica of the ‘Old Sophocles.’ cf. Bull. Comm. 1898, Pl. 3–4.

^18a With which go the Arundel head in the British Museum, whose former name of Homer has recently been again suggested (‘angeblicher Homeroskopf’) by Klein, , Gesch. d. gr. Kunst. Vol. iii. p. 195Google Scholar and Index; and the relief of a seated poet, certainly the same person, in the Cabinet des Médailles, , Annali 1841Google Scholar, Pl. L; Jahn, , Billerchron. ii. 4Google Scholar; Bernoulli i. p. 136.

^18b Dr. Bernoulli supports Visconti's attribution; for the Homer theory see Furtwängler, , Beschr. der Münchn, Glyptothek. p. 298Google Scholar.

¹⁹ To the Homer types already mentioned may be added a bust at Wilton (Michaelis, , Anc. Mar. p. 688Google Scholar) and a medallion head at Lowther Castle (ibid. p. 492), neither mentioned by Bernoulli; the writer has seen neither, and can only note that they are not described as modern by Michaelis.

²⁰ Bürchner (op. cit. p. 109) says ten, but this appears to include types assigned by earlier writers to Crete and other cities and now discredited. Bernoulli speaks of ‘Smyrna, Kolophon, Chios, Nikaea, Kyme u. and.’ as giving the full-length figure, los and Amastris as giving the head only. Temnos is in fact the only state omitted, but the different issues are not enumerated by Bernoulli, or apparently elsewhere.

^20a Paus. v. 26. 2: and Frazer's commentary.

²¹ Strabo xiv. 646. The passage is quoted in full in note 32.

²² Vit. X. Orat. Isocratcs 10.

²³ Anth. Gr. xvi. 292.

²⁴ Paus. x. 24, 2; pseud. Hdt., Vit. Hom.

²⁵ 11. 291–5; ed. Teubner, 1908, p. 249; this composition, usually appended to the works of Hesiod, used to be attributed to a sophist of the age of Hadrian; recently the recovery of a fragment from the Fayum (beginning at 1. 63) dating from the third century B.C. proves that the text as we have it is a Hadrianic recension of a work of much earlier date, in fact, of the of Alcidamas. (See Mahaffy, , Flinders-Petrie Papyri, 1891Google Scholar, Pl. XXV. Nietzche, F., Rhein. Mus. für Phil. 25, pp. 528Google Scholarseqq; Acta Soc. Phil. Lips. ed. Ritschl. vol. i. 1870; Allen, T. W., Homeri Opera v. p. 225Google Scholar. The prose part of the work would appear to be of Hadrianic date, i.e. of the period to which the earliest Chian issues bearing the portrait of Homer can be assigned (post, pp. 7–8); there is therefore no clue to the earlier date limit of the statue or of the Argive decree as to the fiveyearly embassy to Chios; but the author of the speaks of it as a well-known fact, and his statement as to the Argive sacrifices agrees with that of Aelian, , V.H. ix. 15Google Scholar.

²⁶ Enc. Dem. 2.

²⁷ Ael. V.H. xiii. 22.

²⁸ Ibid.

²⁹ Anth. Pal. ii. 320 seqq. Homer is described as bald about the forehead, but with long hair falling on his neck.

^29a Fränkel, Inschr. von Pergamon, i. No. 203.

^29b Mémoire sur l'île de Chio, in Questions Historiques, edited by M. Camille Jullian, 1893, p. 313.

³⁰ For this and all other cities claiming Homer as a citizen the references in Pape, Gr. Eigennamen, s.v. Homeros; Slaars, Étude sur Smyrne, 1868Google Scholar; the standard work of Westermann, Vitae Script. Graec. Minores; the Life printed in Iriarte, , Regiae Biblioih. Matritens. Codd. Gr. 1769, p. 233Google Scholar, and vol. v. of Mr. T. W. Allen's Oxford Homer should be consulted.

³¹ B.M.C. Ionia, pp. 238, 244–7; Bernoulli, , Münzt, i. 6Google Scholar; Macdonald, , Hunter. Cat. ii. p. 359Google Scholar.

³² Strabo xiv., 646. Cf. Cic, . Arch. 8Google Scholar, Homerum Colophonii civem esse dicunt suum, Chii suum vindieant, Salaminii sepeliunt, Smyrnaei vero suum esse confirmant itaque etiam delubrum eins in oppido dedieaverunt.

³³ Num. Comm. on Paus. Pl. CC 5.

³⁴ B.M.C. Ionia, p. 262; Macdonald, , Hunter. Coll. ii. p. 374Google Scholar. The type is inaccurately figured by Cuper, , Apotheosis Homeri, p. 23Google Scholar, where Homer is described as holding calamum vel palmam, ut videtur; cf. Gronovius, , Thes. ii. p. 19Google Scholar.

^34a Itaque urbs antiqua varia fortuna ac multis monumentis insignis horarum spatio in cineres collapsa est (when the Venetians fired it). Hic vidimus multa antiqua monumenta quadrati lapidis ac marmore magnifiee aedificata, quorum nonnulla corruerant quaedam etiam extabant. Inter quae Homeri monumentum cum statua et inscriptione graecis litteris. This passage, from Cor. Cepionis Dalmatae de Petri Mocenici Imperatoris gestis libri tres, Venice 1477, sig. c 3, does not appear to have been hitherto connected with the Homereion.

³⁵ B.M.C. Ionia, p. 346. The date is suggested on p. 343.

³⁶ Collection of Mr. J. Mavrogordato; Macdonald, Hunter. Coll. ii. Chios, Nos. 67–8; Gronovius, , Thes. ii. p. 19Google Scholar.

³⁷ B.M.C. Ionia, p. 346, Nos. 140–1; Fulv. Ursinus, , Imagines p. 20Google Scholar; Allatius, Leode patria Homeri, p. 11Google Scholar; Cuper, , Apotheos. Hom. p. 23Google Scholar: apparently also reproduced in the last of Gronovius' engravings (Thes. ii. p. 19). It should be noted that Whitte in the work cited above mentions a second specimen of with inscribed as in the Hunterian Collection. The inscription is not mentioned in connexion with any of the specimens figured in the Hunterian Catalogue.

³⁸ de Coulanges, Fustel, Chio, in Questions Historiques, edited by Jullian, Camille, 1893, pp. 315Google Scholarseqq.

³⁹ Cf. Leo Allatius, c. ix. and Westermann, , Vit. Script. Graec. Min. p. 28Google Scholar.

⁴⁰ B.M.C. Ionia, p. 41; Hunt. Cat. ii. p. 325. A variant of this type reads

⁴¹ Ibid. p. 44.

⁴² Ibid. p. 45. This specimen is countermarked Β

⁴³ Ibid. p. 46.

⁴⁴ Imhoof- Blumer, , Nymphen u. Chariten, Pl. X. 8Google Scholar, and No. 436, Mionnet, Suppl vi. p. 15, No. 119. A poorer specimen, Æ. 95, has recently been acquired by the British Museum, with the figure of Critheis turned more to the l. I have to thank Dr. Regling for the cast here reproduced. The Critheis of Gronovius, (Thes. ii. p. 12Google Scholar) is a purely gratuitous attribution. For Critheis see Philostratus, , Imagg. ii. 8Google Scholar.

⁴⁵ B.M.C. Troas, p. 115; cf. Borrell, , N.C. vii. p. 47Google Scholar; the form of the seat is somewhat obscure, and was described by Morelli (Spec. Rei Numm. Tab. iv.) as rocks.

^45a Mionnet, iii. 9, 50, who describes the figure as that of a philosopher.

⁴⁶ Waddington, , Recueil, Pl. LXXIV. 23Google Scholar.

⁴⁷ Ibid. Pl. LXXIV. 24; Gronovius, , Thes. ii. p. 19Google Scholar.

^47a Bernoulli, , Münzt. i. 7Google Scholar.

⁴⁸ B.M.C. Troas, etc. p. 145; Hunter. Coll. ii. p. 311.

⁴⁹ Imhoof. Kl. M. p. 9.

⁵⁰ A.-B. Porträts. No. 572.

^50a Anth. Pal. xvi. 301 etc.

⁵¹ Further evidence is collected by Leo Allatius, c. xi.

⁵² Head, , Hist, Num ². p. 486Google Scholar. B.M. Cat. Crete, etc. Introd. p. xlix. The only known specimen of the didrachm is at Berlin, and I have to thank Dr. Regling for sending me a cast.

⁵³ B.M.C. Crete etc. p. 101, 1.

⁵⁴ Ibid. Nos. 4, 6, 7.

⁵⁵ Ibid. p. 102; Hunter. Coll. ii. p. 205.

⁵⁶ I may perhaps quote Plutarch's picturesque remark about Smyrna and Ios at the beginning of his Life of Sertorius, that “of two cities which take their name from the two most agreeable odoriferous plants, Ios and Smyrna, the one from a violet the other from myrrh, the poet Homer is reportel to have been born in one, and to have died in the other.”

⁵⁷ The comparison should be made with the head in Munich (A-B. 423–4), or the still finer example in the Barraeco collection, rather than with the poor and academic copy in the Vatican, from which the type is generally known.

⁵⁸ See Strabo xii. 9; Pauly- Wissowa, i. pp. 1749–50

⁵⁹ Head², pp. 505–6; B.M.C. Pontus, etc. pp. 84–5.

⁶⁰ Bernoulli, , Münzt, i. 1Google Scholar; said to be (1901) in Arolsen collection. The reverse is undescribed by him, and I have been unable to obtain any description of it from Arolsen.

⁶¹ Ibid. No. 2. I have to thank Dr. Regling for a cast of this coin, which is now at Berlin.

⁶² B.M.C. Ponlus, etc. p. 86, No. 13.

⁶³ Ibid. No. 14.

⁶⁴ Ibid. No. 15; Cuper, , Apotheos. Homeri, p. 22Google Scholar; Hunter. Coll. it. p. 233.

^64a B.M.C. Pontus, etc., Amastris, No. 16.

⁶⁵ B.M.C. Pontus, p. 86, No. 17.

^65a Cuper, , Apotheos. Homeri p. 22Google Scholar. This type is not published more recently, but is not necessarily suspicious. Cf. infra, p. 322, xv.

⁶⁶ Cf. e.g. the bronze and silver coinage of Ios (supra, p. 13).

⁶⁷ Visconti's suggestion that, because Amastris was a colony of Smyrna, therefore the coin type was probably taken from the statue in the Homereion there, is quite unsupported by facts; the type is, however, of course due to the Smyrnaean origin of the Amastrians.

⁶⁸ For the Capitoline example Bernoulli i. Pl. Ill; Bottari, i. p. 51; Helbig² i. 503; more recently called Hesiod, cf. Bernoulli i. pp. 26–7.

⁶⁹ i. p. 21. The fillet is unquestionably larger than usual, as it is on some of the coins of Amastris, hut this is a detail which varies so much that no great stress can be laid on it. Contrast, e.g., the broad fillet worn by the Homer of the los coins with the mere thread worn by the Hellenistic Homer of the Louvre.

^69a These have been with great probability assigned by Dr. Head to the reign of Aurelius, Marcus (B.M.C. Ionia, p. 261Google Scholar); therefore the Amastrian issue is later than that reign.

⁷⁰ Bernoulli enumerates ten replicas, op. cit. i. pp. 27–8.

⁷¹ Lexicon i. part ii. p. 101.

⁷² Figured in Haym, , Thes. Brit, part ii. p. 58Google Scholar.

⁷³ Numismat. Musaei Hon. Ariyoni. vol. i. section on Numismala Deorum, Heroum, etc. Pl. III. 15. (This book is unpaginated and the sections of plates separately numbered; the present comes towards the close of the book.)

⁷⁴ Opera Selecta, p. 109.

^74a Lett. di Contin, v. p. 42, tab. i. 22; hence Mionnet, p 390, No. 13.

⁷⁵ Prontuario delle Medaglie, 1553, p. 59; the Latin title is simply Promptuarium Iconum.

^75a Kum. Chr. 1906 p. 17.

⁷⁶ There are perhaps three exceptions, the Lysippic head of Alexander, the a faithful copy of a famous Roman gem signed by the engraver Solon, and the type of Pythagoras with obverse head of Helios. See my articles in Num. Chr. 1906, p. 17, and in Papers of the British School at Rome, 1905, p. 310.