^{page 86 note 1} This is published by kind permission of the Sydney University authorities, to whom I am also greatly indebted for furnishing me with the photograph reproduced in this article, and for allowing me to inspect closely the stele and to copy its contents.

^{page 86 note 2} Vide Ægyptiaca—a Catalogue of Kgyptian Antiquities in the Sydney University (London, 1891), p. 141.Google Scholar

^{page 87 note 1} “The Karian Inscriptions”: Trans. Roy. Soc. Lit., n.s., vol. x, pt. iii, 1873.

^{page 87 note 2} The author makes no mention of this circumstance.

^{page 88 note 1} See footnote supra.

^{page 89 note 1} It is certainly evident from the use of the epithet AMAKH (line 2 of the hieroglyphical text) that we are dealing with an Egyptian inscription of the Twenty-sixth Dynasty, for it was in the beginning of this era that the custom grew up of following the archaic style of the Early Empire texts. In these older texts the deceased was commonly termed AMAKH, i.e. “loyal follower”.

^{page 90 note 1} Portion of a statue of Shep-en-Upt, the wife of Psemthek I, is preserved in the Sydney University Museum. Vide Ægyptiaca, p. 19Google Scholar, where the queen is erroneously described as the wife of “Psammetichus III—the Pharaoh-Hophra of the Bible”.

^{page 90 note 2} Herodotus (ii, 154) says that Amasis II (570 b.c.) founded a Karian camp or settlement at Memphis, and as this is where the stele came from, it is probable that the monument is to be assigned to this reign.

^{page 90 note 3} The ensuing numbers and letters in brackets have reference to the same distinguishing signs placed before each line of text in the accompanying plate.

^{page 90 note 4} The Πετησις or Πετισις of the Greek graffiti in Egypt.

^{page 91 note 1} The sculptor made a mistake in the course of engraving this determinative, for he first of all placed the left arm of the man in a downward position, but afterwards, realizing his error, obliterated the fault as best he could, and rectified matters by placing the arm in the usual uplifted position. This fact can quite easily be ascertained from the accompanying photograph.

^{page 91 note 2} In Karion Language, pp. 145–6.Google Scholar

^{page 91 note 3} A misprint for “Mavnaüwian”.

^{page 92 note 1} See the Karian signs in “The formation of the Alphabet”, Petrie (Brit. School of Arch, in Egypt, vol. iii), where the value of is given as ō. The inner curved line in the character on the stele is undoubtedly an engraver's error.

^{page 92 note 2} This fact is clearer from the stone than from the photograph.

^{page 93 note 1} As Thoth was the name of the Egyptian god of language, literature, etc., it is just the kind of name we should expect a foreign dragoman or an interpreter, such as Ävetho probably was, to choose when taking over an Egyptian appellation.

^{page 93 note 2} Petrie, “Formation of the Alphabet,” transliterates the Karian and by PH.

^{page 93 note 3} Scripta Minoa, vol. i, p. 92.Google Scholar

^{page 93 note 4} “Egyptian Origin of the Semitic Alphabet”: Journ. Eg. Arch., Vol. iii, Jan. 1916.

^{page 94 note 1} Petrie, op. cit., equates the Sabæan with “V”.

^{page 94 note 2} Although the true Karian F was or (Petrie, op. cit.), it is certain that in view of the phonetic similarity this consonant was sometimes represented by the sign generally used to indicate “PH”. This would especially be the case if the sculptor were living in a foreign country and therefore not in everyday touch with the speech of his native country.

^{page 95 note 1} Op. cit.

^{page 95 note 2} Karian Language, p. 134.Google Scholar