GO\'ER~~IENf OF I~DL-\

DEPAR T:\IE:\T OF ARCHAEOLOGY

CFNTRAL ARCHIE.OLOGICAL
LIBRARY
 .,
c~; [,
..,,_
,.I
fl,:/
;/"'
..
 THE JOU RN ~\_L
OF

HELI_jENIC STUDIES
THE SOCIETY FOR THE PRO:\IOTIOX OF HELLEXIC ~TrDIE8

THE

HELLENIC

VOLUME XXVII. d9071

.r

PUBLISHED BY ..~TH~ COUXCIL. AND. 80LD ON THEIR BEHALF

BY

1L\..C}ULLA.i., ''"D co.,

,, A.J.., - L L\IITEIJ, S'l'.
,_ 2\IARTIYS STREET
LO~DOX. ·w.c.

)IDl'L'CCYI!

The Rights of T,·Cli1slation (Ind Ee1,roJ11ction (1 ,.e E,:.~e,Ted

GIMTftAL A1C 1 I \FOLOGICAl

......-
LIIRAkY ► l'"- W vc.LHI •
... N~..
u -.. . . . . . .
~ \ ' \ ~ , ' • 4 '"* ~A; ----:...~

~ :,..i.-..~- :. ::~.::__-_ _ . . ;~~-

HrcH.\1:n CJ..\ Y A'<:• :30:-<,, Ln11TED

rmL.\l, ,Jf..EIJ l!IL!. i:.,: . .\:S-D
 COKTENTS.
Rules of the Society ... XIII

List of Officers and )!embers

Proceedings of the Society, 1D06-H1(ii xliii
Financial Statement ... Ix
Additions to the Library
Accessions to the Catalogue of Slide~ lxxii
K otice to Contributors .. lxxYii
COMPTON (W. C.) and H. AWDRY 'l\ni X otes on Pylos and Sp!t:1.cteria :!i-!
DAWKIXS (R. l\I.) Archaeology in Greece ( HIOG-HIOi)
FORSTER (E. s.) ... Terracott,t:- from Boeotia and Crete
FOTHERIKGHA)I (J. K) On the 'List of Thal.1,-,,ol'racies' m
Eu,ebin,
GARDIXER (E. N.) Throwing the Diskos [Plate,c, 1.-III.~
,, Throwing the .Jawlin [Plate~ XYI L-
X.X.. 7 :;,!~I

HASLl;"CK (F. \Y.) In~c1·iptions from the Cyzicu& Di,,trict lj 1

HICKS (E. L.) Three In~criptions from A ,ia )Iino1· :2:!li

l\lAcnosALD (G.) Early Seleul'id Po1·traits [Pbte~ XLI1.,
XIY.] ... 1-!.)
MILLER (W.) )Ionewrn~ia [Plates XY., XYI.] ... :22(•. ::(1(1

31 YREf, ( J. L. ) The 'Li,t of Thalas:,ocr,1ci"s · in Eu,,ebius:

,) .-,
a Heply 1 _.,
,, A Hi~tory of the Pelasgian Theory 17(1
"
SmTH (C.) The Central Groups of the l\uthen"n
Pe,limenh :.:-!:!
STRZYGOW:iKI (,J.) ~.\_ S.trcophagu~ of the Sida!llara type
[PLtte~ Y.-XIL] ...
Tarn (W. \Y.) The Fleeb of the First Punic \\'ar
 CO~TE.XTS.

TILLYARD (H.J. W.) Instrumental Music in the Roman ~.\.ge . .. liiO

WELLS (J.) The Pel'Si:rn Friend~ of Herodotus 37
WROTH (W. "\V.) Peparethlb and its Coinage [Plate IV.] \JO
:N"otices of Books 131,302
Index of Subjects 315
Greek Index 321
List of Books N oticell
 YU

LIST OF PLATES.

I. B.-F. Amphora in the British :\Iuseum ( B 2i 1).

II. Attic B.-F. Lekythos in the British :\Iuseum (B 5i6).
III. R.-F. Pelike in the British :\Iuseum (E 395).
R.-F. Fragment at 1.Yi.irzburg.
IV. Coins of Peparethus, etc.
V. Figure B from the Cook Sarcophagm.
VI. C
" " "
VII. D ,.
"
VIII. E
" "
IX. F
"
X. ('
-'
" "
XI. II
"
XII. .J ,, ,,
"
XIII, XIV. Early 8eleueid Portraits.
XV. )fonemvasia: Ilam 1 ,a ::UvpnilH,rn.rcra-'A,,a 'i.vrp[a.
XVI. ,, Town 1.Yalls aml G,ttt>-:\Ioderu town at Ba.se oi
l'liff.
XVII. :Nolan Amphora in the British :\Iu;,;eum (E :3:!6).
XVIII. Panathenaic Amphora in the British :\Iuscum (B l:H).
XIX. R.-F. ~.\mphora in the Briti~h :\Iuseum (E 25G).
XX. Panathenaic Va~e in the British :\luseum.
 CONTENTS. IX

LIST OF ILL F~TRArfION8 IN THE TEXT.

PAG"E

Throwing the Diskos.

1. R.-F. Kylix (Louvre G 96) ... 2
2. R.-F. Kylikes (after Jiithner) 11
3. R.-F. Kylix (B.M. E 6) 13
4. B.-F. Kelebe (B.~l. B 361) ... 15
5. R.-F. Krater (after Hartwig) 16
6. Diskobolos on Bronze Lebes (B.::\I. 55\:J) 17
7. Fifth Century Bronze (after Burl. Fine Arts Club Cata!.) 18
8. From B.-F. Tripod (Berlin 1727) • HJ
9. 10. R.-F. Kylix (Naples: after ,lrcl1. Zeit.) 20
11. Bronze Diskobolos (lUI. 673) ...
12. Lekythos from Eretria ('E,t,. 'Apx.)
13. The Standing Diskoholos (Vatican) :.!3
14. R.-F. Kylix (:\Iunich 705) ...
15. R.-F. Kylix (from Gerhard)
16. R.-F. Kylix (interior of Fig. 1±)
17. R.-F. Kylix (after Hartwig)
18. Myron's Diskobolos (Lancelotti) :28
19. Coins of Co,; in Briti~h }Ius~um ...
:20. From Panathenaic Vase (Naple:i: after Eull. Xap.)
21. R.-F. Hydria (B.)l. E 1134: after B.C'.H.)
22. Athenian Lekythos (Bonlogne: from Le Jlusee)
23. R.-F. Kylix (Boulogne: from Le Jlusee) ... ;34,
24. B -F. Hydria (Vienna) ;J-i

Inscriptions from the Cyzicus District.

In,cription at Kermasti

Terracottas from Boeotia and Crete.

1. Primitive Standing :Figure from Boeotia G~l
2. Primitive Seated Figure 70
3. Primitive Standing Figure 71
4. Chariot Group from Crete ... 72
5. Horseman carrying Faggots
X

Peparethus and its Coinage.

A, B. Coins with winged figme and head of Herakle,; £15
C. Coin with seated Dionyso5, ... 9i
A Sarcophagus of the Sidamara type.
1. Fragment A of the Cook Sarc·ophagus 100
'> The Sidam,wa Sarcophagm, ... 101
3. Sarcophagus Fragmenb at Slll_nna ... 103
4. Dioscnrns from the Siclamam Sarcophagu,-, 10-i
3. Sarcophagu:-: from Selefkeh at Constautinoiile ... 105
6. DeYelopment of the Sarcophagn,,-Capitab ... 108
, . Relief at Berlin ... 109
8. Sarcophagu,-, Fragment in the Briti~h ;\Iuseum 110
£,. Muse from the }Iantinean Ba,,is 111
10. The '}Iatron of Herculaneum' (Dresden) ... l 12
11. Xiche in Cemete1·y of the Tulunids, near Cairo 11-i
12. From the Throne of St. }Iaxirni,rn, RaYenna 116
1:3. Leaf of Ivory Diptych in the B. }I. ... ll'i
1-t Portion of Pompeian Wall-P,1inting ... 11!)
Hi. Reconstruction of Pompeian Stage-Fa~flde 120
16. Pompeian Wall-Painting 121

Instrumental Music in the Roman Age.

1. Trigonuu1 or Sarnbnca 11;2
.-, Te1Tacotta Fignre at Sma (\Yoman "With Zithet•i 163
3. Pandnm 164
4. Terracotta Figure at Sn~a ( \Voman with Pamlnra and \Vreath) 165
5. in }Ins. Aboui (Man playing on Panclura) 165
6. Sarcophagu, in thl' Taormina }Iu~eum 1Gf3
7. Pan-pipes lt:l'i'

Three Inscriptions from Asia Minor.

Inscription from Troy ... 226
Monemvasia.
1. }Ionemrn~ia from the Lan,! :!:!D
:2. Entrance to Ka,tro 2:rn
:,. Kastro ...

The Central Groups of the Pediments of the Parthenon.

I. Scheme of Ite~tor,,tion uf Ceutral Group of K Pedunent :!H
., \Y. Pediment :?-!5
:-,. R.-F. Ya 0 e with Birth of Athena :!-i'i
 COKTENTS. Xl

Throwing the Javelin.

1. Various methods of attaching the amentum 250
'> Interior of B.-F. Kylix (B.~I. 380) ...

3. From the Franqois Vase (from Fnrtwtingler) 253

4. U ~e of the throwing-thong 237'
5. R.-F. Psykter of Phintia~ ( from Ant. lJenkm.) 23~,
6. Panathenaic Amphora (Ley(len, from A,·cli. Zeit.) 2fi0
7. From R.-F. Stamnos (~[us. GL'eg.) 261
8. From B.-F. Vase from Acropolis, Athens 2(il
9. R.-F. Kylix (~Iunich: after Jiithner) 2ti:!
10. R.-F. Kylix (Berlin: after Hartwig) 21;:3
11. From R.-F. Kylix (Torlonia: after Jiithner)
12. R.-F. Kylix (l\Iunich: from .·frcli. Zeit.) ...
13. R.-F. Amphora (Munich: after Fm·tw,mgler)
14. From R.-F. Kylix (Rome: App. des rui,i. Inst.)
15. R.-F. Kylix (Berlin: after Jiithner;
16. Panathenaic Amphora in B.~I. (B 14(;) 27'2

Two Notes on Pylos and Sphacteria.

1. General View Korthwards from Cliffs South of the Panagia
Plan of Pylos and Sphacteria (after Grundy) ...
:l. Red Bluff from South
3. Red Bluff and Route between Oliff and Buc:hes
4. Looking Korth from same point as preceding 27'!}
5. Looking down from the Notch southwanl 280
6. Pylos and Sphactena from the Korth
7. ,, from the N. boundary of V oithio-Kilia
 RULES
OF THE

~orictu for tgc ~romotion of ~d(cnit Stubics.

I. THE objects of this Society shall be as follows:-
I. To advance the study of Greek language, literature, and art, and
to illustrate the history of the Greek race in the ancient, Byzantine
and Neo-Hellenic periods, by the publication of memoirs and unedited
documents or monuments in a Journal to be issued periodically.
II. To collect drawings, facsimiles, transcripts, plans, and photographs
of Greek inscriptions, MSS., works of art, ancient sites and remains, and
with this view to invite travellers to communicate to the Society notes
or sketches of archceological and topographical interest.
III. To organise means by which members of the Society may have
increased facilities for visiting ancient sites and pursuing archceological
researches in countries which, at any time, have been the sites of Hellenic
civilization.
2. The Society shall consist of a President, \'ice-Presidents, a Council,
a Treasurer, one or more Secretaries, and Ordinary l\Iembers. All officers
of the Society shall be chosen from among its l\Iembers, and shall be
ex officio members of the Council.
3. The President shall preside at all General, Ordinary, or Special
Meetings of the Society, and of the Council or of any Committee at
which he is present. In case of the absence of the President, one of
the Vice-Presidents shall preside in his stead, and in the absence of
the Vice-Presidents the Treasurer. In the absence of the Treasurer
the Council or Committee shall appoint one of their l\Iembers to preside.
4. The funds and other property of the Society shall be administered
. and applied by the Council in such manner as they shall consider most
conducive to the objects of the Society: in the Council shall also be
vested the control of all publications issued by the Society, and the
general management of all its affairs and concerns. The number of the
·Council shall not exceed fifty.
b
 5. The Treasurer shall receive, on account of the Society, all
subscriptions, donations, or other moneys accruing to the funds thereof,
and shall make all payments ordered by the Council. All cheques shall
be signed by the Treasurer and countersigned by the Secretary.
6. In the absence of the Treasurer the Council may direct that
cheques may be signed by two members of Council and countersigned
by the Secretary.
7. The Council shall meet as often as they may deem necessary for
the despatch of business.
8. Due notice of every such rdeeting shall be sent to each Member
of the Council, by a summons signed by the Secretary.
9. Three ,\!embers of the Council, provided not more than one of
the three present be a permanent officer of the Society, shall be a
quorum.
IO.All questions before the Council shall be determined by a
majority of votes. The Chairman to have a casting vote.
1 r. The Council shall prepare an Annual Report, to be submitted
to the Annual ;\J eeting of the Society.
12. The Secretary shall give notice m writi_ng to each l\Iember of
the Council of the ordinary days of meeting of the Council, and shall
have authority to summon a Special and Extraordinary l\Ieeting of the
Council on a requisition signed by at least four l\Iembers of the Council.
13. T'.Vo Auditors, not being Members of the Council, shall be
elected by the Society in each year.
A General l\Ieeting of the Soc:ety shall be held in London in
J ._i.
June of each year, when the Reports of the Council and of the Auditors
shall be read, the Council, Officers, and Auditors for the ensuing year
elected, and any other business recommended by the Council discussed
and determined. l\leetings of the Society for the reading of papers
may be held at such times as the Council may fix, due notice being
~iven to l\Iembers.
1 5. The President, Vice-Presidents, Treasurer, Secretaries, and
Council shall be elected by the :\Iembers of the Society at the Annual
:\I eeting.
16. The President shall be elected by the l\Iembers of the Society
at the Annual :\Ieeting for a period of fi\·e years, and shall not be
immediately eligible for re-election.
17. The \'ice-Presidents shall be elected by the :\!embers of the
Society at the ..-\nnual :\Ieeting for a period of one year, after which they
shtil\ be eligible for re-election.
 xv

18. One-third of the Council shall retire every year, but the l\Iembers
so retiring shall be eligible for re-election at the Annual Meeting.
19. The Treasurer and Secretaries shall hold their offices during the
pleasure of the Council.
The elections of the Officers, Council, and Auditors, at the
20.
Annual Meeting, shall be by a majority of the votes of those present.
The Chairman of the Meeting shall have a casting vote. The mode in
which the vote shall be taken shall be determined by the President
and Council.
2 r. Every Member of the Society shall be summoned to the Annual
:\'Ieeting by notice issued at least one month before it is held.
22. All motions made at the Annual Meeting shall be in writing
and shall be signed by the mover and seconder. No motion shall be
submitted, unless notice of it has been given to the Secretary at least
three weeks before the Annual l\Ieeting.
23. Upon any vacancy in the Presidency occurring between the
Annual Elections, one of the Vice-Presidents shall be elected by the
Council to officiate as President until the next Annual l\Ieeting.
24. All vacancies among the other Officers of the Society occurring
between the same dates shall in like manner be provisionaliy filled up
by the Council until the next Annual l\Ieeting.
25. The names of all candidates wishing to become l\Iember5 of the
Society shall be submitted to a Meeting of the Council, and at their
next Meeting the Council shall proceed to the election of c:rndi<lates
so proposed : no such election to be valid unless the candidate receives
the votes of the majority of those present.
26. The Annual Subscription of Members shall be one guinea, payable
and due on the 1st of January each year; this annual subscription may be::
compounded for by a single payment of £15 15s., entitling com pounders
to be Members of the Society for life, without further payment. All
Members elected on or after January 1, 1905, shall pay on election an
entrance fee of two guineas.
27. The payment of the Annual Subscription, or of the Life
Composition, entitles each l\Iember to receive a copy of the ordinary
publications of the Society.
28. \Vhen any l\Iember of the Society shall be six months in arrear
of his Annual Subscription, the Secretary or Treasuffr shall remind hirri
of the arrears due, and in case of non-payment thereof within six months
after date of such notice, such defaulting Member shall cease to be rt
:\Iember of the Society, unless the Council make an order to the contrary.
/j 2
 XYl

29. Members intending to leave the Society must send a formal

notice of resignation to the Secretary on or before January I; otherwise
they will be held liable for the subscription for the current year.
30. If at any time there may appear cause for the expulsion of a
Member of the Society, a Special l\Ieeting of the Council shall be held
to consider the case, and if at such l\Ieeting at least two-thirds of the
l\Iembers present shall concur in a resolution for the expulsion of such
l\Iember of the Society, the President shall submit the same for con-
firmation at a General :\Ieeting of the Society specially summoned for
this purpose, and if the decision of the Council be confirmed by a
majority at the General l\Ieeting, notice shall be gi\·en to that effect to
the l\Iember in question, ,,·ho shall thereupon cease to be a Member of
the Society.
3r. The Council shall have po,\·er to nominate British or Foreign
Honorary l\Iembers. The number of British Honorary l\Iembers shall
not exceed ten.
32. The Council may, at their discretion, elect for a period not
exceeding fi,·e years Studenk-\ssociates, ,,·ho shall be admitted to certain
privileges of the Society.
33. The n:i.mes of Candidates wishing to become Student-Associates
shall be submitted to the Council in the manner prescribed for the
Election of :\Iembers. Ewry Candidate shall also satisfy the Council
by mean~ of a certificate from his teacher, who must be a person occupying
a recognised position in an educational body and be a ::\Iember of the
Society, that he is a bon/i fide Student in subjects germane to the
purposes of the Society.
34. The Annual Subscription of a StudenL--\ssociate shall be
one guinea, payable and clue on the Ist of January in each year. In
case of non-payment the procedure prescribed for the case of a defaulting
Ordinary ::\Iembcr shall be followed.
33. Student-Associates shall receive the Society's ordinary publications,
and shall be entitled to attend the General and Ordinary :\Icetings, and
to read in the Library. They shall not be entitled to borrow books from
the Library, or to make use of the Loan Collection of Lantern Slides,
-:>r to vote at the Society's ::\Ieetings.
36. .--\ Stuclent-.--\ssociate may at any time pay the :Member's entrance
fee of t,\·o guincc1s, and shall forthwith become an Ordinary Member.
37. Ladies shall be eligible as Ordinary :.\Iembers or Student-
Associates of the Society, and when elected shall be entitled to the same
privileges as other Ordinary :\Icmbers or Student-Associates.
38. Ko change shall be made in the Rules of the Society unle~s
at least a fortnight before the Annual l\Ieeting specific notice be given
to e\·cry Member of the Society of the changes proposed.
 XVll

RULES FOR THE USE OF THE LIBRARY

AT 22, ALBEMARLE STREET .

. I. THAT the Library be administered by the Library Committee,

which shall be composed of not less than four members, two of whom shall
form a quorum.
II. That the custody and arrangement of the Library be in the hands
of the Hon. Librarian and Librarian, subject to the control of the
Committee, and in accordance with Regulations drawn up by the said
Committee and approved by the Council.
III. That all books, periodicals, plans, photographs, &c., he received
by the Hon. Librarian, Librarian or Secretary and reported to the
Council at their next meeting.
IV. That every book or periodical sent to the Society be at once
stamped with the Society's name.
V. That all the Society's books be entered in a Catalogue to be kept
by the Librarian, and that in this Catalogue such books, &c., as are not to
be lent out be specified.
VI. That, except on Christmas Day, Good Friday, and on Bank
Holidays, the Library be accessible to Members on all week days from
eleven A.M. to six P.M. (Saturdays, I I A.:\f. to 2 P.l\I.), when either the
Librarian, or in his absence some responsible person, shall be in
attendance. Until further notice, however, the Library shall be closed for
the vacation from July 20 to August 31 (inclusive).
VII. That the Society's books (with exceptions hereinafter to be
specified) be lent to Members under the following conditions:-
(I) That the number of volumes lent at any one tifile to each
Member shall not exceed three.
(2) That the time during which such book or books may be kept
shall not exceed one month.
(3) That no books be sent beyond the limits of the United Kingdom.
VIII. That the manner in which books are lent shall be as follows:-
(1) That all requests for the loan of books be addressed to the
Librarian.
(2) That the Librarian shall record all such requests, and lend out
the books in the order of application.
(3) That in each case the name of the book and of the borrower be
inscribed, with the date, in a special register to be kept by
the Librarian.
(4) Should a book not be returned within the period specified, the
Librarian may reclaim it.
 xviii

(5) All expenses of carriage to and fro shall be borne by the

borrower.
(b) All books are due for return to the Library before the summer
vacation.
IX. That no book falling under the following categories be lent out
under any circumstances:-
(1) Unbound books.
(2) Detached plates, plans, photographs, and the like.
(3) Books considered too valuable for transmission.
(4) New books within one month of their coming into the
Library.
X. That new books may be borrowed for one week only, if they have
been more than one month and less than three months in the Library.
XI. That in the case of a book being kept beyond the stated time the
borrower be liable to a fine of one shilling for each week after application
has been made by the Librarian for its return, and if a book is lost the
borrower be bound to replace it.

Tlze Library Commzttee.

jilz. ]. G. C. A~DERSOX.
PROF. \\'. C. F. A:'-IDERSOX.
i.\IR. TALFOURD ELY. D.Lit.
PROF. ERXE"T A. G ..\IW?\ER.
:\IR. F. G. KE:--:Yox, D.Litt.
:\IR. GEORGE :\L\c:\IILLA'.\', D.Litt. !Hon. Sec.).
:\Ire :-\IZTHUR HA'\IILTOX S:IIITH (Hon. Librarian).
}IRS. S. ARTHUR .STROKG, LLD., Litt.D.

Applications for books and letters relating to the Photographic

Collections, and Lantern Slides, should be addressed to the Librarian
(i.\Ir. J. ff. Bakcr-Pcnoyrc), at 22, Albemarle Street,\\'.
 THE SOCIETY FOR THE PROMOTION OF HELLENIC STUDIES.
OFFICERS AND COUNCIL FOR 1907-1908.

President.
PROFESSOR PERCY GARDXER, L11T.D

Yice-Presidents.
MR. S. H. BUfCHER, l.rTT.D., LLD, D.LITT.
PROF. INGRA:\! BYWATER, LrTT.D.,LL.D.
REV. PR_OF. LEWIS CA'.\IPBELL, LL.D, D.L1n.
:\IR. SIDNEY COLVI::,.;, D LITT.
IIIR. ARTHUR J. EVANS, F.R.S., D.LITT., LLD.
PROF. ERNEST G,\RD).ER.
PROF. HEXRY JACKSOX.
MR. WALTER LE.-\F, LITT D., D LITT.
PROF. SIR W. :\I. RA:\IS,\Y, D.C.L ,LL.D. LITT.D.
.'.\IR. J.E. SAXD\"S, L1TT.D,
Rl<:V. PROF. A.H. SAYCE. LLD., D.L1TT
:\IR. A. H.-\:\IILTON S:\!ITH.
:\IR. CECIL S:\IITH, LL.D.
PROF. R. Y. TYRRl<:LL. LITT.D., D C.L., LLD.
PROF. CHARLES W.\LDSTEIX, L1rr D., Ph.I>,
L.H D

Council.
PROF. W. C. F. A::-IDERSU:--:. '\IR. H STUART JO::'IES
PROF. R CARR BOSA:-,.,QUET. :\IR. F. G KENYON, D.LITT.
PROF. RONALD BURROWS. :\IR. GEORGE :\1.-\CDO:-i' ALD, 1.1..D
:\1R. H. G. D.-\KYNS. .'.\IR. (;_ L .'.\1.-\RINDIX.
:\IR. R. :\l. D.-\WKI'>S. :\IR. F. H :\1.-\RSHALL.
?i!R. C. C. EDG.\R. :\IR R. J. G. :.\1.-\YOR.
MR. LOUIS DYER :\IR. ERXEST '.\1¥ERS.
MR. TALFOURD ELY, D.L!TT. REV. G. C. RICH,\RDS.
LADY EVANS. PROF \\"ILLI.UI RIDGEWAY.
l\IR. L. R. FARNELL, D.LITT. :\IR. \\·. H D. R<1USE, L1TT.D.
l\IR. E. NOR:\L-\='l' G.-\RnINER. :.\IR E. E. SIKI-:S.
l\!R. B. P. GRENFELL, L1s-T.D., D.L1TT. .'.\IRS S. ARTHUR STRO:\'G, l.L.D. L1n.D.
MR. G. F. HILL. :\IR F. E. 'l HO:\IPSON.
MR. D. G. HOGARTH. :\IR. :\I. N. TOD
llIR ..-\ S. HUNT, D.LJTT, :\IR H. B. \L\.Ll'ERS

Hon. Treasurer.
MR. D,)l,'GLAS W. FRESHFIELD.

Hon. Secretary.
:\IR GEORGE A. MACI\IILLAN,D.LITT., ST. l\l.-\RTIX'S S1REET, \\" C

Hon. Librarian.
:\IR. ARTHl'R H. S:\IITH.

Secretary and Librarian.

'.\IR. J. ff. BAKER-PEXOYRE, 22 .-\LBE:\L\.RlE STREET, W.

Assistant Treasurer.
MR.GEORGEGARNETT

Acting Editorial Committee.

PROF. ERNEST GARDNER. I l\IR. G. F. HILL. I l\lR. F. G. KE::\'YCIX.

Consultative Editorial Committee.

PROFESSOR BYWATI-:R I l\lR. SIDNEY COLYIX I PROFESSOR PERCY GARDXER,
PROFESSOR HE'sRY JACKSON anJ :\IR. R. :\I. D.\WKINS (ex officio as Director of the Brit1,h
School at Athens).
Auditors for 1907-1908.
MR. ARTHUR J. HU1LER. ~IK FREDERICK POLLOCK, BART.

Bankers.
MESSRS. RORARTS, LUllBOCK & lO., r; LO:\IB.-\RD STRLET.
 CAMBRIDGE BRANCH
OF

THE SOCIETY FOR THE PROl\IOTION

0 F H E LL EN IC STU DI ES.

OFFICER;, A:,,'D CmDIITTEE FOR 1907-1908.

tl'ite-( ~airm:m.
MR. J. E. SANDYS, LITT.D.

tommittre.
::--IR. J. G. FRAZER, D.C.L., LL.D., ;\[R. E. E. SIKES.
LITT.D.
MR. ARTHUR TILLEY.
P~OF. ER:-;EST A. GARD:,,'ER.
PROF. HE:,,'RY JAcKso:,;, LITT.D. 1!R. A. \Y. VERR.-UL, LITT.D.
l'R0F. \V. RIDGE\\"AY. PROF. C. \VALDSTEIN, LITT.D.

~IR. ARTHUR BERNARD COOK, QUEEXS' COLLEGE.

 XXI

HONORARY MEMBERS.
HIS MAJESTY THE KING OF THE HELLENES,,; slf. le Secritaire du Roi des
He!lt\nes, Athens.
H.R.H. THE CROWN PRINCE OF GREECE, ,i JI. le Secritaire du ill. le Pn'nce Ro;•al des
Hellenes, Athens.
Sir Alfred Biliotti, K.C.B.
Prof. Maxime Collignon, The Sorbonne, Paris.
Prof. D. Comparetti, lstituto di Studii Superion', Florence.
M. Alexander Contostavlos, Athens.
Prof. A. Conze, .R."ai'serl. Deutsches Archaeolo;;isches Institut, Cornelius-str.,r2, II. Berlin.
Prof. Hermann Diels, The University, Berlin.
Prof. \Vilhelm Dorpfeld, Ph.D, D.C.L., Kaiser!. Deutsches)Arclzaeologisches: lnstitut
Athens.
Monsieur L'Abbe Duchesne, Ecole Franfaise, Rome.
Monsieur P. Foucart, 13, Rue de Tuurno11, Paris.
l\fonsieur J. Gennadius, D.C.L., I..J., de Vere Gardens,:Eensington.
Prof. B. L. Gildersleeve, Joh11s Hopkins Cniversity, Baltimore,~ C.S .. 1.
Prof. Theodor Gomperz, 4/2 Pldss~:;asse 4, Vien11a.
Prof. \V. \V. Goodwin, Cambridge, Jfass., U.S.A.
Prof. Federico Halbherr, Via Arenula, 21, R,,me.
His Excellency Hamdy Bey, Keeper of the "Jluseum of Antiquities, Constan/ill{)ple.
Monsieur Joseph Hazzidaki, A..'eeper of the .:.'\'ational slluseum, Candia, Crete.
Prof. \V. Helbig, Villa Lante, Rome.
Monsieur Homolle, Jiusie du Louz 1re, Paris.
Dr. F. Imhoof-Blumer, ll"interthur, Swit:::erland.
Monsieur P. Kavvadias, Ephor-General ef Antiquities, Athens.
Prof. A. Kirchhoff, The University, Berlin.
Prof. Georg Loeschcke, The Unh 1ersity, Bonn.
Prof. A. Michaelis, The UJJiversity, Slrassburg.
Signor Paolo Orsi, Director of the Archaeolw;ical Jluseum, S;•racuse, Sialy.
1\1. Georges Perrot, 25, Quai Crmti, Paris.
Prof. E. Petersen, Friedriclzsruher Strasse 13, Berlin.
Prof. Rufus B. Richardson, TVi,odstock, Conn., U.S.A.
Prof. Carl Robert, The University, Halle.
Prof. T. D. Seymour, Yale University, 1Ye'Zi-1l1m:en, Conn., C.S.A.
l\L Valerios Stais, JVational _Jluseum, Athens.
l\L Ch. Tsountas, 1Vational illuseum, Athens.
1\1. Henri \Veil, 16, Rue Adolphe J',;:•un, P,1ris.
Prof. Ulrich v. \Vilamowitz-l\Iollendorff, Tlze Uniz•ersilJ', Berlin.
Dr. Adolf \Vilhelm, Archaeol. Epigraph. Seminar, A:. A..'. Cni,•ersitat, Vienna.
Prof. John \Villiams \\-hite, Cambridge, illass., C.S.A.

LIST OF MEMBERS.
* Origi,zal llli:mbers. t Life 1ll,·mbas. :!: Life Jlembers, Honoris Caus,1.
The other 11/embers haz•e b,en ekcted by the Council smce the Inaugural llledi,zg.

+Abbot, Edwin H., 1, Follen Street, Cambrid_[;e, sll,lss., U.S.A.

Abbott, G. F., 233, Temple Chtzmbers, Temple A-;:•ollh', E.C.
+Abercrombie, Dr. John, Angil!, BrouJ:h, lf'estmorland.
Abrahams, Miss, 84, Portsdown Road, Jlaida l'ale, lV.
Adams, l\Iiss l\Iary G., Heatlzjidd, Broadsto11,', Dorsd.
+Ainslie, R. St. John, Greenhill, Sherbon1t', Dorset.
Alford, Rev. B. H., 51, Gloucester Gard,·J1s, IV.
Alington, Rev. C. A., Eton College, TVindsor.
 Allbutt, Professor Sir T. Clifford, K.C.B., :.I.D., F.KS., C/1,11"·0- Rcild, Ci1111bn,~s·,·.
Allcroft. A. Hadrian, 53, A'ensington Jl,111s1ons, E<1rls Court, S. Tf'.
·Allen, J.B., c'o Bank of ,1.lontr,:,d, 22, .-lbdlltrdt Lmt', E.C.
•.\.llen, T. \\'., Queen's College:, Oxford.
·-Alma-Tadema, Sir Laurence, R.A., 34, Grout' End R,//1d, St. j,,/11/s 11~1,,d, ,\~ Jf'.
Amherst, Lord, Didlington H,dl, Brando!!, Sujfulk.
Anderson, James, 19, Lu,i,mus Stred, •.J.t/101,, Grc·ea.
tAnderson, J. G. C., Christ Church, 0.1/urd.
Anderson, R.H., A'ind,1r, 95, Alexandr,! Road, St.J,,/lll's Tl'o,,d, .Y. Jf'.
Anderson, \Y. C. F. (Counol), Hermit's Hill, Bur,:;liJie!d, Jlortimcr, R.S.O.
Anderson, Yarborough, 50. Pall Jlall, S. n·.
Anderton, Basil, Public Libr,11y, .':t',,'Cast!e-on-T)'nc.
Andrews, Prof. Xe,\ton Lloyd, Colgate. Cni,•ersi{v, ffamilton, N. r, CS.A.
Angus, C. F., Trinity H,t!l. Cambridge.
Anson. Sir \\-m. R., Dart., :\J.P., D.C.L, TViirden ,,j .-ill Souls' C,,!/,::;,-. 0.!"/,>rd.
•.\.rcher, Rev.\\·. J., The Jl,msc", Hek11s Bay, County Do,iln, Ird,md.
t ..\.rkwright, \\· .. •-Jdb1oy House, ,Ye,,·bun·.
Arthur. :\I1ss L. F., T11c Tr ,:/l H,,,us,·, B,mstead.
Asquith, Raymond, All Souls" c'ol!,:;;e, O.ijord.
..\.squith, \\-. \Y., Clift,m Coll,:re, Bristol.
Atkey, F. A. H., Jlerd1,mt Tayl,,n· Sdto()l, Ch,1rferhouse Square, E.C.
* Avebury, The Right Hon. Lord. Hig/1 Elms, Do,,•n, Kmt.
Awdry, :\Iiss F., 4, St. Cross Ro,ui, TVinchester.
A,\·dry, Herbert, rf'dli11,1;!011 Co/1,:,:e, Berks.
Baddeley, \\·. St. CL1ir, C1st!t: Erl<', P,11·11s,,•z'd,, Glos.
Bailey, Cyril, Bal!iul Co!l,:('e, Oxfi,rd.
Bailey, J. C., 20, EJ;crt,111 Cardcns, S. n·.
Baker, H. T., 3, Temple Gard,:m, E.C.
Daker-Penoyre. J. ff. (Secretary & Librarian:, S, Kin_,:' s Bcnc/z TValk. Inner Te111j>le. E. C.
llaker-Penoyre, Re\·. SL1de. Edm/i,,/111,·, C/1e!te11ha111.
*IL1lfour. Right Hon. A. J.. :\LP., 4, Ci1rlt,,11 Gardens, S. rrr.
*Dc1lfour. Right Hon. G. \\· .. Fhl1t-rs· Hill, Tf'oking, Surrev.
Dall, Sidney. St. John's Ct>!lt'ge. 0.1/ord.
Barker, E. Phillips, 10, Reddiffe Ro<1d, "Yotting!tam.
t Dado\\·. :\Iiss .-\nnic E. F .. Greenthonh', Edg,,•orth, Bolton.
Dadow, Lady, 10, rr·1111p,,1e Street, rr·.
Barnsley, Sidney H., Pi11b11ry, llt'tlr Cirenccster.
Barran, Sir J. .:-., Dart., .'ia7c•ft:v H,dl, Ripon, Yorks!tir,·.
Bather, Rev ..\rthur Geor~e, S1m11J·side, rr·i11cl1cster.
Battle, Professor \\.illiam James, Austin, Te.nu.
Beare, Prof. John I.. 9, Tnni~v Col!eiy, Dublin.
+Beaumont, Somerset, Sltffe, 11e,1r Guildford.
Dell, H. I., Britis!t Jf11se11111, TV.C.
Dell, :\ltss Gertrude. 95, Sloane Stred, S. TT'.
tBenecke. I'. \'. :\I., .llagdalm Coll,-ge, Oxfi1rd.
tBenn, Alfred \Y .• fl Ci!i,gi(), San G,r,•,1sio, Flor,mcc.
Dennett, S . .-\., Hill Jlo11se, E,<Jdint', TVallingfi•rd.
Bent, :\Irs. Theodore, 13, Gre,1! Cumberland Place, TV.
tBernays, .-\. E., 3, Primy Road, A-e,e, Surn·1•.
Bertram, .-\nton. Nin,.,'ia, 0,Prus. •
Dev,1n, E. R .. R,·111j>st,m,·, Co,Ji· Castle, Dorset.
Bicker~tc:th. C. F., TVej·t Le,(,;<', Rij){Jll, Yerks.
B!ckford-Smith, R.• \. H .. ~'). I..,rdbrel.:<' Gro;:•,·, n·.
B1enko,,·ski, Prof. P. von, IJ,1s::fo7,<'a, 5, A'ral.:au.
Biggs, Rev. R. C. Davey, D.D., St.John's C()lfexe, Oxfor,i.
B1gl1:1m, F. T., 27, Chqne TVall.:, Cl1e!se,1, S. IV.
tBikclas, Demetrius, LL.D., Athens, Greece.
 xxiii

Billson, Charles J., The TVayside, Oadby, Leicester.

tBissing, Dr. von, Leojoldstrasse, 54, 1111mcl1e11.
Blakiston, C. H., Eton College, IVindsor.
Bodington, Prof. N., Vfre-Cl1ancdlor ,if tl1e l'nf,,ersity of Leeds, Leeds.
Bond, Edward, +3, Thurloe Squart?, S. IT~
Booth, l\liss Harriet, 46, Cliett Road, Sefton Park, Lfrerpool.
Bosanquet, Prof. R. Carr (Council\ Illstitute of Ardz,1<·0!0.[:Y, -1-0 Bedford St. IJi!erpool.
Bousfielcl, Sir \Villiam, 20, Hyde Park Gate, S. li".
Boyd, Rev. Henry, D.D., Pri11dja! of Hertford College, Oxford.
Boys, Rev. H. A., North Cadb11ry Rectory, Bat!t.
Bramley, Rev. H. R., l\rettleham Fidd, Lincoln.
Bramwell, :\Iiss.
Brightman, Rev. F. E., JI,~t;dalen Coll,1xe, 0.1:ford.
Brinton, Hubert, Eton Coll,:,;:c, IVindsor.
Briscoe, '.\Iiss, iVeach Hilt, Sl1ifnal.
Broadbent, H., Eton College, n·i11dsor.
Brooke, Rev. A. E., Xing's College, Cambn'd_g-e.
Brooke, Rev. Stopford A., r, Jianc!testcr Squarc, Ir.
Brooks, E. \V., 28, Gre,1t Ormond Street, Tv:c.
Brooksbank, l\lrs., Le(g-/t Plaa, God.stone.
Brown, Adam, 1Vetlzerby, C,zlaslzids.
Brown, A. C. B., Aston Vimr,1,r;e, Stone, Stajfi.mis!tire.
Brown, Prof. G. Baldwin, Tlze Cni7:ersity, Edinbzu;,:-lz.
tBrown, James, 1\retherby, Galaslzie!s, i\'.B.
Browne, Rev. Henry, Uni-;.•ersi(v Co!le,i;e, D11b!in.
*Bryce, H. E., The Right Hon. James, D.C.L., Litt.D., Britislz Embassy, Tf,1sl1i,{[;tc>11.
Bull, Rev. Herbert, TT'e!lington Hous,:, TVestgate-011-Sea.
Burdon, Rev. Rowland John, St. Peter's Vfrc1ra.~e, Clzidi,:s!e'r.
Burge, Rev. Hubert ;\I., Tlze Co!!q;e, Tf'ind1ester.
tBurnaby, R. B., Trinity Co!!eg-e, G!ow!mond, Pertli.
Burnet, Prof. J., r, Alt!xandr,i Pla,-e, St. A11dre,,'s, 1\'.B.
Burrows, Prof. Ronald (Council). 13 I, Hab,.,-:,/to11 Stred, East JI,,ors, Cardiff.
Burton-Br.own, '.\lrs.-, Priors Fidd, 0odll!111ing.
Bury, Prof. J. B.. LLD. Litt.IJ., D.Litt., A.·i11g's Co!!,:,:<I, Cambri,(,:,·.
Butcher, S. H., Litt.D., LL.D., D.L1tt., :\LP. ( V.P.,i, 6, Ta,:istod: Squarc, lf~C.
Butler, Arthur J ., H 'ood .End, If 'qbri,(i;e.
Butler, H. E., ,Ye,,• College, O.i:ford.
*Butler, The \'ery Rev. H. ;\L, D.D .. D. C. L., Jiasfcr ,if T, inity Colll:,;e, Cambridl[t'.
Buxton, F. \V., -1-2, Gros-;.•enor Gm dens, S. IV.
Buxton, :\Irs. Alfred\\·., 3'.:!, Great Cumberland Place, If'.
Bywater, Prof. Ingram, Litt.D., D. Litt. 1,,V.P.), 93, Onslo,v Sq11are. S. TV.
+Bywater, :'llrs., 93, Ons!m,; Square. S. If~
Callander, Prof. T., Queen's {J111c'ersity, 1,_-lllJ,<"St,J/1, Ca11,1da.
tCalvocoressi, L. :\I., Jlessrs. Ra/Ii Eros., Jid!-l,r ·s l,'t(i;-s., Exc!tange St. East, LhJerjool.
Cambridge, A. \V. Pickard, 22. St. Jim:,;·ards Road, O.,:ford.
Cambridge, \\'. A. Pickard, The C',.,/!eg,·, TVi11,-lzcstcr.
*Campbell, Rev. Prof. Lewis, D Litt., LL.D. 1T.P. ,, 6, Arlington Street, Piccadil(I', rr·.
Campbell, l\lrs. Lewis, 6, Adi11gto11 Str,:et, f'iff,1dilly, If".
Capes, Rev. Canon \V. \V., Tlte Close, Herefi-mi.
Capper, Prof. S. H., Victoria Cni,,,Tsity, Jian,hesfcr.
Carapinos, Constantin, Depute, Athens.
Carey, l\liss, c/o T. Brooksbank, Esq., Edford Lod,:c, 5, St. John's Road, Putney, S. Tf'.
*Carlisle, A. D., ·H,zilqbury Co!!t?ge, Hertfi-,rd.
Carlisle, :\Iiss Helen, Hou11d/1i!!, Jfarclu'11,,;ton, StaJf'"i.,rd.
+Carmichael, Sir T. D. Gibson, Cc1stlt'craZ:,.;, Do!plzint,,11, .V. B.
Carpenter, Rev. J. Estlin, 109, B,mbury Ro,ui, Oxford.
tCarr, Rev. A., Addington T'icara,::;e, Cn~l'don.
 xxiv

tCarr, H. \Yildon, Bury, P1t!boro1~£;l1, Sussex.

Cart, ReY. Henry, 49, Albu! Court, Kensington C,>rt', JI'.
Carter, Frank, Asltdt·ne, Tf'indzesfer.
Carter, Reginald, Rector of Edinburglt Academy, Edinbmglz.
tCarthew, ::\Iiss, 1 5a, Kensin;;ton Palace Gardens, T-V.
Case, l\liss Janet, 5, TVindmiil Hill, Hampstead, N. ll~
Caspari, :\I. 0. B., The Uniz,ersi~v, Birminxham.
Caton, Richard, ::\l.D., Holl)' Lea, Li'i.'ingstone Dri.:e S011tl1, Li'i:erpoo!.
Cattley, T. F., Eton College, fVindsor.
Chambers, B. E. C., Grays..c'OOd Hill, Hlls/emere, Sttrny.
Chambers, C. Gore, Hertford House, de Par_ys A,:owe, Bedford.
Chambers, Charles D., q, ,liansfield Road, Reading.
Chambers, Edmund Kirchener, 9, Lansdo,c'lle Cresecnt, Ir.
Chance, Frederick, 30, Lennox- G,miens, S. Jl.
Chapman, R. \\•., 10, St.Joltn Street, Oxford.
Cha\·asse, A. S., Elmtltorpe, Cowley, near O.iford.
tChawner, G., A'in;;'s College. Cambridge.
tChawner, \Y., 1llaster of Emmanuel Co/leg,', Cambridge.
Cheetham, J. Frederick, Eastz.,o,1d, Stal£_ybri,zfe.
Cheetham, J. :\I. C., E;f,,rd Park, Bourton-on-tl1e- lVater, R.S.0., Gloucestershire.
Childers, l\Irs. Erskine, 13, Embankment Gardens, C11dsea, S. iv.
Chitty, Rev. George J., Eton College, lVindsor.
Cholmeley, Professor R. J., Rl1odes Cniversity College, Gralzamstown, S. Africa.
Christian, J. Henry.
Christian, Rev. G., Tlte l'icarage, Billesdon, 11r. Leicester.
Christie-:\Iiller, S. R., 21, St. Jami!S' s P !<IC<', lV., or Gun/on P,rrk, ne<lr Cromer, j\'oifo!k.
Church, Rev. Canon C. :\I., Tlte Libc'r{v, l!'d!s.
Churchill, E. L., Eton Colle.re, Windsor.
Clark, A.
CLuk, Charles R. R., 10, Cheyne Ro,.,, Chelsea, S. lV.
CL:trk. J. W., D. Litt., Scrooje House, Dmzbrid,ge.
Clark, Rev. R. l\L, Den.stone Colle,,;e, Staffordslzire.
tC!ark-::\Iaxwell, Rev.\\·. Gilchrist. Ciunb111y T'icarage, Asl1ton-on-Clim, Sal()p.
Clarke, Somers, 48, Albert Court, J<msington Gore, S. TV.
+Clauson, ..\. C., Hawksl1L'lld Hous,', Ert/idd, Herts.
Clay, C. F., 1::3, fm,erncss Terran:, IT~
Cobbold, Felix T., :\I.I'., Th,, Lo,(t.;e, Felixsto,.,e, Sujfi.,!k.
*Cobham, C. Delaval, C.::\LG., H.B.JI. Commissioner, Larnaca, Cyprus.
Cockerell, S. Pepys, 35, Plu'/limore Gardozs, I,ozsi1~;;t,w, TV.
Cohen, Herman, 1, Lower Terrace, Frogna!, iV. IV.
Cole, A. C., 6,i, Port!,md Place, IV.
*Colnn, Sidney, D. Litt., (\'.P.\ British Jfuseum, IV.C.
Compton, Rev. \Y. C., Tlte Co!l,f,ce, Doz,er.
Connal, B. :\I., The Yorks/tire Colle_f{e, Leeds.
Constantinides, P. F., Larnaca, Cyprus.
Com\ay, l'rof. R., Dradlien, D/dsbu1y, Jfanc!iestcr.
Conway, Sir\\'. :\I., A !!i,z,:tNt Castk, Jlaidst,,11t'.
Conybeare, F. C., c '-' Ji. C. JI. ConJ'beare, Esq., Delmore, In.zatesltore.
Cook, Arthur Bernard, 19, Cranmer Road, Cambridge.
Cook, E.T., 1, Gordon !'lace, Ta,·istod: Squ<1re, H·~C.
Cook, T. A., 54, O,zk!t-_y .Stred, S. TV.
Cooke, Rev. A. H., Aldenl1am School, Elstree, Herts.
Cooke, Richard, T!ie Croft, Det!inr;-, .llaidsto11e.
Cookson, C., Jfa_,;J,ilen College, Oxford.
Cooper, Re\·. James, 1?,D., The· C11iz·crsi{1·. G!a.);'{dZ<'.
Corb~t, His Honmir Eustace K.. C.:\LG., Xatic,c: Court of .Appeal, Cairo.
Corg1alegno, :'IL, ~3, .llount Stred, Bcr/.:dq SqzMre, /!'.
Corley, Ferrand E., 82, Qut·s·it"s Road, .Fi11sbll!y Park,.\-.
 _XXV

Cornford, F. M., Trinity College, Cambridge.

Correra, Louis, D.L., 241, Viil Saverio Correr,1, N,ijo!i, Jt,ilv.
Coupland, Reginald, Trinity College, O.tford.
Cowper, H. Swainson, Hig!t House, Ha«1kslzead, Lancaslzin.
Crace, J. F., Eton College, IVindsOJ.
tCrawford, G. R., I 19, Gloucester Tcrr,1c,·, H_yd,· Par!..·, TV.
Crewdson, j\liss G., Homewood, TVobttn; S,wds, R.S.O., Beds.
Crewdson, "\Vilson, Southside, St. Leo11,1rds-011-Sea.
Croft, George C., 5, Green Street, ]\irk 1..mz,:, n:
; Cromer, The Earl of, 0. :\I., 36, J!'impo!e Str,·d, S. TV.
Cronin, Rev. H. S., Trini{v Jl,1!!, Cambri,(,:e.
Crooke, "\V., Langton House, Cltarlton A.-in,:s, Clte!tenl1run.
tCrossman, C. Stafford, Bucklturst Hill House, Bu,·khztnt Hz!!, Enex.
Crowfoot, J. "\"\r., J{/zartum, Soudan.
Cunliffe, R. J ., 12 1, ff :·st Gi:orge Street, G!-a.,~,:orc•.
Cust, Lionel, Oliplz,mt Housi:, Tlte Crescmt, rr-indsor.
Cust, :\Iiss Anna :\faria, -1-9, Campden Ht!! Roc1d, ll".
Cust, :\Iiss Beatrice, I 3, Ea!eston Sq u,zr,·, S. TT~
Dakyns, Geo. D., Gr,u11m,zr Sc/too!, J[,,;jdlt.
Dakyns, H. G. , Council), Hi,;ltt'J" Combe, Has!,·111ere, Surrer.
Dalrymple, J. D. G., Jleik!e,i'ooJ, Stir!t1z_:::, "\~B.
Dalton, ReL Herbert_-\., H,zrrison Ct>lh-.,;·c. Barb,ui,,,-.
Daniel, A. :\I., I..j., Royal Cresc",'llf, s,-11;-/Nrouglz.
Daniel, :\Irs. A. :\I., q, R,,yt1l Cr,:se,·nt, Sc,1rboroz~rli.
Daniel, Rev. C. H., Pro,•ost o.f lVi1 rc,,st,r Cc,!!,;;,·e, Chj,1rJ.
Danson, F. C., B., :?2 aJJd :?], Liz•t,,-poo! and London Clzam[i,-rr, Lh-irjoo!.
Da\·id, Rev. A. A., Clifton Coll,:,;,·, Bristol.
D,ividson, H. 0. D., Harro,,•-on-tlzc-Hi!!.
tDavies, Prof. G. A., Tiff Cnh-ersi(v, G/tlJ;,:-,,,,,.
tDawes, :\Iiss E .. \. S., ;\LA, D.Litt .. lf",~l'h·i,(::,·, Surrq.
Dawkins, R. :\I. (Council';, Britis/1 Sd1,,,,/, .,.l!l1t·11s.
Dayton, Captain E. "\Yinthrop, 763, Fifth A ,'omc, Xe,o 1 'orl.:, C:s.A.
De Burgh, "\"\T. G., Cnh 1,·rsi(v G,!/c'gc, R,udiHg.
tDe Filippi, .:\Iadame, 167. Via Crban, 1 , Ru111t·.
tDe Gex. R. 0 .. Clifton Col!t~i[<', Brist,,f.
De Saumarez, Lord, Slzrub!tmd l'<zr!., Codd,·nlt,zm, Su.Jli->!k.
Desborough, Right Hon. Baron, Ttrp!,;,,, G,urt, J;zp!o,,•, Bud:s.
tDeubner, Frau Dr., 7, Ernst TVidzert Str,rss,·, J[ar,w11c·1tlw/: A',,,,ll<,:-s(,,•1:,; 1 f'r.
Devonshire, His Grace the Duke of, K.G., [)e,wzslzir,: House, l'ic,·<1dil!y, n·.
Dickins, G., Britislt Sdtoo!, Atl1t·11s, (7, ,'c',',•,
Dickson, :\Iiss Isabel A., 69, E,·,ui_fi-,rt Jl,msio11s, E,·m{/,_,rf Slr,·d, .:,·.II:
Dill, Prof. S., Jl,mtpe!ier, .ll,z!one R,Jt1d, Bdf,st.
Dobson, :\liss, c/o Jliss E. JI. d,· L,mt,,zll', -1-3, ff~rr,,•i,,;- Ro,1d, F,,1r!'s CtJZ1rt, S. lV.
Donaldson, J:tmcs, LL.D ., Principal ,>f tltc Cnfrcrsitv, St.. -1 ndr,·,,·s.
Donaldson, Rev. S. A., ll/aster o.f JJ,1_:;d,li,'lh' Ci,l!c:<;'', Cambnif_:.'"<".
Douglas-Pennant, the Hon. Alice, P,;11rlty11 Crst!,·, lJ,llzp 1r, .\-. lf',1/cs ,'t,, (1,•for,,•,rrJ,·d.
Draper, "\Y. H., 13, Hamm,:rsmitlz Tcrr,zff, rrr.
tDroop, J. P., 11, C!ei•da11d G,mle11s, Hyde Par!.:.
Drummond, Allan, 7. E11nismore Gardt?ns, S. rr:
Dryhurst, A. R, I I, Do«•nsltir.: Hill, Jfi1ntjst,,,1if. "'·· [l-.
Duff, Prof. J. \Yight, .,-lrmstro1zt Coll,:,;,·, .Yc,,•,·,1st/i:-i>n-T_1·11c".
Duhn, Prof. von, Cniz'crsity, Heiddb,.,;,:-.
Dundas, R. H., Cairnban/.:, Duns, Ber,eid:slzirt'.
Du Pontet, C. A. A., Tzmsta!! }[oust, Jla1-ro,,•-011-tl1t'-Hi!!.
Duke, Roger, 9, Pe!lzam Crcs<"ent, S. rr-.
Dunham, :-liss A. G.; Soutlz Ln:,;lz, .-lslt Gri>,',', /f,,rtlting.
Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin, B,1rt., 13, Cui/NZ ll/!11se Terra,·t·. S.Ii·.
 xxvi

Dyer, Louis <'Ccuncil\ Sunbwy L,,,(,:e, Banbmy R,111d, O.tfurd.

Dyson, Reginald, Oilk,,•uod, Kir!.:burton, Huddasfidd.
Earp, F. R., 1 5, S!tt·,·n Pilrk, Rid1mond, Surrey
Edgar. C. C. Council,,, .--Intiquitics F>tj!., JI,111s1'11r,!l1, E/;1'/1!.
Edmonds, J. :\I:i::rn·ell, T/1e Sc/too!, R<'j>ton, Burlon·Oll· Trt'nt.
Edwards, G. :'IL, Sidll(I' Sussex Co!!,:,:e, C,1m!>ri,~,;e.
Edwards, l\Iiss J. L., 4, Ho!!,111d Park, Ti'.
Ed,\·ards, Thos. John, .j., Ho!!,md J'arl.:. Ti'.
tEgerton, H.E. Sir Edwin H., G.C.B., h'.R . .lf. Amb<1ss,1dor, Rritis/1 E111b,n.,)', Romt.
Egerton, :\[rs. Hugh, q, St. Giit's, Oxfi.,rd.
Eld, Re\·. Francis J ., Pols/cad Rcdo>y, C,,l,·!teskr.
Elbm, E., De,zn Close Jfemoria! Sd1,,ol, C!tdtenltam.
t Ell1ot, Sir Francis E. H., K.C.:\I.G., H B.JI. Jfinister, Britis!t LeJ;,1ti,1n, .-1 l!tms.
Ellis, Prof. Robinson, Trinifl' Col!,:,:e, 0.1/i>rd.
Elwell, Le,·i H., Am!tcrst Colil',,;e, .-lml1c-rst, .lf,1ss., l'.S.A.
Ely, T.1lfourd, D.Litt. (_Council 1, 3, Ho,•e Park Gard,·ns, Ho,·,·, Bn:i:1tto11.
Esdaile, :\Irs ...\rundell (nt'r: :\IcDowaH, 166. .flollil11d Ro,llf. .A:ensi1z,:t,,11, ll'.
Eumorfopoulos, ::\'., 33, G!,,11c·est,·r Sq11<1r,', !lydr: Par/.:, II'.
E\·ans, A. J., LLD, D.Litt., F.R.S. •\'.P.\ Asltmolean JI11seu111, Ox.ford.
EYans, F. Gwynne, Tl1e Vale House, Sl,wif,.>rd.
E,·ans, Sir John. K.C.D., D.C.L., F.R.S., Brit«•el!, Berklwmsted, Berks.
tEvans, Lady (Council;, Brifa!ell. ./J,:r/,:/111111st,·ad, Berks.
E,·ans, Richardson, 1, Camp Vie,,,, ll'imb!t'do11.
E,·e, H. \Y .. 3i, Gordan Sq11,1re, l!~C.
E,Yart, :\Iiss :\Iary A, 68. Albert Hal! Jfansions, S. TV.
Exeter, The Right Re,·. The Lord Bishop of, D.D., T!te Palace, Exetn.
Fairbairn, Rev. A. l\L, D.Litt., Jfansjidd Coll,:£;<', 0.1ford.
Fairclough, Prof. H. R., St,uif,.mi Cni,·ersi(v, Cal., U.S.A.
Fanshawe, Reginald, 7, .A:eb!e Road, 0.1jord.
Farnell, L. R., D.Litt. (Council), Exd,'r College, Oxford.
Farrell, Jerome, .\·e-wlands Par!.:, Hu!!.
Farside, \\"illiarn, Tlzorpe Hall, Robin Hood's Bal', Vorl.:s!tire.
Fegan, :\Iiss E. S., 135, Lwdad,1le .lf1111sions, fr:
Felkin, F. \\·., Cni,·ersity Co!!,;g-e Sc/too!, Gozl't'r Street, TVC.
Fennin::;, Rev. \\". D., Hailt')'bmy Ci1i!c:,:e, Hert.ford.
Field. Rev. T., D.D., Radley College, Ab111_,;don.
Finlay, The Right Hon. Sir Robert, K.C., 31, Plti!limt>rc G,1,-de11s, A·,-1ll'i11,i;lon, 11 ·.
Fisher, H. A. L., Xe,,• Colkgc. Oxford.
Flat lier, J. H . 90, Hills Rt>ad, Cam!iri,~t;,'.
Fletcher, F., T/11: Ct>ll,:;r,-, JI,1r!bor,,u.1,rft.
Fletcher, F., 60, lfi-r,ford R,h1d, B,(vs,v,zt,-r, Tl:
Fletcher, H. :\I., 10, L111,·0!11's /1111 Fields, lf'.C.
Fletcher, Ilanister F., '.!9, "'\',·,,, Bridg,' Sir,·,'/, Lu,(i;ale C'iruts, E.C.
Floyd, G. ,\, A·,u,,,,f,; Cott,~£;,'. T,,nbri,(;<·.
Fo,1t. F. \\'. G .. D.Litt., Ci(i· of LonJ,,n Sc/tool, r·ido;-ia Emban!.:mei!t, E.C.
+Forbes.\\'. H., Ballio! C,1/!,;,:'<'. O.tford.
Ford, Lady, Slwmrod· Cu/1,~,:e, Lymi11.:;ton, .flants.
Ford. Re,·. Lionel. Repton /fa!!, Bur/011-011-Trent,
Fnr-;d 1 ke, E. J., Britis!t Jfus,·um, ll'.C.
Fnr-;tcr. E. :\I., lfr.1r11lt,1111, .II011t1111t'11/ Gr<'tn, Jf-'e)•bri,(£;e.
F,)rstcr. E. S .. Tlte l ·11i,•ersi(r. Slti·jfidd.
Fothcrin;.;ham, J. K .. .lf,~,;il,t!t'll Co!!,;,r,•, Oxfi,rd.
Fo,der, Harold:\'., l'h.D .. lf~·skrn Res,'r,·e C11h-ersity, C!cz•eland, O!iio, C.S.A.
Fmdcr. \\·. \\'arcle. Li11co!11 Coll,:,:,,_ Oxford.
Fr,lZer. J. G .. LL.D., D.Litt., D.C.L .. Trim{1· Colle,;.;e, Cam!>n'd:;-e.
Freeman. :\Iiss .\.C .. He<,r,,,.,' .lf,111s1011s. l;rt>s;:•,nor Garde"ns, · ff'.
Frcem,rn. \\·. Ceorge. 163. f',1d·d,!e R1>,td, P!umstc,u!.
 XXVll

Freshfield, Douglas \\r_ ,:Hon. Treasurer), r, Airlie Gardens, Campden Hill, Tf'~
tFreshfield, Edwin, LLD., 31, O!djewr;•, E.C.
Frost, K. T., Turf Club, Cairo. ·
Fry, Right Hon. Sir Edward, D.C.L., Fai!and /louse, Failand, 11t·a, Bristol.
Fry, F. J., Cri,·ket St. Thomas, Chard.
Fry, Rev. T. C., D.D., The Sc/zoo!, Credi Berk/zampstead.
tFurley, J. S., Cl1ern, 1cke House, Tl"i11d1ester.
Furneaux, L. R, Rossa!! Sc!zo,,!, F!,·dz, 100J.
Furness, :\Iiss S. :\f. :\I., 7, {jttt'lztill Road, B!t1(,l:lze<1tl1, S.E.
Fyfe, Theodore, --1-, CraJ" s Inn Square, TI'.C.
Fyfe,\\'. H., Jier/on Co!!,:,;e, Ox.ford.
Gage, :\Irs. H. Calnn, --1-, Dupont Cirde, TT'as/zingtou, D.C., C.S..-1.
Gardiner, E. X orman /Council\ Z:,j,som Coll,~1;e, Surn;•.
Gardner, :\Iiss Alice, Tlte Old Ha!!, ,\'ez,mlwm Co!le__t;,', Ccmtbrid~y,,_
+Gardner, Prof. Ernest A. ,:V.P.), T,,uf.,,•ort/1, Surrey.
+*!Gardner, Prof. Percy, Litt.D. President:, 12, Canterbltr_v Road, Oxford.
Gardner, Samuel, Oaklzurst. Harn>IL -on-t!1e-Hi!!.
1

Gardner, \\-. Amory, Groton, Jiassac/zuselts, C.S.A.

Garnett, :\Irs. Terrell, 3, Quem dmze's Gate, S. TT~
tGaselee, S., 7 5, Lind,·n Gardens, B,l)T,u,1ter, TV.
Gaskell, :\Iiss K., The lplands, Great Shelford, Cambri,(,;e.
Gatliff, Hamilton, Ir, Eaton Square, S. TT~
Geikie, Sir Archibald, F.R.S., Sc.D., D.C.L., 3, Sloane Court, S. Tlr.
tGenner, E., Jesus College, 0.1fl1rd.
tGerrans, H. T., ::w, St.Jo!tll's Stred, Oxfiird.
Cibson, George, 2, Stirling· Jiallsions, Gmjie!d Gard,·ns, H,,mpstclld, .\~ Tl~
Gibson, :\Irs. :\brgaret D., Castle-brae, Chesterton Road, Cambrid(,'.
Giles, P., E111ma1111d Colkge, Ccmtbri,z,;e.
Gilkes, .-\. H., T!tc Co!kge, Dlll«;idt, S.E.
Gillespie, C. :\I., 6, Hollin Lalle, Far J-leadi11J:!,y, Le,'dJ·.
Giveen, Rev. R. L., 66, Jiydddten Squarc·, C/c"rk,·11Zc-dl, E.C.
Glo\·er, :\Iiss Helen,,, o The Jianaxer, London and County Bank, l'idori<1 S/J,·,·t. .\. IV.
Godden, :\Iiss Gertrude :\L fi.'i11rn1r11ty, IT:ybri,(,;,·, Surrey.
Godley. A. D., --1-, Crick Ro,id, Oxlord.
Goodhart, A. :\I., Eton Co!h;5 ,·, lf'i11dsor.
Goodhart, J. F., :\I.D., LLD, ::?5, Portland Pia,·,·, If'.
Gosford, The Countess of, 2'.!, JI,zmjidd Strt"d, Ca,'t'!Zdislt Squ,1r,-, ll'.
Gow, Re\·. James, Litt.D., 19, Dca11·s J ·ard. rr·cstminster, S. lf ·.
Granger, F. S., l'nh•ersi(v Co!kge, .\·ottin,1;kw1.
Graves, A. S., St. Jiartin's, Cambri,(1;,·.
Gray, Rev. H. B., Bradfield Co!l,:i;e, Berks.
Green, G. Buckland, 35, St. Bernard's Cr,·sccnt, Edi11bw:rl1.
Green, :\Irs. J. R., 36, Grosz·mor R,wd, S. lf'.
Greene, C. H., The Sc/zoo!, Great Berklt,wzpstmd.
Greene, Herbert \\'., JI,~i;d!l!t'll Coli,:i;e, O.i}mf.
Greenwell, Re\·. \\·., F.R.S., Durham.
Grenfell, B. P., Litt.D., D.Litt. (Council,, Qucm s Coll,:,:,·, 01/ord.
Griffith, F. LI., Ir, _\'or/1,1m (;,rrde11s, 0.1/11rd.
Griffith, '.\Iiss :\[ary E_., 4, flnwz/1a111 c;t1rdo1s, S. ll'.
Grundy, George Beardoe, D.Litt.. '.!j, Hc,//lt I-la!!, Oxfi 1rd.
Gurney, '.\[iss Amelia, 69, Emtism,,r,· c;ardens, S. If~
t Gutch. Clement, 1i.·i1zi;-"s Coli,:,:,·, C,unbri,(,:,·.
Cuthrie, C. I., 13, N,:1•11! Crt·s,-,·11t, .F:did wglt.
Hadow, \\'. H., if'orccjter C,,l!,:1;,-. OxforJ.
Haigh, :\Jrs. l'. B., .JI,n·!t,t11t T,~r/,,rs' Sd1< 10!, C/z,1rt,·r!t,,us,· Squan·, E.C.
Haines, C. R., l'11!borN1,:!1, .'..-uss,·x.
Hall, Rev. F. H., Oriel Co/kg,', Oxj,,rd.
 xxnii

Hall, ReY. F. J., ,Nortlww Place, Pott,·r's B,zr, H,·rts.

Hall, F. \Y., St. jo!tn's Colle,;;-e, Oxford,
Hall, Harry Reginald, Britis!t Jlusc'lllll, rr:c.
Hall, :.li5s S. E., 12, Belsi:::e Square,"\'. TT'.
Hallam, G. H., Ortyxia, llarro·«•-on-tl1e-Hill.
Hals bury, The Right Hon. the Earl of, -1-, Ennismore Gardens, S. Tf',
tHammond, B. E., Trinity Col!c:xe, Cambri,(~e.
Hardie, Prof. \Y. Ross, T!te Cni'iNrsi{i·, Edinbur_g/1.
Harding, G. \-., Tile Firs, Cjper Basi!d,•11, P,lll,,:·bourne.
Harper, :.Iiss Barbara, Queen·s C()/le_ge, .J.3, llarhy Stred, rr-.
Harris, Prof. \Villiam Fenwick, 8, JI,·rar Cirde, C,1mbridge, Jlass., C.S A.
tHarrison, Ernest, Trinity Co!lo:,;;t?, Cambri,(,:e.
Harrison, :.Iiss J. E., LL.D., D.Litt., 1Ye,,,11!1am College, Cambridge.
Harrison, :.Iiss L., Elleray, Li1111d Ln1c·, Li,•erjoo!.
Harrower, Prof. John, T!te Cnh·ersity. _-Jbcrdcen.
Hartley, ReL R., Tli,· Jfount, 0.1/ord.
Hasluck, F. \\-.• Rritis/1 Sdwul, Atlzens. Cret',·e.
Hauser, Dr. Friedrich, Pi,zz::,1 ,~t,w::a-C·s,1ri11i --1-1, Rome. Ita{v.
Haussoullier, B .. 8, Rue S,1intt?-Ceci!,-, Paris.
tHa\·erfield, Prof. F. J.. LL.D., C/1ri,·t C/1urd1, Oxford.
Hawes, :.Irs. C. H., ro East 85!!1 Stred._\.<",,' 1·0,l, C.S .. 4.
Hawes, :.Iiss E. P., 13, Sussex Card,:11s, IT'.
+Hay, C. A., 127, Harley Stn·et, Tl:
Hayter, .-\ngelo G. K., .J., Fon·st Rise, IT "a!t!tamsto,,', Essex.
Head, Barclay Vincent. D.C.L., D.Litt., 26 Lt'i11ster Squ,1re, Bays,z,•ato- ll.
Head, John .\!ban, 66, C1dog,m Placi:, S. TT·.
Headlam, Re\· . .-\. C., D.D., Prin,ipal t:f A'ing·s C,illc,i;e. London.
Headlam. J. \Y., ,- o Jfrs. lf,,1dlam. 1, St. Jfmy's Road, n·zmbkdon.
HeadLlm, \\". G., A-in_,;'s C,,lle_,::e, Ctw1bri,zi;e.
He.1rcl. Re\·. \\-. .-\., Fdtes Coll,;,:e. Edinbu1:,.;l1.
tHeathcote, \\". E., Clc,•ehurst, Stoke P,,.s?s, nt'ar Slow;/1.
Heberden, C. B., Prindj>,lf of Br,rsmose Ct1!!ege, O.r:ford.
Helbert, Lionel H., IT•"est lJo,,•ns, l I 'ind1est,T.
Henderson, Arthur E .. T!te Luods, DuhNclt, S.E.
Henderson, Bernard \\-.. Exeter Cu!!,:i;,·. Oxford.
Henderson, Re\·. l' ...\. \\"ri~ht, D.D .. fI ;u•dm rf iVi1dliam Ct>il<',:C:<', 0.1/ord.
Henn, :.Ir,., Tlte I"i,ar<IA'<', Bolton, L,111<·asliirc.
Henr:·· Robert :\I., 61, Cni,·o-si{i' Rd.. Re[/;nt.
Henty, :.Irs. Douglas. rt·es(,;ak, C!tid1,stcr.
Hereford, The Lord Bishop of, Tltc Pa!aCl', Hereford.
t Hertz, :.Iiss Henriette, 7 lie Pojl<1rs, 20, A ,•m ue Ro,1d, .Y. If:
Hett, \\-. S., r '.\ Exef(r .lfonsions, Hron,ksb11r}', 1\: TT:
Hewitt, J. F., Holton Cotta.,;,-. Oxford. '
Hicks, Rev. Canon E. L., St. PJ1i!ips, Sa[ford, Jla11d1,·ster.
Hicks, F. :.I., Bra,-k!ey Lo,zi;e, lViyb1ir!_i;e.
Hill, George F. (Council•, BritisIt Jluseum, II·. C.
Hill, :.Iiss :\Iary V., S,mdcceles Sc/too!, Par!.:stone, Dorset.
Hillard, Re\·. A. E., St. Pauls Sc/we!, lf"t·st A'emin.,;tun, lV.
Hirst, :\Iiss Gertrude, Rus,,•arp, If'/1ill'.1', l'orks.
Hodgkin, Thomas, D.C.L.. Litt.D., B,rrmoor Castle, Beal, 1Yortlwmberl,md.
Hodgson, F. C., Abbotsford I"i!la, T,,,fr,.(-01/wm.
H~garth, D:l\·id G. (Council.', Clwpd .llcado-z,,, For,·st Ro,,•, Sussex.
Hogarth, ::-.Iiss :.I. I., T/1e R,·d House, fl"est/don, Suffoll.:.
tHolborn, J. D. S., 28, Xi!e Gro,,,', Edinl,m;~/2.
Holding, :.liss Grace E .. 9, Re11cN1 Eli!!, Camden Road, i\'. TV.
Hopkinson. J. H., Tf'trrd.:n r>f Hulme flail, r·idr>ria Par/.:, Jl,mdtesl,·r.
Hoppin, J.C., C,1 1trl!ands, Pomfret Coztre, Conn., C.S.A.
 Hornby, Rev. J. J., D.D .• Pro,:ost ,if Eton College, ll'inds,>1.
+Hort, Sir Arthur F .. Bart., 1Vewlands. Harro,<1-011-t!te-Htll.
Hose, H. F., Du!widt Col!e,,;e, !Juhuid1, S.E.
Hoste, \Iiss \I. R., St. Az~,;ustinis, B/<1r/.:z..·ater R,hld, E,1sti1c,un1c·.
House, H. H., T!te Co!le_i[e, JI,ih.1ern.
How, \V. \\'., Jferlon Co!!eJ;,'. O.iford.
Howard de \Valclen, The Right Hon. Lord, S,a;;,rd H,,1u,·. 1/,·f,;-rrr,'e Sq1Mrc', S. !T".
Howorth, Sir Henry H., K.C.I.E., F.RS., 30. Co!!inglzam P!,1c·,,_ 5. Tf'.
Huclclart, Re\·. G . .-\. \\'., A-irk!ingt,111 Redo1y, lJ,·,l1!e, 1·,,rks.
Huddilston, J. I-I .. I'h.D .. T/1e Cnh't'l'si(1' ,f Jl,1in,', Or,m,, . .ll,1i11c-, CS.A.
Hugel, Baron Friedrich \'OD, 13, r-icllr,l,,[e Gate, A'ensi1,;:;t,,11. n ·.
Hunt, A. S., D.Litt. Council':, Qut'oz's Cu!!eg,. Oifurd.
Hutchinson. Sir J. T., Chief Justice of Ceylon. Ce!e111b,,. C,:r/011.
Hutchinson, .\liss \\'. \f. L., Jloor Hurst, Tr:nisun .-1,·,,wc', C,u11•;ri,(-:,.
Hutton, \liss C. ,\ .. ..J.9, /Jr,~vtun Gar&ns, S. ll:
Hyslop, Rev. A .. R. F., IVirrd,·n of Trinitv Collc-,;e. Gl,·11,r 1mo11J. P,·rr/1, .\'.IJ.
Im Thurn, J. H., ()3. jamyn Stnd, S. /!··.
Jackson, Prof. Henry, Litt.D. · V.P.,, Tri11i(v C,//,·;,·, C1111.',nJ;,.
Jackson, \Irs. F. H .. 7+· Rutland G<1te, S. n·.
Jackson, T. \V., S. B1lld111ore Ru,id, O.ij~>rd.
Jackson, Re\·.\\-.\\'., Redor ,if Exdcr Co!!,;,;,·, 0.1/i.nJ.
*James. The Re\'. H .. \., D.D., Sd100! House, Rz~:;by.
J arnes, H. R .. B,mkipure, .f11di,1.
James, Lionel, St. Pdt'l"s Co!!,:,::e. R<ld!c:_t', Abh{:[don.
Jam.es, \Iontague Rhodes, Litt.D., Pro,'ost ,if A-in,{s c,11,·,y. <.:-u,zurid~,'.
Janvier, \Irs. Thomas A., co Tl10111,1s ...J. J<1n·uit'I'. Ej-q .. J1:t1 C,·nt1t1:i' Clui,. - ! I 'tSt
.+3rd Str,d, .\·e,,:, J'orl.:, C.S .•..J.
Jasonidy, 0. John, B!ondd Street, Lzmas.w!, Cyprus,
Jeans, Re\·. G. E .. Sliur,ud!, ;\·e,vjlurt. fsli cif ll?,;lzt.
Jenkinson. F. J. H .. D. Litt., Trinity Cu!!ege. C1111{,ri,(:;·,.
Jenner. \liss Lucy c\.. 2 3. lViirwzck G,1rdms, A-,·11s in,:; /,'II. n ·.
Jevons, F. B .. D.Litt.. lite Ccstl,·, J>ur!itu11.
Jex-Blake. :\I iss. 1.;irtun Col!ege. Cw1b1 i,(:;<'.
Joachim, \ilss :\I..
Johnson, :\liss Lorn,1, ll"uod!e,:1;1i. _..J!trin,11,w1.
Jonas, \Iauricc. 8..p-8.p. Sa!isbmy lfouN. Lo11d,,11 11·,11!, E.C.
Jones, Henry L.. !Vi!!,1ston Sc/tool..\·,1nt,.·id1.
tJones, H. Stuart . Council), G!an-y-Jl,w. S,wnder,fout. Pemb;·,,kesliirc·.
tJones, Ronald P., 20S, Co!t'herne Cuurt, Soutli A'msi11gtun.
Jones, \V. H. S., Tlze P,:rse Sd10ol. C,1111bri,z:[,'.
Jones, \Villiam. 65. Hig-/1 Stred, Bcr'Z.,id:-on-T,ut'cd.
Joseph, H. \V. B., Xc,u Cu!l,;i[e, Oxford.
Judge, \Iax, 7, Pa!! Jf,d!, 5. ll '.
Karo, George. Al.:,ufc"mis,·!tes Kunstmuseum. Bonn illll Ri1t'i11.
Keene. Prof. Charles H., Cni,:ersit_y Club. Dublin.
Keith, A. Ilcrriccblc, C't1lo11ia! Office, D01, 111ing Slrc'd, S. l! ·.
Kelly, Charles Arthur, 30, Clteyne lVir!k. Clzdse,1, S. l/1.
Keltie. J. S., LL.IJ .. 1. 51.joltn's lf·'ood P,1r/.:, .V lV.
Kennedy, J., 12. Fi·,:::n,ll La11<'. Fi11l'!tley Ro,1d, .\'. IV.
Kensington, \liss Frances. I..J.5, Gloucester Terrae. Hyde Air/.:, TT'.
Kenyon, F, G., D.Litt. i'Council), Britislt Jfusmm, lV.C.
Ker, Prof. \\'. P .. 95, Go<i ,·r .',free!. H~C.
1

Kerr, Prof...\lexander, Jladison, lf'is,onsin, C.S.,l.

Keser, Dr. J., Colat,i!, Cltemi11 Vinet, Lausanne.
Kettlewell, Rev. P. \V. H., 1, Albert Road, Clz/ton, Bristul
Kieffer, Prof. John 13.. ..J.,p, College Avenue, Lmcaster, Pc1., C.S ...l.
King, J. E.. Gr.r1J1m<1r Sclwol, Bedford.

'
-tKing, :.!rs. \\"ilson, 19. H<,JtJidd R,,<1d. E1z1;b,1st1 111, Rirm,11,:/1,1111.
Knmdes. Sir James, K. C.Y.O., (_}11eo1 Anne's L11(,,"t', St. James· f',,ri:, S. I I·.
Kohler. OliYia C .. 39, A.·in,'s,,•,111d A,·0111c', !J11ee1t's Par!.:, lf:
Lane, :.Irs. Charles T .. D,111,1.,·"o·tein, Pelc'njidd.
Lang ...\ndrew, LLD., D.Lltt , 1, Jf<1r!, 1 es R,wd, A.·e11si11,1.,•iu11. I I·.
*Lang-, Sir R. Hamilton, K.C.:.T.G .. T/1c Gro.·e. Dcd!tam, EsScx.
Langdun-Il;l\·ies, B. :'.\ .. Cefthz!I. H111::;l1 ffe,1t/J, ,'.,-11rr,J'·
Langt, m, :'.\ e1 ille, '.!O, B,·11tlilci: .')/r,·d, c·,li','lldn/1 Sq11,z1 e. t I·.
tLansdowne, The :.Iost Hon. the :.L1rqness of. K.G .. G.C.S.I.. <;.C.I.E., G.C.l\l.G,,
Bowo()d, Caine, u·11ts.
Lantour, :.liss de. Oaf.: LeZ::;l1, .t>stf,,,11n1c'.
La Touche, C. D., j3. Ra,1;la11 Road. Dub!zn.
Lawson, L. :\I.. Cnivcrs1(J' Club, l-1/t/1 A ,','lllte and Fi/ty-f,,urt/1 .'>Ired.,\-,,,, J ,,1 l. CS.A.
Leaf, Herbert, Tlze Grec'l/, Jfar!!•11r11u_,:l1.
ttLeaf, \\.alter. Litt.D .. D.Litt. \·.!'._,. 6. Sussex Pl,ll',', R,:!;elll s P,,r!:. 1\'. 11·.
Lecky. :\!rs., 38 U11s!oz,• Gardens, S. If:
Leeper, ,-\lexander, lf,zrdm ()f Trinity Co/!<'_1;,·, Jfdbourn,.
Lee-\\-arner, :.Iiss E,·elyn. L1·11,.•, 1dc. Goda/111111,s·,
Legge, F., 6. Crtl),'S Inn Square, u·.c.
Leigh. \\-. Austen, Hart.fdd, Rl'dt,w1pt,,11. S. If·.
Letts, :\lalcolm H. I.. 3-1-, Can1111burr l'ar!.: South, .\·.
Le,,is, Harry R., 5. Argyll Road. A."cnsin,,:ien, If".
Lewis, l\liss :\I. B., 4'.!, .':,/1n·«·s{l/trJ' Ruc1d, Ox/en, Bn-/.:e11/1e,ui.
tLewis, l\Jrs. S.S., Cast!c-br,1e, C/1es!erton Road, Cambrli(i[c·.
Leycester, :\Irs. Rafe. 6. Ch,ph· [[~1!/.:, S. lf·.
Lindley, :.Its, Julia, 7-1-, ,',/wolt'r':; Hz!! Road, Blad:!1cat11. :,.L.
Lingen. Lady, 13, /Vi·t/Jerl'.J' Gardens. S. /f·.
Lister. Hon. Regmald, Bri/1s/1 Embassy, Pans.
Lloyd, .\Iiss A . .\!., C,~rtl1u1jc· fla!I, Gra11tlw111.
+Lock, Re\'.\\-, D.D., lf:mit'lt uf Xeb!e College, U.1ford.
t Loeb, James, 37. East 38th Strc·d, Xe,,, Y()r/.:.
tLongman, :\li,s .\Iary, 27, 1Vo1jc1!/.: .,q11art', Hyd, Par/.:, Ii:
Lorimer, :\!1ss H. L., So111tT,•il!e Co!!eir-·, U.tford.
tLonng, \\"1,li.1111. Go!dsm1tl1,' Colle,:,·, "Vt',,' Cn,ss, S.F.
Lo"e, :\liss D., ffint, 111 .')t. Gc, 11;,:e, Ch'w!.:trne, .:,um,Tsel.
Lucas. Bernard J ., .,,,ut/1d,,;:,,n, Brambn·, .':,uss,·.1.
Lumsden, :\l!ss, if ·arre11 C1,tt,1_,:1·, Cr,1n!,·t;,;l1, Surrey.
Lunn, Henry S., :\LD., O!djidd ffo11se, fla1-ro,t1-on•t/1,:-lli!!.
Lunn,\\'. Holdsworth, 5, Enddo:,;11 <~an/ens, 1V. l! ·.
Lyttelton, Hon. and Re\'. E . Ft,111 College, 11 'llldsor.
*Macan, R. \\'., .Jf,ll'to· (If Cni,·,rsity Co!!,:,;e, U.ij,ml.
Mcc\rthur, ,\. C., 28, Li11d,·11 1_;ardoz.1, If:
:McClymont, Re\'. J. ,\., D.D., 5, !Jueen's Gardens, Aberdeen.
:\Iacclonald, (-;cor:;e, LLD. (Council, 17, Lr:an1//,11t/1 Gard,·n,, ~-dinbur,,/1.
l\1acclnnalcl, .\I1ss Louisa, 11·omt'll's Ce!!,:,;e, ,'>J•dnq Cniz•ersitv, Sydncy, ·:v.s. u ·.
:\i:1ulonell, \\'. R., LLD, Brll(,:;,jidd, Bri,(,:e of Don, .-lberdee11s/1ire.
l\lcDou:;all, :\Iiss Eleanor, lf~·s/Jidd Col!,:,:e, ffampstcc1,I, 1\ : lf~
MacE\\'en, Ke,·. Prof. Ale-.,:, R,ibertson, j, Doua,: J errau·, Edinbll!J:lt.
:\lclntyre, P. S., T/1,: Clll,'c'rslli-, St .•-111dn,,•.,. ·
1\Iaclver, D. l:Zandall, fl'oh·erl,l/1 ffo1tst', Clzfton, flristu!.
1\Iacken?ie, Lady, j3. CilJ,,_:,··,m .\<jft<lr,, .,. If:
?llackenzie, !Junc.111, 1 K I ·i.1 ,1~-! .lf,u,·h,Tin,,, Rom,.
Mackenzie R. J.. I'.!. l;r,·,zt .\/11,1rt .Vr,·d, E,f1Jll>1tJ:<li
!l!cClcan, J. R. .. Rus/11,1!! J!,,us,·, l zmr1nd, ,' I! 'di,.
:\l:tc Le hose, Ja1;1cs J., 61, .\/. / ·u1,u1t Str,·d, c;/,1,:,:,,,e.
1\L1dnill.1n, .\!rs. Alexander, 3~, 1;n,.;;·,·11or Noud, .'l·. If:
r*~lacmillan, Ccorge .-\., D.L1tt Hor1. ~cc.;, St. J/,1rtin's Str,·et, u·.<.;.
 i\Iacmillan, '.\[rs. George ..\.., 27, Queen's G,zte Gardens, S. rr·.
;\[acmillan, '.\[aurice, 52, Cadogan Place, S. ii·.
+Macmillan, \V. E. F., 27, Queen's Gate Gardens, S. rr·.
t:Macnaghten, Hugh, Eton Co!l,xe, H'indsor.
;\,1acnaghten, The Right Hon. Lord, 198, Queen's Gate, S. Tl'.
ti\1agrath, Re\·. J. R., Pro, 10,·t r>_[ Qt!t't'll's Colle.,:e. 0.iford.
*Mahaffy, Rev. J. P., D.D., D.C.L., C.\".( '., Tnnizv College, DuNlll.
Mair, Prof. A. \V., Tlte C11i, ersizr, t.'di11b10:,;l1.
1

tMalim, F. B., Sedbo:_;;I, Sdwol, 1 ·or/.:s.

Mallet, P. \V., 25. Ht;,:-/1b11ry Nez,, P,irl.-, .N.
Manatt, Prof. Irving, Bro,c'll Cni,.'ersity, Pn,, idt:JIL"<!, R.l., C.S.A.
1

tMarindin, G. E. (Council_1, Ham11w11d:,,, ood, Fr,'!1s/zam, Farnkrm.

1

t:\farquand, Prof. Allan, Pri11ceto11 Colkge, NeZi 1 jo-sey, U.S.A.

Marsh, E.,
Marshall, :.\Iiss. Far Cross. lf',,ore, 1Ve,,'c"<1st!t', 5·1,ijfs.
Marshall, Frederick H. (Council', Bnlis!t .llust"11m, H'.C.
;\I arshall, John. Le,ves I-f,,use, Le«•,·s.
i\Iarshall, J. H., Benmore, ~',zmla, J11di,1.
Marshall, Prof. J. \V., Cnh-ersi{r Coll,:i;e ,f TVa!es. Abt-rph<vllt.
Marshall, R., 31, T!te TViddrons, Cr,,yd1>11.
l\farsha!l, T., Higltfidd Cltapd, rl l!crt,,11, .leeds.
i\lartin, Charles E., Box ..J.2, Oberlin, 0/1ie, l'.S A.
+Martin, Sir R. B., Bart., 10, Hill S!tYd, .ll,~1/itir, TV.
Martindale, Rev. C., Jla11r,'s,1 House, n od1,rmpto11, S. TV.
+Martyn, Edward, Til{rra Casllt', Ardr,1/1,m, Cozm{J' Gahc'<lj'.
Massy, Lieut.-Colonel P. H. H .. ff..ll. {'. Consulate, Varn,1, Bu!gar/,r.
Matheson, P. E ...\'""' C,,ll,;1_;-c', < i_tJ;,rd.
i\lavrogordato, J., 34. G!t>uaster G.trdots, HJ'd,' Pt1rk, TV.
l\Ia\"rogorda.to. J. J., 2, Four/It A .. enue .ll,nzs1ons, Ho,,,-, :,ussex.
1

i\Iavrogordato, J. l\l. 62, TT',,sthourn,; T;•rrdCt', f~vdc· P,r1k, II".

i\favrogordato, P,mdeh A., 74, rf~,,th,ur11..: T.:rrtta, Hy.le' Par/,:, tr·.
:\Iayor, H. B., Clift"n Co!!,xe, Rrist,,f.
i\layor, Re\·. Prof. Joseph B. (Ju,·ms,,:?11,' H,,use, A'mxst"n Hill, Sun e_1·.
i\layor, R. J. G. (Council',, BMrd r>_f Edu,·atio11, ll'!tztdw!I, S. If".
Measures, A. E., A-ing Ed.c•ard r·1. Sdwo!, H1nni11,1;!t,1111.
:\1erk, F. H., C11ris{s Hospital, lf~,st Hors!t,wz.
Merry, Rev. \V. \\'., Redor of Lin,·t>ln C,,//.:ge, O.tj,>rd.
Metaxas, D., Gree/,_, Lq:,1tion, 1, Stan!t,,p,: Gardens, S. u·.
tMiers, Prof. H. A., F. R.S., Jf,,gdaloz Coll,:,:,', u:r;,,rd.
Michel, Prof. Ch., .p, .-l .. 1e11ue Blonden, Lit;i[,', Bd,:ium.
Miller, \Villiam, 36G, Via Ar!estro, Rome, lt<1(1'.
Milltet, P., 95, Eoult',•ard .'it. .llidtd, Paris.
Millingen, Prof. Alexander van, Nobert Colle_,:·,. Const,rntinop!e.
Millington, l\liss :\L \'., 47, Peak Ht!!, :-.),,!t'nl,am. S.E.
Milne, J. Grafton, Dunc"roft, Lind,·11 Gankns, L,'al/10-/1ead. Sun·,;_1·.
Milner, Viscount, G.C.B., Brook's club, St. jaJJ1c·s -~Ired, S. If'.
Minet, ;\liss Julia, 18, Susse.1· ~"qzmre, flrde Par/.:, If'.
Minns, Ellis H., Pembro/,:e Co!!e,1;·,., Cambridg,'.
Minturn, '.\liss E.T., q, C!tdst',z 1.,,-mban/.:mmt, S. n·.
Mitchell, '.\lrs. C. \V., j,:smond l>zurs, ,\·,..,,,,·,rs!le-,>11- l)'Jh'.
i\1oline, :\liss I. P., 172, Chun-It Slrt'd, St,,/:,: .\•,,,,'in,;-t,,n, ,\'.
tMond, '.\1 rs. Frida, Tlte Popl,1rs, 20, .cl. ;·,1111,' R, 1,,d, N,gmt s /1,rr/., ,\'.TT·.
Monfries, C. B. S., 68, Laud,·rJ,t!,: (;,1r,101,, fl_vndl11nd, Gl<l\i;O,c',
:Monson, Right Hon. Sir E. J., B.trt., l~.C.IL, l;.C.:-1.C .. R,J,m, 111,I l'ar!..·.
:\!organ, '.\li,s, 64, Sc,1rsd11le I "d/,rs, A·o1.,1n_,:t,,n. u·.
tMorshead, E. D. A., 29, Trinity •''J'Uctr,·, ~'>ou/11,,•,,r/..·, SJ:.
;\loss, The Rev. H. \\'., T/1, ~'>c/1001 f/, 1111,', .\ltrc:,'si'ur_r.
'.\Iount, Rev. C. B., q, ,Vur/z,rm R,,ad, 0.1;;,,-,1.
 :.Ioxon. Rev. T. Allen. 2, Solio Square, l 1·.
:.Iozley, H. \Y,, Tlze lf'liite House, Has!emerc·.
:.Iuirhead, L., Hasdq Court, l!'allin,eford.
t:.Iunro, J. A. R., LinL"oln College, Oxford.
:.Iurray, G. G ...\., 131, B,1J1bury R,Md, O.iford.
:.Iusson, :.Tiss Caroline, 29, Beec/z 1-fi!! R,,,,d, Sltq/il°ti(
t*i\Iyers, Ernest I Council), Br<1d:<'llside, Clti.,kltw:,t.
t:'.\Iyres, Prof. J. Linton, T!1c· Unh•ffsity, Lh•,·rp,,,,1.
+Nairn, Rev. J. Arbuthnot, .lierdlllnf Taylors Sd1L'1 1!. E.C.
Nash, :\Irs. Yaughan, ,-1.2, lf'e!l rr;r1,f:, Ha/1/psk,rd.
Xewman, \\". L., Litt.D., D.Litt., Pitl,•i!!e L,1/Zi'll, Lizel!c'11/1,r11:.
::--Jewton, The Lord, 6, Bdgrllz'e Square. S. lf':
::---ichols, :\lorton C., Jldropo!it,uz Club, Fi/tit . 1,•,Jlle, .\',·,:• J ·or!.·, C.S.A.
Noack, Prof. Ferdinand, Fddstr<1ss,: I .j.O, A'id.
Northampton, The :\lost Hon. the ::\Iarquis of. 51. L·1z11,u 1.;"r<1,'Jls. S. n:
Oakesmith, John. D.Litt .. 6, Elm R,ml.: 1.;,1rd,·11s. Bllrn,·s. S. lf'.
Odgers, Rev. J. Edwin, D.D .. I.J.5, Tf'o,,dst,,,·,(, Ro,rd, O.iji,rd.
Oppe, A. P., Roard ,,J Fduc,t!i,,11, rr·1titd1,1/I, S. fl'.
Oppenheimer. H ., 12, Sott!hzvid.: CFt'sc,Jl!, ff_1·Jc' P<lrl.. If'.
Orpen, Rev. T. H., h:r C,,tt,z,.:,·, Little .,lt<'[/i>rd, C,1ml,ri,(,:·,•.
Osler, Prof.\\"., 13 .\"orl1<wt Gardens. c1.1f,,rd.
Owen, •.\. S., A"d,/e Co!lt'ge, O.iford.
Page, T. E., Cltarterlto11.fr', God,l!mi1zr;.
Pallis, Alexander. Tatoi, :li._[[!mr_,,-Jz Dri,•c, J.i,·c"1-p,,,,1.
Palmer, Rel". J., B,rl/iol C,,/f,-ge, 0.1/ord.
Parker, :\Iiss :\I. E., l'rillCt'JS Hd,-11<.1 C,.,/1,:,:e, E,ili1z:;·. rr·.
Panniter. S. C, fl~·.,• Ba11!.:, l'ppi11/;k1111.
tParn·, Re1·. 0. H .. hz<,:ldll,Pe. Cr<111JJ1t'r Ro,ul, C,rml,ri,1_,·,·.
Parry, Re,·. R. St. J, Trini(r Coll(,:,·, Canuiri,f,:·'°·
Paton. J. Lewis, Grammar .'-,dzool, JlaJ1dzest,·r.
+Paton, James ::\[orton. 65, Spilrks Str,·d, Cwzbri,f.::;,· .lf,1s,.. C.S.•.J.
Paton, \V. R., Gnmdl11JJ11e Ho11s,'. lf"oodside, Aberdt·oz.
Payne-Smith, Re,·. \V. H .. Jlozt!trie Roild, Ru,,:i>y.
Pearce. J. \\·.: Jler/011 Court Sdzool, Footso-ay, A",·11!.
Pears, Edwin, 2, R11c· de la B,uzque, Conslanti11,,Pk.
Pecko,·er of \Visbcch, Baron, [f'isbed1, Cambs.
tPecko,·er, :\Iiss .;Iexandrina, Ballk House, lf'i,-/1e,!1.
Peers, C. R., 9rJ, Gros,·enor Road, .,·. rr·.
Peile, John, 52, ]11,:erncss Ten,ll·e. lV.
Peile, John, Litt.D., Jiasi,:r ef Clirist's Co!le,:.;e. Crmbrid,:.;,·.
Peile, Rev. J. H. F., 3,-1., R11tl,111d Gate, s. n·.
Pember, E. H., K.C., Vicar's fii!!, J1e11r Lymi1ztti>11, l1<1J1ts.
tPer.rose, :\[iss Emily (Council_ 1, Somerz.,f!!e Co!ls,;e, O.ifoni
"'+Percival, F. \\'., 1, Cites/tam Str,·d, S. II:
Perkins, 0. T., lf'dli1z1;ton Col!t'.'[t', ,lo-/,s.
Perowne, Connop, 7, Grange Gardon, Easti,ourn,·.
Perry, Prof. Edward Delavan, D1!11mzb1i1 Cniz ,-rsi(r.•\"e7,, Vi>rk City, U:S.A.
0

Pesel, ::\Iiss Laura, Oak Hous,·. Br<1dford.

Petrocokino, Ambrose, Tlzames Cotf,rJ;e, Pa11,1;bour11c.
Philips. :\!rs. Herbert, Sutton Oa/.:s, Jfa(d,'sfidd.
Phillimore, Prof. J. S., The Cnfrersi(v, Gl,1s,:.;m,·.
Philpot. Hamlet '>., The Cozm!Jy School, Ra!timore. J/,1J·l'l1J1d, C..S.A
Picard. George, 2 l-i,, Rue R,·11011'11i!!e, Paris. , ·
Pinckney, A. U., Tlte Ordzard, B<1t/iford, Sol//,-rsd.
Plater, Rc-v. Charles, S.J., St . .II,ufs lf,1!/, St,mylturst, B!,1,!.-r1urn
+Platt, Prof. Arthur, 5, Chcs!Pr Terra,-e, R,:;','IZ!'s l'i!rk, 1\'. ll:
Pollock, Sir Frederick, Bart., 21, Hyde P<1rk f'f,lc',, lF.
+Pope, :\!rs. G. H., 6o. Banbury Ro,1d, Oxford.
 Pope. Re,·. J. 0. Fallon, S.J .. Foj,/s /1,r//, c>xfimf.
tPostgate, Prof. J. P., Litt.D .. Trill,·zr Coll,'_(,",', Camhi,~~•,.
Powell, C. '.\J., E,zstjidd, Ct1,•ersitam. Reading.
Powell, Sir F. S., Bart., '.\l.P .. 1. Cam/iri,(,•;: Sqtfttr,·. /(1·& f',rr.'.·. 11 ·.
Powell, John U., St. Jolzn's c,,!lt'g,', c '-tfi>rd.
Poynter, Sir Edward J., Bart .. Litt.D .. D.C.L. P.R.A .. ,o. AddL,1'11 R,,ad. S. ll~
Preece, Sir \Yilliam H., Gotlzi,· /,()1(,,',. IVimNcd,,11 C,)lJIIJl<'ll. _,. ;_ u·.
Pretor, A., 2, Camden P/a,-e, If)·kc, ff ·,:i-111011//1.
Price, Miss '.\label, Clwrlton, 1/,:adlllglun. O.tfi>rd.
Prickard, A. 0., Holly111011nt, l·!ed R..':-.0., 11,m ✓-,.
Proctor, '.\Irs. A., Tlze L1,1f.s ,·. I I ~rlt/1,1m 1.:,-,,s,.
Prothero, Henry, I 3, Pro111c·11ad,·. C!tdten/111111.
tPryor, Francis R., H-',,1,djidd. H,rtjidd, Hert.,.
Pyddoke, '.\Iiss '.\[ary, 0.1·/zi!I. f.,,11.::·lzt,,11. J,,'s-,: ·.
Quaritch, Miss, 34, Bdsi.::e l7ro,',', JJ,,mj,lt'ad. X.11 ·
Quibell, '.\Irs. Annie A., Gi.::elt Jlu.,e11111. 1-,--,_,::1,Pt.
tRackham. H., 4, Grang,· 1~·rrau'. C,unbri,'.,:·,•.
Radcliffe, \\". \\·., Fontizi!I. J:>st 1.;rinsl,·,1d, .',//j,><'.r.
Raleigh, Sir Thomas, K.C.S.I., D.C.L., .-1I! Souls Coll,:,;,·, O.iford.
+Raleigh, :\Iiss Katherine A .. 8. P,1r!.· Ro,1d. l '.dwi1(,:-,·
*Ralli, Pandeli, 17, Belgm,'e Squ,rre. S. rr·.
+Ralli. :\Irs. Stephen.-\.., St. Ci1tlzeri11/s Lo,(,:;,·. Ho,·e, S1,,·.fr'T.
Ramsay,.-\. B., Eton Colle;;,·. TI"in1l,{)r.
R::unsay, Prof. G. G., LL.D., Litt.O .. I !r11111,1r,-, fl!alJ',,;oic•ri,'. X. fl.
tRamsay. Prof. Sir\\'. l\I., D.C.L., Litt.D. V.P. ,, Tlie Unh•ersity, A/1,:rdem.
Ransom, '.\Iiss C. L., Bryn .lf,z.cr ci,!lt'_,:·,·, Bryn .lfaz,,r. Pc1ma. C.S.A.
Rawlins, F. H., Et,,11 C(l//eg,,_ n·111d.,111·.
Rawnsley, \\'. F., T/1e Jllllu>r lfouse. S/1,rml,:1· Grt'en, Guildford.
Reade, Essex E.
Reece, :\Iiss Dora, 26, Bul!i11_,:!tam Jfa11Si1>11s, l't"tl Str,·cl. A·,'11.,i1(,'le11. 11 ·_
Reid, Mrs, C. 1\1., Lan,,;lztl111 ilt>ld, }',-rt/and P!,rcc. 11·.
Reid, Prof. J. S., Litt.D .. C,riu.,· Ci>ll,:,:·,·. Cambri,(,;·c.
tReinach, Salomon, 31, Ru,· de B<'rlin. Parh.
+Rendall, Re\'. G. H., Litt.D .. Clt11rterlz,wsc. (;,,da!111i11,;·.
tRendall, Montague, Tize C,1/I,:~-,,_ n·111d1t·.,ter.
Rennie,\\'., Tlte C11i'i. ersity. 1;/,r,::;oz,·.
1

Richards, Re\". G. C. (Council. Ond Coll<";;,·. Uif, 1rd.

Richards, F., I<ings,,'{)"d Sd10,,!. B,1tlz.
Richards, H. P., Tf'adlwm Ct,//,::;,·. i !.1_1im!.
Richmond. 0. L.. 6➔, Con1<-'11!! Gardens. S. u·.
Richmond, Sir \Y. B., I-;:.C.B .. D.C.L.. R..-\ .. f;<','1 1r /_,,,~,;,'. fl·,-,11,·11d. fl,111111w.,1111i!t. u·.
Rider, :.\Iiss B. C., 21. R11,· jt1t·,,/!. /',rn,·.
Ridgeway, Prof. \Y. (Council. 1-:w Ditt,,11. l~1111Z.ri,(,;,·-
Ridley, Sir Edward, 48, Lemwi 1_;,1rdc-11s• .,. 11 ·.
Rigg, Herbert A .. 13, (Ju,·,·1i's (;,1/,' !'!,re,,_ -'-·.If·.
Riley.\\·. E., Coun(v H,r!!. sprin_,: Gard,11,, S. If-.
Roberts, Re,·. E. S., Jft1st,·r of 0, 111,i!k ,111d C1i11s C,,f!,:,·,·. Ci11Ni1n,(;;,'.
Roberts, J. Slingsby, 3, 1'1>Z<•is I ·;;!as. Br(i;/t!,,n
Roberts. Principal T. F., Slter/1orn,· Jf,,us,·,. lt1cn•sf;.'.vt!t.
Roberts, Professor\\'. Rhys. LL.Ll .. Tlte C11i,·asil_1'. l,,·t"Js.
Robertson, D. S., Trini(1' c,,/1,:,:e. C,olli ri,I,,:,·.
1

Robinson, Charles X ewton, 11, Clt,·st,1/idd Street . .lf,(1/,rir, 11 ·.

Robinson, Edward . .lldri,Po!it,1n .l/11s,11m ,f :I rt . .\·,."' 1·,,rl.·. { ·_s ..-1.
Robinson, G. G., JJ,·,·dtcT1,j!. l',·;•,·11s,·v Ro,rd, St. l,t"1 1n,rrd;- 0 11-.)-etl.
Robinson, \\'. S., CourtjidJ. lf ·c.,t Iii!!, />11/11<:1· il<'<llh.
Rockwell, :.\Iiss Eliz. H., If ·wstt'II. C1 1n11 .• C.S ..-1.
Rodd, Sir Rennell, K.C. :\I.G., Britis!t L,:,;t1lion. St, 1d,!t, 1lm.
Rogers, Benjamin Hickley. F,1.,tz,,,,,,J..'-,/r,,,,,f,,·r;y /Iii!. T,,t', l,·111t,,11,.
+Roseben·. The Right Hon. the Earl of, K.G. 38, IJ,r!.d,:i· .,·q11,1r,-. u:
Rosenbr~-Lehn, The Baroness, C,zsa dd Pr,1/,1, Assisi, It.i~I'.
Ross, \Y. D., Orid C,,/1,:,!:e, O.tford.
Rotton, Sir J. F .. Lod:,i•,,od, ri·it/1 iii!!, 0,,d,d111ill_,.: ..,1on:1·.
Rous, Lieut.-Colonel. rr·,,1 j!t't1d Hous,·, ,\',,r,,•1t-!t.
+Rouse, \\-. H. D., Litt.D. 1Counc1l), B,1!,m,m lf,,uj,·. (<1111uridg,·.
Rowland-Brown, H., Jun., Ox/icy Gn>Z'<', lft1rr, 1h'·ll·,.,,1d.
Rube!1, Paul. 3--!-, A/ft' R,1b,·11s r,1ssc'. lit1m/.ur_,;·, t;,Tlll</111'.
Rubie, Rev. Alfred E., l'/1t• R,~r,z! .\·t1,•t1! SJ1,,,,1, Elt/1,1111, S.l:-.
Rucker, :\Iiss S. C., -!-, T'.111br11_,.:/1 l ort1,-,._ JJl11<"kl1t·,1!/1. s.1,·.
Rtickcr, Principal Sir.-\.\\'., D.Sc., F.R.S., Il), (_~/t'd/1,>:,' L;,1rdo1.,·. S. A-,J1,111.<l,m, S.IV.
Runtz, Ernest, I 1, TI:1/broo/;, l:.C.
Rustafjaell, R. de, I, D,1,,•11 Stred, Pi,"c·,rdi!{r. u·.
Sachs, :\!rs. Gusta\·e, 26, Jl11r!bon)//.,.:i1 Hi!! . .Y. rr ·.
Sampson, C. H., Bra::t"l!osc: Coll,:,:,·, 0.1/011(.
Samuel, ;\liss Edith Syh·ester, So, 011s/,,,,, Gt1rd,·ns. S. lf•.
Sanborn, F. B., C,,mw·d, .!lass., l:5..-1.
Sanders. :\liss .-\. F. E., T11e JJ/,,d.:!1c·c1t/1 J/1:~1t .,dwo!_. u·,111_rss R,1.1d, .,.E.
Sanderson, F. \\·., l'/te .')'dwo!, Ound!e. ,\'ort/1c1111pt,1JL_d1ir,.
tSandys, J.E .. Litt.D., \'.P.\ .!Icrt,"1 Jf,,w,. C,wti>n<1i{,'·
tSandys, :\Irs., .JI,·rt,111 Hous,·, C,wzbri,~,.:,.
Sarg-int, H.J. J .. 12 :,;1.J,1111t·s', Sq11,1r,·, S.11·.
Sawyer, Re\". H. ,\. 11., :-,'d100! Jl,,usc, St. E,·,s, c·u111!1,·1 !-111d.
-r*Saycc, Rev. Prof.,\. H., LLD. \'.I' .. S, Cki/1110·., Cr,-,«·nt, F,,!in!1ur,.:/1.
tScaranunga, .-\. P.,
Scholderer, J. Y .. British .lfust'l!m, rr·.c.
Schr,1der, Prof. H., l ·ni,•,rsitat, /111Lsbrud,. Trr,,!.
Schultz, R. \Veir, 6, .lf1111tie,•ille PIil,·,•, lV.
Schuster, Ernest, I::. Harrin,,.:ton G<1rdo1s, S. Ti·.
Scouloudi, Steph,rnos, A !ltt'lls, Gree,-,._
Scull, :\Iiss Sarah A .. S111dlzjh1rt, Jf,A-t',111 C,,. /',t .. l ·.s.A.
Sca,;er, Richarcl B., ,· ,, Bari11.:,·· JJJ"tis. and Ct,., 8, lJi:,·ill>j,.,:,:c1tt' Stred II ·;1J11n, 1:.C.
Seale, RcL E. G., Sd10,1/ Jfous,-. h?,.:-Jz_,;·<1/,,_ 1\T.
Secker. \\'. H .. Ck1pdt!t,,,p,: J/a!!, II 'll/;,jtdd.
SceLohm, Hu:;h. l'i~rnd,-r·, End, 11t·,1r JhtJtin.
Seltman, E. J., A'i11_,.:-/zo,·, Cr,·,1t IJ,·rk/t,1111.,!t-d. /J,.rts.
tSelwyn, Rev. E. C., D.D .. Sd100! lfom,·. (jj>i11.J1,r111
Shadwell, C. L., IJ.C. L.. /'n1,•o.,·t o/ /lrid C,1/le,;e, Oxr:,rd.
Sharpe. :\Iiss Catharine, .V,w,·1·,-nyr. F!str,·,·. /1,·rlr. ·
Shaw~er. J ..-\., Ermy.,t,·d', 1-;r,11nm,rr Sd101>!, .',/:ij,t,,11 .
Shc,tr, :\Irs., 509, //~-st 12211d Strt'd, _V,-"' J ;,,-/,:. l ·.s.. /.
Sheepsh,1nks, .-\. C., J;;/1'11 C,,!!,·g,. /f'111dsor.
Shepp,ucl, J. T.. A'lll,,.: s Co/!,:_,.:-,·, t ·,r111bn1(,.:,·.
Shern·ell. John\\' .. .,;1d/en· 11,i!!, C!Lc·<1p,1dc, l:·.c.
Sherwood, F. \\' .. 3. /Jrid Court, .Jfidd!,· J~·mp!,·. 1:·.c.
She\, an, A!cXcmdcr, S,·t'/10/ St . .-/ ndr,',,'.J, 1-i'k.
Shipley, II. S .. C.\U ;., .V. lfdo1·,. Coll,r,,.:·,·. ·(.:,,,,!;•i!I,·. Lo,·,·,tff.
Shoobridge. Lcona1 d, 33. /', 111/ Y!r,·,·t, .'·,.If·.
Shove, Miss E., 25. St .. 11,rrl..-,· Cr,·,·,·,·11!, f,'c·,·,·11{, /',rr/,. _\·. u·.
Sid:;\, ick, .,\rthur. CJ/'/J/11· Cltri,ti C,,/1,:,.:,·. 1i.1J;1rd.
Sikes, Ecl\\·ard Ernest Council . .,t. J,,1tn·, (_ ·,,/!,;,..--,·, C, 1111 (, 11 ,(,.:,·.
Silcox. :\Iiss. Jl<,.:!t S,·lt,,1,ff,>r 1;;r1,. rr:·,t fiuh·1J1 . .s.F.
Sills, II. H .. /J,,ur/,111. If',·,t R,,ad. C1111!il'id,.:,·.
Simpson. Pere!·, St. I i/,r;•,-·, Gr,1111111,11 ,-, It,,,,;, /'.,,, •.·r /!rid',',', s F.
Si1nps011. l'rofessor. 3, Hno1,;,•i,·!.- l'l,t.,'. N,,,..·,nt', /' 1r/;. _\-.fl·.
+Sing. J. \I., S. Fd:,'dn{, .,·, !too!. I !_if,;-,/. ·
*Skrine, Re\·. J. H., ft, ltc·11 S/1>!.-,· R,c/,,;T, . Jir,·,-1;,rd. / f, 111 ts.
Slater. I:. \'., Ft, 111 C,,/f,·,:,. I I 'ilid"'r. - .
 XX\V

Slatf'r, Ho1\·arcl, S!. Hud,•,111 i-. De,'c)Jlporl.

Slater. .\Iiss \\' . .\I.., r, .\'t.J,,hns 11/ood P,tr/.: . . Y. [[,~
Sloane, .\Iiss Eleanor, 13, rI 'dj,,rd R,,,,d. L,i, ,·stt'F.
ttSinith, .\. H.umlton, \'. l'. ', 22, E11ds!dgh :-.trc·d, u·.c.
Smith, Cecil, LLD. \'.P .. 62, R11t!,111d !J,,t,-, S.ll'.
+Smith, l'rof. l;uldwm, ltll' 0·r,uz,:·<'. 1;1ro11to. L',111,,d,1.
Smith, H . .-\.. , fi,_i:d,c•,,,1/f, Tl1c· P,rrl. l '/1dtai/1,1m.
Smith, H. Babington, CB., C.S.I., 29, 11yd, Air!.· r7.,t,. S. [[~
S1rnth, :-- O\\'ell, Soutli,i;i1!,· C,1n1cT, l r·111d1c's!cr.
Smith, R. Elsey, R,,sc,1;,1rth, lf:rld,,11 Ro,1d. H,,nd!. rr;,:•i11<··
Smith-Pearse, Re\·.::-. :'\. H., Th,· Coll,:,;,·. F},wn.
+Snow, T. C.. St. John's Co!lqr,·, /i_q;,rd.
+Somerset, .--\nhur, C,1stll' G,1ri11_1;·. lf',,rt/1i1z,·.
Sonnenschein, I-'rof. E . .-\., 7, H,,r11s!e1· Ro,rd. J/irmin-.;I: !111.
Souter, l'rof. :\lex., 2+, Cllcz(font Ro,1d. !J,f •rd.
Sowels, F., LM!lt College, B,t//t.
Spiers, R. Phene, 21, Bernard Str,·d. Nus,·,!! .,·q11,11·,, ll ·.,_'.
Spilsbury, .--\. J., Ci~i· of L,111don S,/1,,,,1. li,t,,n,1 Fmi•.•1dm.'11t. F.1_·_
Spooner, Re\". \V ..--\., /['urd,·11 ,f .\',,,· 1.·,,1/,':_,',' 1 1.,f,rd.
Stanford, C. Thomas,
Stannus, Hugh, 2+, J",,rk Hou"'· llt;,;l1/Jit1y Cr,·,,c'nl. . \·.
Stanton, Clurles H., Fzdd l'l,1<",', .',tr,,ud. Gf,,u,·,·st,rc/1ir,.
Statham. H. Heathcote, 1, C,1111/i T·;,,,', II 'i/1//i!,d,,n C,1111111,,n. SIil ✓ c'/'.
tStawell, .\!1ss F . .\[elian, +4, IV,·st/1oun1t· /',,rl r·;11 !,., u-.
Steel, Charles G., Re1rl:1· A'<'ad, Ru,,;i,y.
tSteel-.\Iaitland, .--\. D .. 72, C,1dogan Sq. S. If'.
Steel, D., 23, Homer Stred, .-J.t/12ns.
Steele, Dr., 2, [Tia Pi,·o dd/,i Jlzr,lllJ,,/,,, J-1or,·11c,.
Steele-Hutton, .\Iiss E. l'., 62, C!o,·dh- Jf,11uz, 111,. c;r,~1.-, Inn R,1 1,I. 11-.c ·.
Stephenson, Rev. F., Sd1uol H,w.,,, r·',:ht,·d, E;s,T.
Stevenson, .\Iiss E. F., Elt/1,zm 1..;,,ur!, E!t/1,u11. A-, 11/.
Stewart, .\Irs. H. F., Tlte Jlalti11.,· JJ,,u_,,-, C,wu',nd<e-
~te\\·art. Prof. J. _--\., C/1nst /..'lwrJ1. 1.).1/,;-J.
Stu~don, Ee\. Ed:,;,1r. H,11-rc,,,,-,,;z-t,1,_•.fiill
Stogdon. J.. / l,1rr,,,,,-on-tl1c·-Hzfl.
Stone, Re\". E. D .. .·lbingdon.
Stone, E. \\'., Eton Coif,:,·,·, IT't11d" 11.
Storcv-:\laskeh-nc, X. If.\\-.. F.R.S .. /;,r"d J),,:,•11 f/,,1,,c". l!>, 111<:!{,,,1, .,:.·111d.. n
Storr: Rev. \'e~non F., Tltc R,·d,•rl', H,·,rd!,oun1c-I/',,,·t.'11·. II :nJ:,·,/,·r.
Strachan-Davidson, J. L., Jl,11!,r ,:( fl,r!!i, 1/ L',,//i,'·,·. 1 J.,:r;,r,I.
Strong. .\Irs. S Arthur, LLD .. Litt.I>. Council. 5S .. \, :,• C,r, ,·11d1"' ,<t;·,d, !',,, t/ u1d
Pia,,, If'.
Struthers, John, C.D., Do,',r Hou,·,·, ff'/11/c'h,1!!. S. /['.
Sturgis, Russell, 307, Fa"t li//1 Strdl. ,\-,·~,, 1 ·,,,i.·.
Surr, \\'atson, ;7. Old Hr,,ad Str,·d, F.1.·
Sutton, Leon.1rd, Hillsid,-. R,·,rdzn.,.
tSykes, .\Iajor I' . .\Iole,"orth, .ll,•"/1,·d..\-.F. l',·n-1,,. ,·1,i /l.ri!ll ,•nd .·hl.-,,·,,,J.
Tait, C. \\' ..\., i•J. C,,/int,,n N.,•,rd. 1,·,11ni,//J:<l1.
tTancock, Re\". C. C., U.D.
Tarbell, Prof. F. ll., [ ·ni,•enilr' ,,( (-Iii,'(<''· 1.'!ti,- r;,', I ii .. f ·..<. l.
Tarn, \V. \V., .Jl,11ozt,,;,-rc1!d, JJin,;·,,,,rlf, .V.ll.
Tath,llll, H. F. \\'., J:t,m c,,!!e,c;,, ll'i11J,,,r.
l'atton, R. ( ;., 60, Lt'i11st,·r .'iqu,rr,·, ll ·.
Tavler, :\[1ss :\L1r~arct, R,,r,r/ H,,/f,,7,•,n- C,,/!c',,'. 1-:,,;!,!/ll.
t1'a~·lor, l{e\·. Cha;les, 1).1)~. J[1lSlc'r 1~/ .-..·1. /1>/uz \- c·, 1,':',-<1.- 1_· Ult"r1,/...,,t'.
Ta;·lor, :\liss .\I. H.. ...J ,td! f,/,,u,c', C!tdt,·1t!1,w1.
Temple, \\'., 8, A',·blc: N,,,1d. 1>.1J;,rJ.
Tennant, .\Ii,s L. E., 19. 1;·1e JJ,,//,,11,. S. lf'.
 Thackera\·, H. St. Tohn, 18. R,,ru/ A,·c1111e. Cltd>'t'11, .,.11·.
Thomas. \\·. H., The "Ycss, Ro,;1a11 R,,ad, Li11tl1/lrpc. Jliddksi,,,r,w,;lt.
tThompson. :,[iss Anna Boynton, Tl/{/ytr A.cadem_1·, Soutlt Bn1i11tr,-<' .. 1/,"-s .. l ·.s ..-1.
Thompson. F. E. 'Council·. 16, PrimrNC Hi!! R{lmf, .\: 11·.
Thompson, Sir Herbert, Bart., 9, A·e11si1z[;t/lJ1 Par!. G,rrdms. :.;_If·.
Thompson. :,Iaurice, c;ar!ands, R,-dlti!I, ."-'urr,:J'.
Thomson. A. Douglas. Litt.D., q. A.<'h•in T>ri',•c. J{d,·imid,· .\·.. (;/,1,:,:,,,, ..
Tiddy, R. J. E., C11h1,-rsity Colkgc, 0.1/ord.
Tilley. Arthur, A'ini/s Co!lt:,;,·, Camf>ri,(,;L
+Tod, :,larcus X. 1'Council ·, Orid Co!kge, 0.1/i>rd.
Tolstoi. Count John (Junior\ T,1s. Ost,.; line, lwu.,·t' ".! ••'-.'!. l'd,n!•!IJ:C:- Ru.,,1,•.
To,rnsend. Re\·. Charles. St. fJ,,1111,,·_,· Col!,:,;·e, St. Asaj>/1.
*+Tozer, Re\'. H. F., 18, },,,r/1am G,1rd,:ns. O.iji,rd.
*tTuckett. F. F .. Frenck~J', 11t·t1r llri.,t,,/.
Tudeer, Dr. Emil. .l-Ie!si,z,;Ji>rs, Finl,mJ.
+Turnbull. :,Irs. Pe,·eril. S,u11(1·-Rr,,e!: .ff,,/!.. l.,lti•<'ttn1c·.
TYier, C. H., R.,,ss11I! Sdw,,!. Flt'dz,,,,,,,f.
T;·lor, Prof. E. B .. D.C.L., F.R.S., Tit, JJ11,·,11m .fiuust', li.i}•nl.
Tyrrell. l'rof. R. Y., Litt.D .. D.C.L.. LL. D. · \·.l'. ·. Trinizr C,,/lc:v·- 1 Ju/o/in.
Underhill, G. E., Jf,~,;-da!m C,,!!,g,·. (_!_iferd.
l.i pcott. Re\'. A. \V., Cltris(:,· Hospit,il. u ·,·st J-li,rslt,w1.
C pcott, L. E. Tlte Co!!e;;e, .JJ,rrf(,,,r,,11,,;k
C re, Percy ]\,. Unh•ersi{v L1>/I,:,:<'. (_ ~rrdijf.
t\·aughan, E. L.. Et,,,1 C,,f!c-;;,·, ll'indsor.
\'aughan, \\'. \\'., Gigglesz,•id: Sd1i,ol, .!)d//t', 1 ·orl,:s.
\'errall, A.\\' .. Litt.D., Trilli{\' c,,11,::;,·. Caml1ri1(,;,·.
\'errall, :.\Irs. A. \\'., Sehyn (;ardens. Cam/,n',(i;c.
t\'iti de :-Iarco, :-Iarchesa di, l',t!a::::u (lrsini, Jfente S,1,·d/,,, Rcme.
\'lasto. :.\Iichel P. I:!, A/Ile des Capudns, Jlarsci/ks.
t\'lasto, T ...\ .. H/Jue,·aine, S,ft,lJI Par!..-. J_iz-crpe, 1!.
\\·ace ...\. T. B., Cah•,-rtu11 Heus,, .,t,,m· .,·tr11tfi,rd.
t\\·ackern;gel, Prof. Jacob. Tl1c· Unh•,;·.,-i(r, (;,,ttini.;,·n. G,Tmt11n·.
\\.ade, Annigel de,-.. Tltc Cnft H/Jus,·. Hmfidd, .~11,s,-x.
\\.ade, Charles St. Clair, T1~ft's Cel!,;t:;,'. Jlass .. C.S.A.
t\\·agner, Henry. 13, H,r!f Jlo,l/1 .'-tr,·d. n·.
t\\'aldstein, Prof. Charles. Ph.D., Litt.D .. L.H.D. (\'.l' .. A·in,;;·.,. Ce,'ft':/, C,unbrid,c.
\\.alke1, :.\liss D. L., Rcgmt Lodge, Heading!q. I.c,·d,·.
\\.alker, Re,·. E. ?IL. Qll<'Clz's c,,/1,;:;,·. 0.1_-/imi.
\\'alters, Henry Beauchamp (Council\ British Jl11s,'lt/ll. lT'.C.
\\'alters, :-!rs. L. H .. I,, Cardin11l JJ,111si()ns, Car/_J'ic" J'laff. S. n·.
\\.alters, Prof.\\·. C. Flamsteacl, 3, Dou,,;-/m Hrl//sc. :lf,,id11 Hill Il'cst. II:
\\'arc!, Arnold S .• 2j, Grt'S,'l'll<'r !'!ace, S. IT:
*\\'ard. A. \\· .. Litt.D .. Jlas!,-r /lf l'dcrlt,i11sc, C,w1/>ri,(:.,'<'-
\\'arcl, John. J.P., Fi1n1inglmm, A"m!.
\\'arc!, T. H .. 25, Cn>s,•,:11er 1'!11,-,._ S. TI'.
\\·arner, Re\'. \\'m .. 6. Cricl..- RMd. 0.1_-/i,nl.
\\'arr, :,[rs., 16. E,rrls l~·rrac,·. A'<'ltsin_i:tun, n ·.
t\\'arre, Re,·. Edmond, D.D., D.C.L., C.B .. .111111,ir H,,11:,·c. Fi11dtl1amps!<'1rd. /Jo-1.-s.
\\·arren, E I' .. Lcz,•,·s H()11sc, LcZc•,·s. Sus.l'c.i.
\\. arren, :\!rs. Fiske. 8. Jf,,11J1! I ,'J'ltoll 1'!11,-c. /i'ust,,,1, C.S.A.
\\·arren. T. H .. lJ.C.L., l'rcs1d,·nt ,f JJ11gd,1!<'J1 C/lllc_:;c. U.1/ord.
\\.aterficlcl, Re\'. l{., JJ,intpdli,·r /.(!<(,;,·. Cltdtcn/1,1m.
\Y,ttcrhouse, 1:c1,1 in, Fdde1111'h', near Dl'rl..-i11x.
E,z,,·
\\'atcrhouse, :\Ii,s :'IL E.. j<J. Lr111c. JJ,·o-p,,,,/.
\\'atson, :'II rs .. 17 l11,1fd .'lrt"t'I, (;rt1sz•o1,>r l'/,,,-, . .,. I l;
\\-,tbon, \\·. J.. 6, l·icteria 7~-r,a,-,·. h1,'tTJ1<·,·:,·.
*\\·ay. Re"- J. l' .. D.D .. Tl!<· /hi!. N,,."·,tll. l'it-d,,,,,,J.
\\'ebb, C. C. J., Jf,1",;d,1!01 Coll,:,·,-, Oxt:•1-d.
t\\'ebe!·. F. l' .. :.\l.IJ .. 19. ff,n·/,1· .,tr.·, t. n ·.
 \\'eber, Sir Hermann, :\1.D., 10. C"n 1.,·,·,·11,>r .'·,tree/, fl'.
\\"ebster, Erwin \\'entworth. lVi,d/211m C()ff,:i;,·, 0.ijurd.
\Yedd, N., King's C()fl,:1;,·, Caml>rirf.,;<".
\\·edd, :\1rs. ~-, Tit,· ,1fill Hous,·. Dr<1ntd1ot,-r, C11111bri,(,;<".
\\'eld-Blundell, Herbert, Rr,,ok's Club, St. Jam,:s Street, S. ll·.
t\\·elldon, The Right Re\·. Bishop, Tl1t· Dc1111t·1:1·. Jl11nd1t"sler.
\\'ells, C. :\I., Hton Cell,'gc, Tf'indser.
\\-ells. J., lVadllilm Coll,:s-,·, 0.1furd.
\\'ells. R. Douglas, 171, {J11ff1z's Gate, S. 11:
\\·elsh. :\liss S. :\I.,,· o R. E. Emson, Esq .. 1, llt!/l·id,· Ro,1d, 7it!.,c flt!! P11rl. S.11·.
\\" erner, C. .\., llarrm, 1 Sdwol, Harr,,;,, en·llti·-Jlil/.
\\'estlake, Prof. J., LL.D .. Tlh· Rizw· Jli.11ts,·, C/1ds,a EJ11ht11b11,nt. .,. u·.
\Vhately. A. P .• .J., Sout/1,, id, Crcs<"cnt. Jlydi: l'ar/.:, n ·.
1

\\'heeler, Benjamin Ide, l'r,·szdcnt t(( tlzc Cnfreni(v of California, Berldq, Clli.. c·.s.A.
\\"heeler. Prof. James R., Ph.D., Colum(,ia Coll,:,;,-. 1V,·,,• J"i 1rl.- City. U.~'·A.
\\'hibley. Leonard. P,·mbr()/..·,· Coll,:,;,·, Cambridge.
\\"hite. Hon. :\Irs . ...\.. IJ., Cornell L izi,.•crsi(I'. lt/111,·,,. C.S..-1.
\\'hite, J. N'., Rod-land, ll,,toford.
t\\"hitehead, R.R., lV()Odsted-, C!ster Co .. :V. L C.S ....J..
\\'hitelaw, Robt., Tlze Sdl{le/, Ru_,;by.
\\-hit\\·orth, :\. \\"., EtNz Coll<:,;,·. ll"indsor.
\\"ickham, The \"ery Rel". E. C.. lite De,,11c·1y. Lin" 1!11.
\\"ilkins, Re\·. George, 36, Trini(r Coll,:i;e. Dublin.
\\'ilkinson, Herbert, IO. Ormt' Square. n·.
\\'illiams, A. :\Ioray, Heda/cs SL°h,,ol, Pdersfidd. H,1111,.
\\'illiams, T. Hudson. Cni'i'ersi(t' Coll,:i;,·, B,m,,:,1r.
\\'illis, J ...\nnine, 6, .ll11r!ocs R,wd, A'cnsi11,,;h>n. u ·.
\\'ilson, Captain H. C. TI .. Cn:ft,w Hall. Cnft,,11, 11<"<11 II ·,tf.:,:fidd.
\\"ilson, :\liss, i..aklt,1111, E,1stl>e1111;c.
t\\-inchester, The Right Rn·. the Lord Bish0p of. D.D. l,1ni/1,w1 C,,.,t!e. Suu,y.
\\"indley, ReL H. C., St. C/2,11fs. JJ01slzi1m. l;11!t'sk·ad I'll· T_t'Jh'.
\\'inkworth, l\Irs .. H,1//_1· f..,,,(1;e. C11mjdo1 Hi!!, II'.
\\'iseman, Rev. Henry Jo!m . .\,ri;·dl>r Redorr, lfun1,,1,t!c"
\\'ood, ReL \\". S .. Ljfi,rd R,·do1y, St,wtj,,rd.
\\·oodhouse. Prof.\\". J.. 7 /z,· Cniz·,-rsi(r, .\J'dn,y.. \·.s.11·.
t\\·oods, Rev. H. (;., D.D., ,I/aster's 11011st', 7,·mf!,·, E.C.
\\·ood11·ard, A. :\I.. (()/'nil n,,,,,f;:,.,,rrd, S11,,fl,· C/11/,, l'1(uU!tl!y, 11·.
\Vodward, J>rof. \\". H., :/1,·i!e Cluf>. l'i,·,·,rdt/l_l', 11 ·.
\\' oolley, C. L., Ashmo!,'!111 Jlus,·11111. I i.1j, 1rd.
\\·right. F ..-\.. Jlil! Hill ,\(ltt>ol. Jfi!I Hi!!,.\·. If'.
\\'right, l'rof. John Henry, LL.D .. fl11r,'c1rd Cm,·t'rs1{r. C1m/,1idt;,·. J/11'-'·· C..'- ..·l
t\Vright. \\". Aldis, l'ic,•.Jlaskr. Trim~1· Cull<;~'<'. C.r11u',n,(v·-
\\"roth, \\'. \\-., Hritis!t .ll11s,·11m. lV.C.
tWyndham, Rev. Francis :\I.. St. JJ,11:i' ,f tlte An_,;d.,. l r ·, .,tm,,rd,,n,I Rt'11d. /!,ry., ,,,,110. J.-V.
\\'ynne-Finch, :\Iiss Helen, Till· .lf111wr I/um,, ,',fl'/,:,·,!c:1·. 1·,,1 !.:.,.
tWyse. \\'., Halford, Sltipston-1JJ1-Sto11r.
Yeames, •.\. H. S., ,· ,, G. F. Ht!!. Fsq .. Brilts/2 .llmo1111. ll:l·.
Yorke, Y. \\·., F11rri11_,;:d,l/l If'or!.:s. S/2,,e Lme, E.C.
Young-, \\'illiam Ste1Yart. ::o, J/011t,1_,;H Sq1111r,·. ll'.
tYule, :\Iiss Amy F., Tarradale House. N,,,·.,·-,·ltir,· ..,,·,,ti,111,i.
Zimmern. A. E., :\'c,,• C,,fk1;·e. 1 ix!iird.

.','TUDE.\T .-JSSOCLl TE.\.

lJodcl, C. H., Ci<1,•dl_v L 1>tt,1.,;e, 11·rcxlw111.
0

Preedy, J. n. K .. JO, R,;i;mt Sq11,rr,·. rr·.c.

Shields, :\Its., qG, P,,rtman .llan.,i,,11s. B,r!..t'r :,"fr,·<'/. II:
Speyer, Ferdinand, Ri,(~';·hurst. S/201/q. //,_·rt,.
Symonds, H. H., Orid Coll,:,;,·, O.iJi 1rd.
 .\\\I tit

LIST OF LIBlL\RIES ::,l·ll::,CR!Bl~G Fl)R THE JOCR~.\L OF

JIELLE~IC STL"DIES.

Aberdeen, The l"1111·ersity Library.

Aberystwyth, Tbe l'nffer,ttY College of \\.,des.
Bedford, Bedford .\ns Club.
Birmingham, The Centr.d Free Libr.1r:. R,if, !i/f,: l'l<1cc·. !Jin1ii11_.;k1111 :\. 1 ·.1pcl :>h,1w,

Esq ..
The L"ni1 Lbtt1 ,,i Birm111gh.1m.
Bradford, The Free L1bran: ,me! :\rt :\luseurn. f),rrl,:I' Slr,d, J:r,u(r;,rJ.
Bristol. The L1brc1r:· of l·1111·ers1ty College. Hri,·1<>1.
Clifton, The Library of Cl1ft,1n College. C!{/io11. llrislu!.
Cambridge, The FttL11 tll1am .\rch,1e<>lngic,\l :\I useum .
., The Ctrton Cnllege Librciry.
The L1br.,ry of Kmg's Co!;ege.
The Library of St. Jolm·s College.
The Library of Trinity College.
-r The l'ni,·ersity Library.
Cardiff, The l"ni,·ersity College of South \\",des. C.rrdiff
Charterhouse, The Libr.ir,· of Ch,utcrh<'use School, c,,J,r/mi11g.
Dublin, The King·s Inns I~1brary.
The Xational Library of Irelctncl.
The Royal Iri,h A.caclerny.
+ The Library of Trinity College.
Durham, The Cathedr.11 Library.
The l"ni1·ersit,· I.1br.1r,·.
+Edinburgh, The .\choc:ne; Lil;r.1r:··
The Selbr .111cl (;onclh,nt L1br.1ry. l"m,·,rjily. Edi11.i/ll;,!t.
Eton, The College LtiJr,iry. Lton C,11lege. /l'indsur .
•, The Uoys· Libr.ir:·, Eton College. II "i11ds,,r.
Glasgow. The l"ni,·ersity Librar:··
Harrow, The Schon! Libr.1ry. /1,rrr,,:,•, .\·. TI~
Holloway, The Roy,11 Holln1L1y L'ollege. Fi;l1,w1 ..\11rr,'.J'.
Hull, The Hull Public LilJraries.
Leeds, The Leeds Libr,lry. c·,,111111,·r, 1,t! .\/rc•d. f_,·,d,.
,, The Public Libra1 ,·.
Liverpool, The Free L1br:ary.
London, The Society of .-\nuquarics. /!urli11<!,,11 11,'lfs,. I/·.
The Athenaeum Club. !',ti! .11,ril..\.Tl'.
t The British :'lltheum. lf'.C.
The Department of Creek .111d Rom,rn .\ntil1uittcs. /Jri/1,/1 Jftr,,u11:. / f .. C
"I he Bur!i'.lgton Fine . \rt, Club, .,,r,•1/i- Ruz,•. Tl·.
The L1br,uy of 1..:in:,(s Colle~e. S!nrud. 11'.C.
The London Library . .,1. j,1111c·s s :•.;qu,1r,'. S. If:
" The ()xforcl .me! Cambnd_.;e Club. r'o :\Iessr,. H,uris,rn an l Son,, .+5• /',di
_)[,,/!. Tl'.
The Reform Club. !',,!! .1/,r!i. \. u ·.
The RP: ,1! I nstitut1nn .. I /!,,111,1ri, Sir,·d, TI·.
Tnc Srnn Cnllege L1brc1r1·. f ·1, t,,ri,1 l:'111/1,111k11tc1J!. /, (. ·.
The l.tbran·. nf St. l',utl·, School. lf~·st Kw,111,•t,,11 ., //:
,, The Library, / 1·,·,·t111iml,r .\, It,,<>!. ,\. f 1·.
Manchester. The l·hetham, L1br,lr:·· llu11t, /i,111l .. 1/<111,ft.·,/,r
 Manchester, The <;rammar School.
The John Rylands Libr.u-y.
\'ictoria l'ni\·crsity.
,, The \\'hitwoi th Institute.
Newc1stle-upon-Tyne, The Public Library. Xe",,' 1:,·1-i.;,
Oxford, The Library of .~ii Souls Colle_c;c.
The Library of R,lliol Cullege.
t The Bodlcian Library.
The Library of Christ Church.
The Junior Library. Corpus Christi C,_-llc:~c.
" The Library of I:xeter College.
:\Ieyrick L1 br.ir:. Jcsus College.
The Library of Keble College.
The Library of Lmcoln College.
The Library of :\"cw Colle:,:e.
The Library of Oriel College.
The Library nf C2ucen·s College.
The Library of St. J ohn·s Colle:,:e.
,, The Library of Trimty College.
,, The U ni\·ersity Galleries.
,, The L'nion Society.
,, The Library of \\'orcester College.
Preston, The Public I.ibraiv and :'l[useum. l'r,·st,,n.
Reading, The Library of L:ni\·crstt:· College. R,,,1d111•.:.
Sheffhld, The L'nivcr,ny Library, Sltcf!idd.
St. Andrews, The l'ni\·ersity Library, :.;1_ .·lndr,·,,•.,·, .\ .. B.
Uppingham, The Library of L'ppingham School. Sd1,,,,f r1<>11.,,.
York, The York Public Libr.1r:·, J'<,rf.-.

COLONIAL.
Adelaide, The l'ni1·ersny Library, Add,1id,·, ,\ . •--ludr,r/i,t.
ChristchurP;h. The Library of Cantcrbur:· College, Clms!Jwr,!1, .\·.z.
Melbourne, The Public Library. .lfdh,11n1c. l ·1d/ln,1.
Montraal, The :\lc(;t11 L'ni\·e~sity Librar:·, Jf,,11/r,·,1!. C,r;1,1d<1.
Sydney, The Public Librar:·, .\i·d11,:r..1·<',,' So11t!t rr:r/,,.
Toronto, The Uni1·ersity Library. J;m,nli-.
Wellington, The General .\sscmbly Libr,u-y. ll'd!i11_;t,,11 .•\·.z.
U~VJTED S7:1 TES UF .LllEJUC..J.
Albany, The :\"e1\· York State Librar:·, .·1/!,,u{r, ,\',-,,, i·,,r!.-. C.S..·/.
Allegheny, The Cirnegie rrec Library, .·l!l,:,:!10(1'. J',r., C.S .. l.
Amherst, The .~mherst College Libr.u-y, .1 llllt,·r.'1. .J/<1., , .. l ·.s..-1.
Berkeley, The Cni1·ersity Libr,iry. Bo-1.·d,y. t',dtj,,rm,r. c·.s..-1.
Baltimore, The Enoch Pr.Ht Library, R,dlzlll,,r,·, l ·.s..--J.
,, The Library of Johns Hopkins L'ni\C'.rsit), /.'.rl!i111,,r,·.
,, The Pe,1body Institute, H,r!!ill1<'r,·, C.S ..-1.
Boston, l\Iuseum of Fine .\rts, B,,st,,11, C.S .--1.
,, The Public Libr.iry, JJ,,ston. l ·.s.. /.
Brooklyn, The Drook!: n l,1stitme nf ,\rts ,1.ml Science,. !?r,,, 1/.-{l'n. C.S .. I.
Brunswick, The Bm1doin L'ollcge Librar:·· Rnm,·,,•1cl.-.. lf,,111c·. ['.., .•--/.
Bryn Mawr, The Bryn :\Lrn-r College Library, H1:l'n JI ,:,·r. l',1., l ·.s..--J.
Chicago, The Le11·i., I nstitutc, C!1i,-,1_,;-c1, Illi11,,1s, l:. :-,· .. 1.
,, The C ni versity of Chica;~o l'ress. C/1i,·".s'", f!li11,,i,. l ·..-.·. I.
Cincinnati, The Public Library. Cincim1,rli. C.S .. I.
,, The l' ni1·ersity Libr.uy. i..111,i11l!,1!1. C.., .. l.
Clinton, The Hamilton College Libr,iry, C!intc>ll ..\',,u l ·,,;i·. I·..\ ..·}.
Colorado, The U nive1 sity of Color,1C!o, c·,,1or, 1d,,. [ ·.. \ .. 1.
Detroit, The Public L1br,1ry. /idr<'il, ( ·..\ .. 1.
Grand Rapids, The Public Library, (;rand Rapids, Jfidu::;·a11, c·.., ... J.
Hanover, The Dartmouth College Library. Ht.m,,1,,·r, c·.s.A.
Harvard, The Harvard College Library, Ci1111bri,zt_;,·. Jlass., C.S.A.
Illinois, The Library of the l"ni\·er5ity of Illinois, Crbaniz, Illinois, c·.s.A.
The X orth-\\"estern l. ni\·ersity Library, If ~msf()n, ll!fn()is, U.S.A.
[owa, The State l;ni,·ersity of Iowa, lo,,'a, l:s.A.
Ithaca. The Cornell Cniversity Library, ltlwc,z, .\"t',t' Vi>rk, l,:S.A.
Jersey City, The Free Public Library, Jers,:l' Ci~r . .\",·,,, jt"1".,·,:1•, C.S ..-l.
Kansas, The G ni,·ersity of Kansas, i..tfo'rm,-e, C.S ..·1.
Lowell, The City Library, Lo-z,-d!, .llass., l :s.A.
Michigan, The Uni\·ersity Library, Jlidu::;,m, C.S.,..J..
The State Library, Jlid1ig,m. c·.s.A.
Middleton. The Library of the \Yesleyan Cni,·ersity, .llidd!don, Conn., c·.s.A.
Missouri, The l7niversity Library of State of ::\Iissouri, Columbia, Jfi:,rouri, c·.~,·.A.
Mount Holyoke, The :\Iount Holyoke ColJege, S,wt/1 Hadley, .llass., C.S.A.
Nashville, The Library of Vanderbilt l"nivcrsity, .\',1slt,1ille, Tenn., C.5..1.
New York, The Library of the College of the City of Xew York, iV.:w l~Yk, C.S.A.
The Library of Columbia Cni\·ersity, Xe,e Vi>r,:\ CS.A.
The :\letropolitan :'.\luseum of .-\rt, _\',1t• Vi>r,t C.S.A.
,. The Public Library, Xe·w J',,rk, C.S ..-1.
Northampton, Smith College Library, .Yorthampt,,11, .llass., C.S .. 1.
Ohio, The \\·esleyan l'ni\·ersity, Dda,ua,,., Oltio, C.S ..4.
Philadelphia, The Library Company. l'l1i!addpl1it1, CS.•-l.
The Library of the l: ni\·ersity of Pennsyh-ania, l'hiladdphia, Pa., c ·.s.A.
Pittsburg, The Carneg:e Library, Pittsbm:,;; P<1., C.S.A.
Poughkeepsie, The \'assar Library, Poi(£:ltkeej>sie, .\·,w J'i,rk, C.S.•-1.
Rhode Island, The Brown l"ni\·ersity, l'ro,•idmc,\ Rhodt' Island. C.S.A.
Sacramento, The California State Library, St1Jam<'11I<', Califor11i,1, CS.A.
St. Louis, The :\fercantile Library Association, St, Louis, Jlo, CS.A
Swarthmore, S\\·arthmore College Library, S,,,art/1mort·, Pa., C.S.A.
Syracuse, The Fni\·ersity Library, S;nzt'US<', 1Vezu 1·ork, C.S.A.
Washington, The Librar~ of Congress, lf"as/1i11,,:to11, C.S.A.
Wellesley, The Wellesley College Library, ll'e!!csley, .llass., U.S.A.
Williamstown, The Williams College Library, lf'il!iamstown, Jlass., C.S ....J.
Worcester, The Free Library, lf'orccslt'r, Jfass., C.S.A.
Yale, The Library of Yale Fnh·ersity, 1\'c,,•lw,•en, CS.A.
A USTRld-HUNGAR J~
Budapest, Antikencabinet des l'ngar. National-:\Iuseums, Budapest, J/1111.5111;·.
Czernowitz, K. K. "Cnin:rsit;its-Bibliothek, C::crne;;_,if::, Bukc,zeina, A 11stria Jf1owa1y.
Prague . .-\rchaolog.-epigraphisches Seminar. Cnh-o-sital, Prag-, Bohemia Dr. \Yilhelrn
Klein.
l' ni\·ersiti,ts-Dibliothek, Prag, Bol1011ia.
Vienna, K.K. Hofbibliothck lf'i,·11, rl.mtri,1-lf111zi;a1y.
BELG/CJ/.
Brussels, La Dibliothcque l'ublique, l'alais du Cinquantenaire. Bruxd!es, Be~i,:ium
DE~YJIARA~
Copenhagen, Uet Store Kon::;elike Bibliothck. ei,po1k~i;-,·11, De11111arl.-.
FR.L\"CE.
Lille, La Bibliothcque de !Tim·ersite de Lille. 3. N11,,J,·,r11 Hm·t, J,i!le.
Lyon. La Bibliothcque de \Tni\·ersite, Ly,,11.
Nancy, L'lnstitut cL-\rcheologie. \Tnh·ersit(. Xancy.
Paris. L1 llibliotheque de \'lnstitut de France, P,m,.
La Bibliothcque de IT ni\·ersite de Paris, P<1ri.,
La Bibliothcque des :\I ust:es '.\ ationaux, .lfusee., du LNn-re, f'ari.,.
L, I3ibliotheque Xationale. Ru, de Ridtdieu, l'aris.
La Bibliothcque de !'1\olc '.\ormale Supcrieure, -1,5, Nuc tfU/111, l'arn.
 GER.V,-:LV Y.
:Berlin, Konigliche Bibliothek, B<!rli11.
,, Bibliothck der Koniglichen :.\Iuseen, Berlin.
:Breslau, Ki.inigliche und U niversitats-Bibltothek, Ens/cw.
Dresden, Konigliche Skulpturensammlung, Dr,sdc·11.
Erlangen, Fniversitats-Bibliothek, Erlangm.
Freiburg, L"niversitats-Bibliothek, Freibw::; i. Br. B rdm Prof. StcupJ.
Giessen. Philologisches Seminar, Giesso1.
Gottingen, e niversitats-Biblioth··k, c7i,ttilz,;m.
Greifswald, C niversitats-Bibliothek, Grei.fsz,·a!d.
Halle, C'niversitats-Bibliothek, Halk.
Heidelberg, t; ni versitats-Bibliothek, H,·iddbc·1:,;-.
Jena, U ni\·ersitats-Bibiiothek, johr.
Kiel, :.\Iiinz- und Kunstsammlung der C'ni\·ersitc1t, A-id.
Konigsberg, Konig!. l111d Fniversitats-Bibliothek, A-e11/:;.,/a:::-
Marburg, l.'.niversitats-Bibliothek, Jlarbw:,;.
Munster, Ki.irngliche Paulimsche B1bliothek. Jlunster i. If~
Munich, Konig!. Hof- und Staatsbibliothek. Jlli11d101.
Rostock, C'ni\·ersitats-Bibliothek, Rostod., JltYk!mbur-"··.
Strassburg, Kunstarchaolog. Institut der Univer;,itat, Str,1_,_,.1;w::;- Prof. 'IIid,ac'.is.
,, Universitats- und Landes-Bibliothek, Str<1ssbu1~,:.
Tlibingen, Universitats-Bibliothek, Tubmgm, TTTiirttembo: 15·.
Wurzburg, Kunstgeschichtliches :.\Iuseum der Cni\·ersit:1t, !l"iir::!,111;,;. Bc1,"c1n<1.

GREECE.
Athens, The American School of Classical Studies, .-lt/1c·1/\°.

HO/,L-LH).
Utrecht, L. niversity Library, Ctred1t, Ho!!,111d.

JT.-JL 1'.
Rome, The Amencan School of Classical Studies, ;. l '1,1 l· 1cm::,,. Remc.
Turin, Biblioteca X azionale. Torino, Ita{r.

NORW.-l Y
Christiania, Universitats-Bibliothek, Clzristia11i, 1• •'\-or,,·<1y.

STVEDEl\~
Stockholm, Kong!. Biblioteket, Stod/10!111, 5,.;_•cden.
Uppsala, Kung!. Universitetets Bibliotek, lpjs,r!a ..Y,eedm.

S TVJTZERL-JND.
Freiburg, Universitats-Bibliothek, Freib10:1;, S,,•it::er!,u1<1.
Geneva, La Bibliotheque Publique, Genh·e, S,,,z't::er!and.
Lausanne, L'Association de Lectures Philolo,;iques, Rue l ,rle11ti11 4.J, f_aul'al/ne
(Dr. H. :.\Ieylan-Faure;.
Ziirich, Kantons-Bibliothek, Zi,rfrlz. S,,,it::o-/<111£1.

SYRLJ.
Jerusalem, Ecole Biblique et ..\rcheologique de St. Etienne, Jerusalem.
 xlii

LlST UF JUFR.\AL:-i. &c .. RECEl\"ED I:\ EXCI--L-\:\<;1.: FOR THE

JOUR~.-\L OF HELLEN'IC STUDIES .

.-\mencan Journal uf Arcl1.te,,[ogy (\Iiss .\Iary H. fluckinglum. ff ~Hesley Hills,

.ll, 1 ss., U.S .•--J..:.
American Journal of Philolog-y Library of the Johns Hopkins l- ni,·ersity, Baltimore,
.ll,11:!'land, c·.s.A ...
Analecta BolLmdian:i. Societc des Bollandistes. n 5, /Jou!t','<lrd Jfz!itaire, Hruxe/les.
Annalcs de L1 Faculte des Lettres de Bordeaux Renie des Etudes Anciennes-Bulletin
I

Hispani,1ue--Bulletin Italrcn 1
Redaction des Annalcs ,le la Faculte des
•

Lettres, L' c·11i;;er.,il,, Bord,·,,ux. l·i·,m,t' .

.-\nnales du Senice des .-\ntiquites de l'Egyptc. (_ ·,ur,,.
Annual of the British School at .--1 tlh·11s.
Archiv fur Relig·ionswissenschaft B. G. Teubner, Leipsi,
Berliner Philologische \\· ochenschrift ( 0. R. Reis land, C1rlsstr11s.1c· ~o. L,·ip::i:;, Germany\
Bulletin de Cnrrespondancc Hclknique (published by the French School at A t/1ens).
llullettino della Commissione Archeologic,1 Comunale di Roma (Prof. Gatti, Museo
Capitohno. R1'm, .
llyzantinisc'.,e /.eitschnft l'rof. Ur. K. Krumbacher, .--l.m11!1t·11.dr,1,·s,· 77, Jlii11d1e11,
( ;er11111 np1 · i.

Ephemeris .-\rchaiologikc . .-llitt'lu.

Hermes · Hen Pn,fes,,,r Friedrich Leu, Fried!at·ndo- Tl~:,;·. (;ot/111,;;:11, Gt'r111a11y).
J ahrbuch des k.1b. deutsch. Archaol. Inst1tuts, Corneliusstrasse ;\' o. 2, II , Berlin.
J ahreshefte de, thterreichtschen Arckrnlogischen Institutes, Turkenstrasse 4, l 'ic11na.
Journal of the .-\nthropolog1cal Institute, He1110,'t'r Squaro·.
Journal of the Royal Institute of British .-\rchitects, 9, C{l11d11it Str,'e/, lf~
Journal International d'.-\rch~ologie N nmismatique : .\L J. .\. SYoronos, :.I usee
N,1tional. At/1t'lls,.
Klio (Beitr.1ge zur alten Geschichte). ,_Prof. C. F. Lehmann-Haupt. Ho·lin, IV. 50
3/arbzu:::cr Str,1,-se 6, Germ,my -.
.\Ielanges d'Histoire et d'Archeologie, i,,,/c-fra11(,1ise, l'a/<1:::~,, Fanzese, R,•111c'.
?IIittheilungen des kais. deutsch. Arch,10!. Institute;, At/tens .
.\littheilungen des ka1s. deutsch .-\rchaol. lnstituts, Rom<".
?llnemosyne !co .\Ir. E. J. Brill:, I.eiden, H{lf/and.
N ene J ahrbucher (c ·o Dr. J. II berg), lf ~z!dslmsse 56, I.ap;i:~--.
Xotizie degli Sca,1, R. Accadem1,i dei Lincei, Rcme.
Numismatic Chronicle, 22, .-l!hon<1rle ::;tnd.
l'hilologus. Zeitschrift fur das kbss1sche Altertum ·c 'o Dietrich ·sche \' erlags-
Buchhandlung, Geltin,:,·-01 .
Praktika of the Athe111an .-\rchaeological Society, A.then:,.
Proceedings of the Hellenic Phi!olog1cal Syllogos, Co11sta1ifi}/{>j!t'.
Publications of the Imperial .-\rchaeolog-ical Commission, St. l'etcrsbzox.
Revue Archeolog-ique, r, Rut· Ci,sllli, 1..1- ,.,,, P<1ris.
Revue des Etuclcs Grecques, l'ubhcation Trimestrielle de 1.-\,sociation pour !'En-
couragement des Etudes Grecques en France, Paris.
Rheinisches .\ltbcum fur Plnlolog1e ."Professor Dr. F. Bucheler. SJ111m,11mslrasse, E{lnn-
am-R!tein, 0<"nn,m_i,.
Transactions of the Cambnd,.:·e Philological Society and J om nal of Philology.
\Vochcnsclmft fur k)~s,1schc Phi!1Jlogie <'Berlm ,.
 PROCEED I~ GS.

SESSION 1906-~.

THE First General .Meeting of the Society was held on Xovember 13th,
1906, when the Rev. G. C. Richards read a paper on 'The Ionian Islands
in the Odyssey,' the object of which was to bring before the notice of
English students the theory of Prof. Dorpfeld that by Ithaca Homer in the
Odyssey meant the island later known as Leucadia or (after its chief town)
Leucas, and in modern times as Santa l\1aura. This theory is now
conveniently published in pamphlet form along with a reply to Prof. von
\Vilamowitz (Athens, Beck & Barth). Since the excavation of the sixth
city at Hissarlik, the substantial accuracy of the descriptions of scenery in
the Iliad has been demonstrated, but the Odyssey has presented such
geographical difficulties as apparently to cxclucie personal knowledge
on the poet's part. The greatest difficulty is, however, removed by l\1.
Berard's identification of the Pylos of ~ estor with Samikon, near the
mouth of the Alpheius, which, if correct, supplies an instance of the
transference of a place-name to another ,:;ite. Dorpfcld's theory starts from
the comparison of Od. ix. 21 with xxi. 3..J-7, which shows that the three
islands Dulichium, Same and Zacynthus arc off Elis, and Ithaca is not.
The only four islanjs \\'Orthy of being reckoned in tl:c ~eptinsular
Republic (Corfu, Paxo, and Cerigo, not being in question) arc Ccfalonia,
Thiaki, Zante, and Santa ;\laura. The first three arc off Elis ; Santa
Maura remains for the Homeric Ithaca. The ancients thought of Lcucas
as an island, but as one that had been in earlier days connected with the
mainland: they therefore identified it with the peninsula in Od. xxiv. 378.
and were debarred from identifying it with Dulichium or the Odyssean
Ithaca. Recent resecirches have shown conclusively that Lcucas was an
island in 1000 B.C., and separated from the mainland then, as now, by a
channel liable to become c,1okcd unless artificially kept open for naviga-.
tion. Thi,:; explains the transport of cattle from the mainland ( Od. xiv.
100), where the CephaLenians then lived (Od. xx. 187); and also the four
times repeated line ' I d<J not think you came by land,' \\·hich it is
impossible to interpret as a joLe of Telemachus at the moment of recognition.
If Leucas= Ithaca, Cefal(lnia .,uits Dulichium \', ell ( Uulichium. if a rciil place
in the catalogue of llzad .i, cannot be imaginary in the Odys,cy), Thiaki
is Same; while Zantc has a;\\·ays kept the same name. Thiaki will not
suit the Homeric data. ( 1) It is an island divided almost into halves,
 :div

with two mountains of approximately the same height, not an island with
one conspicuous mountain (_Od. ix. 2(. (2) It is not 'furthest of all to
the west.' (3) It is so close to Cefalonia that it seems to be part of it
from the eastern side (contrast with this ix. 25, xxi. 346). (4) Yet it
x0aµ,a'A.1j means low-lying, it is quite inappropriate to it ; whereas Strabo's
interpretation 'near to the mainland' suits Leucas, and if the other
rendering is correct, Leucas has more le\·e I land on the coast. ( 5) The
only possible site for the :.\Iegaron of Odysseus has yielded no trace of pre-
historic settlement to the excavations of Dorpfeld and Vollgraff. (6) There
is no possibility of identifying Astcris ( Od. iv. 844) with the rock of
Daskalio. (7) The local identifications in the Thiaki arc all modern and
suspicious ; the island ,,·as deserted, and only repeoplecl early in the
sixteenth century. Leucas provides (I) a suitable site for Odysseu,;'s
home, where Dorpfeld has found prehistoric remains ; ( 2) similarly suitable
sites for the other Odysscan descriptions ; ( 3) a suitable Asteri-s with a
double harbour in •.\rkondi, between Santa Maura and Thiaki. Changes of
population (,,·hich Dcirpfeld connects with the Dorian invasion) pushed the
Ccphallenians into the islands ( Od. xxiv and Il. ii). The inhabitants of
the northern island passed m·er into Same and founded a new Ithaca
there; while the inhabitants of Thiaki founded a city in Cephellenia,
\\·hich existed in historic times under the name Same or Samos. This
explains the statement of Pliny H.N. iv. I 5) that X eritis was an early
r

name of Leucas. It is impossible to maintain any longer that by Ithaca the

Odyssey means Thiaki. Against the view that the poet had no correct
local knowledge, and merely gave his fancy play (Von \\'ilamowitz), mu~t
be set the ease with which Leucas satisfies the data of the Odyssey.
On Xovember 27th a special general meeting ,vas held for the purpose
of further discu;sing the paper read on Xovcmber 13th. No one was
found to maintain the claims of Thiaki adequately to represent the Ithaca
of the Odyssey, as still maintained by Berard, and in Germany by those
who, like :.\Ienge, :.\Iichael, Lang, have opposed Dorpfeld·s view.-Prof.
Ernest Gardner said he took up the position of a sceptic rather than of a
convinced opponent of Prof. Dorpf::ld's theory or a defender of the identifica-
tion of Thiaki as Ithaca. Prof. Dcirp1eld's arguments seemed to him to fall
into two classes: those which dealt with the geographical position of
the islands. as described or implied by Homer, and those which suggested
a minute topographical identification of sites, such as the stalactite cave
of the Xymphs or the double harbours on ..\steris. The latter were
rather a source of weakness than of stren;:th to the theory ; but it must be
admitted that the broader geographical evidence for Leucas made, in Pro(
Durpfeld's masterly exposition, a very strong case, if we were to recognize
the Homeric topography in existing i:-,laPds. \Ve must, however, remember
that this theory would impiy that the Odyssey was composed by a poet
and for an audience familiar with the Ionian Islands, and before woo n.c.,
from which time to the present day the names of the islands had been as
they now are. Such a solution of th~ Homeric question required a revision
 xlv

of the whole evidence, philological, historical and literary, as well as

topographical, before it could be accepted ; and in any case the Odyssey
was interpreted by all the Greeks of the historical period as it is by modern
scholars. To them the Homeric topJgraphy did not correspond to any actual
topography; and there did not, after all, see,n sufficient reason for rejecting
the Yiew now generally held that the poet's imagination rather than his
familiarity with the spot was responsible for his descriptions. Such a \'iew
wa.s more in accordance with the usual custom of poets and \niters of
fiction. It was generally aJmittcd that in the Odyssey we had an inner
zone, confined mainly to the ~-\egean. within \\ hich the geography was
familiar to the poet and his readers; and an outer zone of vague traditio:1s
and tra\·ellers' tales, ,,·here the knowledge of both \\ as at best taken
at second hand. If we rcg::irded the Ionian Islands a~ belongin;:; to the
vague rather than the more definite re 6 ion, there was no difficulty in keeping
to the accepted traditions about the names of the islands.-Prof. R. C.
Bosanquet said that minor identifications were of !cs~ importance, and
general correspondences alone -;houlJ be looked for. On the whole.
Leucas reproduced Oclyssean geography better than Thiaki. Dorpfcld's
find,; in Leucas suggeste l to him an earlier cl tte tlnn the period :,;en~rally
described as :\Iycenctean. The tran~ference oi names \\'il-; extre:1,ely likely,
and had parallels in mcclixval and modern Greek hist, ,ry. But he \\·a,:;
not clis;-iosed to accept Dorpfelc\':; ,·ic\\. that thi,-. took place at a very ectrly
date.-.--\fter the reader of the paper had made a brief reply the l'resiclc:,t.
in ,;umming up. regarded t:1e claim-; of Thiaki as cunclu,;i\·cly di,.;pro\·ecl,
but maintained that Homer could not be regarded as a safe source
for history.

The Third General meeting was held on Febn:ary 19th. Professor P.

Gardner, President. was in the Chair and ::.poke as f,_,llows : -
Since our last meeting, one of tlw m,)st distinguished of our \-ice-
Presidents has been some,\·hat ,;udclenly carried a\\'ay by death. Professor
Henry Pelham, President of Trinity College. Oxford. He \\·as from the
first a Member of the Council of this Society, and a \'ice-President fro;n
I 895. In the foundation of 1,-hat may be called offsh· >ob uf thi,; Society.
the British Schools of _-\thens and R.01111.;, he to,ik an important part :
the latter was indeed a special child of hi,; and he was Chairman of the
Committee of the School. Ever since our Society was founded Professor
Pelham has been its earnest supporter at Oxford. and has clone all in his
pO\ver to further its aims.

His work and his interests lay rather in the direction of Roman than of
Greek antiquity. But while an acknO\declged master in his 0\\'11 studies,
he b,· no means limited his interest tr1 them. but in a broad anJ earnest
spirit applied hi,:; great power,; of orgctnization and his ,;trcmg personal
influence in support of the \\'hole m,Aement for broctdening and deepening
classical study, for promoting research, tr,n-cl and excavation, for spreading
d
an interest in the inscriptions and the monument:-; of the ancient world. in
\Yhich this Society is so deeply intere-,ted. Though he ne\·er himself
contributed to our Journal, he did so copiou,;Jy through hi-; pupib.

I have often felt that if Profe,;,;or Pelham had cho,;en a political career,
he \rnuld haye attained a \·cry high poo-ition. He had all the qualities of a
statesman. But he preferred the more modest career of a C ni\·ersity
teacher and organizer. And his ju:-;tification has been that hi-, pre-;ence
and \\·ork at Oxford has raised the whole tone of the place. :\Iore I think
than any other man ha,; he succeeded in impa1 ting a high purpose to
Oxford study and a high tone to Cni,·ersity business. ~·\II this ,,·as the
re,rnlt of a noble personality. .An English gentleman of the highest type,
straightforward. manly. open minded. ready to appreciate any kind of
excellence, gencrou, almost to a fault, he ,,·as everywhere a central figure,
the doyen of ancient history at Oxford. the leader \\'horn \Ye were all glad
to follow. His departure leaves a great void which those who remain must
try between them to do something towards filling.
:\Irs. S. ,--\rthur Strong, LLD .. Litt.D., then read a paper by Professor
J. Strzygmnki (printed in this volume, pp. 99-122). The paper was
discussed by :.\Iiss Gertrude Bell, Sir H. Howorth and Mr. .A.rthur Smith.

The Fourth General :\feeting was held on ,--\pril 30th, :\Ir. G. F. Hill in
the chair. Prof. Ridge\\·ay read a paper on 'The True Scene of the
Second ,·\ct of the .. Eumenic.le-; '' of ,-Eschylus.' of which the following is a
summary. His object \\·a,; to inquire whether the true scene of the second
act ,,·a_c; really the Erechtheum on the ,--\cropolis. or ,vhether \\'e ought not
rather to look for another site. It \\·oulcl be said, \\'hat more appropriate
spot than on the Acrop0Iis and at the most famous shrine of ~\thena in
the ' strong house of Ercchth<.cu:-i '? But the action required a shrine
l\·hich contained an ancient brdas. at \\·hich manslayers took sanctuary,
and moreonr ;:i. brdas called by the name of Pallas. not of Athena; for
the Pythian priestess ,-;peak-; of Palla,,; .--\polio bids Ore,tC'i take refuge
with Palla,. and it i,; I\tlla-.. who ,,·ill sec that he has a fair trial : and the
Eumenidc" on their de1Jarture address the !!Oddcss as Palla,;, thotJCTh
u ~

Oreste,; t,, ice. and the Chorus twice. speak of _-\ thena. NO\\. there is no
e\·iclcncc that there ,,·a,; any snch brdas in the Erec;1thcum , ,r on the
A.cropoli,;, or that ,uch brd<1s c,·cr c011ferrecl o-anctuary; whil,t there is the
strunge-,t <xidence that the godde,;s of the Ercchtheum \\·as onk known as
A.thena, or the Pol1as. fJr .-\thena l-'olia,, ne,·er a,; Palla,;. It i~ still more
~trange that not one of the f,mr famou-; court,; fnr the trial of homicide was
,itu~,tccl at the Erechthcurn or on the ,\cropf,!1,, thuug·h in the l'rytaneum,
nn the llllrthern slupL', ,,·ere tried ,,·capons ,,·hich had sh·.cl the bl0od of
men ~r u:-:cn. It ~eem_s incrccl1ble that -'°Eschylu_c; ,;houlcl not have placed
the trial at one of the tour place, 1,·herc from c,f old man,la,·crs \\·c 1-c ti iccl
for the .-\ttic audience \\·nuld have been \Try cen,;orious if ·he hid placed'
the trial at a :-,pnt ,,·here there \\·a-.: neither -anctuary nor la\\· court. There
 xlvii

were fi\·e courts for the trial of bloodshed: (, the Arcopagus, on the hill
,,·est of the Acropolis, \\·here were tried those accused of \\·ilful murder,
poisoning and arson ; (:] J th<..'. TO Jr.1 IIa7\7\aoi'qi south-cast of the .-\cropolis,
outside the walls, where \1·crc tried those guilty of involuntary homicide
(Tot, ltJCovcn'r.tJ-, ,,r.oKTEt1 lta-1, ; (3 the Delphinium, a shrine of tJ,e Dclphian
1

Apollo, where those 11·h,i pleaded justification 'for in,;ta11cc. for ha,·ing slain
an adulterer,' were tried ; "-1-1 the court at Phreatty,;, on a tonf.;ue of land
at Zea. ,,·here a man who was said to ha\·c shccl blood during his period of
exile \1·a,; tried, docked in a boat off the shore, the judges seated on the
land; :' 5;i the Prytaneum, already mentioned. It is ob\"ious that the last two
cannot ha\·c been the scene of the trial in the play. The .-\rcopagus will
not do, for there is not a jot of c\·idcnce for the existence of any ancient
image there called either Pallas or .-\thena, Pausanias mentioning only an
.-\thena Promachos; nor is there the slightest e,·idence that there was
ever an asylum there. Again, the Delphinium will not do, for it certainly
did not contain a brdas of Athena, but rather an image of .-\polio;
morco,·er, its name shows that it \1·as not an immemorial cult-spot, since it
was in honour of the Delphian god, who first urged in Athens the plea that
deliberate homicide could be justified. Only the court of the Palladium
remains. Here there \1·as a most ancient xomzo1z or brdas. This brd<ls
was an asylum, for each year the image \Yas taken down to Phalerum to
the sea, doubtless to be washed in order to rid it of the pollution of the
manslayers who in the course of the year had embraced it, as Orestes is
supposed to ha,·e done (cf. Eur. lplz. Tmrr. I 169,', The only name e,·er
applied to this image was Pallas or Palladium. Some said that it 1rns the
Palladium from Troy; otlwrs that Athena. after sL-1.ying· her playmate
Pallas, in atonement set up an image of her. Finally. the court for trying
involuntary homicide iG classical times 11·as held there. , (' The plea urged
for Orestes is that he slew his mother on compubion by .-\pollu, and Apollo
bears this out. 2) .:\pollo urge-; jmtification. It may be sa:cl that
justification trials were held at the Delphinium, not at the Palladium in
classical times; but it has just been sl101rn that the Delphinium i,- a later
court, as its name implies and it derfrcd its title from the story that
Apollo in the trial of Orestes had urgecl that certain kinds of homicide
could be justified. There is no <:Ticlence that the Delphinium ,ms
e\·er an asylum. IIencc ire arc led to conclude that in early days,
when the first step ,1·a, taken to11·arcls mitigating· the dread doctrine
op1ia-al'T1 r.atiE11', tho.,;e who could plead that they had shed blood either
by mistake or ju,titiably tor,k refu~e at the I'aliaclium. The trial of
Ore,tes is represented by _£.;;chylus a~ the fir-t for murder: the court
\\hich tries him is called ,; tiEa-µo,. a term ahLtys applied to irnrnl.'.morial
institutions. The judges here, at the Delphinium, l'hreattys, and
Prytaneurn and in early times on the .-\rcopagu,;, \\·ere the Ephet:1:, the Court
of the Fifty-one, i <'. 50 Ephct;:e and the King . \rchon. Thi, c1Jurt probably
was a surviv,d of the ancient king and the Gcrothia, the only tribunal
in a primiti\·e community. .-\II the condition,; required for the ,;cene of
d 2
 xhiii

Act I I are now fulfilled: ( I) an ancient image, (2) called Pallas, (3) used
as an asylum, (--1-) with a court attached for the trial of· involuntary
bloocbhed, and probably in early times for justifiable bloodshed also. But
not one of these conditions is fulfilled by the Erechtheum. It may be
urged that, though Orestes certainly took sanctuary at the Palladium,
nevertheless he was tried i-,n the Areopagus; but thi,; involves the
insuperable difficulty that the man who had taken asylum ,,·ould be
carriL'.d from that spot right a\\·ay to another place, all the \\·bile being
expo~ed to the attacks of the a,·enger of blood. The essence of such
ancient asylums \\·as that the ca,;e must be decided \\·here the man w;is
in s.1.nctuary. If Oreste,; took refuge at the Palladium. he must haw
been tried at that court. :.\Iorem·er he 1\·ould be out of place in the
Areopar:;us, which tried ca~es of \\·ilful murder onl)·.-The paper was
briefly discussed by the Chairman and Prof. \\'. C. F ....\nderson, the latter
expres<n;; considerable doubt as to the proposed remo\·al of the final
scene of the play from the Areopac;us.

The ~-\nnual General :.\Ieeting \\'as held at Burlington House on June

25th, the President, Professor Percy Gardner, taking the Chair. The Hon.
Secretary. :.\Ir. George :.\Iacmillan, read the following report on behalf of
the Council :--
During the pa~t se~~ion there has been no striking event to record, but
the S,xiety ha,; carried on its regular work in an efficient 1\·ay and shown
abundant Yitality in the several departments of its activity.

The modification in the rules recommended by the Council. that the

office of President be in future tenable for fi\'e years only, was approYed
by members at the last Annual :.\Ieeting, and on the same occasion
Professor Percy Gardner was, under the terms of this rule, unanimously
elected President in place of the late Sir l{ ichard Jebb.

The ne\1· departure in the Constitution of the Society, the creation of a

class to be admitted to certain priYileges of the Society \\'ithout payment of
entrance fee and to be knm\·n as "Student- ...\ssociates," \\'as also approved
at the last "\nnual :.\Ieeting, but it i:; a little disappointing to find that
durinr; the fir:;t year only three candidates ha\'c availed themsel\'es of the
arranr:;ement.
Professor Henry Jackson has been appointed a ::\Iernber of the Editorial
Consultati,·e Committee in the place of the late Sir Richard Jebb

The Secretary, :\Ir. J. ff. Baker-Peno'.'re. ha-; obtained lea\'e of

absence fnr a year, 1\·hich 1\·ill be ,;pent mainly in re11e1Ying or extenclinrr
hi,; acquaintance \\'ith Greek lands, in ,;eeing the latc,;t re,ult,; of cxcav~~
tion ,llld in independent rl·search. :\Ir. Pcnoyre had earned ,;omc relief
after his strcnuou..; labour, for the Society an~ \Yill nn doubt come back
still better equipped f()r the\ aricd du tic, r,f hi, pcht. The Council \\'Cre
 xlix

fortunate in securing the sen-ices of a member of the Society, :.\liss

Katherine Raleigh, to carry on the Secretary and Librarian's work in his
absence.

The continued interest which the Society takes in the progress of the
British Schools of Archaeology in .-\thens and Rome is emphasized by the
fast that a short ab:c;tract of the work of the two schools \\·as inserted, by
special permission of the Council, in the volume of the Jon ma! of Hdlmic
Studit'S for 1906. During the session of 1905-6 the efforts of the Briti~h
School at Athens had been rewarded by the discovery, on the site of
ancient Sparta, of the shrine of Artemis Orthia, the stern goddess in \\·hose
honour Spartan youths underwent the ordeal of scourging. Thousands of
\·otive offerings were found there buried. among them a series of terra-
cotta masks \\·hich may ha\·e been used in some dramatic ritual. Early
in the present year another important discovery \\"as made. The sanctuary
of Athena Chalkioiko;; on the "--\.cropolis of Sparta was identified by
inscribed tiles found on the spot, and it is hoped that exca\·ations there
may proceed next season. Among the finds on the site is a fifth-century
statuette in splendid prescn·ation. representing a trumpeter. Further dis-
coveries of ivory figurines ha\·e since been made on the site of the temple
of Artemis Orthia. It is plain that the Society's grant of £ IOO for the
excavations in Laconia, the renewal of \\·hich was voted in January of
the present year, has been abundantly justified. The annual grant of £25
to the British School at Rome has been renewed for a further period of
three years.

The Roman School has undertaken. with the ,;anction of the Italian
Go\·ernment, to make a new official catalogue of the sculpture in the
Capitoline l\Iuseum. The work is well in hand and ,,·ill shortly be
finished. ::\Ir. A. ::\I. Daniel was appointed A,;sistant Director of the ~chool
at the opening of the session 1\·ith the special duty of furthering· this
enterprise.

Tlzc: Li/Jrm)'.
During the past year '277 visits to the Library are recorded. as a~ainst
375 for the year 190..j.-j. and 372 for the year 19oj-6, Besides those books
consulted in the Library 396 volumes were borrowed, the figures fur the
preceding year,; being 313 and ..J. r 5. 109 additions to the Li brat') have
been made, including pamphlets, and exclusi\·e of periodicals in progress.
The Council made the usual grant of £7j for Library expenses.

Some interesting acce,;sions arc :-Hermann's D,mlmza!er dc'F Jla!,rei

des .·l!t,Ttlmms :in progress·,: \\.iegand and Schrader, Pric'll<'; \\'iegand,
Porosarclzitcdllr da .-J.kr,,p,J/is: the 3 Ergaw:;1uzg.sl11f!t' 1:f tltc' ]<rlzrbudt
dc·s k. k. d. arclz. lnstituts. The Librc1ry Catalogue publi,;hecl in 1903 has
now been brought up to the present date by adding the four supplements
under one cover. The price of the complete volume to members is zs. 6d.
net, and that of the supplements 6d. net.

The Council desire to ~xpress their thanks to H. :.\I. Government,

the .--\uthoritics of the Cniversity Presses at Oxford and Cambridge,
the Trustees of the Briti,h l\Iuseum, the A.rchaeological Institute of
America, the C ni\·ersity of California. the Committee of the Archaeological
Society of .-\thens, the Cni\·ersity of .-\then--. the University of .--\bcrcleen,
the C ni\·ersity of Colorado and the Institut :\" ational Gene\·ois for
donatiJns of booh.

The following authors have presented copies of their works :-Dr.

Ashby. :.\Ir. S. Chabert, :.\Ir. J. \\'. Duff, :.\Ir. S. Eitrem, Dr. J. W.
E\·ans, Dr. Farnell. Professor Fairclough, :.\Ir. C. Gilliard, :.\Ir. G. F. Hill.
l\Iiss Hoste, Dr. Kenyon, Dr. Keser, l\Ir. G. :.\Iacdonald, :.\Iiss :.\IcDm\·all,
:i\Ir..--\. :.\Iaiinin, :.\Ir F. H. :.\Iarshall, :.\Ir. Phene Spiers. l\Ir. F. \\'. Simpson
l\Ir. J. \\'. \\.hite, Dr. A. \\'ilhelm.

:\Iiscellaneous gifts of books have been received from Sir J. Evans, :.\Iiss
E. Fegan. Profe~sor Ernest Gardner, :\Ir. F. \\'. Hasluck, :\Ir. G. F. Hill,
:'.\Ir. J. H. Hopkinson. :.\Ir. Rawlings. the ReY. \V. G. Rutherford. l\Ir.
Arthur Smith. and the Librarian.

The follo\\·in::; publishers ha \·e presented recent ,1·orks :-:.\Ieso-rs. E.

Axnolcl. Clark, Dent. Heinemann, Long:11an,, and Green, :.\Iacmi!lan,
:.\Ictlw _·n. :\"utt, Reimer and Seerr.an.

Umin;; the past year the sale and hire of slide,, has proceeded briskly,
and many nt:1,· 11e,;,1ti\-c" ha,·e been added to the collection. The
stati,tics 11 ill be publi~he.l. a~ arranged. at the end of a three years'
period counting from I 90G.

:.Icmbcrs may find it co1n-enient to kno,\· that there are in the

Library fCJur complete copies of the Slide Catalogue 'each \Yith supple-
ment:;), and that these can be borro\\'ccl on the same conditic>ns a:o the
other books.

The thanks of the Society arc clue to members of the Argonaut Camera
Club. members of the Hellenic Society and other5, who have presented
lantern slides, negative5 and photographs.

Fz'Jlilll((.

It is "atisfactnry to be able to report that the Society's income for the

year ha, exceeded ih expenditure by £1 I I. This surpluc; is less by £6r
than that of last year, and a comparison with last year's account-.; ~hows
thi::: difference to be accounted for a-.; follows: On the receipts side it will
 Ji

be seen that the total income for the year is £87 less, the principal
differences appearing under the headings of Entrance Fees and l\Iembers'
Subscriptions in .-\rrear. The falling off in the receipts under the first
heading is explained by the fact that fewer new members have been
elected than in the year preceding; and in the second case by the fact that
a number of resignations received have been those of members whose
subscriptions were in arrear and could not be recm·ered. On the expenses
side noticeable increase has to be reported only under the headings of
the Library-due to the completion of the catalogue-and the additional
£rco granted towards the excavations in Laconia. On the other hand, a
saving has been effected on Sundry Printing, Postage,; and }liscellaneous
Expenses; while it has not been thought necessary to write off any further
sum for depreciation of Stocks, so that the Treasurer is left \\ ith a balance
over on the year as stated abo\·e.

The account for the Journal shmvs that while the sales have dropped to
the normal average (the sales of back volumes in the year ending }Iay
1906 \\·ere unusually high, the cost has also been less, the balance on this
account being almost identical \\·ith that of last year. The sale of fa·e
copies of the .--\ristophanes Facsimile has ,vell repaid the cost of a ne\\.
circular to Librarians, \\·hile the continued ,;ale of the Supplementary
\Tolume on the Exca\·ations at Phylakopi is also satisfactory. The Lantern
Slides and l'hotog-raphs account sho,,·,, this department to have again paid
its \\·ay. there being a small profit on the year.

Turning to the Balance Sheet, the surpluoi of ,--\ssets o\·er Liabilities

shmrn is £283. The Debts l'ayable by the Society -;tand at the same
amount as last year. viz. :-£293, ,,·hile the ca,;h in hand amount,; to .£6 l 3,
as against £ 376 last year, an increase of £237. The Donation,; recei\·ed
for the Endm,·ment Fund cluri11g the year ha,·e amounted to .£16 16s.
The sum due for Arrears of Subscriptions at }lay 3r'it stands at £127.

The Council feel that the financial ,;tatement may be rcg·arded as

satisfactory. It is ho 1ied. hmrever, tlMt the Enclmn11cnt Fund established
two years ago ,,·ill not be lost ,;i;.;·ht of. The amount ( £ jOOi invested of
the sum already received ha,; produced .£ 1,in interest this year, and
the steady growth of this fond through Dnnatinns from member,-; ,;hould
prove a ,·cry valuable source of future revenue.

Co!ldusioJ!.
Hamdy Bey. the Director of the }Iuseum at Constantinople, having
completed twenty-fiw years in that important office, the Council thought
it right, as he is one of our Honorary :\Iembers, to 'iCt1d him a congratu-
latory address in the name of the Society. and the compliment ,,·as
gratefully acknowledged.
In recording lo-;ses by death, special mention should be rn;:ide of two
 Iii

Honorary l\Iembers, Professor Otto Benndorf of \'ienna and Professor

F. Blass of Halle. Both were well known in this country. Professor
Benndorf was always ready to encourage British scholars and explorers with
counsel and assistance. while Profe~sor Blass had given much generous
and im·aluable help to Drs. Grenfell and Hunt in the decipherment and
identification of the Greek literary pajJ'ri. In Profc:osor Pelham. the
President of Trinity, the Society has lost one of its Vice-Presidents and
a man who had taken a keen interest in its work from the foundation. A
special tribute t,) his memory ,ms paid by the President of the Society at
the first general meeting held after Professor Pelham's death.

During the year ~9 ne1\· members and 3 Student .--\ssociatcs have been
elected. 38 ha\·e been lost by death or resignation. The number of
members at present on the list is 9 r 8, and there are in addition r S..j.
sub,;cribing libraries ,an increase of I..J. in the year) and 38 honorary
members.

It will be seen that the Society has during the past session well
maintained its position in its various fields of work. The only dis-
couraging symptom is that the number of ne11· members elected falls short
of those lost by death or resignation, so that there is a slight diminution
in the total. It is not at present serious, but it is very important, in
view of the obligations undertaken, that the Society's re1·enue shm:ld be
rather increased than diminished, and the Council trust that all members will
do their best to bring in new candidates. It is on the other hand satisfactory
to note that there has been an increase of I..J. in the number of subscribing
libraries.

The Chairman then delivered the following address:-

c\. S0UETY like ours is an organism with a continuous life. \\'e ha,·e
liwd long enough to form traditions, and \\·e ha1·e been more succes:oful
than most societies in gi1·ing birth to other societies and movements for
the advancement of science. So long as I have the honour to be President
I shall clo 11·hat I can to cherish this common and continuous life. It is
my special duty to contribute towards it by an annual address, whereby we
mark the milestones of our course. sec what \\·e ha,·e done and \1·hat more
awaib us in the immediate future.
E,·ery s;ociety which has a continuous life is anxious to keep up a
connexion \\·ith the past by a commemoration of those who arc lost to it
by death. One of the most cherished institutions of Athens was the
vEKL;a-w, the fea:ot oi all souls. when offering,; were brought to the family
graYe. \\'c too haYe year by year to note who of our members have
passed a\\ ay. and ,,·hat they have bequeathed to us. Fortunately the list this
year is a short one Of prominent members we h,ffe lo.st but two, Professor
l'elham and :'.\Ir. Shuckbur~h. Our greatest loss is certainlv that of our
Vicc- l're,;ident, :.Ir. l'elham. It is true that his interest \\·as c~ntred rather
 liii

in the history of Rome than in that of Greece, and indeed in Roman

constitutional history. But with that breadth and generosity ,vhich were
the basis of his character, he extended his sympathy to research in all
parts of ancient life. He was most helpful in the founding of this Society,
and from the first e\·ery attempt of ours to ,,·iden and deepen Hellenic
studies found in him a friend and ally. I have, ho1,·ever, at a previous
meeting spoken more fully of our loss in Professor Pelham. I am glad to
say that a project is now being carried out to establish a memorial of him
in the form of a studentship at the British School of Rome in connexion
with the Cniversity of Oxford.
:\Ir. Shuckburgh, one of our earliest members, ,,·as also rather
concerned with Roman than with Greek history. But his ,rnrk in editing
the orator Lysias, and in publishing a translation of Polybius, bore on
Hellenic studies. He was an acti\·e member of the teaching staff at
Cambridge, and his personal character helped to make his ,1·ork effecti,·e.
Uf our foreign honorary members two have died, Professor Blass and
Professor Benndorf. Dr. Blass is known as an extremely able and
many-sided philologist. His \YOrks on .--\ttic orators and the Xew
Testament writers are of great importance. He often visited England and
Ireland, and ,,·as almost one of us. In recent years he rendered im·aluable
service to :\Iessrs. Grenfell and Hunt in their publication of the papyri
which they have found in Egypt. \\'ith Dr. Benndorf I had much to
do. For many years he stood at the head of the study of Classical
Archaeology in .-\ustria, first as Professor in the C ni\-crsity of Vienna,
later as the head of the Austrian Archaeological Ir.istitute, 1,·hich was
virtually his foundation, and of \\'hich he was the guiding spirit. That
Institute has done a ma'3s of important ,vork. Its .falLrt'she.fte is among
the most important of archaeological periodicals. The researches of its
members in Lycia, and the now progressing excavations at Ephesus have
produced results of great value. Dr. Benndorf was a prolific writer, and
all his work stands at a high le\·el. It is the more satisfactory to
remember tliat when we elected him as honorary member, he wrote me a
letter expressing in the warmest terms his pleasure, and qying that he
regarded our Jou ma! as second to none in the value of its contributions to
Hellenic antiquities.
\\'hile speaking of the works of our deceased members I ,;houlc! call
attention to a volume which has recently appeared of addresses and papers
by Sir Richard Jebb, appropriately edited by :\Ir. Butcher and Dr. Yerrall.
It may be long before there arises another scholar so accompli,;hed and so
broad in his sympathies as Professor Jebb. I hope that our Society will
ahrnys cherish the traditions which he represented. In particular the
Romanes lecture delivered by him at Oxford is perfect, not merely in taste
and expression, but also in comprehension, in it,; realisation of \Yh:i.t ancient
Greece can contribute to modern 1, ays of thought and feeling and action,
hm\· what is best in it may live again in our ideab, and tend to counteract
the many pen·erting and n1lgarising influences of modern life. There are
 many scholars, but few who really deserve the name of Humanist, a name
which since the clays of Erasmus has scarcely been better earned by any one
than by our late President.
Indi\·iduals come and go ; each builds his little part of the fabric of
knowledge, and hands on the task to successors. Let us turn from our own
losses to the more cheerful sub_iect of the progress made in the year in
Hellenic studies, a progress the rate of which varies from year to year, but
which never ceases
Of the acti\'ities of the Society during the year, you have heard from the
Report of the Council. I am glad to find that the particular part of that
work with which in the past I have been associated proceeds with energy
and succe,;s. The journal of He/lone Studies, of which t\Yenty-six \·olumes
have now appeared, has kept up its reputation for thoroughness and
originality. The issue of last year contains excellent papers in most fields
of Hellenic stuch·.
I think that ~ince I cec'l,ed to be Editor of the Joumal, it has co\·ered a
some11·hat wider field, there ha,·e been more papers primarily historical.
I am quite prepared to rejoice at this. Greek life in all the variety of its
manifestations ,,·as one. Each branch of Hellenic study throws light on
other b1 anche,;. The history of institutions, of literature, of philosophy and
of art i, but one history after all; and no man can pro 1")erly understand one
side uf Grct.'.k history who has not some knowledge of all.
.\ny c,:;mplde account of the :::;ains of the year is be~·ond the scope of
this ,li:-.;ht ,,ketch. and it i,; the le,,,; nece,qry that I should weary you with
a lun~ catalogue of our succes~e", since thc:rc i,; no\\" published every year,
by the Clas--.icd .\,,~ociatiun under the editorial care of :.Ir. Rou:-;c, a brief
but complete summary uf them. a most useful little \·olume called The
1·,·ar's u·,11-/..· u1 L!1uszclll ~'i'tudzes. I cannot speak tuo highly of the
admirable labour-; of the group nf scholar:; 11 ho thus bring together the facts
\\"hich ,,o ,:;-reatly interc-;t members of this Society. Their publication leaves
me at liberty to ~ekct for comment any di.-,co\·cries and any books 1\·hich
,-,eern to me c,f ,:_;reatcr and mnrc general intcrc,;t.
I will bq._:in ,1·ith the prchi..,tc1ric a:::;e, a field in 11·hich Engli-,h scholars
ha,-c for a ]l)ng time p:l,.;t L,kcn ,l prominent place. :\Ir. .-\rthur E1·;u1-; con-
tinue" his \F>rk at Cno"sLh in Crete. \\"Ork which has recon;;tructed a splendid
and hitherto unknom1 phase of early .·\.natolian culture. Cnfortunatcly
bounds are '-'Ct to :.Ir. Evans· inexhaustible energy and cnterpri::.e by the
smallness of funds a,·ailabL:. Hut this year he tells me that hi,, re:iearches
ha,·e brou~ht to light a complete ne,,· wing of the great palace at Cnossus,
which imperatiYcly demands excavation; and my knowledge of :.Ir. E\·c1.ns
lead,; me to think that in nne ,,·ay or c1.11other he 11·ill succeed in carrying out
his purpo--.c. }Ir. E,·anc; h;:is al,;o turned hi,.; attc:ntion towards more fully
11· ,1 kin~ nut the material already cffailablc. I le has mapped out nine
1

-;uccc,;,iH: periods of }Iinoan history, early, middle, and Li.tcr; and it is

bein:; by <le?rccs discovered that the prehistoric remain-; of the Cyclades,
and e\-c:n ut Italy, may be cla::-sified on lines parallel to those which can
 lv

be fixed in Crete. There is now set up at the _-\shmolean .'.\Iuseum in

Oxford a very extensive arrangement of originals and facsimiles classified
according to period, giving the student such a conspectus of the products
of .'.\Iinoan civilisation as can be seen nowhere else, unless indeed at Candia.
I would recommend a book recently published by a member of our
Council, Prof. R. Burrow~' account of the recent researches and discoveries
in Crete. It seems to me an excellent piece of ,,·ork.
But I feel that, interesting as arc these peeps into a pre-Greek
civilisation in Greek lands, this Society must always regard \\'ith still deeper
interest the literary and artistic works which belong to the historic Hellenes,
and which embody that spirit which has been one of the t,,·o or three great
formers of European civilisation.
Sparta, Syracuse . .'.\Iiletus ! \\'hat associations cling to each of these
great names! To the early history of each, recent excavation has brought
contributions. _-\ series of vase-fragments, found by the German excavators
at .'.\liletus, which reaches back to the .'.\Iycenaean age, proves how very
early was the foundation of that Ionian colony which was not only in
power and wealth but also in age the mother-city of Greek Asia. The
ground plans of many of the most important temples and buildings of
l\Iiletus have been traced; and the site is gradually giving up its secrets.
Remains of the ancient Sikel people found at Syracuse, ha\·e gin:n us the
touching point between the ancient nati\·e ci\·ilisation of Sicily and the new
culture brought in from Corinth by the Greek settlers. At Sparta the
excavations of the British Scl10,)l ha,·e brou~ht to light fir,,t the site of the
shrine of Artemis Urthia, ancl then that of the brcnzc-lined temple of
, \then a Chalcioe.::u,;, stre\\'n ,,·ith innumerable yoti\·e offering,; in lead and
terracotta. But I mu,;t not d1,·cll on Spart;,, nur Sr1arta, nor anticip,1te the
accounts nf discc\·cry which \\'ill later in the year be lc,id. before you at the
annual meeting· of the British School of .-\tlicn,;
In Rome a most valuable elate has been reco\·erecl from our knowledge
of Greek ,·ases. In one of the primiti,·e graves laid bare by Si;nor Berni in
the Forum, there \\'as found a small ,·ase of the proto-Corinthian cla,,s.
This little yessel, purchased for a few pence by some early R•Jman, and
gi\·en by him to some deceased friend, ha, a \·alue \\'hich cannot be
exaggerated for determining the stratification of the site.
The slowness with \\·hich the rc,;ults of the excavations at Delphi arc
published is a matter for much regret. .-\ certain number of plates ;1nd
photographs have appeared, but for the explanation of them ,,·c still hdve
to trust to old volumes of the Bu!!dill de· Cu,Tc':,Je11da!lcl' !td!/11iq1ti:.
German archaeologists are losing patience, and in recent numbers of the
Athenian Jfittltt!ilimgt'11 Drs. l'omtow and Bulle ha\·e publi,;hed ,;earching
papers on the geography and the monuments of the qcred enclosure, in
which some of ;,\I, Homolle's views are called in question. These papers
will, I imagine, not hinder. but facilitate the French publication. But ,ve
cannot hdp feeling that the results of the great cx:caxatinns at Delphi will
not be set forth in an orderly ,,·ay until they arc no lr,11,_:cr frc,h.
 IYi

Perhaps one reason for the <lelay may be that :\I. Homollc has been
recalled to France to occupy an important position, ,vhilc the staff of the
French School of ,\thens is busy with the renewed excavations at Delos.
These promise, in their way, to be almost as important as those at Delphi:
,,-e are recoyering the whole plan of a Greek city of commerce, ,vith its
wharves and store-houses, its spacious private houses, as well as its sacred
buildings. The inscriptions found at Delphi and Delos are of immense
extent and the greatest importance.
I may mention a fe\Y of the books of the year \\-hich throw light on
Hellenic studies-among these are :.\Ir. \\'alters' Art o_f tltc- GNeks,
:\Ir. Freeman's Sclzoo!s of Hd!as, :\Ir. Tucker's charming Life lit .'illcient
.,1t/zms. and :\Ir. :\Iahaffy's enlarged re-issue of his most genial and
deli~htful account of the Progrc-ss /If" Hdlc'llism. These are books which
do not appeal only t0 the learned, but ,vhich bring the fruits of Greek
thought and idealism to bear upon the studies and the life of modern
times ; and surely there never was an age which needed the leaven of
Hellenic culture more than ours .
.--\lso, since no line can be drawn between the art of Greece and that of
Rome, I may acid ~Irs. Strong's ,-a]uablc manual of Roman Sm!fturc, which
may be considered the first attempt to set forth in order the chief
monuments of the great nation which so long dominated the world.
Greek literature will naturally and necessarily in the minds of English
students hold a more important place than Greek art. The principles
embodied in both arc the same, but we arc as a people more literary
than artistic. I ,,-ill not on this occasion discuss at any length the
cbcm-erics in the literary field. The discm-erics which come nearest to us
arc those made by :\Iessrs. Grenfell and Hunt of papyri in the gra,-es
of Egypt. There is, however, not much to say this year in regard to these.
The explorers have had a last season at Oxyrhynchus and made
considerable additions to the literary papyri found last year, \\'hich
contained, as you are a\\'are, new Paeans of Pindar and fragments of a
fourth century historian. This is the end of the Oxyrhynchus excavation ;
and we must most heartily congratulate the self-sacrificing scholars who
have, with infinite pains and patience, ac!decl so greatly to our knowledge
of the earlic,;t literary manuscripts of Greece and of the history of
Ptolemaic Egypt.
The researches of the past year have not brought to light any work
of art ,;o important as the Charioteer of Delphi, or the .--\eginetan marbles
of Furt\\'anglcr. Perhaps the most remarkable statues found arc two
archaic figures from Samo,;, one seated ancl one standing, both male
and fully draped. They arc of the ~ame heavy Ionian style a:,; the seated
figures f~om Rranchidilc in the British :\Iuseum. The seated figure is
a p,,rtra1t, unfnrtunatcly headless, of .--\eacec;, father r,f Polycratc-; the
Tyr;rnt. A elated morrnment of this kind i,-; beyond ,·alue: and it enables
us to pu"h back the beginning,; of Ionian ,culpture to a somewhat earlier
date than that formerly a"--;igncd to them. At the other encl of the history
 lvii

of Greek art, the researches of Danish archaeologists in Rhodes have allowed

us finally, it may be hoped, to fix the date of the Laocoon in the middle of
the first century B.C. \Ve have thus secured two points marking the
beginning and the end of the splendid de\·elopment of Greek sculpture.
Of recent hooks on sculpture perhaps the most useful to students,
though not the most learned, i,; Dr. yon :\Iach's series of 300 photographic
plates, good enough for ordinary purposes, and published at the price
of a guinea. A learned \\·ork which ,viii specially interest us is the
Catalo 6 ue nf the l\Iuseum of Sparta by two members of our school, ~Iessrs.
Tod and \\'ace. \Ve may hope that next year this ll'i!l be follo,ved by
a catalogue undertaken by the British School of Rome, comprising the
celebrated sculpture of the Capitol ~Iuseum. Catalogues arc not only
\·aluable to researchers, but their compilation is the best and most educati,·e
work th·tt can possibly be assigned to students.
The study of Greek ,·a,cs has in the past been gTeatly hampered by
the fact that it has only been possible satisfactorily to pursue it in the
vase-rooms of one of the great museums of Eurupe. Old engravings
of vases, such as those published by Gcr:1arcl and Lenormant, were not
sufficiently accurate to be trust11·orthy. Twenty years ago Prof. Benndorf
of \'ienna greatly faciiitated the study by his issue of Vor!,g,·blltta for
use in archaeological instruction. The great series of pL1tes now being
published by Furt,vangler and Reichhold carries accuracy even further,
enabling us really to examine even questions of style ll'ithout journeyi;1g·
to the Museums of Europe. A like ser\'ice to ancient mural paintin,.;s
is being performed by Dr. Hermann in hi::; gTeat ,-,cries of reproj uctions
of Pompeian and other fresco:3. It is a pity that tl1e cost of th sc
works places them out of the reach of odinary persons; but at all
events they may be consulted in libraries such as that of our Society.
Meanwhile J\Ir. \Yalters' ne1,· book on the Hist,,,), £:f .-l!tch'lll Pot!s'JJ' has
provided for the first time an adequ ,te handbook, to guide those \\·ho are
taking up the study of Greek vases.
Perhaps no side of Hellenic life has occupied more of the attention of
English scholars in recent years than Hellenic religion. By a sort of tacit
compact our two old Universities seem to have di,·ided between them this
fascinating field. A.t Cambridge Professor Ridgeway, Dr. Frazer and }Iiss
Harrison ha,·e worked on the prehistoric and primitive c·ements which
,;un·i,·e in Hellenic religiun. Dr. F1:azer, in his recent .-ldu11is .--lttis a11d Oszns,
has aho discussed the foreign elements which made their \\·ay i!1to the
popular religion at the time of Greek decay. .--\t Oxford, on the other
hand, the higher de\'elopmcnts of Greek ,wrship ha\·e attracted scholar,;.
Dr. Caire! has written an admirable 1rnrk on the theology of Greek
Philosophers ; Dr. Lc\\·is Cunpbell has gin.:n an account of the religion
embodied in works of Greek literature; Dr. Farn-.:11 has published a mo,;t
elaborate and learned ,rnrk on the Cults of tl/L· G-'r,d,: St,lt,·s, ll'hercof two
volumes have appeared this year. I wonder ,,·hether there is any member
of this Society \\'ho has talent erwugh to bring to:;cther all the:-e 1·arious
 h·iii

sides of Hellenic religion, and gfre us a complete account of its main

features. It 1rnuld be a fascinating task, and el'en if imperfectly accom-
plished would be a great help to the purpose,; of our Society.
Before concluclin~·, I shoulJ like to turn for a few minute-; from the past
to the future, to see what ta,;ks 11011· lie before us, in what direction,; 11·e may
hope to extend the field of Hellenic studies. In this \\'ork we han: now the
co-cperation not only of the Schools of A.thens and Rome, but abo of the
Classical As::iociation, whose energy and enterprise is infu:oing fresh life
into humane studies, especially in the northern Universities.
"-\t the recent International meeting of :\cademie-;, the project for a
great Thes:turus of the Greek language \\'as considered, and ad\·anced some
steps toward actual accomplishment. "-\t the meeting Professor Bywater
represented the British Academy ; but the enterprise has been especially
connected with the name of our late President. He 1vas warmly in favour
of it ; and if it is finally carried out, it may be regarded as in a sense
a memorial of him. I am glad to say also that the very original and
thoroughgoing studies of :.Ir. ~ orman Gardiner on Greek A..thletic Sports
are likely to take the form of a book, which will I am sure be epoch-making
in the subject with ,,·hich it deals.
I tc1ke this opportunity of informing or reminding the Society that the
third International Congress of the History of Religions will be held at
Oxf,ird in September, r908. :.Iany continental scholars 1\·ill come to
England to take part in it ; and one may hope that the study of Hellenic
religion will be among those ,vhich will profit by the contact of mind
with mind.
It is a far cry from this learned Congress to the Olympic Games. These
also are to be held next year in England. Their interest is no doubt
mainly prctctical. But it is 1rnrth while to pause and mark the influence
of Greece shm,·n in the ,·ery fact that these international contests are called
Olympic. There still lingers about them something belonging to ancient
Greece. ..--\ncl it may be well to try to profit by the occasion by bringing
before En_.,lish-speakin::;- athletes what is re:i.lly best in the athletic spirit of
ancient Greece, the di 6 nity, the lm-c of be,tuty, the manliness which marked
the earlier celehratiuns of tlw Olympic 6 ames, and to point out ho,r in
later Grceet.~ the games \\'ere ruined by professionalism and over
:cpeciali,,ation.
~ \nother ~ood pro:'pccL i, offered by the probable intention of the

Carne~ie ln.-tituti<>n at \\'ashington to regard exploration and research

in the land- tu the Eil..;t ,,f the :.[editerrane:rn :ts not outside it,; scope; and
there is a pn-,spcct thilt ,o,nc part ,if its rnunifice:·,t enc!01nne11t ma,· be
expe1,ckd in rcscilrchcs in 11·hich \1·e ,,hall h,l\"e an interest, if n..t a sl;are,
in "\,ta :.Ii1nr and Syria.
Our 0\\'11 duty i,-; mn,t cit "Lly connected \1·ith the excavatiun of Sparta.
Since the (;.reek Go,-crnment ha, libcr,t!ly made 01·n to the British School
the -;itc -,,cc,111ll to "-\then, in Greece in hi,-;toric, if not in archaenlogic, interest,
it beho\·es lh t,, strc1in c1·ery nen-e t,, :ind the men and the money necessary
 lix

for the full carrying out of so important a task. If however the plan which
originated ,dth Prof. \Valdstein meets the success for which \\·e must all
hope, it may be that e\·en the excavati0n of Sparta \Yill take second place
in compari,;on with that of Herculaneum. But very little of that incom-
parable ,-,itc has as yet been touched. The extraordinary difficulty and
expense im·olved in cutting through so many feet of hard deposit has
delayed the work. But ,,·e must remember that a single Roman villa at
Herculaneum. that called after the Pisos, has bestmved on us not only a large
number of papyrus rolls containing important documents, but al:io a series
of st:citues and busts in marble and bronze of incomparable extent and
beauty. These arc almost the only ,,·orks of Greek art ,,·hich ha\·e come
clown to us, thanks to the presen-ati,·e power of the soil, in almost perfect
condition, and e,·ery vi~itor to the museum at -:\"aplcs mu~t ha,·e felt his
breath taken away by the number and the beauty of these works of Greek
plastic art. It is \\·ithin the mark to say that, if we lea,·e out of account the
Hermes of Praxiteles and the Delphic charioteer, the remaining fruits of
the great excavations of Olympia and Delphi are from the point of view of
the modern lover of art surpassed by the contents of the Herculanean
Villa, ::\Iay we but find one such more ; and even the dullest of scl1o!ars
and the driest of historians will feel what great help in the realisation of
the past is given us by the re5earches of the present.

After the President's address the Report of the Council was presented
to the meeting and adopted unanimously.

The officers and members of Council as nominated were then declared

unanimously elected or re-elected. :.\Ir. .-\rthur Smith was elected as Yice-
President. Profes~or R. Burro\,·s, 1Ir. R. :.\I. Dawkins, :.\Ir. C. C. Edgar,
:.\Ir. H. Stuart-J,mes and Dr. Rouse \\·ere elected to vacancies on the Council.
The proceedings \\"ere closed by a vote of thanks to the Auditors,
moved by Dr. Sandy:, and seconded by Profe,;sor \\"a!Jstein, \\·ho spoke
hopefully of the outlook for the propo~ecl exca,·ation of HercuLrneum.
 A comparison with the receipts and expenditure of the last ten years
ts furnished by the following tables:-
_.\.c\'_\LYSIS OF RECEIPTS FOR THE YE_.\RS ENnI:\"l~ -

31 :\laJ 1 :;r ~Iay 1 ~r i\lay, 31 :\L.iy, 3r ?\lay, 31 .:\by, 31 :\by 31 ~1~} 31 .:\-Jay, 31 :\lay,
1293 r5g,;' F/JO 19or. 1902 IS/.J3 19u4 1 7 05 19o'J 1907

£
Subscriptions. Current 613 62S 672 753
Arrear, IO 13 13 205 72
Life Composttiuns 7S 78 94 126 47
Libraries ... 179 185 202 I,-
-ti 1 73

Entrance Fees 33 45 100 103 65

Divickc,ds 61

Rent IO

I:ncluwment Fund 30 475 17

· · Exc.1\·.1tiuib .1t l'n) bkopi, ..
::.ales 21

·· F.1cc1irnil,~ C•)ik:x \'enetu..;, ·,

,.1les 17

S13 945 990 99S 1,047 r.2;2 1.390 1,Sq 1239

A:\" ..\LYSIS OF EXPE?\fJITURE FOR THE YEARS E:\"DI:\"G -

3r :\fa:·. 31 :\lay. 31 .\Lly, 31 :\lay, 31 .:\-lay, .3( }lay. 31 :-.ray, 11 ).Iay, 3r :\ht): 31 }lay.
2
1~9':. 1 91 19::,0. 1901 19n 1;.,::,3 IJ'-'-1-• r;'o~ ri;,u5 1,Jo7.

(. £ {, £ £
!{ent So So So So So 8S 100
Insurance 15 15 15 15 15 18 13 14
S,11.trie, 50 fo 60 60 60 165 1,8
Library 93 61 73 74 82 50 JOO

Co,t uf Cat,1!0;:ue 55
~nntlry P1 int1ng, Postnge, antl
Stat11)nery, etc. 32 61 41 72 137 1-J.7 IOI
Pnnting :-inrl P11-.,tagc, 1-fhtory
of Sucte!) 24
I'rintin~ ant.l I'( )...;L1gc. Pro-
ceeding...; at Ann1ve1s.uy. 10
L1ntern Slides _.\ccount 13 17 35 }
2
Phot0~r.1phs .-\ccount 26
Cn-,t of _l.JUI nal de;;~ sa!e.;;) 516 536 390 5II 511 356
c,ht of lou1118.I, Reprint «if
Yn] .\:XIII. 122
Gr.111h 150 200 200 260 225
" F.1,:,imilc of th~ Codex
Y enetti... nf .-\n-..tnphant..':3 -·. 210 30
.. r\.C1Y,1t\On-., ,1t PhyL11\np1 .. qo
Curnrn;-..-.1,)n a1id l\)~1.1~e pt_r
L.1nk 3 2
Pt..p11..:c;.1t1,1n qf ~t,Jt'k-., <•f
l\th1i,~,1t1(•n-..
104 10

Sl I 6 S•55 1..+32 1,335 1,573 1,095 1069

 Ill, "JOURNAL 01• IIELLENIC ~l'lJDIES" ACCOUNT. J•1w,1 JUN!•: 1, 1901,, 10 l\lAV 31, 1907. C11.

L ,\. d .l d. .l ,. d. .l s. d
To P, in ting and l'ape1. Vol. XXVJ., Pan 11., and llySalc,, including hack Vols., fiomJnne 1, 1906,
XXVJI., Part I. 260 19 6 lo May 31, 1907.
Plates ......... . 59 18 l'cr l\lacmillan & Co., Ltd .. I I2 5 2
,, llrawing an,! Engraving ..... 7(i (i 9 ,, licllenic Society ........ 14 19 0
Editmg anti Sundry Contributu1, 62 5 6 127 ·t 2
l'acking, , \d,h cs,ing, an,! Carriage tu l\lem lier, .. 44 0 ()
J,cccipls for Ad vertiscmcnts ..... 20 (, I)

503 <J IO Balance lo Incornc and l·>,pcnditurc Account 3S'i 19 s

£503 9 JU £5o3 <) IO

"EXC.\VATIONS AT 1'11\'l,.\KOl'J'' .\CCOLINT. FRmt JUN!•: 1, 190(,, 'J'() :\IA\' JI, 1907.

lcullllllll -.,Ji!)WJll~ { 'ulumn ... howill,1.!;

I Fitl,llJt 1al \( COlltJI I Financi.Ll .'\lt.Olllll
! l{l'-;Ult f, Olll
f!ll
Rc..,ult f1nll1
fill
J),lk uf Date of
l111ld1t ,1tin11 tu l \111t 111 V1 .u PuhliL.tlJOII to ( '111 l"t'lll \' l',ll
\I ,L) ; l, li)< 17 Jl.1y .;1, 1qo7.

l ,I ,l ,( ( ,l d
I )dH 11 Bal:uici• \,1uugli1 (1)l\\':11d {t xcludi1·g
1

,alnl' of Stock) ::? H) (1 ll liy ~.1le of 23 ( 'opil'"' du1111g ye.u 22 I 7 U 22 17 (J

( 'tl'-1 !if ) 1 1i11ting- J'JO'->J't'l 1\l', I I 5 I I 5
B.tlnncl' 1 )ll <·u, 1enl VL',ll to Int ouw lkticit lbbnce f,orn l'ui>licat10n al
,llld E,jll'111l1t111,· .\ccount 21 I I I i\lay .P, 1907 (exdnding value of
S'.ock) ........... .. 195 4 i
I [218
1_ _ _I_ _
I ,• _ _ _ __ .[22 17 <> .[218 17
---
.[22 0
I I
 "FACSIMILF, OF TIIE CODEX VENETUS OF ARISTOPHANES" ACCOUNT. FROM JUNE 1, 1906, Til MAY 31, 1907.

I
1
( 'ulumn . . howrng- Culmun -,howi11~
·

Financi.tl Fina!lt ial Ai-count

Account
Rc,;ult from Re.,ult f1um f11r
for IJak of
Date of Cui tent Yeai C.:111 rent \'1·a1.
Puhlicat1on tt1 P11lilic,tt10n t,i
M:iy p, 1,:;107 \l,1y \1, ll)!J7

,(, d. ,(, d. !., d /... d

To l ll"lic·it Balance l,runghl ft1rw.1nl (exc\n,\ing l\y Sak Df Five Copies hy the l lellernc Society .. .,16 I") y, 15
V.tlue of Stt1ck) .. 121 q 5 I lcllc11ic Society\ I le licit H:dancc ft 11111
< ·u..,l ()f 1'10....,pet·tth and l'u.;tage . 3 0 7 3 0 7 l'nl>lication to 1\1:ty 31, 1907 (c•xcluding
Vaine of Stoel,) ........ 104 17 2
llalf Shall, t1f .\rnt1unt, less E,pc·1he,, f01
l'opie, ,11lil l>y I lelknic S"c1ety, due to the (No Sale, by American Arch:eological
A 111v11c,tn ,\rch:t·ological I u . . t1tutc ...... l(j 17 3 16 17 3 Institute.)
Bal:i.nct· on c1trrl·t1t )'l':lr to Incon1e and
E,penditllle Acc"nnt ............. .. 1(, 17 3
1£141 12 3 £3<, 15 [141 12 ' ! ;·,(> 15
I- 1
•. . . . ., I_"'·'

,-
LANTERN SLIDES AND l'IIOTOGRAPIIS ACCOUNT. FROM JUNE 1, 1906, TO !\IA\' 31, 1907.
8:
,(, .,. d ,(, ,. a.
To Slide-; a11d l'hi,tog,aph-, fut Sak 40 0 S'
<' l\y Receipts from Sales .. .... .. ...... ... ... . . . .. .. .. .......... 5I I.,
Siid"' f"r 11" ,. ..
l'hotogtapb f,JJ Reic•Jl'lll'l' Ct11lel'lion
[[ 17 2 Hire .............. .. 10 4 ·'
2
7 2 2 Sale of Calaloguc, ()
.l 9
Babnct• to l11co111e :1nd 1<,pt·nditrnl' AtT111111t I 1!!
·'
1:<,2 I 2
£62 I 2

LIBRARY ACCOUNT. FROM JlJNE I, 1906, TO l\1A Y 31, 1907.

,(, ,·. d. l d. ,(,

To l\11cha..,L'" 57 12 7 By Balance fo, wanl frnnt la,t year .. IO IS
B111ding 2S I ,} ,. H.e, eiv,·cl for Sak, of Catalogue.,, I l11plicall-.,, ,\c. 11 4
85 I 3 ll
Ha la net• to lncolllL' and E:qlenclit 11rc Account
Snpplenwnl to ( 'abloguc
i,
8.1 12 2
10 10 S

-
/,qi)
/.'CJ(i ·I i
 !'.\/('(>\IE ,\Nil 1':\l'l•,'.\11>1 l'lJRE .\CCOUNT. Vi<>mJnnc 1, 1906, t" l\lay 31, 1907-

E 1;,,·11rlit11/'I'. ln101JJt'.
( \, d f, ,\ d
To Rt'nt I By Memhe1s' Subscriptions-
~ d f, I.
"
JOO 5 {)

Sala, ies l'rop<>rtion brought forwa1 d f, om last yl'a1. -12') s ()

Librarian a11<\ Sec, elary ........ qo 0 ()

Received during current ye.tr-A near..; .. 72 "I ()

At-i..,i:"Jtanl Tn:a:iun._•1 .. ... ..... 25 () C ! 1906 ..... II I I I>

Office Uoy ........ . ............... .. I.l' 2 (J
11)07 7-P (J I I

17S 2 6
1254 q 2
Insurance .... .. ...... 14 4 s l,l''-,'-, 7
I~ of 11)07 subscription, forward t"
Miscell,rncous Expen,cs ...... JI/ J J 5 m•,t year . .. . ' . . ·1 )2 S 11
Stationery .... .. ..... . .. ..... 5!,
" 9 822 5 3
Po-;tage .. ......... .... ,, . .. ... s ', M L'n1 hers' Entrance Fees .. . ... ' .. .. .. . ' t,s
······ i'J I I 2 {)
Sundry Piiutinf.;, Ru!'-':,, I ,ist of l\le,nlw,,, Stn,\ent Associate,· Subsci ipt ions ............. 0
3 3
Not ice..,, &e. ... , ... I() I S I ,ihraries Sul>sc1 iptiom-
(;rants -- l'J()i,01tion hrougl,t fu1w,ml f,om last )'L'ar.. ~){) I () ;,:
H,itish School at .\thens ................. 100 {) 0 l{cceivec\ d11ring; cuncnt ycar-1906 ...... I.\ 2
fo1 J~:1coni.1 100 0 L' 1907 .... 1(,5 1S 2
.
Ronll' .... .... .. 25 0 ()
---

2iO I 3
225 (J \)
Less ,\ of 1907 snhscriptions fmwaul to
llalancc f,"n' Liln,uy Account ........... ...... s., 12 nc,t year . ... , ............
2
.., .. <)(> 15 7
BaLu1cc fr()III "J ou1 nal of 1!cllcnic Stud1c, "
----- 173 5 s
,\ccunnt ..... . ......... .. " ...... . ... 355 I() s Life Compositions brought int" R<·\'CllllL' Account (Nil)
J Jep1 t'cio.t1on of Stocks ... . .. .. ... .. . ... ') 8 0 Inte1csl on Deposit Account ...... ...............
4 5 IO
Balance .. .. .. ... ' Ill II l~ Dividends on Investments ... ... .... . . .. .. ' ... ti, IO 5
Contributed towards Rent by Brit 1sh School at
Athl'ns and llriti,h School at Runw f"r use of
~
Society\ 1oun1 .............. ..... Ill 0 0
l:alance from" Excavations al l'hylakopi" Account 21 I I I
IJ
"Facsimile <'o,k, \'enetus" Aceonnt 16 I 7
Lanlern Slide, and !'hot ographs J\c. ·'
.l l l i
(118() 12 50 /11Su 12
_,
~"
 IxiY

0 :: ..,.
0 C

-~ N
0
0
,,,
>.f)

"- '°
0

"'l C
,,,
,.:, 0
0
Cl U"I

..
f.

=--
~
2
j-
1
.!.
:)

f
:,
;,
::: :::
2

J.
.:::
..,. '= ..,.
z
--:
"
:r.,

::: 0

,.._
N
 FJFTH LIST OF

BOOKS AND PAMPHLETS

ADDED TO THE

LIBRARY OF THE SOCIETY

SIXCE THE PUBLICATION OF THE CATALOGUE.

1906-1907.
~Yolt.-The fir,t four ::iupplement,iry List,. which were issne,l in volume,
xxiii-xxYi of the Jo11,·11r,/ of Hell,:,,;,. St11rlir-, haYe been reprinted, cnmlJine,l in a
6mgle alphabet, price tid. Iby post 7d. ). The Catalogue publishe,l in H)1);{ a!lll the
Combined ::inpplement i-iY. bound together in a stiff t:0\·er, can be pnrchase,l l,y
member, an,l ~uhs~nl,ing hl,raries ,it ~,. fld. 1by ~po,t :z,. 111r1.); price tu non-
member,;~,. tirl. 1hy post;{,. lOJ.)

Ainsworth (W.F.) Tnwels in thP Track of the Ten Thou-,and

Greek,. AYo. 1.-:-1-L
~- --- Tnn-eb and B.e.-,t>an·he-, in Asia }Iino1·, }fesoputarnia,
Chaldea and Annt:>nia. :! vols. Km. 1:3!:!.
Altmann (W.) Die Rot:>misdwn Umhaltaere (lt•r Kai~er,:Pit.
t-rn. Berlin. 1 !-JU::i.
American Journal of Philology. t-rn. Baltimore. Frum IX. :1.
(lt::,-st,: ). J,1 ]Jt'O!/l'fo8.
Anthologia Graeca Epigrammatum Palatina, cum Planudea.
E,l. H. ~tacltmut'ller. Yo!. III. TPubner.
1. t<Yo.
Leip"i,·. l 9Uti.
Arundell (F. V. J.) A vi,-;it to the :--e1·en Churclws of ~\~ia.
Kn,. 18!:!.
Atkinson (T. D.) ~-\. glu~~ary uf tt:>rm~ mt:>d iu Engli,-,h ard1itectt1n•
Brn. 1901i.
Baker (J. J Turkey in Enrnpe. ~YO. 1~77.
Balkankommission, Schriften der, (Anti,1uaris~he _\bteilun!..:J·
1. Dit:' Lika in Romiqcher Zeit. By K. Patsch.
-!to. Yienna. HlOU.
 If. Romi~l:he Yilla bei Pula. B\· H. Sd1wa!L.
-Ho. Yienna. l!-J0:?.
III. Da~ 8amhdiak Bernt in Albanien. BY E.. Pat,t:h.
-!to. Yienna. 190-!.
IY. ,-\ntike DPnkmal,-,r in Bulgarien. By E E.alink,l.
-J-to. \'it·tma. l \IOG.
Bernoulli (J. J.) Die erhaltenen Darstelln11ge11 Ah•xan,lerc- dP,
Gro'i,en. ~Yo. }hmid1. 1 \)0).
Blackie i J. S.) Home Hellenicae
Blass (F.) Prunum:iatiuu ui ..:\.rn:ient Greek. Tran,. l'ul"tun.
;-3,-0. Camh·id_:.,:e. 1890.
Breal (M.) Pour mieux cunnaitre Humt-re. ~n,. Pa1·i,. 1906.
British Museum.
DPJia,·t;nnd r:r" ]J;-iti.,h rmd .I/Pdir,n·u1 A,,ti'l11itiP,.
Catalo.~ue uf Early Chri'itian Antiquitie,.
By 0. }I. Dalton. -!to. 1901.
Guide tu the ,\nti,1uities uf the Stone ,\~t'. ,-.;rn_ 190:?.
Guide to the ..:\.nti,1uities of the Bronze Age. 8m. 190-t.
Uuide tu the Anti11uitie, of the Early Iruu ,\ge.
By R ,-\. Smith. •"HJ. l\JUJ.
D,-p,u·tment ,f Jfa ,111,,_Tipt,.
Greek Papyri, Catalogue "-ith Texh. Ynl. III. .Facsimiles
\'ul. III. -!tn. anrl Fol. 1907.
Burrows (R. M.) The Di~con·J"ie, in CJ"ete and tlwil' heaJ"ing on the
Hi,tnry of Ancient Ci\·ilization. ~YO. mo,.
CAIRO. Catalogue general des Antiquites Egyptiennes du
Musee du Caire.
Gnweu-Egyptian Collins. }Ia,ks and Pul'tmih. !Jy C. C.
Edgar. Hu. Cairo. 1 \JO::i.
Scaral,-,lrnped Seak By P. E. );°ewben-y.
+to. Cai1·0. HJO::i.
Sculpturs' Stuclie, and l' nfini,,]u"d \\'urk--. By C. C.
Edgar. -!to. Caito. InOG.
:-:tatuPc- de 1>iYinit,< :2 vnk By G-. DarP.,,y.
-J-to. Cain,. l\!Oli and HlOi".
Statut', et ~tat1wtkc- d,-, rni, et partic-11lier,. By G.
Legrain. -± tu. Cair, ,. 1!_1015.
Chabert (S.) Hi-..toit·e ~l)llJJllaire de, Etude, ,rr::pigraphil' (_{l'et:•iue.
~Yo. Pari,. 1HOG.
Claflin (E. F.) The ,yntax u!' the Bueutian dia]pt:t in,t:riptiun,.
Svu. Baltimore. HIOli.
Clarke (E. D.) Tnl\-elc- in \'ariuu-, l'uuntrie, uf Em11pe, ,\,ia awl
.\frit:a. 11 Yu]-... l'Y11. l,S:lf-i.
({reek marblP, brought fr11m tlw ,ho1·e, of thP Eu:-._irn•
_\n·hipPlago arnl }[editerranean. ~Yo. C.unln·i<l;..:·p, 1.--or/
Classical Association of England and Wales. Pr11c't'Pdi11g,. ft1
pru:1 ,·e,s. ,j \ "· 1\JOJ
Cochrane (G.) \\',rndning-.. in Gl'Pt'l'l'. :2 n,k •'-\11, 1.--:37_
Cole (A. F.) Tra11,ttt111·. :---ee ,J uYenal.
Colorado. (l'nin·r,ity ,ii) Stmlie,. Yol. IY.
•"'"' ,_ Rou], ll·1-. 1!)OG.
Cornford (F. M.) Thucnlidt''- ::\lvthi~tnri<:u,. ,"1·11. rnn,.
Corolla Numismatica . . Xurnism:iti<: Es~an in hunom uf Tia,·dav Y.
Head. · ,"Yu. 19CJG.
Dalton (0. M.) L'atal,1gue uf Earl:· Chri~tian Antiquitie,. See
Briti,h ::\[u,eum.
Daressy (G.) Statue.;; de Di,inite~. 8Pe Cairu.
Davidson (W. L.) The :-ituic Creed. 8n,. Eflinbur~·b. l\JO,.
Davis rn. J.) ..\natolirn. :--:'""· 187-t.
Demosthenes. Orntio11t•s. Ed. S. H. Butcher. :2 w,!,.
8,, ,. Oxford.
Duff (J. W.) Rumer and Beowulf, a literary parall,-.]. [:-iaga-buok
of the Yiking Club, 1DOG.] :--:rn l DOG.
Edgar (C. C.) Grneco-Egyptian Collins.
:-iculptors· .,tuclies. :-iee Cairo.
Egmont (J. Ae. van). Trawls. :.! Ynb. i:'Yu. 1 ,:-,9_
Egypt Exploration Fund. ::\Iernoirs :Xaucr-ati-; II. :--eP
Ganlnn E. _\_
Egypt. i--enice des .\.nti,1uites. Annale~. Yo!. YII. Fa"c. :.!.
Rappo1·t sur !cs Tranrnx ex,:<:utt'·s tl Eclfnu. By A.
Bar,anti. 8,o. Cairn. l !IOG.
Elgin. ::\Iemorandum 011 the sulJ,ied of the Earl of El.::in", ]•Ursuit--;
in Cl-ree<:e. :--:,u. 1:--:ll.
Engel (A.) and Paris (P.) rue .Fortere,"e Iberi,1ue ii ( l,,una.
( \~ol. XIII Fas<:. -t <Jf :Xouwlle~ -.\.rchive-; de~ ::\Ii,,-;iuns
:-icientitir1 ues.) i:'Yu. Pari ~- HIOG.
Evans (A. J.) The Prehi"tori<: Tombs uf Kno-,5rr,.
[ A.rchaeologia, Yul. LIX.] -tt<,. 190G.
Evans (J. W.) The identity nf the amiantos ... with chrysolite.
[}Iinernlogical ::\Iag. XJY. X o. 60.] :--:n> Hl06.
Fairclough (H. R.) The attitude uf the Gt'eek Trage,lian, toward
5ature. Svo. Torontu. 1897.
- - - - The Counection het,,een )[u~i<: and Poetry in early Gt·eek
Literature. t-:vo. Baltimure. 1~10:2.
------- The Helen Epi,ode in \~ ergil",; Aeneid II. ;jj~l-G:.!:3.
t-:vo. Chicago. 1'.lOG.
~ - - - - Yergif-; relation;:, to UraPcn-Roman Art.
:--:n>. Chicago. 1\JOG.
Farnell (L. R.) Cult~ of tlw Grel'k ~tate-;. Yols TH and n~.
:-<rn. Oxf, n-rl. 1907.
Ferguson (W. S.) The Prie~t,., of .\sklepios.
t-:,·o. Berkelry. 190G.
Ferrero (G.) The Greatne~s and De<:line of Rume. Tran,. hy .\. E.
Zimmern. :.! Yols. :-::\',>. 19U7.
Finlay (G.) Greece under the Romans.
:--:Yo. Edinburgh and Lundon.
Finlay (G.) Hi,t,)l'y of the Byzantine Empirt·.
/'YO. Edinburgh and Lumlun. 1.-,;:j(j_
Tllt' Histor~· uf Greece under Uthoman and \' t'Ht:>tiaH
l>ominatioll. :,,-o. Edinburgh and Londun. I .-;:iti.
Hi,tory of tlw Greek Revolution. :! Yok
8\o. Edinlmrgh and L,rnlon. 1.-;Gl.
Foucart ( P.) Etude sur I>idynw-, tl'apri:~ u11 P,;pyru, de Berlin.
[}Iem. dt' L\.ead. de~ ln~er. XXX \'III. 1.]
-!tu. Pari,-,. l!JOi'.
Frazer (J. G.) Aduni,, Attis, 0-;iri~ : ,tndie, in the hi;;.tury of oriental
religion. .-;w,. 1£l0G.
Freeman (K. J.) :-ichools of Rella,. .\.11 essay 011 the prndiee and
theory of Aueient Greek Education from GOO tu :300 B.1'.
t:rn. mo,.
Furtwaengler (A.) Die Aeginetni. KnJ. ::\Iunich. l !:lOG.
Gardner (E. A.) The Briti5h Hehonl at Athens. [Oxford and Cam-
bridge ReYit:w.] 8rn. 190,.
- ---- - :Xaukrati;, TT. l,-;88. (Eg. Ex. Fund, Gth 1Iemoir.)
4tu. l1':3t:_
Geneva. }Iemuire" de l'Imtitut :Xatiunal Generni,. Yo!. X: \'III.
A.iol'TOS TOl' a-o<f,ov TO £.r.apxlKOl' {3i{3A[ov. (Le Line du Prefet.)
Trall,lated and edited hy .Jule,- Xicole.
-I-to, GeneYa. moo.
Giffard (E., A Short Yi-,it to thP Ionian I,larnb, Athen~ arnl the
}Iurea. l:!rno. 1:3:37.
Gilliard (C.) Quelque, Reforme;, de Solu11. t-\ u, Lau;,arrne. mo,.
Hackett iJ.J A History of the Orthoclux Church uf Cypru,.
t(yo. l901.
Haigh (A. E.) The Attic Theatre. 8\-o. Oxfonl. 190,.
Hall (H. R.) 1Iurray'& Handbook for Egypt and the Sudan. HlO,.
Head /Barclay V.) :-iee Corolla :Xumi,matica [in honour uf B. Y.H. J
Herodotus. Tram,latetl hy G. Rawlimon. -1 rnk 8Yu, L'-::i.-,;.
Hermann (P.) Denkmaler der }Ialerei des Alterthum;,, la pru!Jr"'''·
Fol. }Iunieh. 1HO,.
Hettner (H.) A.them and thP Pelopnnne~e. (Tram,.)
~Yu. Edinbmgh. l ,'-:-,-L
Hill IG. F.). Hi,torit:al Greek Coin~. ,"\u, l!ltJlj.
------ :-iouree~ for· Greek Hi~tory between the Pn;..ian and Pelupun-
ne~ian \\'ar;... ;-<eeornl i,,ue. .-;Yo. Oxfurd. 1907.
Hobhouse (J. C.) A ,Journey through Albanin (ete.) during tlw year,_
180D and l,'-10, :! n,k -!to. l,'-1:1.
Hoste IM. R.) :Xausicaa, an idyll of the Ody.,s('Y· ~rn. HlOfi.
Hyperides. Oratione, t•t Fragmenta. Ed. F. G. _K_p11yu11.
,'-n,. Oxford. [X.D.J
Jacoby I F.1 ;-<pp }Ianuur Pariulll.
Juvenal. :-<atir""· Trnmlatecl l,y .\.. F. Cole. ,'-rn. HWti.
Kalinka (E.) .\.ntikP I lenkmah•1· in Bnl_g·ariPn. :-<e., Halkankom-
n1h,1011.
Kalinka (E.) Tituli Lyciat'. :-,pt' Tituli .\--,iaP )Iiw,ri~.
Kenyon (F. G.) Tht· E,idem·e of <:1°f'l'k Papyri with re~arrl t<>
T,,xtual Critil'.i~111. l fl0-1-.
- - - - Editu,·. ::--ee Hyperide,-,,
Kinneir (J. M.) ,fournt>y throu.!.dt ~-\.rmenia and
Knorrlic.,tan. ~Yo. 1~},...:..
Lang (A.) ;-:yr,_ l \:l(ili.
Lear (E.1 .T.,urnal-, uf a larnl--,l'.ape painter in .-\lbania Ptc.
8,-,,. 1,-.::-,1
Lechevalier (J. B. J \' uyage de la Truade. :1 nJb.
1--Yu. Pari~. 1,:-U:!.
Legrain (G.) :--tatue-, et ::--tatuette--, de mi, et particulier~. ::-;,_,"'
Cairo, Catalogue dn )fusee du CairP.
Leland Stanford University. Antigone.
8Yu. San FraiH.:i~l"'-'· HlO:!.
Leo. .\e'orrn, 'TOV U"orpov 'TO irrapxtKOI' /3t/3A£o1•. ::-;ee Genent, }Iemuilh
,lp l'In--,titut ~ational UeneYuis.
Louvre Museum. Papy,·i. Papyrus Urel'.c.; du Loune et de la
Bililiothi·,11w Irnpt'l"iale. [Xotices et Extraits des )Ianu-
..,l"tit--, ,Jl, la Bibliotht>que Imperiale XYIII, :!.] Plat,,,
u111Y. Fol. Paris. 1863.
Macdonald (G.) Fixed and Lou,;e Dies in Ancient Coinage (fru1t1
Curolla X11mi.-11wtica). 1--YO. Oxford. 190G.
and Park (A.) Tlw Human Forte, nn the Bar Hill. Du111-
hart1m--,hire. 8.-o. Glasgow. 1906.
Mackail (J. W.) Sell'd Epigram-; from the GrePk Anthology.
8w1. l!lOfi.
Malinin (A.) llie Enneakrunu,-Epi~ude bPi Pau~anias.
1:\Yo. \'ienna. l!JOlj_
Marmor Parium. Ed. F. ,Jacuhy. 1--Yo. Berlin. l 9U-!.
Marshall (F. H.) The Second Athenian ConferleracY.
1--rn. Cambrirlge. 1903.
Mayser (E.) c:rammatik der Gried1i~ehen Papyri au,-, der Pt11h•-
maerzeit. vo. Leip~il". HtOG.
Monro (D. B.) A :--hort }Iemoir. :-:,o. Oxford. HIUi".
Newberry (P. E.) See Cairn. CataloguP gPnPral de-; Anti,1uit.-,~
E,~yptiPllIH:'S.
Nicole (J.) Le Li \Tl' du Prt'•frt. :-;Pl' ( :cm•Ya, ..\[t'.moit·f,.., dP J"In~titut
Xatiunal Genen•i~ .
.\lPhm.~e.., Xil"ole. Hel'.ueil de ..\l,'·nwire--, de Philolo.~it'
Cla"..,i'\lll' Pt d'An·ht'·olo.~ie o±i"erh ,l ,Jule,; Xicule.
c"Yo. UeneHt and Ba ,le. l \iU3.
Orsi (P.J l>ue 1\•~k di Hili,·,·i Fu1wl1ri Attiei rinwnutP in :--icilia
(ft-um ..\li~c. di ),rd1. di ~tnria l' di Fil11l11.~ia).
:-:, "· PalPr1110. HlOj".
X110Yi llot;Ullll'nti della Ci.-ilt,'t Premicem·a e ..\lil"L'llt'a ill
Italia (from .!11.,11nia ).
:--111all +to. HomP. l!JUi".
Papyrus Grecs. (ell. .Jvuguet) [In-,t. Pal'yr11lg1<p1<: dt> rl·nin·r,it,;
<le Lille.] -Hu. l'ari,. H11Y,.
Paris (P.) rue FurtereS',e Iberit1ue it O,una. :--e,· En:.:d (_\.) and
Paris (P. ).
Park (A.) The Roman Fnrh 11n the Bar Hill, Dum l 1;u ton,hit ,·. :--ee
::\Ia<:dtmald (G.) and Park (A.).
Paton (A.A.) The Danube and the _\driatic. ,-:,-... J,-:1;:,!.
Patsch (K.) Die Lika in Romi,-<:her Zeit.
-------- Da~ Sambchak in _\lhanien. :--l'l' Balkan,!;:. •lllllli--ion.
Paulatos (N.) H IL\TPI::£ TOY O.lY:::~Eff'.::, frum tlw G,,1·111a11.
,-:.:n_.. _-\.tlieu s. 1 !lllG.
Plato. }Ienexenus. (Eel. ,J. _-\.. :--lrnwy,__.r. I :--1·u. 0:d',,r,l. l !ll)G.
Pococke (R.) A de,cription uf the East and utl1e1· Lum1trie'i.
:2 Yub. F, ,I l,
-1:3-::i.
Pollux (J.) Onoma~ti<:on cum Annotationihu, Interp1 etum. Ed.
Dindorf. :i mis. ,-:n,. Leip,ic. 1,-::_!_J,_
Polites (N. G.) )hA£Tat 7r€pt TOl' (Jfov • . • TOl 'E,\,\·1)1'lKOl ,\ao,·.
:! Yuk 1,1·0. A then,. l ~JCl-t.
Poulsen (F.) Die Dipylongrneher uncl die Dipylom a,e11.
,..,rn. Leip,i<:. l DO::i.
Prasek (J. V.) Ge,;chiehte tler }Ieder uml Zlll'

makedoni,ehen Ernberung. Band I.

i'1·u. Gntlia. 1 !1013.
Prescott (H. W.) :--ome pha,es nf the relation of thnn:.:ht tu Yei-se
in Plan tu". ( l. niY<:r;;ity of California.)
l'n,. HPt·k .. Je\·. l ftO,.
Ramsay (W. M.) Imprt>,-,ions of Turkey during t11·t>ln· n_.ar,
'\Yawlnin;;, •"""· 1,-:!1,.
and utlier-,. Stmlie-, in the hi~tury am 1 at t 11f tlw Li-,ten1
vrU\ince, of the Homan Empir,·. [.\hL·1·de,·n l·ni1·.
Studit>s. So. ~O.J -Hu. _\lwrdt>e11. Ul(Jfj.
Randolph I B.) The Pre"ent ~tate of the }fon•a.
-Jtu. Uxfurd. 1 lji,(i.
The prP~ent ,tatP nl' the }Iorea. Tn:.:ether with a
cle~eription of the City of .\.then~. I c,Janrl, 11f Zant.
Strafacle, aml :--erigu. -ltn. 1,;,-:1,.
Rathgen (F.) Th<: prese1Tation of _-\.ntit1uitie,. Tran,. (;_ H .. \11<len.
,-:nJ. Ca111l,rid,c,:,·. 1i11_1:,;_
Rawlinson (G.) T,·,,,u;l,,tor awl Er{i/111·. :--ee lfrr11rlotll'>.
Reinach (S.) Apollo. Tram. F. 8immorn[-.;. ,-:1•11. 1!Iii,.
Rodd (R.) Tht> Prinee'i of Adiaia and the Cl1ru11idt•, ol' :\111rea.
:2 Yuk '"'°"· l!l1J 1.
Revue de Philologie.
P,·r1y1·P,-..s. ,...:y(,. Pari'i.
Rhys Th" Ct>ltic In',tTiption, of Fnrnc·t· and lrak. [P1·0(·. of
(J.)
Briti,h .-\.c-aderny. Ynl. IT.] I'm. IJxf,'.nl. 1!11),.
Richardson (L. J.) Horne,:, .\kait: 8trnl'lw. Hnk1·l,•y. l DO,.
Savary. Lt'ttPr-- Oil Gret'C-l'. (tran,.) ,-:1,,. 1,,,.-.;
 lxxi

Schmidt (M. C. P.) Kritik tk•r Kritiken. Ein ·wort zur )..1,wchr
uml zur Yertheidigung <lei· reali~ti,l'hen Chn·~tumathie .
.-:rn. Leip,il'. lDOG.
Schrader (H.) Pl'iene. i-iee Wiegand.
Schwalb (H.) Rumische \'ilia hei Pola. See Balkau,kunnni,,iun.
Seymour (T. D.) Life in the H, ,meric Age.
l",·o. X ew York arnl Lorn Ion. l \107.
Smith (R. A.) Antir1uitiPs of the Ea1fr Iron Age. ~........ Briti,-,h
)Iu~eum. ·
Sophocles. <-\.ntigont->. Tmnslaterl h_\- R. \YhitPlaw.
:S:n,. Oxf, ,1·(l. 1 !IOG.
Steuart (J. R. \ .A Desl'ription uf ~•>lllE' <-\.ncil'ltt )J.,nurncnt, in
Lydia and Phrygia. Fol. 1 S-!:?.
Stevenson (J. J.) <\. He,-,toration of tlw )Iau~uleum at Halil'ar-
na,~u-,. (:-iuciety of <-\.ntilJUaries.) ll"HG.
Strong (E.) Roman :-iculpture. :3w. Hl07.
Svoronos (J. N.) Da°' Athener Xational :'llu,eum. plwtutypi,-,dw
\Yiedergalw ~einer Schaetze. -!to. A then,. l £10-!.
Taylor (J.) )Iarmor Samh·iceme. -!to. Camh1·idge. l 7 -!:3.
Tennent (J. E.) ThP Hi,tory of )[odern Greece. :? w,h.
:--'""· l:S:-l-3.
Tituli Asiae Minoris. Tituli Lyl·iaP. R\· E. Kaliuka.
.F, ,1. Yienna. lfil)l,
Tschihatscheff (P. von) Rei,-,en in Kll'inm,ieu urn! <\.l'llll'llit•Il.
Small Ful. G-utlia. l :--1; 7.
Tucker (T. G.) Life in Ancient <-\.then,. :-,·o. 1!11)7.
Visconti (E. Q.) Planche5 !le l'Icon11_graphie Urel'L\lW.
Ful. P,ni,.
Walters (H. B.) The art of the G1·eeb. :--,·11. lnOl-i
Waxel (L. de). Recueil ,le LJnel,1ut•s <-\.ntiL1nit;,.;, t1·11n.-i'-p, ~u1· le~
Burd, de la 1Ie1· X oirc'. -1-to. Berlin. l :--1):~.
Whitelaw (R.) Trnn"lator. ~ee ~ophocles.
Wiegand (T.) Die ardiai~l'he Poro~-<\.rd1itt"ktm dl'l' ~\.kr<>poli~ Z\I
..:\.then. Hu. aw 1 fol. Lcip,iL·. l \10-l-.
Wiegand (T.) and Schrader (H.) Priene. -I-tu. Ht·rlin. lfiU-1-.
Wilkins (W.) ..:\.thenien,ia or Bemarks on the Tupugmphy and
Building-, of Atlwns. -"rn. 1:--lt\.
- - - - - A letter to the Lunl \~i~l'nunt Gnodril'h un the patrnua.~t' ol'
the art-; by the Engli~h GowrnmPnt. :--y11, }:--:'.:!.
Wyse (T.) Impre,o,ion, of U-reeet•. ,-.:,·11. 1:,;71.
Zehetmaier (J.) LeichenYerhrennnng urnl LPichPnlw,tattnng im
alten Rella-;. ,-.:rn. L,i\"il·. l !l07.
Ziebarth (E.) Kulturbikler au-, !!.L'ied1i"c·he11 ~tatltt·n.
l",·u. Leip,i,·. l \)07.
Zimmern (A. E.) Trn11.;,\at111'. :--ee Ft->nt•r 0 (t}.).
COLLECTION OF NEGATIVES, PHOTOGRAPHS, AND LANTERN SLIDES.

THIRD LIST OF

ACCESSIONS TO THE CATALOGUE OF SLIDES

PCBLI:-HEIJ IS YOL. XXff. OF THE JiJUR:'1-AL OF HELLE.VIG ST['DJE,,.
(Fo,·Ji,~~t li-.,f of acetssioiis see J.H./{ tol. XX't, p. lxii.)
(Fn,· ..,,,1_·un1l lust ,~f acc,';;;sfons S•'t' to!. xxvi, p. Jx'\:iY.)

:\Ie11,Lets de,11 iug information re,pectiug thi., ,lepartrneut of the Society's work are re,p1ested to
ap1•ly to tlre Lrn1,ARL\:S-, Hellenic Society, 22 Albemarle Street, "'·

Copies of this .dccessiun List may be !,ad, p1·ice 3d.

TOPOGRAPHY, ARCHITECTURE AND EXCAVATIONS.

ASIA MINOR.
.J.303 . .\naz,u 1,n .... B,1-.1Ju·a X o. 1, f1\Lgment of co1 nieP .
4:3,), . , lintel of door.
4:JIJ;, acanthus bra,·ket.
4:J(ltj detail.
4:31,, Xo. :3, S. ,loor
4308 Ak E,tle, c ,teri,1r of ,·rllliforn1 from \\".
43111 Bu,lrn1t1. :::Sr,rthern Ba,ilrea, exterior of ll)he.
401J:! ca!'ital outside apse.
43:!S Bi11h11k1J1-.-..e. Xo. 8, rnoulding5.
6ltiti Cm,ln,, rerne110, of Demeter.
4318 Corycian cluptl, X. fa,:ade.
4:Jlfl Daonl,·h. Xn. 1, nave awl S. ai,le,
4:3~1) ,letail of aro:a,le of na,-e.
4::21 :J, iu tL-rinr of ap,e.
4:l:!:!
4 ;:!4 .. J._). ,ln"r a!lll niche in one of tlte p.irallcl chaml,er,.
432,, 14. \\-. fa,:,iclt: r,f d1:tlll her A.
4·:20 C'.
4~27 . . cat ,·e,l iiutel.
4:32p 1.~, E. ta,:3dr·.
432:3 .. to1111,.
 lxxiii
4:JO!l Kanyteli•leis, Ba,ilica No. 1, interior of ap,e.
4310 engage,! capita.ls an,! prothesi,.
4311 ,, 4, interior of aJ•SP.
-1:112 ,, engaged capital in narthex.
4313 Korghoz, Basilica Xn. 1, engaged colnmn in 1Y. wall.
-l3H ,, window in X. E. apse.
4:115 ., 2. doorway.
,i::\16 ., interior lookillg X.
431 i ,, 3, enga~e,l capital in central ap,e.
-!:331 ~Iiram, St. Enstathios from the S.E.
43:30 Silleh, .St. :'llichael', from the X. W.

CRETE.

7601 Crete, Venetian aquedrn°t near C'no,-;os.

AEGEAN ISLANDS.
,-;147 Rho.Jes, Lin,lns, co.1b of _'ums.
nl:26 Them, excaYations.
,-;1:10 view from htights.

NORTHERN AND CENTRAL GREECE.

ISLAND SITES.
611:i Delphi.
t,!} 117 1ihin of K inha.
it:i02 view from St.uliu1J1.
109 Enr !'11,.

THE ACROPOLIS.
:,!l:!j .\cropoli,. detail of :S-. wall, 1•0s,1ble l'e1sian a-cent.
f,.J,tl Ei»chthenn,, JJLrn (_-ith. Jhtt. l\'104. PL vi.)
:~01 ·~ .~e11e1al view fro1n.
itl06 X. 1'01Cli, 1905,
3023 Te 11, pie ,,fN'ike A 1'te1 os from the P1 opy]aaa.
:3022 looking S. 1\'.
11:il l'.nthenoll, new in Tnrkish time,.
6306 restored (William,' Yiews in (ireece).
:5002 from S. W.
300-! from X. E.
:,012 corner of\\'. colonna,le.
.31'105 inte,ior looking :-l. E.
i605 X. ,i,le. l urvatme nf sty lo bat<·

BUILDINGS, MONUMENTS, ON S. SIDE OF THE ACROPOLIS.

:30:!4 .\ sdepie1011.
i313 sa,-ritkial pit.
7312 ,-left of the Enmeni•les.

BUILDINGS, MONUMENTS, OTHER THAN ON THE ACROPOLIS.

::J0:36 Rock-,:nt houses a11,i tornbs, i-... r l'n: x
in07 The,eion. 3. colo1rna,le.
 lxxiv

ATTICA.
i60S Parne, tr,im Pe1ttelicus
6383 :\lap of Sahmi,.
PELOPONNESUS.
621\1 =
Ger,mth1.1c Geraki, Church of St. Athana-,in5.
16Si Kar~·taiu,,, F1,111kish bridge from E.
1682 ::\[egalopo1i,, theatre.
1393 ::\[istrn.
15\'!2 rnim of 1,alace.
148-1 ::\Iycen,1•·, ::\[e::,uon, pre,ent st.1te.
3273 Olympi,1, Her,,ion. ,leL1il, of masonry.
5717 Phig,,ld,1. 1Ba,,.1e) general view of Temple
6309 TernJJle restored (1niliam,'.
6811 Bank of Eurota, near S,rnctuary of Artemis before excaYatioH.
6802 PL111 of Sp,1rt,1 exeavatioH (coloured).
6812 Sancttmry of Artemi, Orthi,1, excavator-, digging out ivories.
680-1 plaD.
6805
680~
6801 :-:,ection of I coloure,li.
6901 genern.l view.
690-1 s1,a1 ra, l,,1,e, ul I•l'·b nt Roman theatre.

By:,,nti,11'.
i612 Byza11m1c l_'hurclt.
MAGNA GRAECIA.
41i8 Agrig,,ntm,1, Temp],_, of Juno, architr.we and cat,itals.
-11 i~ capit.d.
41!'4 Selinn,. T"nq,le C, e,1piul.
4195 D.
-1191 E,
-1189 F,
41Si I~-
H 93 0.

PREHELLENIC ANTIQUITIES.
5tiSti C.uniru, ,utnrtte. IL ::\1.
6346 Cnossos, Pab,:e "a,,·. (J.H S. ix, p. 120, fig. 75. \
6:Hi :\Iycena,·, · P,t!ace · Y,1,e. (J.H.::i. xxiv, pl. xiii.)
6H2 ::\[yccna, rn je1n llety lrom Aegina ·. '. Cf. ./. H. S. xiii.,
0

6-H4
,~go Phylakoj'i, L,rge jar.
7305 ]"Jttery.
72Sfl Pr,11:sos part ol larn,1x bird.
6~1:i Pit ho".:, Sl) n tn.

SCULPTURE AND MODELLING.

ii'S:20 Fi~111 iw:--. ~l 1 ll t'.1.
6S~l
1JS~:!
OS:2:} I vori1.::...
DS:25 Ivory I d1( f ..
6S:2-l St:ah
 SCULPTURE.
EARLY PERIOD.
l:id64 Aq,ina, 1,eJiment-; 1e,tored.
6661 E. pen•lirn•·nt. Furtw,rngler's 'Aegina · pl. \J5,
6663 head.
666;, _\croterion re,tore,_l.
666~ W. Funw,u1gler', · Aegina' pl. 96.
o:H8 Naxiau ,phrnx, lJ·lplu_, iv, pl. vi.
6:350 Del1,hi, frieze iv, pl. J:3, 1-1.
6351 wntinue,l.
6352
6353
:Jjgl Apoll", .\ln,. X,tl., !(olllc.
FINE PERIOD.
66; 5 Anacrec.n < "iJ1,e~1hag1.::11.
56150 Diadumen .. , uI l\,lycleitn,. Terracotta revlica.
1111 c;ran-relief
:J2i9 Head of Plate,.
f,9S2 Stele of Xanthippo,.
:lHI;', Two 1,_leal female head,. Athens, Berli11.

LATE PERIOD.
3i90 Arch,,i,tio reliel. Lirth of ,-,,nus, Rome. :\[us. Naz.
3i\13 Stattte ot (',_r,_,, :\lu,;. Yat.

TERRACOTTAS.
;,'560 Di,ldumen,), ( J. H. S. Pl. !xii ,, . )
7204 Lion from P1,le,os.
7297, Pr,te-,o~. 'Yon11g ~od.:
i:2,:3 b.1ck vie\\.

VASES.
BLACK-FIGURED VASES.
t3381 BF. _\1111,l,oi\l. Xn1,tiah nf Zen, awl Hera
•Bio B.F. Y.1,c. Yictoriotb horseman.

RED-FIGURED VASES.
o:3i5 RF. kyl1,_ exte1ior . .Jn,l;;ment oi PHi,. Hit"nn.
637-1 Oedipus ,111'! Sphinx \G .\. ,-. iii. :2:l-1 \,
637\• R F \ ,be. Cirh at play.
6034 · Tbe, .. u,' kv:i, ,·xtcli<lr.
,303;,

BRONZES.
97 B . .\I.
Bronze .\[irr,_or.
13668 Ephesu-. Bro1,b' atltletc, ,i,le.
666\l b,1 1:k.
 lxxd

MISCELLANEA.
~q4 )b,ks, S1,,uta.
tiS15
6S1•,
6317
6S1S ,ra,k tur he,1,_l ut cretin, Spat ta.
d818 :\Ia,ks, S1 1,uta.
S80;, :'iia,k
632t3 Strla.e w1t1!" <lnlications, 5p11 t.1.
 .JOCRX}, L OF HELLEXIL' :--TCDIE~.
22 .\LB}.,I.\RU, :--T., \Y .
•Yo,·. :{,·,/, H111:1.

KOTICE TO COXTRIBt-TURS.

THE Cuuncil of the Hellenic Society ha, ing <1L·ci<kd that it i;c, <lcsirable
for a common systern uf transliter.1tiun of Greek wunb t11 bL· a,1/lptL·d in
the Jou 1'i111l of H..·l fr1111· St1 1 d1,-s. the following sd1emt· ha,, been <lra wn up
by the Acting Editorial Committee in <·,m,inn..tiun with tlw l'o11--11ltatin°
Editorial Committf>t•. aml ha,- reeei,·ed the approni.l of the Council.
In consideration of th,· literary tr:11litiun-s .,f Engli--h ,-,·holar,-,hip. the
scheme is ut the nat\ln· 11t' a cu1upr,,1misL•. anrl i11 mc,,;t c:,..,,.,._ c-.,11..,id,·r:1hlc
latitude of usage is tu he allu,\'etl.

( 1) All Gret'k jlrupcr mune,; --hunk! b,.. trnn--lit,-rat,·d int" thL· Latin
alphabet acconling- tu the practiec· ,,f e->clucate,l Ru1tt:rn-s of tlw Au:;·n::-tan agL·.
Thu,; K ,-houlcl he rt·prc"<:·nt,·d 1,~· ,·. tht- ,·nw, 1-- arnl rliphth"ng·,- v, a1, 01. ov
0

by y, ae. oc. awl 1, r•.·--11t:·r·tin·l)·. tinal -o, al1ll -01• li~· -11s and -11111. n11cl -po,
by -e;·.
But in th,, l':l'-l' uf thc· rlipltth1111g El. it j.., felt that I Ii-.. llllll'i' --niuhk
than , or i. :dthung·h in 11,ur11·~ lik,· Lu,,,1;,.,,, __-11, ,:,1wl1·1,,_
,vhen:' tlw:· an: U•ll"c'l'l'cltL'rl lJ:· u~ng,·., 11r; ,-,Ji.,11lrl l,._. prc·-•·n ,·<l.
al;,o ,F,nb Pnding· in -Ewi1 mn--t bL· rq1r•:--1·lltL·d by -0 1 111.
A cr•rtain arn,,nnt 11f rli--,-rdi1111 11111,t bi· alln,h•d in n~iug tlw
u t,.•n11inati11n:--. c,-,1,.·cially wh,·n· the Latin 11--a.~·,· it--,·1± Yari,·-.
or prclt•r::- th,·" f,.rn1 :1~ D, !,,.,_ :--i111il.t1 ly Latin 11--ag,· --hnnlrl
be f,,l111,n·d a:- far a,-. po--~ilik 111 -,· arnl _,, t,·n11i11ati"n".
e.g· .. I'l'ie1u·. S111.1Ji'1111. Iu ..,,)111<_• •Jf thL' 1n .. n: ul>--clll'L' nnnu_•,-.
ending in -po,, a-- _\Ea 1 po,. -1·1· --hunlll lw aH,id,·d. a-- likelv
to !earl to c11nfo--inn. Th,· Ure-><·k f,,n1t -,,,, i,- t" b,:' prdi·n,·d
to -o fur rn,1111•,-, lik\' Di,_lit. !Ji,_·,·u,1. 1·\:l'C·pt in a n,t111,· ..,., Ct>l11ll11>t1
a-- rl1111!1u. \\·hl'rl' it m,nlrl l,l' p,·rlanti,·
Xume:-- which ha\·,· ac,itiircd a ddi.nit,· E11:.Ji--h f,.rn1 --n,·h a-..
C,:,t'i,dl,. Af/1,'11,. shnukl of CUlll'':'l' ll"t J,. ... r!t,_·l'\\ 1--,.· rcpre--L·nt,.·,1.
It i._ hardly 11,.·,.:e-----ary t11 p,,iut 11nt th,lt f,.nll-- lik,· JI, i'n 1 /,15,
.lfr,·, 11 i'//, Jli,1.-;·cu. --h .. nid l!()t h· 11--t·d f,.r }{,, ,,, ,, , JI, r1111 ,_ an,!
_-Ulo.·,1,1.
l
 lxxviii

(2) Altlrnngh names of the god,-; ,.;honlrl be tran-,literated in the same

way as other proper names, rntmes uf per,-,nnificatiurn, and epithets such as
~Yil:c. lfo11u,n i11, Hyul,·i,1th ios. ,;huultl fall 1tJl(kr § -1-.
11

P~) In n" ca--c ;,houkl accent,.;, especially the circu111tlex, be written over
Ynwels tu shm\· qnantity.

(-f In the• ease of Gt'eek word,- other tlrnn proper names, m,ed as names
uf pers"nificatiuri-; or technical terms. the Ureek fr,rm ;,honlcl be tran,-literated
lett'--'r t,1r letter, 7, being u:-ell fur K, ch for X· 1mt !I arnl " being snbstituted
f<H' v aml ov, ·which are mi,-,leading in Engli,-h. L'.g., ~\~ike, l'JJO)_'yo!i1c,u1s,
du1,l11,w'110.,, ,·l1,1;t,,,1.
Thi, rnk :-houkl not be rigidly enforced in the ca;;e uf Greek
\,-unl" in cu111111011 English n·+, :-nch as //cgi.s, .S!J11iposi11;,1. It
i-- al --u ucce:-sary to pre,-,en·c the u,-;e of on for ov in a
ec·rtain nurnber ,,f wurlb in ,d1ich it ha,- b,,cume almost
uni,-er:--aL ,-nc-h a, l.oule. g, m, 1 .,iu.

( ."j) The· ~le-ting Editorial l'ornrnitt<:e arc anthuri,;ecl tu currcct all

}ISS. arnl prunf..., i11 acc"nlnncc with thi,, --clwlli(". c,xc-,-pt iu the ca,-e of a
...,p,_•eial prutL'-..t frum a C<>1ttribntt1r. All e"ntri1inl11r-:, thcn·fi,rc, \Yh" object
u11 principh: tu th,: ,-;y-..tL-111 apprn,-(:tl l,y thtc C._)n11cil, ,U'l' r'--''lllL·:-ttccl tu inf,inn
the Edit,,r-.. ,_)f tbL' fact ,rlw11 ft1rwardi11g <_•u11tnb11t1u11-- tu till' ,Junrnal.

In ad,liti.,n t" th,_· ahi,·L' ,-.y,-.t,:111 .,f tran"lltt·rntic,n. et1ntribntor:- t,) tlw
Ju11,·,u1l ,/ JI, ll,_1111 8!J1J1,·, arl' n·,1nL•...,t,·•l, . . " far ;i..; p,,;c....,ibk, to ndhcrtc t,-. thtc
fnlluwing t'(>ll\'t_·11tw1i-- :~

XatnL' . . ,,f a1tth,,r,-, ,,,h,,nkl n"t lJc m11krlin,:d. tit\,_, ... uf bu(1k,-,, nrti,_.\c-,-_
l .. ,ri .. dical-- Ill' t1t hL·l' c,,11, ,,:ti\ L' }Jll blieatiuns -..hllnld h· l\]J(krlinL'1l u;)l' italic--,).
If th•· tit!(• "t ,rn artir·lt> i-.. ,,w,tc,d a-- \H'll n-.. th,· 1J11hlic-atiu11 in \Yhic-h it j...,
''"11tai1wd. tlw btH'l' .-..h11nld ht: !,racketed. Tim~:

l}nt a--- n l'l!l,, th,- ,-hurter f11n11 .,f citat i,in i,- l<> 1J(' prd't>rred.
Th,, n111J1l><•r ,,f the eiliti .. 11. ,d1,,n 11t-Cl'...,-..mT .... Ji,n1ld lit> rndicated h,· a
,1,1.1.ll ti.~11r,· ah,r,· tlw lim·: '·!I- J)ittt-nb. S!111_c· 12:l.
 lxxix

Titl,_'S ,j Puiui1fr,d ,1;11l C'ullc,·tir,: Publiwtio11s.

The following abbreviation,,; nr.:· ,-mggest<,ll, a,-, alr1:acly in more or Jc,,-;
~encral u,se. In other ca,;es. 1w ablire\·iatiun \l'hich i,,; nut readily i1lentifi-~ll
:'<hnulcl he employed .
. 1.-B Jf. = Ard1:i,,l,J_c;isch-epigraphi-d1e :iiittheilnn 6rn .
. I 1111. ,/. I.= Annali dell' In,titnto .
. l,·,h ..-l,1:. =.-\rchiiologischer .-\nzeiger -_Beil_1L,tt Lnlll .Jnhrlrnd1:•.
Arch Z1·it. = Ard1iiolo:-;ische Zeitnng.
.-l th. Jlittl1. = :iiittheilungen ,les llent,chen Ai-ch. lu-t., .\theni,d1e .-\b;l1e1hnc.;.
Baumei-ter=Ba.urnei'iter, Denkrniiler cle- kL--i,d1en .-\ltert,un,.
R. C.H.= Bulletin ,le C, ,1T2spon,Lnce Helleni,1ne.
Bed. T'o.,. = FurhYiiugler, Besch1·t-ib1_mg ,ler \ a,en-1rn1,il:rng L'l Be1lin.
0

B. JI. B,-,_,,,:e, = British :iiu,;enm (\1t,tl,,gu,, uf Bronze-.

B.JI.C. = Briti,h :iimeum Cat,1lns:11e ,)f C~reek C.\,in,.
H . .lf. l11scr. =Grel k I11,-c11ption, i11 the Bnti-:1 :iln,en:11.
0

R. JI. J'as,s= Bi-iti:-11 :iiusemn Cat,1l11e:ue ,_,i \ ,t,•:s. l ':'tl:1. etc.

0

H.8 . .d.=~-\nnn,,l of the Briti,h :::._houl at .\thens.

Bull. d. I.= Bullettino Jell' I11,-titnt,1.
Bn,olt = Bu,ult, Griec hi;,che l_~e 0 d1id1te.
C.I. G. =Corpus In,cripti•:•num Gr,1e.-arn111.
C.'.1.L. = Cur1•ns Iu,criptioman Latinanun.
Cl. Hn·. = Cla-,ic.11 Re\·iew.
C.R. d,:11d, ]1ISCi.=C,_,m1,tes ll,:1t1.ln, J,: r~\.c,l•Lcll1i,· ,1~- I11--211pt1•,11-.
Dar.-Sar:l. = Dare111lierg ·S,1;J1u. Dictiunnall ,. ,le, .-\11ti, l m r.:-.
liittenl_1, 0.1.-/-. l. = Dittenl_1er_c:el', 01i,·nti, Gr.~•:, i ln•ll'll•tillJlh sl-1<:. \,),:.
l>ittenb. •"11ll.=D1ttent,erg,·r. :-:,yll,J:-,'-' Ii,,, 1ipt1,_,nu111 1_;r,1e, ,,11iJa.
'E<p. '.Apx. = "E<f,ryµ<iJl~ ·.-\pxawXoy,K(
G.LJ.I.=Culhtz, :-5,\llltlllnng ,ler (;11,:.J,j .. _]1,,n Di,dekt-lll,, 111iften.
G,,rh. ~1. T'. = Gerhnr'-l, _-\11,e1 le,ern~ 1;,\ oenl ,il, ler.
(cr'.G .• l. = Gc,tting1-che Gdelu tc .-\nLeige11.
Head, II ..\T. = Head, Hi,toria X nrn,,ntm.
I.(;.~ [nsl.:ri1_1ti1Jne~ (}rl1ecae. 1
I.U.A. -= H,;h]. In,n·i1,t1un,·, Gr,u:,:,1e ,rnti,1ni"i1n,1e.
Ju/11·/, -= JaltdJ11ci1 ,h, Dent,cl1e11 _\. r, 11,tul, •:.:i-,h,·i. I n,tit:1 ,-.
= .J,1hr1:-.l1eft•~ \_l~..: nl.'~t1•t1 t._•i 1:hi--d1L'll A.1 i:11:l, 11, 1_ l---J1,_:l1 r u,tit 1ltl --.
,{lf!11·f ,.,fl
J. !I.S. ,=J111m1,d ,_1f Hdkui,: :-:rn,li,,,.
Le Da,-1V,1,l,l. = Le ];,1,- \Y,l'l,lin;,ct,,n, \'ny,te;e .\1cl1,'., ,], ;1,111,·. 1

:iiicltel= :iiiehd. Ite,·w·il ,l In,cripti,ms '.:l'c·c 111,e, .

.110,1. ,I I.= :iin1111n1enti ,1\'ll' ln-.titn'.,1.
>Inller-iV1l',.=.\[11llc>r-\Y1e,el,·r, Denkm,tl,:r ,1,-r ,,lt,·11 E>rn-t.
.lfos. J£11rl,lc.s=C'11ll,·ction ,,f .\ncient .\LnlJle, in the Hriti-h .\[,i"•,11n.
Xeu,, .la /11·/,. l l . •·1 lt. = X eue .J,1hrl ,w>ll<·r fur ,l,1, k l.1"1 ,ch 1: _-\.l te1 t:t ]!I.
Xo1r J11hrl,. l'lul. ~ Xenc .J,tl1rl.wlter for Phi].,],." i,·.
1 Tl1e attl'llt1ou ot L1Jllt11llutu1:-. h t_,1tle1L t,, t11e Lt•_ t tl1,l~ tli, ttilt'-:- , 1 th1· \ 1•llllll• '- i t the ...,, . ,,nwl
1 1

i".,-,lle of the ('orpu-, ()r c+t('t_•k I11",("ti11tiq11-..., 1i11l,1I-,1t,_,,l !,y :he I\n-..--1:~n .A, .t•1 1 111\". }1,n-~"l 11(1\\" been
chauge,J. a,; follo11"S : -
1.C:-. L == Iu~,:;r. _\.ttii",H: ,1Hw1 E1~di1lis Y1·tn~ri .. re--.
11. == aettll:-: 1tn,1e ,,;;t 1utr_1· 1~·1 l ~11111. t:t ..\'"ig1ht1 tt'1upo1,L
Jfl. = ,1etati-; Rom,rn,1e.
IY. = Argoli,lis.
YI!. ::::: )f,-·g:i.ri,l:-._ C·t n1)(:1ti,u·.
IX.-== Graec1ae ~f•ptrnnio11:1h--.
XII. == ill..,Ul. ~In.ri".- _\t•~,lt'i }ILteli-:: Del'.~lll.
XIY. = It.1h,,,· ct :--,cilue.
 lxxx

Xiv,e= Nie,r, GC',chidit,· iler gried1i,chen u. mak~<lo11i,chen ~tauten.

_Yum. Chr. = Numi,111atic Clm,uide.
_Y11111. Zril.=Nmui-m.1ti,.·he Zeibchrift.

Pauly-1Vis,ow.1 = P.rnly-Wi,so,rn. Real-Encrclnpii,Jie cler cla,,ischen Altertum,wi,sen-

sc1rnft.
Pl, ilol. = Phil, ,1,,.c:n•.
Ram,.1y. ('. n. = R,rnhty, C'itie, nn,l Bishupric-, nf Phry~i.t.
Hu. _-1,·,·h. = Renie Arel1e<>lc,:,;i,p1e.
Re,·. El. (;,·. =Iten12 rles EtwJes GTec,1ne,.
R, ,·. _\'w,,. = RcYne Xnrnismatir1ne.
Re,·. Pl,ilcJ. = Itenic ,le Philolo:,:ie.
RI,. Jf11s. = Rheilli-ches :\hi-.enm.
Ri,,1,. Jlitt!,. = :\I1ttheilnw.:en Lle;, Deut,chen Archii,_.Jn~i~chen Iu,tituh, llumiscl1e Abtheil
llll~.
R,-,,ch0r = Ro,Ju,t', Lexie, ,n ,_l\'r :\Iytholo~ie.
'f'..--1.Jf.=Titnii A,i,w :Mim,ris.
X r: .Y. ~ Zeit,cl,rift fnr Xurni,rnat1k.

I1·u ,,_j ir,_ i'Uf iun 1:/ I11suiptiu11 ,.

[ ] Square hraeket,., ti, indicate ailditiun~. i.t. n lacuna filled l.iy cunjeetnrt.<.
l'nn-,·d l,racket,-; ti:, indieate altt.-rati,-,n,-, i.e. ( 1) the re-,olution of an
ahl,r,•1iati,,n i:,r ,-ymbi,1: ( :21 letter:- mi-.repre-.ented by the engraser:
(:J1 ktt,_•r~ ,uungly "lllitt,-cl by the· engran•r: (-l) rui--takes .,f tlw
cup,\ 1-...t.
< > .-\..ugnlar l_1rackd,-. tu i11clicate u111i~-,i,_,11,-.., i.e. to u1elu,-.e -,upc·rfluulb
[,-.tt,-,1:-, appl'aring- on the , ,rigiual.
D11t--. r,, 1,·pn-•,;c•11t an nntilk·d lanmn ,Yhen tlw exaet nul!lber 11f llii~--.ing-
1.-t t,,r-; i, k1111\\'tl.
Da-;lw~ f;,r th,_· -;a111,_• p11q,,1-;c•. when th,: nnmhl'r .,f rni--.sing ldtt•r,; is
nut kn, ,1111.
l~w-,·rt,lill l<'ttt:r~ ~h,_,nld ha1 l' d,,t" 1u1du· th,_•11t.
\\'h,-n· rh.· 111i_~inal h;,~ iut,t ad~c·npt. it -.\wnlcl bL· repn,clnc,:11 in that _fon11;
nrh,·n1·i~,· it --.h,.nld 1,._. ,-11pplied a--. ,mb,-.c-ript.
Tlt,· a-.pirnt,·. if it "l'l"';1r~ in tlw 11ri~inaL ,-h.-,nlrl he l'r•pn·~Pnted by a
"'tit•1·l1d -...i.~11. r-.

Tlt,· ~.:t111· i-<1111v1:ti,.11-. ,h,.nlcl 1,,_. t'iltl'l"yi:·,l f.:r thi~ 1,11rp,,,,c·a-- fc,rin~crip-
ti,,11 . . , ,,it_h !lu_• h'1l1i\\i11; ,·,1 11u,·ir111! ,•,'1111/11,,1-: : -
1

( ) C11n·,.,I l,r.,,--k,·t~ t» indi,-·at, «nh· thP r,•~nl11tinn 11t an ahbreYiation or

0

,n1,l, .. I.
[[ Jl l 1.,,tl,I<' "'l1,:1r,· l,r.wk,·t~ t« ,·11,-].,,,. -.1lj1<·rti111111~ ktr,·r~ :11•111-·arin.c; ,,11 the·
11ri:_:1twl.
< > .\.n:_:11L1r l.r,wk,-t~ t« ,-111·],,,,. l,_.n, r,, ~npply1n,c:· an u1111,..;1,_111 111 tht.<
,ir:...!.111,l l

Th,· Edtt<>l- d,:-11,· '" 11,q,1,·-~ 1q.,,11 1·»ntril.111 .. h tli,· 111_-c•,"~~it.1- .,f dearly I
I
anrl a,·,-:,r:ll ,·h- 111<11,-.u-,nc_: ,w,·• 1tt~ :111d ]q·,-ar l1111c;'-. a, the, 11,·~l,-et c,f this
0

111·,.,. 11111 .. 11 .,,1,1, ',·r:·: ···»11-1d, r.1hly t» rh,· ,-.,.,t ,,f l'l~•dnct i»11 ,.( tl1,• J,.,,;·, 11 d
 J. H S VOL XXVII. (1907). PL I.

\
I.

' 1-- a ~@
_,-l§J
~ ~ -
~

'

• s ·. !". ,,
.
e. _• ~
:I?
:::>
UJ
en
•• :::>
.
••
••
'-<__::
'
'
:I?
J:
en
., . '
_-,~-~
j
;:--/ .
_/
.=
cc
m
i UJ
J:
1-
z
<
cc
0

--- J:
Q.
:I?
<I:

...
Fis u.:
a:i
liiiiii' '
. ;;;-- ....

-
. =--
'. 5
 J. H. S VOL. XXVII. (1907), PL II.

:E
::,
w
Cf)
::,
:E
:r
Cf)
i=
a:
QJ
w
:r
1-
z
Cf)
0
:r
I-
>-
~
w
J
LL
cri
Q
I-
I-
<t
 J. H. S VOL. XXVII (1907). PL. Ill.

- ....,.,,_,.,

,..,::~: .· ·,,;;C:~~ ~~J..~.u.u.u.u4u..J.~~

l

"'

···~....
:?~~

R.F. PELIKE IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM (E. 395).

~-
.
i"
-
~'i..
~ ,_ __
~
.. .
,· .. ·, 't '

'
" I•

R.F. FRAGMENT AT WURZBURG.

 J H. S. VOL. XXVII (1907) PL. IV.

,.:..:~~... ,
--,

• .
.
1

."i 6

COINS OF PEPARETHUS, &c.

 J. H. S . VO L XXVII. (1907). PL. V

--...;
~ ,//
11:
_,,ii>"

~ FIGURE B FROM THE COOK SARCOPHAGI,.)$;

 J. H. S. VOL. XXVII. (1907). PL VI.

..
. ,i ".t>t,
'oi>:"~, • '. ;, \'V''
. ''¥ " }.•,... 111111,.e-•-""""'ad
.. L~•
II, • ..,,__
,--..,:~ "'t

... .... ,l':

~ . 1
_·
--r ,.::~
~~i
i -<J
~;{iii; '
.. . . . :f
:1·~-:;j,·. .
·.:...·

FIGURE C FROM THE COOK SARCOPHAGUS.

 J. H. S. VOL. XXVII. 11907). PL. VII.

FIGURE D FROM THE COOK SARCOPHAGUS.

 J H. S. VOL. XXVII (1907• PL VIII

FIGURE E FROM THE COOK SARCOPHAGUS.

 J. H. S. VOL XXVII. (19071. PL. IX

"~i
··I
>·,

''"
'
~

-\
A

J~ ~
t;•i~:f~fM:. -~-,:

l
r,il_·
~·-
.. . .
.,,,;.

t·
.
.

·'<li:
""" ";,,,k ~"'"

r: ,.._/t ·

FIGURE F FROM THE COOK SARCOPHAGUS.

 J. H. S. VOL. XXVII (1907). PL X.

,,..;l l~
·-.
'

.
.
.
.........., . -~·!4,'
- ;,;,;,,

FIGURE G FROM THE COOK SARCOPHAGUS.

 J. H. S. VOL. XXVII. (1907). PL. XI.

i
l

FIGURE. H FROM THE· COOK SARCOPHAGUS.

 J. H. S. VOL. XXVII. (1907). PL. XII.

FIGURE J FROM THE COOK SARCOPHAGUS.

 J. H. S. YoL. XXYII ( r 907) PL. XIII.

r:r
.~fJA'~/
• ··i I.
2

t _,,. - ) ) ,

'JJ,,. ·)-
'
~
. ,.,;-,
.... e'

J~-.~ ,
\ \..,.;~~ -J

EARL\" SELECCID PORTRAITS.

Jr r1i'
!]:)
. r

_.-<t· ~ f _:?-:"~;,
:~ -1~
tt ( ./ -~i
.·J!?i
.;x
\ - ;J f
1' ,.~ -;'
\ ;.
,-.
''-..,;:;1,..-m:;;;v-
-+

6 7

I I

L\.RLY ~ELECCID P< )RTR.'\JTS.

 J H, S. VOL XXVII. (1907) PL XV

_ . -"' -,........
..:;..._.,,._ - •. 5,,; 7tMlt
.

MONEMVASIA. A.-IIava ;i'.a 1IvpTlDlWTlCT<ra.

0

.......

MONEMVASIA. B.-'A ;[a ~o¢ia.

0

(l'i, .. 1,,J, " 1 ,,, , .. JI ..1 J 1), JI',,, •.

 J H S. VOL. XXVII. 11907). PL XVI.

u.: -
LL -;
:i
O'
LL -
0 -
w -c
Cl)
<{
co
f- -
<{

z
3:
0
f-
; z
,,
,. ex:
w
I ,. 0
"' 0
::=E
t.
j
<i.
ci5
<(
>
:E
w
z
0
:E
-
"'
"
u.i :co
f- 2
<{
(.?
0
z
<{ -c
Cl)
...J
...J
<{
3:
z
3:
\.,)
f-

--:
 J H S VOL XXVII (1907). PL. XVII

co
N
(I)

w
~

~
:'.:)
w
en
::::>
~
I
en
l-
a::
Ill

re w
I
I-
z

. ~I~
<(
_
a::
0

~
I
a.
~

I
<(

z<(
_J

• 0
z

::::a.
I
\~

I
~'
 J H S VOL XXVII 119071. PL XVIII

Cl
~

~
:)
LJJ
(/)
:)
~

- .. ~/:-::_~,
;
... ,,,.
:r
(/)
i==
0:
Cl
~ . LJJ
:r
•°¥ ~
- _/ 1-
z
<(
0:
0
:r
c..
~
<(

0
<(
z
LJJ
:r
I-
<(
z<(
c..

~
::z
C
l1
fr:
L..
C
>2
 J. H S. VOL XXVII. (19071
PL. XIX

-
------ .,,. ~ ......._..---
(\,;..} ~ 9 -
,,, . ._____, /.
.

- --
-
·-- - . ---'

ui
LO
C'I

~
~
::>
UI
Cl)
:J
:!!:
::i::
~
t:
a:
al
UI
::i::
t-
z
<(
a::
0
X
a.
:E
<(

~
cc
J. H, S. VOL XXVII '1907). PL XX

~
:::,
Ill
<.I)
:::,
~
I
Cl)
j::
C:
[lJ

Ill
I
1-
z
<(
0:
0
I
a.
~
<(

0
<(
z
uJ
I
I-
<(
z
<(
a.
 THROWIXG THE DISKOS.

[PLtTES I.-III.]

A.-The 8,Jo,;.

'THEX the son of Peleus took an nnwrought metal mass which ancienth·
the mighty Eetion was wont to lmrl." 1 This 0-0AO, avTOxowvo,, which was ;{t
once the weight to be thrown and the prize in the Homeric competition, was
apparently a mass of pig iron just a-, it came from the furnace: probably, as
~Ir. J, L. )lyres suggests to me, • the contents of one of the old open-hearth
furnaces of the )Iediterranc;an world, the natural unit quantity for the
pnrYeyor and buyer of the metal, the classical analogy to which is the mass
of iron (µvopo, O-l01Jpeo,) which the Phocaeans threw iuto the sea before their
Yo_yage westwards.'~
The wonl o-o;\.o, occurs only in this passage of the Iliad and in later
imitations of Homer. 3 The latter part of Iliad xxiii. is generally admitted to
be a somewhat late interpolation, anll the interpolator, wishing to insert in
the games of Patroclus a competition similar to that of throwing the diskos,
gives to his interpolation an archaic appearance by the use of the unusual
word a-o;\.o-. The diskos itself was sufficiently familiar in Homeric times for
the term 'a diskos throw' to be used as a measure of distance. 4 There is no
reason for supposing that the Homeric ltiskos differed essentially from that with
which we are familiar in later times, save that the earlier form was probably
of stone instead of metal. But in the <TOAD\' avTOxow/Jo, we haYe the primi-
tive type from which all lifting and tlirowing competitions liaYe arisen: a
stone, a mass of metal, or a tree trunk provides for early man a weapon in
time of w'.tr, a test of physical strength in time of peace.
Of these primitive contests and feats of strength we liaYe various records
in Greece. .A mass of reLl sandstone lliscovered at Olympia bears a nry
early inscription to the effect tliat Bybon with one hanll threw it over l1is
lieau. 3 The latter part of the inscription is unfortunately doubtful. Accord-
ing to Dittenberger and Pnrgold, it runs Bv,8wv nJTEPTJ XEPL inrepKe<pa;\.c1

1
Ilir"/ --:xiii. 8:!ti ff. 13•5.
0 0 II. xx iii. J n, ;,:23: cp. ii. ,, 4 : C,1. iv.
Helt. i. 16:,.
: • 1q,.,llunins Ithoclins ii1. 1366, 1:3,:!; iv. G:!d ; Yiii. 1:2~), 1 Stj : X\"ii. 163.
tij7. 851: :Xi,:an,ler. T!,u·. 905; Konnu~, ~, l,1s,:h,·. tan U/11,np(,1,,1,: J11thner .t,,1,1,,.,
Dw1t,1t-,. xxxYii. 607; Qni11t. ~n1yrn~tl''llS iv. Tu,·,u2, 1'(i!h,, p. 2:2.
II.S.-VOL. XXYII. u
 E. XOIL\L\X (LUtDI~ER

µ' v1.EpE,811AETO O<flu[:\.]a. X either VT.EpE(3tlA.ETO ll<ll" l'T.EpKE<pa\.t1 seems very

satisfactory, and }Ir. H. B. Walters tliercfore snggests the reading vr.Ep
KE<:pa\.,'"i, Vr.EpEt3a\.E TO o E<:popEl, · he threw CJ\'er his heaLl this thing that he
\\,l:3 carryin):.' But whateYer the reaLling, the general sense is clear, autl tl1e
gre[lter difficulty remains, how cfol he tlo it? The stone weiglis U.:H kilo,.
allil measures GS x :33 x 3:-i ems. The explanation tlmt he merely lifteLl 1t
,J\"01· l1is l1ea<l 0 Llues nut help matters: a one-l1au,le1l lift of an object of such
,njght aid shape i-; quite as incredible as the throw. I can ouly ~u,.;-ge~t tlwt
Bybu11 lift<c•,_l it ahore his l1ea,_l with both lw.utls, then balanced it 011 une hn.tHl
n11,l threw it backwanls. This is precisely what Aelian describes TitonmB a,;
,l,,ing \\ itl. a st,-,ne wl1ich }Iilo could hardly more.' First lie raises it as far
l1is b1ces tl1en lift':i it Ull to l1is shoulders, carries it eight opyvta,, a111l throws
it. ~\. Lu·g,·r hluck uf b:ack volcanic rock ,veigliing 480 kilos has been di,;-
Cu\ •cted at S,u1turill. It bears tlie follc,wing inscription of about 500 B.C.:
Euµ11a-,w, µ' {{l)PEV (l1r0 xBovo, 0 KpiTo;3ov;\ov. 8 To lift such a ,veight off
tlte gronml is a goo,1 performance, but llnite pos-
sible. The Ollly representation I know of snch
,ce11es is in tlie interior of a r.-f. kylix in tlte
L11nn-e, G. 0ri, where we see a youth lifting in
1A,th a.nus a brc;·e, r11umli~1t object, apparently a
~tu11e I Fig. 1 ). L:ftiug foats are ascriocd to :\Iil,1.
}:qtl,_y11111,. an,l oLher athlete,:, auLl tlie heroes in
tlte lliil,I lrnrl ill battle J_,uul<lers that l\rn stalwait
rncu can kmlly lift."
The Hu111eric a-u:\.o,, like the stones clescribe,l
alJU\'L', ha,, n,itliin,c;- tli,,tinctly atl1ll.'tic n1Jont it, auy
mote tliau unr \\UrLl '\\'eight.' It is 1nerely a
wass of it on, au, l it, at Ii letic use is a me1 e acci-
tlcn t. It is trne th,it. like 11tl1er ol,_ject~. especially
1111-t,ll ()11j1_:rts ,ir \\-e;,pnus. 1t has its 11istory. It
lll']un~L·•l n11ce t11 E,-ti,,n. king of Tl1cbes, ,vlio
11'1_•,l t11 11111 l it t11,1. ~\.11,l _\.cl1ill,·, atrer slayiu~ EL·ti"u 1>1,111:,;'11t it to Troy
a111111J_c: !11,; 111,,,,,,,i,111,. Uut the a11tli"r i, Lr 111,:,1,_· c11t1ccn1<c1l witl1 its COlll-
1,1,·rci:il Y,d11,·: 'it ,,.j\\ f11:·11i,h a cou11tryrnat1 \\ it!t ir11!l fur tini years'; awl
\\"(' 111ay f,.,.] ,11r1• that it f11m11l it, }JL1ce i11 Acl1ille-;',-. -,Jiip for piactical
\>1111'""''· 111 _\_p,,\l,111i11..; Rli 11 di11;; \\t' ,hall tin,] tlie a-u:\o, ahnlys llH,ntiom,,l
11t1 ti.,_. -._•a ,h11l'1' 111·,tr tlw ~11ips. ,\. 1,ig "f il',1tt 1\'1·11],; ~en·e the ,-ailor m
,...,\,111:r i11 lliilll_\' \\'ay,.
Tl1,, \\'>Jrtl 1,111~t lt,lH' h1: 1_•t1 au 1111u~11.il 11llc, an,l Cl•rtaioly puzzled tlie
~,,]i .. '.ia-.t,. if \h' rn,1_\-_i11dc::,· fr,>111 tltetr lll1:11t_'l,Jlh ]\1)k8 tl1L'l"1._•,111. 1' 1 \\'it!t a sin:.)e
,·v·,·pti1111 t,, 1,., ,\i,-,:·11,,,.,1 latt·r. tit,,,,, 1111t,·,. a,; \\·,..-ll a,- tlte pa,,-;1g, in later 0 ;;

, liiy---- 1:1',; ..... 1: ;·. · , , 1• ,_ •• ,,1 1,_ ,; -.. .r. I , l,'. ,-. ~O~: xii. -1: 1:1. In the t1rl11s,cu tlw
I,; 1, 1}', 'j ,, ,, 1 ~11 tr) l 1• •-i ~ t _\ :111,-- t111l 11 ... L·1t•~t1~\~t_itJ,_~ lnul 11,1.k::, ;t
tlic
l -,, },' -..,~ ': L .2.2. --ltl! ..... ; 0 ly----,_1>, i\. ±~l. .s~;-: X 1:21.
J.,; \:.i. ~ .. 1~1•1 I 1t1 llt 1 '/' I l'P· :21). ~~l 1_ill1'L'h :111d _
/ I

_\,:.u,. ,• · ,,l: 1-:-. l 1 t 1> \L 11. ,1,,,· ... "!, ... tl1, ~l'i1"h,1.
 THRO"\\TXG THE DT:--KOS. 3

authors where the word occurs, contain no information which mar not be
deriYed from Homer. The wonl is saiLl to luve been found inscribe,l on a
bro1ize diskos (liscovere<l early in the lac;t centllry in the be1l of the Alpheius, 11
out without further information the evi1lence is worthless. "\\~e may however
probably cunnect the word with the 11ames of various places, Soli i.11 Cypru~,
aml Cilicia, aml Sulueis in Sicily (and Mauretania. Accordmg to Lewy, these
names are cognate to the Semitic s,,fa, a rock, and Yictor Beranl explain,, the
uame as due in all these cases to a prominent headland or hill interrupting a
level stretch of coast.u Tl1e etymology is snppnrted by the note of Hesy-
cliius, O'OAO<; = ovoµa {3ovvou; aml it certainly suits the Homeric O'OAO','. the
transition fro111 a boulLler to a mass of metal beiug ea.3y. Thus in Apulluuius
Rhodius the great round. stone which .Jason hurls into the rnidst ol tl1e
drag,m brood is described as
DEll'ov 'Evva;\/ov a-o;\ov •ApEO, ( iii. l:3G6_\,
an expression ,d1ich recalls the boulders thrown by the heroes of the JliC1d in
,rnr rather tl1a11 an athletic implement.
But whatever the original meaning of the word, there is reason for think-
ing that it wa-, from an early date appropriated tu metal. He,,ychius explains
fYOAOtTvr.o, as µ,vopoKTvr.o,, and the Soli in Cyprus a11Ll in Cilicin were certaiuly
111 the neighb.,nrho(J(l of mines. So too Apollonius Rhodius in a remarkable
p:1ssage use::; the word in co1111ection witlt the Portns ..:\.r;,;·ous, the muderu
Purto Ferrnio iu Elba, the wry uame of wl1ich implies the neighbourhood of
tlte iron rniues fu1· ,Y11ich the i~laud was alreaLly fmnuus iu clas:sical times.
Tt1ere the Argonauts on their rnyag·e lauded aml
y-;7cp'iutv (l11'WµoptavTO KaµonE,
tDpw a>..t, ' xpo1j DE KaT' al-ytaAOlO KEXVVTal
ElKEAat · EV DE a-o;\01 Kat TEVXEa 0EO'KE',\a KELVWV (iv. G.3.5).
C,)mrnentators awl translators, folluwing the scholiasts, i1lentify the uo:\.or;; ,yith
a sort of DtuKo,, aml desl'ribe the ~·\.rgonauts as lwl(liug athletic :-ports on the
shore of Aethalia, and then going thruugh their ablutiuns with stone-, for strigils.
The pebbles on the shore have a tlesh-like appearance in conse11ueuc2, awl their
discs and weapons are still to be "een thereP Did the Greeks uever scrape off
the sweat exl'ept after games? Hall the Argonauts no need of such a proce~s
after their endless wanderings aml sufferings by sea? Arnl when at last they
Jicl find a resti11g-place, Llid they at unl'e fall to throwiug the rliskos? The
idea is preposterous, aml but for the trat litio11al explanatio11 uo"'A.o, = 8[uKo, it
would never h,:ixe been mooted. \\"by then are uo',\oi mentioued ! \\' elther
1,i surely right, 'spectant fort.m,se ad ferri abun1lantiam.' i ; To Apullouius
11 t'.1.1~. i. lf,H. a~S rain, ,1wl the peU,lc, ,l!'e fleekccl a-; 11ith
l..:Lewy, Sunr.tz"iclu..- 1·1·e"ultc1nt•:7', 1'· Lt5 ~ scarl-,km ,t1ig1l-,tnppe,l
BJrarLl, L'Od~,.,stc d lu, I_)l1ui1,_'ICil:J, i. p. 38-L To tln,; 1.Lty; .t11tl tl1cll' •1noit, awl wo1.,]run~
1" Thus in the Lite,t YeI,;<>n by .\Ir. ,trnwu1 ,u,· thue. alt ,tone.
14 flt; &,,:,1
A. S. Way: ~l 1ndl,,,1 tl ..:1!'~fr_i.,1 1 11tl 1.'1_·,, !'lliil ,·,
There in athlete-,tiilc ,li,1 tlH'y oll]•j'le th,,ir yt'O'J1·uphfr1s, p. flt_).
litnl,, till the slleat vf them ,ltil'l'l''l
 Aetl1alia woulLl at once sugge,c,t tl1e pigs of iron exported frurn the island and
the mainland oppo-.,ite; aml what objects conlLl be 1uo1-..• natural on bila1d a ship,
whether they ,-,el'\'ed for commerce, for balla-.t, f"r sl1ipbuitdrng. or for 11 L·apou~ 1
Apollonins is surely thinkiug uf the au\.o, at TOxuwvo, in it~ CUllllllL'rCial 1

rather tlw11 its atl1letic aspect.

Howen::r. as we han~ see11. the a-o\.o, tlid take tl1e place uf tlH· diskos i11
the sports of the Ili,ul, aml :=-o the scl1olia$tS interpret it. In the thinl aud last
passage ,d1ere _-\pollouius uses tlie word he describes Thetis corniug to Aeae:1,
wl1ere she timls the _-\rgonauts beguiling the time,
a-u\cp fmrfla-i 7' oia-TWV (i\·. 851),
TEpr.oµEVOV',.
The li11e is an elaborate, archaistic variation of the Homeric

The verse may seem to tell against my interpretation of the previous

pa~sage, but in the case of a student and archaeologist like Apollonins it is not
unnatural that he should use the same word in two different senses, especially
when both senses can be justifieLl from Homer. Even here the a-o;\o, may
just as well be the weight as the diskos. ~icander, however, in his Theriaca does
use the word for a diskos. It is with a cro;\o, rebounding from a rock, he
says, that Apollo killed Hyacinthus. 16 Quintus Smyrnaeus and Nonnns
1uerely imitate and elaborate the passage in the Homeric sports, and their
e1 idence is worthless.

The scholiasts are much exerciseLl in distinguishing the diskos and the
s,)los, and their artificial descriptions still find a place in our commentaries
and dictionaries.17 The Lliskos is flat, the solos round and ball-sl1aped; the
diskos of stone, the solos of metal: the cliskos has a hole in it and a string
to thrmv it with, the solos is solid. The first distinction is fairly accurate;
the di,c;kos was flat, the solos a mass, more or less round. As to material, the
tliskos we know was made bt)th in stone and in metal, and probably the solos
could be either. The thinl and last distinction is ascribed to Tryphon, but
another version ascribeLl to Eratosthenes assigns the hole an(l string to the
solos, not to the diskos. 1' That they bel(mged to the solos is disproved by
every passage in which the word is useLl; that they belonged to the diskos ( ..
still more condusively rlispro.-ed by the monuments; aml Dr. ,Jiitlmer there-
fore rightly rejects the eviLleuce of the ,;chnliasts. But his i,1ea tl1at t11(•
scholiasts invente(l the hole and string theory to explain the term r.1=pwTpEfw,
i,- harcily satisfactory. The athletic craze lrnd spread to AlexanLlria before th<:
time of Eratostl1enes, so much sn that few places prOLluced such an array
1~ JI 77-l=( d. h. tj:.'.ti: 1r;s,
11. ~\'ll f_tl11s 1 y ,·i1i. ][H) :<,7,o7. l~HQT. O OifT•,os
iry T/1,·r. qi)~,
i\i0os -i;v. KaL EpaTua0€n1s el/
OA.u,u.1rwviKats
:;- .T1ith11ti1 1 :11 1• ,t, 1111 ]fl.!!-, r·nll, ct-. ri.11rl
,
LrrTupfL T~v µ.Ev uOA.ov A.E1wi rr167Jp0Vv ;p, iVi\wov
di-., u--••-1•--. the ~1 L,>lia:i.t ]i ngt11. r, xaAk: ,l'z• TETp7J,uEnw Ka.TCl. -r& ,U.EITUII !(al txorrra
1" ~\mu1011. 40 8lfJ'1\11s ,uE1.1 i ;p f:O'-ri A[0us Ka,\~•Owi' €{11u.,u.Ei 1H', uli f,x,Jun·o1 .Bd,\\ov,nv 1•(
1

'TETf)1]U.EVOS ;;_,5 ¢,1]CTt Tiit,r_b.c.i.•.v fi 7rEU7rT(f 7rfpl. lltet.•tt~'"nuE-t 01.

£.\,\1]l't(TUOl', u,;Ans ,)~ r(/ xai\.1-.:-ol! L/,\urJ(pt•,•HOt.
 5

.,[ Oly1L1pic \'id(1r,-, 1:1 arnl \\·e c1111ld i1anlly (Tedit Erato,-thelles ,vitl1 such
a blurnlt:r. It is p<>s,-ible. indeed. tl,at be is speaki11g of ~.,me popular game
ill which a n,irnd 11lijt:ct was hl\vletl nlo11g hy tnean,; of' a cord."" )Ir. R. }I.
Dawkin-, tell,-, me lie lias ;,een :<11ch a game at On·ido, round stones abont a
t'llot iu diatuetn bei11;; birn·kd ;1lo11g the slnpmg n,atl, much to tl1e danger of
pc,k:-trian:-, by llH:n11s .,f a :-;trap wuuwl ro11ml their peripl1ery. Chee,;es are
:-aid tu bl' thus ernpl"ye,l in pat ts 11f Italy, and to he nrnch irnpr,Jye,J by the
treait11ent. A more probable exphmatio11. lt1)We\·er. i:s ~nggeste,l to me by
}Ir. ,J. L. )lyre:;. The sclll)lia uf lli,,tl xxiii .. he ,-ay,s, haw:- becume
dislocated, and tlie ~triug an,l liule belong uut to the sulu'-, bnt to the
Ka"\.aDpot 1t1e11tiu11e,l a few lines fut·ther 1111. Polypoete;; lrnrh the sulos
'as far as an oxhenl throw:S a KaAavpot.' This wor,l ,1 lticlt is nsuall?
exphineLl ~omewhat puintlessly a-,' a staff,' is really, s:1ys }Ir. }lyre,-, a sort of
h,las, a weapon consisting of a stri11g with one or more st,mes attache(l tu it,
\\ hich is useLl in Spani:;h America for throwing at an,! catcltiug cattle. ~Ir.
)lyres tells me that he has often seen Greek boys extemporising a sort of
hi_lls.s with a stiing arnl 1wrforatecl stone. This explanation not only :;nits
the pa~sage in Homer far better than the traditional one of the text, but also
ut'fers a most satisfactory solution of the mistake about the solus aml cliskos.
F1om this passage the mistake would easily be copied elsewhere.
To sum up, a-o"'Ao, is a heaYy weight, originally perhaps a boulder,
atterwarLls a mass of metal, and in late ,vrite1 s it is occasionally used as
a synonym fur tliskos.

The word diskus means 'a thing thrown' : originally any stone of
corn~enient shape and size, then a stone artificially shape,! for throwing, lastly
a similar object in metal. In Homer tlte diskus is :;tili a ~tone: how far it is
artificial we cannot ;;,ay, but in one passage at least it seetns to be used of the
round, smooth stones that are fouml on the sea-shore. OLlys:3ens, challenged
by the Phaeacians, pickell up a cli:;kos · larger than the re,::t, a thick one, far
more massive tltan those wherewith th0 Phaeacians conternl1cLl in castiug.' "1
The scene is the agora of the Pli:leacians harLl by the ships, arnl the sports
are of that impl'omptn, after-dinner sort that needs no appcll'atns. The
Pliaeacian,::, as Alcinous atlmits, are no trailll'll athletes, bnt 'swift of foot an,l
the best uf seamen.' In the palae,-tra of the tifth centmy one woul,.l ex:pect
to find cliskoi of varicms ,wights, like the Juml>-bells uf a moLlern gymnasium,
but surely not in the agora of the Plrneacians; yet Odysseus timl:3 at once a
,liskus such as the Phaeacians themselves uever use. If we think of the
diskos merely as a stone, the difficulty nwishes. The agora is had by tl1e
,-hips, and on the ~ltore are di:okui reatly t,i luuHl of all sizes, tiat, smooth,
ruml(l pebbles such a:S fishermen nse as weights for holLling Lluwu their nets
an,l sails laid out to dry, aml such as enry visitor t,) the seaside ine\·itably

~1 IJc/. viii. lSo ff.

(j E. XOl-t:\IAX G-AltDJXEH

picks up to throw. Fr(,m such n stone to the manufactnre,l stu11e ,li:skus tlte
tr.rnsition is easy, and the recurrence uf tlie plira,-;e

together ,Yith the nse of the term 8/a-Kovpa as a me;-i-mre of di-,tanct·, make,;;
it prnb,1ble that tlie rnanufactureLl diskos ,ms known at all e\·eut,:s in the
later Honwric time:-. It i,- --ometirnes stated. on the e,·idence of thP epithet
«aTwµa8i010,"- 8 that the Homeric heroes put tl1e di,:kos as we put the wei~ht.
It is possible, uf course. but the e\·idence is insufficient: KaTwµ118w,; would
be at least eqnally applicable to ~Iyn:in's di:skobol,,s. am! the use uf the term,;
8w1ja-a;; and r.1:p1a-TpEfa<; prows that, \Yhether they pnt the weight ur 1wt,
the Homeric henw,; sometimes slung the weight.
In Pi11Llar tlicre can be no doubt tli,lt the diskos is an athletic imple-
me1Jt; an,l though he rnnst ha\·e been familiar ,vith the bronze diskos, lie
makes l1is heroes ~ikens and Castur throw the older stune disko~."-i The
latter is clearly represented on certain black figurer! rnses as a thick, \Yhite
object"-' (Pl. l. l, but the e,·i,lence of the yase;; and of the actnal diskoi which
we po~:-e,s ,-hows that tl1e bronze diskos must haYe been introduced before
the beginning of tl1e fifth century.
Thet"e exi~t in our museums nu-ions inscribed and car.-ed marble diskui."'•
But thon:,!h in size anrl shape they differ little from the bronze specimen,-,,
tbcy a1 e too fragile aml thin for actual use, au,l their inscriptions pro\·e
clearly tliat they are merely \·otiYe offerings. The practice of inscribing and
fle.Jicating (lisk1Ji ,ms an aucient 0ne, as we may see from the Ji,,kos uf
Iphitus cle,licateil at Ulyrnpm. \Yith re,f!·ard to the metal diskos we are more
fortimate. Of the specirncus wi·tich we possess, four are probably yotin:
offeriug;,, but 011e of these cert~li11ly, possibly three, liail abo been used; the
re-,t were certairily intended fo~· n~c. .M,,~t arc of hawmered bronze, four of
ca~t hr»nzP, 011e 11f lead. Tl1•sir \1·eights and measure111e11ts c.u1 be best
seen ±rum tbl.' fullu\Yiug table:-

\r L'l:.J1t Ul I 11,t 1 ti~ t1..r Tl111__1,:.1,.., ........

r111,i111::, J,i,»
k1J,1...,. lll l!ll..., llt11lI!b

1. Oly111tjlLl 0)_\"lllj>ll. /,,r. ;;,t_ij ;J·/(!7 ::-1 ;; -I:1

~- l'o1ln ll ~l. :!191 ;j -~l\-1~ I}-}.;
3. Gch Yi1_'Jdl.l .j •-..,!JIJ i
·1 ..:iII! \"1 'la~.:' _\ then,. U" R1,_l,l,_•J'. (',rt, j:30 .J·:J-Hl 1~
5. Ol;;1 1Ju 1 Olyrn!'l.l, 111,. -1:!:,f ::·9-L, :.t!
fl. Olym1,i,, {J]y1n1da. 1111. l~-::-\1:_! :.!. ~/."', 1,
/. It(J1111• )Iu::iP11 K1rd1e1Lu1u ~-.J~.., :!l. :!l ·:,
(llyrnpia 01y11111i,t l,11. ~,':':;'., ~-u,-...; lq, 2:..! j
" :-;i, ilv
!), l :. ~I :! 1, ~ ()/.~ :!l
;J at ,_•clge
.,
10, 01_1,;,1,ia B,-rlm ".!. 0~-3 l ~ .-, ~1 -10
11. _\1-~l!l,1 Berlin l •\h l :!l
12. Oiym1,11 Berl ill l ·i:!1
1-l. Olyuq,1.t gt:rli11. In (. ~2,;.,,)
14 Ol_nnpi,t OlymJ,i,1. 111,. l:!,:<l 1 ·~t;"I
1 ~•. Ce!'halleu1;1 IL.\[. .J~iJ;- 1 ·:!l~

.!.: Oil. iv. ti:26. X\·ii. lt_~5 ; II. 11. /1-L _\",,/ . .ll//S. s:3:_!; .ll11rud, J(_I,~; E,.r/,n /"as. 1;:!;.
" !I. xxiii, 1·n ~,; Ca11tbndge, }'it~1rdll 11 1ll Jlu,'hlun. 70. 7".!.:
'.!-t 01. \. 1::. 1riTpq.• : I,"Jth }II. 1 ~-3 A1t1i: a,s o:(J'Ko,s. Ka\·\·ai_lia-:-, fAu1rTa ToV 'E0v,1'oV Movu., ~:.);
C, JJ . .ll. 1-,IS(S. ll. 1:34, 11:.'.. ~,1; ,-/t/,,_11' S.dz1u,11111 . .\-t,,,opuh ,1,; Ca,111rus, Pl. YIII.
 THW)\\T~G THE DrnKOi-. 7
~,). 1-'; is of ca,t lH·<>11ze, orr1arneutl:,l ll'itl1 conce11tric circle,;. awl bear-
·1ug uu t1t1C ;.;i,le a ,k,iicattn11 1,y Puplin-,, a JJentatl1lcte nf Curinth, t,) Uly111pin11
.Zens, un the utlu:r th,} 11a111'-' uf the alytarch, witlt the dates re:-pt:·ctively
01. 2i.\ -!,.')(j, The ,lift'en·ucc in tl1e date i-, p,,s~ibly ,lue tn different tHetho,b
of reckuuin.~ tlie Uly111piaJ-s. The :--t_yle awl weiglit mah: it impr,>baLle thnt
it ,va.;; ever int,:11,lt·,l f,>r actual 11-ie; 1f it was :-u, it is an illustrnti,,11 ,,f the
th:gern:rncy uf atl1ldics anil the wot·,.ltip of brute stre11gtlt "·hid1 we see abo
in the ,leYelnprnent uf tl1e hea\'_y 1:a..stus.
~u. :3 "" abo uf cast br,>11ze h:ul origiually an i11lai,l tlnlphin, pos,-ibly of
,-i]ver, \\ Iii ch wonl,l liave a:ldeLl slightly to it,., weight.
~u.-± j,; uf a ,:,,)rnewhat scyphate shape.
~o ..j is fragrneutary. The weiglit is calculate,! from tlie ,liarncter an,l
tl1icknes;.:, ::issnn,ing the ~nrface to be spherical arnl the ~pecitic :;ravit_\- that of
-c.,pper. If we 11iake allo\Yauce fur the ,-lightly smaller spe,·itic g1a,-ity .-.f
bronze an,l for the weathering of ~ o. 6, the \Yeights uf the two will be
upproxiurntely equal.
~o. G. The ,wigl1ts of the Olympia cliskoi are only approximate. They
·were \VeigheJ, }Ir. Bosam1uet tells me, in the ,-illage shop.
Xo. 7 is of marke,lly scy]Jhate shape.
Xo. fl and ~o. 11 "9 are .,f ca~t bronze anll engraYecl on tlie one :-iLle
with the tigure of a jumper, on the other ,vith that of a spear thrower.'·'-'
No. 11 is abo ornarnente(l with a series of concentric circles. They beloug
to the early part of the fiftli century, but though they approximate closely in
weight ;llltl size to Xos. 8 an,l 111, their flatness allll tl1e i>kupness of tl1eir
etloes
co
make me doubtful ,dtetlier t11ey •
\Yere ittternlecl for actual use.
No. 1:2 is vfka,l, arnl has proba,bly lost comi,Jerably in \\'eight.
X o. 1:3 is irnpert~ct. Three pieces are hruk211 away from the eLlge. It
must ha,-e weighe,.l 1-:5 at least, perhaps consiLlerably tnore.11
Xu. 1:> is also Yery haclly worn, and must ha Ye been n,uch hea,-ier. It i:-.
inc;cribeLl with two hexalllete1s iu archaic letters of the sixth ce11tnry.

'ExCTotDa'.< µ' a.1·E017KE .iiFo, Qo(v:;pow µE"f{l/1.0lO

X(LAKEOV lt! VlKaCTE KEcpaA.(AJiva, µeya0vµov,.' 1]
In the la,;t Olympic games a wooden di~kos with a metal centre was
used. It is a thick clmnsy object, the prolluct of rnnllern irna.!:5iuatioll,
utterly unlike all(l in every way inferiur to the specimens which we bne in
our museums. There is 110 authority for it wlrntsoeYer.
Is it po:-isible from tl1ese data to arri\·e at any definite conclu,iions as to the
weights actually used in competitious ? The tli,-koi are all more or less worn,
and the weights are therefore only approximate. They seem, however, to fall

"' 0/ympa, i,·, l i9 ; ,li1thner n1,. nt. p. :!S. con1·e1n us at pre,ent: l hope tu ,lc·,,l with it Ill
e; Jolucshejtc ii. p. :Wl, PL I. anuther .1rtide.
9 ll For 1,a1ticnlars ot these twu I .un ind el •tnl
" Jntlrner op. cit. pp. 2i, 2S.
30 The figure on the IL:IL ,liskos i, 1lesc-ril1<,cl to Dr. Zahn. fr,,rn whom I reeei,·e,l a Ll1,rni11g
in the Catalogue as au ,1th],,te liol,ling a of Xo. 12.
12
:measuring eurJ. The i11teq,1etatiu11 ,loes not • B.:\L Er"On>'S, 82•)7.
 E. XOR)L\S G.\TIDIXETI

into certaiu groups. The best marked group is composed of ~os. 8-11, amt
possi1ly 12 if we make allowance for the greater sof'tues5 of lead. It suc-'.gests
a ,,tandarLI of 2·1. Heavier standards are suggested by ~os. 2 and :\ and by
~os. 4 and 5, say 4·0 ancl 2·8, wl1ile Xos. 14, 15 point to a stamlanl of l·:3.
1Ir. Bosanquet, tu whose kindness I :,rn imk1teLl for most of the data given
abo\'e, suggests that these different standard5 correspond to the different ages
of the competitors, bnt it is not safe to go beyond the general suggostio11. ,Ye
k11ow that in the treasmy of the Sicyonians at Olympia three <liskoi were kept
fur the use of competitors in the pentathlon, and we know that there were two
cbsses of competitors, boy;; and men, and that the boys nsed a swaller disko;;
than tlie men. 8-l But we do not know that the standard at Olympia was the
,-ame as tliat adopted elsewhere, or that the di,;koi which ,ve possess were
intended for corn petition. Rather we know that the metrical standards varied
consi1lerably in different parts of the Greek world, and also that there
,vere different classifications of age at different festivals. 31 If then we are to
arrive at any definite conclusion, we must confine ourselves to the Olympi:m
di::'koi, and here the most that we can say is that Nos. 5 and 6 point to a
stamlanl of about 2·8, Nos. 8 aml IO to one of about 2·1, which is confirmed
by .Nos. !J and 11 and perhaps 12.
Nor do the written records enable us to say for certain what was the
stanclar-1 weic;l1t used by men. Phayllus is said to have thrown the cliskos
ui11ety-fi,·e feet and Philostratus speaks of the hero Protesilaus throwing
beyoud a l1111HlreLl cubits, and that with a diskos twice the size of the
Ulympian one. 3 ; Statius,3'; again, describes Plilegyas as hurling the cfokos
across tlie Alplieius at its widest.:i. Little credit can be attached to these
record:;, but a5 far ns they go tliey ngree with the one fact emplrnsizecl by
w1iters, that the diskos was a heavy object. 3 " In view of this arnl of the
existing ,liskoi, it seems probable that the men's <li:;kos was m,ually con-
,-,iderably hea1·ier tlrnu 2 kilos; usually, but not always, for the liglitest diskos
in the list is that with which Exoidas defeated the high·souleJ Ceplialleuians.
The tlim,_·nsiom of the diskos in art correspond with tlwse gi,·eu in our
tabk. 011 tl1e \'ases tuo the diskos is often ornamented with concentric
cirdes, as in ="•>'-'. 1 and 11, with various forms of cros~es and dots, or with
the tigures of bir, ls or miimab.:;:, "'he11 not in use the di,-kos was kept
in a s11rt of sling, the two ends of which were tied in a knot. fo such a
,-,Jiu~ tlie di,,kos is fre,tneutly rcpre::;ented hanging on the wall or C'arried in
the lianils of a youth.;"

,) Pa.u,,111i,l-- \i. ltJ 3: 1. :3~ ..J. ftee style l:}6 ft. The tree style i, po"ibly
Jst ,•.r,. at tl11_' I\1n,lthe11a1•,1, X1.:n1ca. awl 11w1e Lll,,:tin, tlic mrH]ern (;reek ,t\'le ce1 tainlv
I-.tltllll l, 1raiOEs, Cl."';irEwt, lhO~Es. Eh,:where \\t' le,, "' tlun tliat ernpl .. ye,l l,y the ancie1;t
!1 t\1_ t"ur (J~· 1_·\·111 th·~ 1 L1,,-,e-., C.I.G. 159U, l; reek, .
.!:!I I : 1. t( 11. l I l. . . Luij,111 ~..j_ 11 11 d,. 27. U'.l1,·n d,_ , al. tucndrt
,-, JI,·,-,.,,:_ !'· :2'.• I. ii. '.• -11. 1i1. Humer. ,.:t,1tiu, lo,:. l'J.
i•, T/1, l,. n. i;~;,. ,:!I ,J utbutr op~ ,•if. p. :2!~.

::r· In th,: fa,t Ohrn11i,· '...'.:".llllt" ,l 1lhk,1-- 1d ;" ,;,_ ]'· 30. E.,1. E.JI. !'as,, E ,8; YO!.
:2 kilo, w,1, ii,c,l Tlie \\ll111er Ill tl,e C:reek x,- vi. ut tl11, journal. Vi. xiii.
:--t,\ 11· tli11 w it 11:, ft. t 111.. tl~•· "11111tr 1n tlw
 THH.OWI~<; THE DISKO:-,. 9

C.-1'111· B11lii.,.

The diskos, according to Philvstratu:;;, was tl1row11 from a fJaA,8[,, our

kn,nvleLlge of which i,, deriveLl entirely fn,m an extremely 1lifficult passage
describing the picture of the death of Hyaciuthus. 41 {3a)\fJ[, OtaKEXwpuna1
µtKpa Kat (L7TOxpwa-a EVl EfYTWTl E! µ11 TO KaT07TlV Kat TO OE(tov fYKEAO, llVE-
xova-a r.pavry Ta Eµr.poa0w Kal Kov¢U;ova-a 0aTEpov TOlV fYKEAOlV XPYJ a-VlJ- a
ava;3(tA.AE<T0at Kat avµ7ropEvEa0a1 T[J OE;1f TO OE a-x17µa TOV o,a-KOV llVEXOVTO',;
d;aAA.lt;avrn T1)V KE<paAI/V E7Tl OE;la XPiJ KVpTOva-0ai TOIJOVTOV, 0/JOV {rrro;3AE
,fra1 Ta 7TAEVpa Kat (Jl7TTElV oiov llVlµWvTa Kal r.poa-Eµ(3ciAAOVTa Tot, OEflOt',;
r.cia-1. As Benndorf riglitly says. 'omnia dependent a Myrouis Lliscobolo,'
the last sentence being a singularly happy Llescripti,m of the statue ,vith the
rope1ike pull of the right arm aml the concentrated effort of all the right
side of the body. The tin,t sentence is more difficult. ' A balbis is marked
off small and sufficient for one man standing EL µiJ To KaTo-rrw, and snpport-
ing the right leg, the front part of the body leaning forwanl while it lightly
supports the other· leg, which is to be swung forward and follow through witlt
the right lianJ.' This is the renLlering given b_y Ji.i.thner in an elaborate
discussion of this passage in Ei'tl/WS Vindub., p. 317, and is mauifestly superior
to Benndorf's version in bis edition of the Inwgims. J uthner, after an
exhausti\·e examination of the uses of (3aA(3i,, proceeds to i,lenti(\· tlw fJa"\.fJ[,
of Philvstratus with the stone :Slabs with which we are familiar f1om the
stadia of Olympia, Delphi, and other place~. It is irnleed highly probable,
thongh at present there is no proof thereof. that the pentatl1lete did throw tlie
Jiskos and tho spear from the same line of slabs from which the races starteLl.
But when Dr. Jti.thm-r, assuming that the ;3aA(3[, of Philostratus is iLlentical
in size with these slabs, uses this assumption to explain the words El µ17 T<>
KaTor.w as Jue to the narrow112ss of the slabs, which only afforded room for
the right foot an,l not for the left foot behiml, it is impo~sible to follow him ;
and, to do him justice, we must aLlmit that he is uot satisfied himself.J 2 'Ich
gestehe dass diese Erkhirnng nicht gauz i.iberzeugencl klingt.' As a matter
of fact, the starting slabs are amply snfficient for one man to starnl on. though
possibly not in the position of ,\lyron's Lli,-,kobolos; but if we think out tlie
expression, what possible sense is there in' a space small an,l sufficieut for 011e
man except behind'? It is absoiuteiy unthinkable, aml we must either abm1tlon
the pass[lge as hopeless or find some other interpretation. The absurdity tu
whicl1 we arc reduce,] suggests the ~olution. A parallelogram cannot be
sufficient for one man 'except beliiml'; tlierefore tlie ,rnrLls qualify some-

H !111. i. :!4 (Benmlorf an,l Sd1enkl:,. The
earlier t,·,t of -Kayser reacls 15«1.K<XW<rTo., for
OtaKeX~'ptU'TaL, ~ o.;, for 1eal ,ut/, auva11a1rcfA.A.e:u8cu
tor cruvo.vo.fla/1./1.ecreo.,, ,rnd inserts ip-ya~·no., after
Ta lµ:rrpocr8ev. Benn,lorf\ text is undoubte,llv
sn1 1erior ; but I regret the alte1 ation ~f
<ruvo.vo.1ra/l./l.rn80.,, which has con~itlerable ~1SS.
authority. awl, being the ra1~r \\ord. is 1no1e
likely to ha,·c 1ee11 Lhange•l. The " ..,,,l i, ,o
wn111lerfolly ,111prop1i,1te allll lifelike
➔, His rl'!ere11ce of l'i,o.1«xwp<<rTO.< to the
two grooves on the ,tarting ,laLs is ,p1ite
pointless.
10 E. XOR~IAX GARDTXEU

tl1in~· else; they c:111 only c1ualify OiaKEXWPt(J'Tat. The meaning 1,.; clear at
once. The f]aAf][, is marked off-small an,l .;;nfficient f,,r 11ne man-it is
marked off except behind. That the competitor rnust uot o,·1:r~tq, the liuc
in hont is an elementary principle of all rnch competitious. In tLe preseut
.-lay the liarnmer thrower or weight putkr is courine,l to a s11uare or circle.
Tlie comlitious fur the Lliskos tlir,),rer w0rc uot so scn,rc ; the balbis wa~
markeJ off ,,i,le,rnys but not behind, alH1, as we ,-kdl see, the metl10Ll of throw-
ing implied in the diskobulo.;; cif }Iyron requires room t~Jr at least oue step
fonrnn1. .As I liaYc said, it seem,- probable ,1 1 l'i1Jti that the starting sbb.;; 1

shoul,_l haYe been used fur tlll'mriu~ tlu, diskus anLl tlie spear. At the :c-ame
time, in the Delphi iuscription cle:--cnbing the preparatious ±:Jr the P_nliian
gamc5 ,Ye tin,l mention of Taµ r.aptt To'i;; r.El'Tt10"\.ou;, tl1e contiact for ,d1icl1
was e:igln staters_-i; As special c:outiacts are uameLl for the nH1ni11g track, the
jmnp,;, awl tlie boxin_::;· nng 'wliich woulLl mttnrally serTe ab,) for wrestling
and the pankrntion:, the arrangeme1Jts fur the pentathl,m would seem t,, 1efer
to the ili~ko, an,l the spear, i.e. tlie j3a)cfJ/,, arnl the me:rns for mensurir,g the
tlll'uW, aml these arrangements seem therefore to be distinct from tlie starting
arrangements fur the races.
Kietz's the:ory c,f tl1e pa"\.f]i, as a small platform slopiug dowmnmls has
bt.•eu couclusi,·ely clis1Jroved by Jiitlmer, and need hardly haYe been noticeLl
lia.l it not been adopte1l by the Greek authorities in the recent Olympic games.
Accunli11'.::·.__,
to their ,ronderful reo·ulntic,ns.
0 ,
tlie l)latform is 8() cm. lonu·
0
bY
.;
70 crn .
wi,k, ,rith a lieiglit of not more than I.:i cn1. behi1Jd aml not less than 3 un. in
frout. Tliis extraordinary arrangement is ba~ELl solely arnl entirely on the old,
corrnpt reading of the uhscnre pas;:age in PliilostL1tn:=; cp10ted abo,·e. Even
if tLe old text was coned, its cviLlence wouhl be ahsulutely worthless in face
of tlie 111:111ifu:.t ab:;u1Llity of the idea, and tl1e fact that in all the numen,us
statues, bronzes, vases, and gems representing the rliskobulos there is not tl.e
~li'.,:lite~t tr.1ce of suc:h a platform. Can ,re imagine J[yrou's diskobulos tilteLl
furmrnb ! "\\' ere it S•J, t lie re ,rnuld iudeeLl be some excuse fur Herbert
Sl' 1Jncer\ criticism that lie is about tu fall on his face'. E,·en the scant,·
litL,ra1"' J e,·idence is conclnsi\·e a ,-,0 ·,tinst tliis arranQ·emult. Lncian, Pl1il,;- <.....;

f>tr:1t1t~. an,l Statins all tctnphnsize tb1: fullow thruuc:h uf tbe cli,,k<Jbulus. A,,
tlic di,-.kus swi11g~ tlo\nl tlie ldt leg must ine,·itably be a,ln111ceLl, an,l a
platfonn ,diicli preveuts snch a rnorement nnt ouly renders a good tlm:,\\·
i1upos~ibk. Lnt, being fatal tn all freeLlum arnl grace uf actiuu, is absoluteh·
1m-Gn,ekY ·
The tliruw was measmed from tl1e front line of the fJa)c(:Jf., to tlie place
,d1ere the cli~kos foll. That the competitor rni_ght 1wt o,·erdep the line ii!
tbrowillg the di,,kos or the javelin is obviou,;, aml in the Cc1se of the latter is
clearly implied Ly !'in.Jar's expression µi7 TEpµa r.pof]ct,,4-'' 1rnrds which Ci"•nl,l
ne,·er h[lH: h.·en rni~interprete,l by anynne with 1:,·e11 a ;;,uperficial ku,rn·led~e

SJ J: C'. ll. 1,~r,_ I'- ;,ti13, I. ,2. "'l"'•:tctl!y .\Ir. (;_ S. Rul":tt,ou.
~ In rny l'IIttci-,rn of tlw Tll1Hl+·111 C1u·k •·· Eu,tatl,iu, ~,] HouJ. Ud nn. :21J2 l'- Li'.>!,
stylt• I l't 1y nn tlu_• 1,hotng1a1,hs in C'hr_\·,-.,ap111-,·..., -1:.! : j", Ill. Yil. ~Q.
:11trde au1l 11n d,·~e11pt101i-, truu1 t·yt••V, 1t111•;.,,•-.,
 THlWWI~G THE DfoK(i;-;. II

of athletic", excf•pt t,) deti~n,l some a 1 ,,·ion· tlie,)ty. Thi, line, like tbe
jumper's J3anjp i., p<>ssibly iwlicated on certain va 1cs by ~pears stnck ill the
0

grouml 4c '.PL II.). The place where tl1e tli,-kus fell ,,·cts rnarke,l by a peg nr
arr<>w, as describe1l by Statiu;::. a11d ou sen:ral ntses we see a diskobul, ,,.,
putting do1,n or p11lli11::;· np ;;nch a mark.4' (Fi:.,:·.:! ..
In the modern treP :-;tyle the ,Ji~ko~ i-, tl1rn\Yll fr1,m a circnbr are:,
:2½ metres in diameter, an,! the method nf throwing it i, a mo,lifkati,:in of tkit
of throwing tlie l1am111er. the tluo,,·er's ho,ly maki11g eitl1er t,rn or tl1re,·
complete ti11ns. Ot such a rnctl1n1l there is 11n trace in rt11cient times, arJ1l

Frr. :!.-B..-F. E.YUKE:<.

effective as it nmloubtedly is, we may ,lo11bt if it wouH e,·er lrnse heen

invented but for the experience acqnire1l in hamrner-thruwirn;-.

It would be tedious rind unprofitable to de"cribe a11Ll criticize the variom

schemes elaborated by scholars for throwing tl1e rti:,ko:o. Xo branch ,,f
Greek athletics lias been treatetl at greater leugth or \\'ith 11:ss 1egar<l to
practice and uufortunately the scheme established by tl1e Urcek autliu1itie,.,
in the recent Olympic games 1s no exceptiun. A;; the detects m these
schemes are largely Llne tu a misappreciation of tl1e ,·alue of the 1liffere1,t
classes of evidence, it may be useful briefly t,) reYiew tl1e eYi1le11ce.

(1) Litcm,·.11.
The literary eYiLleuce is of the seantiest, aml practically nsdess except
as confirming the e,·idence of tl1e wonm11ents. BesiLle::; the pas,-,a.~e ill
Philostratus discussed above, we have a few scattere,l allusions iu Lucian and
a lengthy description in Statius of a type common in later epics.•~ In the
latter the heroic character of the contest is marke1l by the Yast weight of the

-½ 11.JI. T'"[fsf.'.;; R 57--1; l~rau--e Gy,nn. xiv.
49 : cp . .T.H.S. xxiv. p. 18tj,
47
J nthner op. nt. p. 32, Fig,. 26. 27 : Cvll.
IJutoit, P,11is, lSi\', i9 ; Giranl L'E,Ju,:u/10,1
Ath,,ue,rne, f. 23 ; Pottier Loua,_, 0. i3.
-i, Lw.:l<lll P!tzl ip~c11.,ll.
1 1 S; .. Lztv·lt1u·~ 21 :
L,i,1/vy. lJc-ur. xiL 2: St.1tiu, Th,:/,. vi. oi!l-;1~.
l :! E. :\"OB.3L\X GAIU>IXEH

.lisko;;. Tl1ere are \'arious archaeological details with which WL' are familiar
from otl1er sonrccs, but of the actual throw w1: learn nnthing which we could
1111t learn from ~[yron·s :;tatuc. The description of Hippollleclon throwin~
the ,fokos o\'er hi~ hea,l into the air as a prelin1inary sh,rn- ntf lins in,lced
s11ggeste1l t<i .M. Giranl the delightful theory that the Greeks praeti,,ed nut
,rnly · le lancem,:nt eu lougueur' b;.it · le laucement eu haut.' 4:• Une wonders
liuw tliey contrive,! to mea,ure tLe l1eight '. J1ithner, again, rlepewb
cl1ietiy on nuinu, poetical expre.,:3ions for l1is wonderful theory of the
Kreisschw11nµ. 0 ·• a rnetliocl nf tl1ruwi11g the diskos by whirling tl1e arlll roullll
a,; ,,-hen uue jerks a cricket ball, a feat highly daugeruus tu performer ::tllll
spectators, but liarilly likely to break record~. He is :-mrpri~e,l that a rnetho,l
so fre,pwntly alln,led to in literature finds such scanty support in the
111011uments '. Lastly. it is 011 the otreugth of the passage in Plnlostratus and
of Jlyrun's statue tliat the Greeks !Jave derive,! ry 'E'>...>..r1z•tK17 01a-Kof]o>.Ja,
arguing that because Myron's diskob,>los has his right foot forward, the right
fuut must be kept forward till the completiou of the throw, and regard-
less of the fact that even the literary evidence proves that the left foot
was mlvancecl as the tliskos swung down. Such theories are highly creditable
to tl1c inrngiuatiun of tl1e authors, an<l prove conclusively the inadequacy of
the literary e\·idence.

,: 2) Jloiw mental.
Fortunately, the evidence of the monuments is exceptionally rich and
\',Hied. The two ~tatue;,, Myron's Diskobolos (Fig. 18) and the Standing
Diskobolos (Figs. 1:3), otten assigned to Xaucydes, are of first-rate importance,
sucl1 works being independent of the accidents which affect the types in the
lesser arts. Besides these we have a multitude of vases, bronzes, gem,:, and
c11i11s represe11ti11g this subject. Their evidence is of very different value.
Bronzes often form part of candelabra or serve as haudles of vessels, ancl the
tigure is tl1erefore motlitietl b,v pr,,ctical considerations. The vase painter is
iutiuenced by laws of compositiun or by the shape of tlie rnse space, especially
iu the interior of kylikes. The same cause operates still more strongly in
the case of gems and coins, as ,ve may see by compa1ing the copies tliereon of
}Iyron's statUL' witl1 the original." 1 Hence, wlien we c,)tlle to cla~~itYing the
types in tlie,;e objects, we fi11d apparent di\·ergence, often dne not to difference
iu rnuti,-e, but tu differcuces of material or space, or to the age and style of
the arti~ts. The classitication is important, becanse the constant repetition of
ally uwtirn is ftir eviilellCe tl1at the attitude 1epreseutc,l is typical of tlie
ped;Jnuauce. A,~ain, 11ut only dues tlie style of tlte arti:-<t vary; that of the
disk1,bol1Js l1i111self tlllht have rnried e,111ally. It is incouceivable that tbe
,u1cicnt Greek athletes ~lwuld li,t,·e been cutnpelled slavislilv to imitate the
::,tyk uf a particular perfonner, or eveu of a statue. The swi1;g of the diskns
lll\1:-t have varied with iudi\'idnal performers as much as the swiu:::- of the u-ulf
'- ,::,

ei-'l ''P· L',/. l'· :21J:";

;,, 1 ')1. ed. I'· 3:2.
 THHO\\T~G THE DISKOS. 13

club, and we may naturally expect to see tl1ese ditfereuces of style reflected
in art. It has been neces~ary to dwell on these causes of di\·ergence, because
of the tendency uf arclia,wlogists to force enry ai:titude represented into one
serie-; of movements. It is as though son1eone utterly ignorant of golf were
to try to reconstruct a single swing out of a miscellaneous collectiun of photo-
graphs ur drawiugs of various golfers playing Yarions sl1ots and a few meL1als
or prizes beariug conventional representations of the game. At the same
time, though we must expect to fiml variety in style, we shall find, I believe,
that the general principle of the throw is always the same.

E.-T!Jpical Posdi"m1s.

The scheme generally accepted in England till recently is based on the

two statues. It distinguishes three stages :
(1) The thrower takes up the position of the Standing Diskobolos, right
foot in front, the diskos in his left han.J (Fig. l 3).
(2) He swings the diskos forward and as it rises grasps it firmly with his
right hand, a position commonly represented on vases (Fig. 3).

Frr,. 3 -R.-F. E:1:r.1:s:. D.:\f. F6.

(3) He swings the Lliskos Jownwards and backwanh in the right hand.
turning head and body to the right, till at the eml of the back ward swing he
is in the position representeLl by 1Iyron ( Fig. 18).
In this extremely simple :-c1,eme the right foot is the piYot on which the
whole body swings. This swing of the body round a fixeLl point is of the
essence of the swing of the .tiskos as of a golf club. The force comes not from
the arms, which merely connect the boLly anLl the weight, but from the lift
of the thicrhsb
and swin12"
'"
of the bodv.
•
Kietz-~" in his criticism of Six's
scheme .-, 3 describes the upward swing in the left haml as nsele~;;, because tl1e
H E. :XOR}U.:X GARDI.XER

Lliskos 1s thrown by the right hand, not the left. Such criticism shows
a complete rnisnmlerstarnliug of the whole theory of the swiw.:·, in which
the arms are les~ important tliau body and legs. The ;;,cheme as far as
it goes wonld be quite satisfactory, were it not that it fails to account f,,r the
.-ery large number of n.se paintiugs ,rl1ere the diskobolos is ,;lwwn witl1 the left
foot aLh·ancetl. The same criticism applies to J1it!tuer·,, scheme.
Besides the po~itions of the t,rn statues, there are two other position~, of
snch freqneut occurrence on Yases aml mt bronzes that we tee! sure that they
belong to the ordinary methud of tl1rowing tlte clisko:-.
(l) The rli~kohol,)s ,lwlds the di"kos in front of liim in both liauds
'Figs. 3, +, .5, lG, Pl. II.·,.
He l1olcl tl1e di~k,,s flat in the right 11[1,nd, which is tnrnetl out
· '"> ·

so that the rliskos rest~ on tl1e furcann I Figs. U, i', :-;, D, 10, Pls. L III.). The
ld't hand is usually rni,;ed ab.we the head.
Let us exa111ine these t\\·o types, paying especial attention to the position
of tl1e fet:'t, a detail ot :e,upreme importa11ce, which lias howerer been umluly
ne;;lected by ueiuly all ,niters on the snbject.

(l _', IJ,'Rl ,,s 711,f,l to tlu. f1·0,d i,1 l,,,tli J,u,111,.

There ca11 be 110 ,l,mht ,1s tu the moment represented i11 thi3 type: it is
tlie m,Jmcut imtnC'diately before the di-;l,;:os is swung back in the right hand.
It tlie right foot ,rerc ahYays aclrnuced, there wuuld be 110 clifficnlty, this
p,·1:,iti1,11 beiug tlie uatmal link hdween the po,-itiuns of the two statues. In
a ,_·,.-rt.1iu uumber of va,-;es tl1i:o is the case,-'' bnt in a far greater nnmber we
tiuil the left f,tt)t at.lvanred Fig.+. Xow tlie p:1sition of the feet cannot be
il11e to accident or carel1:i-'i11e,s, f,n· tl1c uuitunuity of other details is retnark-
ahle. Tl1e ath·ame,I le.c:· is ahrnys strai:.:ht nr neari_v S(), the other leg more or
le~s bent. The right ha11d alway-; gra~ps the disko,, the left liau,l merely
'-ll!'POl'~~ it. Thi~ p,,~iti J11 ut tl1e hamh i,; itff,triable. 5
1 Kietz, indeed, °
tm:utiuus a kylix ,1-!it"re the p,,,itiu11 of the hand,- is reversed; but the figure
tlie1c depicte,l ha, n1,thi11,;· t,J du ,,-itlt the actnal thruw_:,,; It i,; true lie
11"lds tl1e d1skt" tu tl1e front with butl1 hand,;; bnt lie is stanrling at ea5e, with
huth fe....r to_!~etlwr, an.I ere11 has l1i~ himation thn>Wll o,-er his shoulder'.
:-,;,_.ei1;;.:·, tl1cll, th,tt the arti,h ~huw s11ch can: aud accuracy in depicting the
P"sitiu11 of tl1e l1and, au,l uther detail,, we c,muut dismiss a~ accidental the fact
that iu so 11Jany rn~tances the l...-fr f"''t i~ adYancerl, while in both the statues tlie
ri'..;·ht fout i-.; in fro11t. The difference cauuut be tl1at between a right-handed

·.• w.~l,t foi,t lll frollt, ( ;,_-1h . •1. /'. :2J8 :,!,;o p11--1ti 1-111 of t~~er. ~lhi 1ne J/us. JJo,_·c,~1 i l (a f1a6-
1 1 ,.-f. Lt-t·-, : Jiu-:. t. 1~11-j ir.-f. ky:1xJ;
l'1t11 1 ::. 11. m,·ll t of ky !ix'· r-f. krat,·r, :'I [l1,l1c, ::;os-1, t-f.
1: . .11. /'11,' E tj tt.-f. k~ll\:, L,,ft f,,,Jt 'll ky!tx, .\!umd1, 80-J: r-f. l,yr!11,l, .\Inm, !1. 3,~;
t!dlit. .... L1·1.h. ;:~1/_ l,~~~- 11. 1~;11 -1; _1,f,1, ,1.1. 1-l. <1m1,l11,1:1. lfrn11it1e(•·. St. I'et,·rsLur~ ltlt;P;
l' 11:. ±. )l., t,e1li. A./'. :J:·, ~•04: ./11 1 • ]f,i.1. i. r-r. t1,1C'.lllU1t. Be1lrn 4011.
-±. ,_; . . : d'If,tn•·tnllif.:'l t~': L' . .ll. Jr,t,,\Bl-:t~. T11i-- n:rj int1i111pktt• lt~t ,rill gi\·e '-iorn,~ i1lt·,1
·;~•;. ::r;l, ,-);ti, t;~J, E ~~ ... ; J/,r..:. (~,· !I- 111 1 a, of tlw t't, 'jl,cll> y ut thi, typ,·.
-t. '.,111. 1. hx.~,t J: ,./ ,t/,•111-'_\-,,,•,,1,1,1l,. 15±.
11
:t> J/11-... Ci d-" i1. 1~1~,; 1{11_t~ op. Clt. p. 75.
1

··, ! i'· \·.t~L.;; \\]1t,_•l~ J ,[11 ll!_it h.1111\\' tlis..:

 THRO\\TXG THE l>I:--KOS. 15

null kft-han,le,l tlir,JW, for, apart frum tl1e absence of any other evidence for
the use of the left hanil, the po:-oitiu11 uf the k1u,ls, the right knlll firmly
grasping, tlie left merely $1lpp,>rtit,g the ,11,ko,. pruves conclnsiwly that the
di,,ko-; is to be thro1n1 ,Yith tlie rigt1t. \Y,, are forcc,1 to conclude, therefure,
t l1at ns the ,li:',ko3 swiug-; furwar,1 iu the left lmu,l the ld"t fuut is achau,·e,l,
aml ot this we slwll rirnl further evi,le11ce \Vhen ,re come to consider tl1is
fon1·ar,l swing.
How tl1en dc,es t,he diskubolos pass from this po:',itiou with the left
foot f,)nYan.l tu the position of ::\[yrou's statue? The clian;::·e uf feet may
be etl'ee:te,l iu t1ro way:3-eitlier hy~rnakiug an,Jther step f,)rwar.J with tl1e right

FrG . .ic.-B.-F. KnEDE. n. ~1. E 301.

foot, or by ,hawing back the left foot. The former was the method adopte,l
by some performers in the Olympic g:,mes c-f 189G. Starting \\ iil1 tlie
left fuot funrnnl. the thro1rer rnisctl the diskos in b,)th harnls to a leH·l
,Yith the shouJ.len:, arnl at tlie moment uf rn·ingiug it back a,hauce,l
the rigl1t foot, stq>ping fonrnnl a:}1in with the left foot as tlie ,liskos
S\nrng funrnl'tl for the throw. Thi~ rnetho,1 rc,111ires runm for tl1ree ;;teps
fvnrn1tl, the impetus being l1elpe,l by this fonrnnl mowmeut. Tl1e other
lllethod 1e11uire:3 room for only one step, an,l tlie pewJulnrn-like swing of
 E. KOIDL-\.X CL\RDIXER

tiie left leg, first forward, tl1c11 back, am\ fiualh· forwar,I ag,1i11, seems at
least equally effecti,·e as helpiug the swing of the bo:l,v, like the preliminary
,1aggle of a golf club.--· 7 Both metholls are, of c,)mse, incompatible ,Yitlt
the balbis of the last Olympic games. Both are e,1ually effective, and
p,)ssi bl y both "ere em ployed. A few vf the rn,-e~
are in favour of the forn·,ud step/'' but the· :-tron~
inclinatiun of tlie bo,ly backwanls in most of the
figures is in favour of the backward step. Par-
ticularly convincing i~ the attitmle shown on a r.-f.
krater of Amasis ( Fig. .5 ). The diskobolos is re-
preseutecl three-quarter face, a position ,_.hich has
I \ < I ;l, greatly troubled the artist: lie bolds the diskos
!'-\_ d I
I ~ before him in both hands, resting his weight on
\ :: \
his right foot, while the advanced left foot barely
touches the groullll. The drawiug is careles'l in
some respects, the athlete, for example, having
t,rn right liands, but tlie balance of the body
clearly indicates that tl1e left foot must be moved
backwards. A B.~I. liydria B. :3:26, published in
Marquardt's Pentuthlo,i, PI. II., carries the move-
Fri: ..5 -R.-F. Ki:.nrn. ment a step farther. The left ha11Ll is alrea,Iy
L,fter Il.11 t,1 i;,'., Fig. 5tj u.)
releasing the di.-;ko3, and the left foot is raised well
, ,ff the ,.,,oToUnlL These two vases seem conclusive for the backward movement
of the left foot.

(:2) D,.,k,,.sjlat Ill th, ;·,glit lwnd.

The ~ccowl typical position of tlie clis:rnbolos i,- with the diskos slightly
in front uf the body iu the right haml, whid1 is t11rnccl outwards so
that the diskos rests flat against the forearm. The left arm is usually raised
abO\·e the l1ead, or in a few cases it is stretched to the front. Tlie right foot
is usually mlrnnced. The attitude of the body varies greatly, from the stiff
11 pright position of certain bronzes to tl1e stooping attitude depicted in the
iuterior uf a r.-f. kylix ascribed to Euphronins (Fig. !J). This Llifference of
attitude ~ecms at first sight to favour Kietz',, view that we have here two
1fo,ti11ct types, one in which the borly is practically at rt:st an,l the performer
is merely fecli11g the weight of tlic disk"s by a short preliminary swing. the
otl1er fortuing part of the actual s1,ing. Ent a c,,nsi,leration of the various
ch;;ses of mnnuments leads rather to the c,)nclusion that the p,,sition of the
arms is; tl1e essential puiut, aml that tlie variation iu the puse of the bodv is
tl11e rather to the limitations of the early arti,ts. •
The type ()ccurs in a wunbcr of br,,uzes, mo,tl_\· archaic an,l uf the ch-,;;

-~ This J!l<i\-,·tnent r1t the ldt. h·~ 1-. 11,Lrt i,f ty11c-, in une :'.!etiec..
tne .. , li1_•1n,; 1'1t p1:eJ li:, ~ix, tli(} 1,1dy 1a•1'.t of ~,- E g. if.JI. ,-,,~, ~ E :}[~.). 3~,1.-,.
"h11:lt 1.... tl:,, eu,l,•a\·,,ar to iu, :u,le to1, 1JL-11ty
 THROWIXG THE DISKO~. 17

fonuerh· llescribe<l as Etrnscau.:.i, The diskobolos on the cover of a bronze

lebes i11 the B.M. (Fig. 6) is an imitation, possibly by an Etruscan artist, of

FIG. 6.-DISKOBOLOS OS B1:o:--zi.: LEBES. B.:\I. 559.

59 Reinar·h J.'epatoire ii. ;i-14. 3, 4, 5 ; Arch.
An~. 1904. p. 36, Fig. 8; Ann. cl. I. 18i9.
p. 133, No. 5 ( = Kietz, F;g. 2) ; E. JI. Bronzes,
502; i\luuid1 Anti,1uarium, 12S; Endinyton
H.S.-VOL. XXVII.
F .•4. Club Cat,tlo:JllC, 190:). Pl. L. 3S a, h. A
,imilar type is founJ on the 1•oins of a\.b,le1 ,1,
Kietz. Fig. 4.
C
 E. XOR)L\5 GARDI:NER

the Greek archaic type, the general features of which it reproduce~, thongl1
it shows 11011e of the promisP. of true archaic nrt. The stiff attitn,le witl1
the feet only slightly apart and the bolly upright, an attitude which at first
sight seems incompatible ,vith vigorous action, is characte1 is tic of early
bronzes. But what is the meaning of the uplifted left bawl, uules,- it is to
balance tl1e body/ And why should the body need this assistance nnle,;s
the disko.-; is being vigorously swung? It seems as if the artists could
reproduce the position of the arms and legs, but not that of the btxly, in
action, a fact which shoulLl 11ot surprise u:s when ,rn remember that e,·eu
Myron in his diskobolos has not completely overcome this difficulty. Tliis
view is confinned by comparison with ;;;imilar but finer Attic bronzes of tbe
fifth century, where the stiffness has disappeared and the attitude is full of
action awl vigour. An excellent example of tl1is is tl1e beautiful little bronze
exbibited at the Bnrlington Fine Arts Club in H)0:3.
to the graceful vigonr of which onr illustration does
not do justice (Fig 7). Here the right foot is well
advanced, the right kuee is bent, and the weight,
as in :Myron's statue, rests entirely on tbe right leg,
the left foot touching the gruund only with the toes.
Another interesting bronze is figured in the Cata-
logue of the Forman Collection. X o. 77.6° The left
arm instead of being raised is extended horizontally
sideways, a variation ,·ery similar to one which we
shall find represented on the vases.
In these bronzes the right leg is usually ad-
vanced, but here, as in the vases, we firnl a few
exceptions with the other leg m front.6 1 There are
also several bronzes representing a youth holding a
diskos in either right or left hand, but not expressing
Fru. 7.-FIFIH CE;-.; 1 u1,Y any definite action." 2
BI!o:..;zE The ;,tiff, upright tn,e is found also on certain
(After Burlingto11 Fine Arts
Clul,, l!Hl3, Pl. L.)
black-figured ve~sels; for ex:nnple, on the B1itish
~Iuse1u11 Panatheuaic vase B l-1-3Y:1 Kietz excludes
such vases from his consideration, on the ground that the figures are
depieted iu a sort of procession. But llespite the prncessional character
which is common to many early vases, the attitudes of all the athletes are
distinctive of their particular perfornunces: the jumper swings his lrnlteres,
the spear-thrower poises his spear, and the diskobolos, with his large white
diskos tlat in his right hand and his left ham! uplifted, is identical in type
with the diskobolus of the bronzes. At the same time, the processional
character may account for the fact that he, like all tlte other figmes rn the
11
'' Rt..~11ta1 h, (Ip. ed. iu 153. 0. "' R,·,naeh. op. cit. ii. 544, ti. 'i. 9 : 54;;_
01 1i1 l."i3. 5 (ac~or.Jrng to Reinael1, iJ,·nti,_:il
,;,_ 1. :!, -1: SH, 4.
w1tli ii. ;i11. ,,, hut thia i, apparently an ei1"r. •il .lutl111er, u1,. ,·if .• Fig. -1-i: J Jl.s. ,. 11 1. 1.
01 t' .... ,. tlu• tll'.l\\ 111g:, are wrong. as tlte 1•0--it1un PI. YIII.
uf tlie h·g::, i::- lt_·ve1~e1l,; B.)L 50!. ,-;,-,g
 THHO\\·rxc-:- THE DISKOS. 19

pri,ct·,sio11, has the left foot advanced. Tlie very similar figure on the B.)1.
rnse B ~71 (Pl. I.,1 has the right foot foremo:;tY 4 A very conventio11al
treatmeHt uf the sal!le type is seen on a r.-f. a1uphora in the Lambert
CullectitJn. rqirolluce,l hy 1le \\'itte, Pl. xxi,·. The artist has attempted to
represent a ,liskobolo-; thri:e-11uarter tace: the exaggerntecl treatrnent of the
muscles and the affected p11se give the ti~me ar, a1cliaistic appearance. and tle
\Yitte therefore cunsi,lers the vase the work of an Italian imitator. I knm,· of
no examples of the upright type on the rc,J-figureil ,·ases, except perhaps a r.-f.
amphora iu )I11uicl1/:, ou which ar,! two grvnp~ of three figures, rliskobi,loi
and akoutistai. Of the;;e only the central figur0 in either group repre;;ents
acti,m. The diskobolos lwlds a di.,kos slightly to the front, flat in his rigl,t
lia11d: hi;-; body i:,; carefully balauced, leaning slightly backward:-, with the
weight on tlie left foot, which is behind. bnt the left arm instead of being
raiseLl is held by the side, bent at the elbow.
Just a-; WE' saw in the bronze,; the archaic type, where tlie moti\·e is
obscurecl lJy the stiffness. passing into a freer, more vigorous type ·where
the motive cannot possibly be mistaken, so it is with the
vases; atlll t!te connecting link is furnished by the clisko-
bolos on a b.-f. tripod from Tanagra, nuw in Berlin,;,;
(Fig. 8.. The artist's intention of expressing vigorous
action is obvious. The bearded athlete strides funrnrLl
with hi;; right leg, holding a thick white diskos in his
right hand well in front ot the body, the left hand being
raiseLl as usnal. In its stiffne~s and angnlarity tlie figure
resembles tl1e archaic bronzes; in its movement it suggests
Fi,,. 8.-B.-F. T1:1-
the beautiful forure~
in the centre of the kvlix J
in the POI>. BERL!':\. 17~,.
Bourguignon collection at ~ aples, to which I have already
referred (Fig. U). EYery liue anLl curve iu this latter figure denotes action,
though I fancy the artist h:,s somewhat exaggerated the stoop of the body t,,
suit the circular space.
The ano-le
0
of the botlv
.,
natnral1'-J va1ies Oa-reatlv:
., ,
sometimes it is incliuC'll
forwar<l, sometimes upright, wmetimes thrown well back. This latter
position is represented on a r.-f kylix published by ~ od des Vergers,
Pl. xxxvii , and al,:;o on the ontside of the Bourguignon kylix mentione,1
above ( Fig. 10 ). In the first of these the left foot is adYanced ; in the sectmd
the left ar111 instead of beino- raise1l above the head is stretched well to tlie
front, still, however, with ~lie iuteution of balaming the body. \Ye timl
the same position of the arms on two r.-f. pel1kai in the Bntish )lu,-eum
E 3U3, :3!)5 (Pl. III.). In both the diskoholos appears to be taking a step
forward with the right foot, but in tl1e one the body is upright, in the other
it is stooping.

o{ So too has th,, ,li,k1<u1<]0, Oll a va,e "·' :\luui,·li. 11.1.,; Fnrt1Lu1,der - Reichhol,l.
tignrcJ liy Tr,chhein i. 5-1 I Kr,rn,,,· xiii. 1! ), of Pl XL\·.
\\Lich I cau liud uo pa1ti,·11l.11,. He has J,,, tii> IJr•,·lut 1---a~. 17~7; .·lrdt. Zcit. l~-:-1.
1iglit arm l,e.,t at the elliow, aIHI the \I ]10],. Pl. I II.
atritu,le is ,uprlc au,l vigorous.
20

If then we are right in assuming that, in spite of variations, the motive

of all these bronzes and vases is the same, the essential points being the use

Frr.. 9.-R.-F. !,nix. X.\PLE~. ,After .drd,. z,,;1. 1884, Pl. .XYJ.,

l)f the unemployed haml to balance the body and the position of the haml
which holds the diskos, it remains to consider what this motive is. We may
dismiss at once the delightful suggestion of Girard
that the diskobolos amused himself by throwing the
diskos np in the air arnl catching it, and that this
is the motive here represented.';; \Ye may also
dismi,;s Kietz's suggestion that in those cases where
a swing is clearly imlicated the diskobolos is swing-
mg the diskos bacb, anls and forwards in the right
hand in order to make the muscles supple. This
idea fails to explain why the right hand is turned
ontwanls, arnl is based on the mistaken idea that
the throw of the cliskos depends chiet!y on the swillg
of the right arm and not on the body swing .
.fotlrner, agai11, imagines that the cliskos is being
,;wnng to the front in the right hand, and he there-
fore places this mo,·ement previous to the position
F1t,. 10.--(Fnm ,·xtenor ot
with the diskos in both hands. But this view is
Fig. 9.) open to the same objection as Kietz's scheme: there
is no danger of the <liskos slippiHg, arnl the out-
war,l tnrn of the rigl1t hand is pointless. It is not only pointless, it is
unnatural; for every gvmnast•
knows how difficult it is to raise a weio-ht
0
 THROWIXG THE Dl:-:iKOS. 21

tu tlic· fnn1t with the liand turned out, and we may be sure that, in a11
exercise depe11(ling for ;ts success on tbe smooth and harmonious working
of all the muscles, any such constrained and awkward movement woulll
have been aroided. Ou the other hand, if the movement represented
1s a dowuwanl swing from tl1e two-handed· position to the position of
~lyron'::, statue, all difficulties vanish. This downward swing must have
been a very vig()rous movement, in which the diskos might easily slip.
Hence tl1e uutward turn of the right hand to prevent slipping, and the
use of the left hand to pre,;erve tlie balance. Hence too the fact that in
ueady every case tbe right leg is advanced.
This view of the relation between the two types is confirmed by a
most interesting bronze in the British Museum (Fig. 11), which represents
tbe moment of transition.•.& The diskobolos stands with right foot
a,lvanced and both hands holding the diskos, which instead of being
upright rPsts flat on the palm of the right hand, while the left hanJ only
touches it lightly and is on the point of letting go. \Ye may notice, however,
that tbe thumb of the left hand is turned inwards, whereas in the vases it is
as a rule on the outside of the diskos. The same peculiarity is noticeable
in a bronze in the Museum at Athens,09 where the diskos is held in both
hands high above the head. This position could not be reached if the diskos
were swung to the front in the left hand from the position of the standing
diskobolos. If, however, the diskobolos takes np his stand holding the J1l,kos
in the left hand level with the shoulder, and then, grasping it with the right
hand, raises it to arm's length, we reach the exact position representeLl in the
bronzes. The attitude is indeed depicted on several vases, the diskos being
sometimes held close to the head,'° sometimes extended to the front. 71
Variations of the motive occur where the diskos is helJ thus on thA right
hand •2 or rests on the shoulJer/·3 and in such figures there can be no connexion
with the actual throw, but the position of the hand in the bronzes forces us
to suppose a previous position with the diskos raised thus in the left hand.
The position is well shown on a lekythos from Eretria, published in the
l,'phemuis for 1886 (Fig. 12) though, as Mr. Bosanquet points out to me, it
i~ doubtful if this particular vase represents a stage in the throw, the stool
with the clothes upon it rather indicating that the youth is leaving tlie

11
~ B.J[. Bro,r:c~ 075; ~lUll'cty lrrrt'k Sclllp~u,c phutogr.11,h of it. On a E.Jl. gem, 18li. th,·
i. )'· 27 4. Perhap, tlw same moment is re1•1e- diskobolns ho'.,ls the cliskos high a hon the h,·a.\
,eutecl on th,, E.Jl. kylix E 96. where the in both hands.
right hawl grasl's the tlbkos as nsual. while ,u Gerh. A. 1·. 272; B.J/. J"asl's. E 2:,t3.
the left. in,tead of supporting it underneath, Cp. 1elid on Athenian stele. Syl,el Tl",//.
re,h flat on the ourface. yc.,,:hi,-h/, dN Kunst, p. 107; J.lmray r;,,.7.
'''' No. i-112. Chryssaphis OJ'· cit., Fig. 2 S..-1ilpt11rc i. p. 13S.
Though the :,mface is mueh corroded, it is of 71 R. .f. amphorae, ~lunieh, 1. \I = KietL
tine an,l vigorous workmanship. lt will he op. C1t , Figs. 6, 7 : 'Eq,. 'Apx. 18~6. Pl. I\" :
shortly pul>li,herl in the catalogue of the B Jl. 1·,,s,·,, E 96.
A theuiau J.rouzes hy the Ephor :\I. Stai,, who -' Gerh. J /'. 22.
has kiwlly se11t mt' through Mr. Dawkins a ,J lJ. JI. V11.scs, B 130.
 E. XOR~L\X GARDINER

,lressing-roorn, perlinps calling to a companion to come on. Here tlien we

liave au alternative position to that of the Standing Diskobolos.

FIG. 11.-Dn .. ~ZE I~ THE B,:1n,n ~lrsEU.\! '.675).

 THRO"\\TNG THE DISKOS. 23

One difficulty remains. As we l1ave seeu, the normal position of the

first type, with the diskos in both hands, shows the left foot forward ; the
normal position of the second type, with the diskos flat in the right hand,
shows the right toot forward. The transition is made either by advancing
the right foot or, more probably, by drawing back the left. There are, however,
exception,;. Sometimes the right foot ioi to the front in the first type,
o:;casionally the left foot in the second type. 74 Though such variations may
possibly be due to the artist's carelessne8s, the care shown in other details
renders it more probable that they nre dne to variations in the style of
throwing. For example, a diskobolos starting with the right foot forward

FIG. 12.-LEK YT1111, F1:,rn E1:i-:r1.1.\. (From 'E<f>. APX• 18Stl.

might prefer to reach the forward position 11 itlwut advancing the left
foot. Or again, supposing he does advance the left foot, and suppc,sing that
to reach the position of Jlyrou's statne he has to draw back the left foot, this
movement of tlie foot may take place at \·,,rions times. He may ld g0 the
diskos with the left haml fir;;t, in whid1 case we have the diskos swinging
back in the right hand nnd the left leg still adnnceLl. If. howewr. he drew
back the left leg first, he wonld for a moment still be holding the di,-kos in
both hands, bnt the right leg would be a(lntuced, and it is noticeable that

:-1 1·. ,,,p,·o pp. 14. 18.

 E. XOR~L\S GARDINER

in vases which do show this attitmle the left foot rests very lightly un the
ground. and the body is slightly inclined forward. The precise moment at
which tbe change took place would be just one of those details in which we
might expect to find a difference in style.
It iias been necessary to discuss these types at length, because they
establish the two important principles, that the diskobolos changed tl1e
po:-:ition nf his feet in different parts of the swing, and that there was con-
t<iclerable -;-ariation in the style of throwing. At the same time, there are
ce1 taiu typical positions which we may regard as fixed: the position with the
diskos in both hands, the swing back in the right hand, and Myron's dis-
koLolos. Bearing these principles and these positions in mind, we may proceed
tc, reco!lstruct the metholl of throwing.

F.-Reconstl'ltdion of the Throw.

(a) Tiu· stand and preliminary morements.

After first rubbing the diskos with sand 15 to secure a better grip, the
di~kubolos takes up his position on the balbis, a space possibly marked out by
side line~, certainly by a line in front. At a little distance behind this line
he takes his stand, carefully measuring with his eye the space he requires, so
a5 not to orerstep the line. This is the precise moment represented in the
Starnling Diskobolos (Fig. 13), a statue the athletic meaning of which has been
so much 11eglected that one writer has actually proposed to reconstruct it as a
Hermes Diskuphoros.7'J The care with which he is planting the right foot,
the firm grip ,vhich the toes are taking of the ground and the consequent
c,,ntraction of the muscles of the calf and leg, the slight bend of the body to
the riglit, all indicate that though the weight may for the moment rest on
the left leg, it will be immediately transferred to the right. Whether the
left leg is kept stationary, or is advanced to the front and then drawn back,
tlie rigl1t leg is the pirot on which the swing depends; and on no other
l1ypothesis can the statue be explained. The position is one of rest; but it
is the rest which precedes action, and every line of the figure betokens the
preparation for action. A point which has never, so far as I know, been duly
noticctl is the direction of the head and eyes. The diskobolos is not, as is
sometimes asserted, looking down the course toward the mark, whatever tl1e
mark may be; 1nuch less is he taking aim, a part of the performance to
which Jiitlrncr and others assign an undue importance in a competition for
distance. His head is inclined to the right and somewhat downwards, and
his eyes are tixed on the ground a few feet in front. HA is, as I have said,
mentally measuring the <listance to wl1ich he may advance the left foot as in
the fiual swing the <liskos is swung forward for the throw. For, in spite of the
m0tlern Greek authoritie;;, the actual throw must take place off the left foot.
 THROWING THE llI~KOS.

Tlie right forearm is said to be modern: if so, tl1e restoration is peculiarly

hnppy: the position of the :1r111 is found OIL certaiu brouzes which closely
rese111ble the statne. 77 and t!te nervous curling of tlie fingers appropriately
"uggests alertuess aud readiness to seize the diskns as it is :-wung forward in
the left hand to the front pn,;ition. The artist has not merely put a 1li~kos into

;~ ;,f
~-·,#'"'··
; ~- t',i,
j,j'
~f
·''

the hand of a youth standing- at ease; he has, as we should •:xpect him to d,1
in a work of such irnp,Jrtancc, selected a truly typical and important p•)sition.
Starting then~in this positioll, the thrower may either keep the left leg
statiouar_y or step forwa1d with it. In the latter case Le will be in the

" l'uartale:s xiii. 3=Rei11ach ii :.45. 3: .111·', . .-In:. 190~. p. :Jti, 11. 7.
:26 .E. XOlL\U.X <U.. HllIXER

position shown on the Pauneti11s kylix in )Iunich ( Fig. 1--1:). Tlie left leg is
mlrnnced and straight; the weight rests on the right leg, which is bent; the
body leans forward, and the right
!mud extemle,1 to the front serves to
counterbalance the weight of the
lliskos, which is still held behin(l the
bods. Kietz sees in this fignre a
left-handed diskobolos about to tlmm
-in a most original style'. Ji.i.tlrner
sees in him a yonth stooping down
to fix or take up a peg. But when
we compare this figure with others
which do undoubtedly represent this
motirn, we find a fundamental dif-
ference in the whole attitude. The
'vor;;icbtig balancieremler Schritt'
which Ji.itlmer himself notices is
surely not necessary for putting down
\[DI< 11 195.
or pulling up a mark, and the
straightness of the extendeLl left leg
would render ;;nch an operation quite difficult. 7~ Perhap:i we may see the
swing forward in a more advanced state, the diskos being now in front

F1<:. 15.-I:.-F. En.ix (F1nrn Gerhar,.l A.1·.1

A the body, un a vase tigl!led by Tischbein i\·. 4:! and ,m the B.\l. kylix
E 5S.7'' bnt neither attitn,k is wry ;;iatisfactory.
The position of the ,~atica11 diskubul<>s is repro1luced, as has b0en said, in

-~ _\ Velf ~im1tll' tj"[>C uCCUJ~ DII tJp, J.-f. ~•• J.H.S. xxi\". l!ll, Fig IO.
kylix 111 Rum,-, .llu1. 1_;,-cg. b:,. :2, a.
 THHO\Vl~G THE DISKOS. 27

certain bronzes, but 1loe5 not, so far as I know, occnr on tlie vases. The latter,
however, suggest alter native l!letlwtls of st:11 ti11g the 5WinJ. One of these,
where the Jiskos is held shonlder bigh in tlte left hand aml then raisell
above the bead in both hands, bas been already described. Another method
i,, snggested by \ m,es which show a diskob,,1'1s h0lding the diskos in both
hands, but low down and with the arms bent e]pse 111 to the body ' t) (Pl. IL).
From tliis position it could be swung up in both bands to a le\·el with the
head. In this type the left leg is already advanced. The actual swing
is perhaps depicte,l on the r.-f. kylix published in Gerhard A. V. :?!)-1<
( Fig. 15 ). but it is possible that the position here represen te,l forms part of the

F1c;. l6.-1F1on, irnc1ior of Fig. 14.) Fi,~. 17.-R.-F. Kn.ix.

(.\.fter Ha1t\\1g. Pl. LXIII. 2)

first method d(.'scribed, coming between the moments represented in

Fig;:. 14 and lG, and that in the other cases we have merely an athlete
carrying a diskos.

(b) The backicaril s1cing.

At the ernl of the swing forwanl, the diskobolos hol,ls the diskos
extendetl to the front horizontally in both hands, the b0tly nprigl1t
or inclined backwarrL,, the weight d1iefly on the back foot. If the
right foot is in front, no forther change of foot is necessary; if the left
is in front, either tlie left foot mu,t be drawn bat·k or the right foot
a•lvance,l. Tl1e latter method does Jll)t explain the position with tlic diskos

so R .[ kyli, i11 Lonne. figtu,,cl l,y Pottier. nii. l ; Jl1t8. 1 /,·,·u. Iii. 1, a ; JJ. JI. T~,,·, .-:,
[Juris. Fig. 6; Cozz,Hlini di 1ui ont ....Yr,~,oJJ. H57tj.
 I

Fr.:. IS.---,1,1:u,·~ Dr,K"c"r."'· 1Jt,mw, l'.,L1z1u L1w_•dott1 J

!B!' p•1·1111""l'.1n ,f J[,s-,rs:. J[1f/111'1I rr111l t_'u.}
 THRO\\T:"'W THE DU,KOS.

in tlie 1ight hn11<l atHl · the left foot forward; and though there is some
evidence tor it, most of the rnontm1c11ts are in favour of the dr::iwing back of
the left foot. The variations in the swing backward have already been
discussed. The diskos is held tlat in the hand until it passes tlie body; at
this point the head an,! body commence to turn to the right, till at the
conclusion of the swing the position of Myrnn's diskubolos is reached. The
moment previous is well illustrated (Fig. 17 cf. below, p. 36) on a r.-f. kylix
figured by Hartwig. It is difficult to say for certain whether the moment
depicted is jnst before the top of the backward swing, or is the beginning
of tlie forward swing. But though the position of the feet certainly fa\·onrs
the latter bypothesis,~ 1 the forward inclination of the body and the evident
care with which the youth is balancing l1imself seem to me conclu~ive tor
the former view, which is further confirmed by comparison with vases which
undoubtedly represent the forward swing.

(c) J'he t,Jp of the l((cbcal'll s1cing. Coin~ oJ Cos.

An intere:-ting variation of the top of the s11ing is represented on a
number of coins of Cos belonging to the early part of the fifth century. It
has been the fashion to connect this type with a totally different position
depicted on a Panathena1c amphora to be discn;;sed later, and to place the
moment represented immediately before or afrer the top of the swing. A
few experiments would convince anyone that no one but a contortionist conlLl
pass from this position to that of .Myron's statue, or rice Cl'l'Sli, and that such
a movement would be fatal to any success. The position of the right band,
with the Lliskos turned to the front, excludes tlie theory of Chrys$aphis that
we have here the beginning of the backward swing. Three points deserve
attention: the bend of the leg, the position of the right hand, and the pos1tio11
of the left arm. \Vhen we examine a se1 ies of these coius we are leLl at once
to the condusion that tl1e attitmle of the body is largely dr1e to the shape
uf the coin space. This will be obvious from the series published below
trom the British Museum (Fig. l!J). The way in whiclt the body is bent over
to the right is manifestly impossible. In ~lyron's diskobolos the body turns
ronml the liips, but its inclination is forward; here the tu1 n is hardly indicated,
and the body is bent to the right. The explanation is, I believe, purely artistic.
The maker of the coin die wished to represent a diskobolos at the top of the
swing frum the front. The difficulty of such a task can be best realised by a
glance at :Myron\, ~tatue from this position. To the artist of .the early fifth
century the difficulty was insuperable. The amuunt of foreshortening
required tu represent the forward beml of the body was far beyond him, and
even if it had not been, the success of the result c,n a coin would have been more
than doubtful. Moreover, the circular space had to be appropriately filled.
He all,1ptecl therefore the obvious expedient of bernling the body to the right
instead of forward. I am imlebteLl to ~Ir. G. F. Hill for an admirable illus-
tration of the same process. In various cultus statues the arms were by the
81 The po,ition of the ri.d1t foot may he ,lne to a <lblike of forc,horteuing.
30 E. XOlDL-\.X GAHDI~EH

side, i,ent at right angles, "·ith tlie forearms extended to the frout: uu co:us
representing them the forearms are extended not to the fruut, but to the right
an(l left."~ Another illustration is afforLleLl by the nrnuuer in which tl1e heads
of the horses rrre turned right rrml left in a quad1ig,t represeuted from the
front.' 1 This view is confirmed by the Yariations \\'hich 02cur 011 tbe coius
themselrns. The more the body i,, bent sicleways, the more it is elongated,
while in the more upright figures there is a decideLl rrttempt rrt fo1t:shorte11i11g.
To tlie same cause may be due the positiun of the front foot. The fnoL i,;
somcti1nes foreshortened in \'ase paintings, but the rc.3ttlt is uften by 11() l!Jeaus

.,-;_---
,;.
( \
. , :

•'

"· ,

liappv,
.,
nnd the coin maker therefore avuids the difficLilt\·
.,
by. extemli,10·V the
foot in such a way tbat the diskobolos appears to he standing on tip-toe.
Comiug to the arms arnl hands, we urny remark first that the Le11diug
of the right arm noticeable on certai11 of tlie coins i3 clcarlv due to consider~
atio11s of space. The position of tl1e diskos, again. may b·e due tu the fact

'~ £~.,,. . .\.1 te1ni-; of Eplit"'~u,. ]). JI. C. lo,ziit ~L1~11t• ..... i.1. 11,. \.rx. -L t. o;
xlli. L :!. i, 8, 1:2; Arterui~ Leuko1,h1yen•· ,tt "1_;ciJ1. .-/. 1· 111;,,
 THRO\YING THE DISKOS. 31

that if represented parallel tu the body it would appear from the front
1nerely as a thin line, which 011 so small an object as a coin would be
unrecognisable. It may, however, also be due tu a differeuce in the style
of throwing. \Ye have seen tliat the left hand is sometimes raised above the
hea(l in the swi11g back, arnl \\'e sl1all fin,l it still raised in tl1e swing
forward as represe11ted in Fig. :21. It i:-. only natmal then that it should be
raised in the interme,liate position. Xow a supple, youtliful athlete would be
alwa_,·s liable tu exag~·erate the swing, just as the youthful golfer does.
In such an exaggerated style the right hand would be raise,l higher tha11
in ~Iyron·s statue, a11tl as it reached the perpendicular "'ould naturally
turn outwards so that the diskos would face to the front, while the tendency
would be to keep the left hand raised in order to balance the body. I am
not saying that such a swing is as effective as that represented by 1Iyron.
The artist of the coin was not depicti11g an ideal, but working from hi;;
own experience of what may have been a local fashion. My point is
that such an exaggerated style is natural, and my point will be conceded
by any one familiar "·ith the differences exhibited by golfers at the top
of the swing. Compare, for example, the position of the young St. Arnlrews
player with that of Y anfon or Taylor. ~Iy conclusion then is that the
Coan coins represent a variation of the same moment as that of
Myron's statue, modified by the shape of the com ;,pace and the
limitations of the artist.

(rl, The tlli'lnc.

'The lliskobolos,' says Lncian, speaking of ~Iyron's statue, ':,eems as
if he would straighten himself up at the throw.' s.i At the beginning ot
the s,\ ing forward the extensor muscles come into play, and by a vigorous lift
from the right thigh the whole boLly is raised and straightened. Thi;;
momentary but most important movement i'l finely represented on two
vases, a Panathenaic vase in Xaples and a b.-f. bydria in the British 1Iuseum
(Figs :20 and 21). The attitude ,lepicted is, as far as I know, unique in
Greek athletic art, which prefers positions of cornparatiw rest and
equilibrimn. But here we have a sort of snapshot, an impressionist picture
of a momentary position which cannot pos:sibly be maintained. On the
Panathenaic vase especially, the thrower seems to be flying from the grouml
in a way which recalls the figures of Winged Yictory so strongly as to
suggest the idea that the attitwle is borrowed from this type. The position
of body, legs, and arms is ideutical: substitute the victor's "reath for
the diskos, and add the ,vings, and we have the Winged Victory so ofteu
represented on athletic n1.ses; aw{ it is certainly appropriate that the
artist should borrow from an<l suggest the figure of victory on :l rnse

'' Philopsewl. 18. Mwv ,-~v o<IJ'l(<uov-ra, ,\v 01,i\.Cf.(0?1ra -rrii E-rfpr.p, -lotKO-ra <1vvava11T7J(J'oµ.EJ1cp
O' f-"'(W, cp1Js ,-Uv E1ru,eKvq>Ora 1<aTCI. -rO <TX~,ua Tl]s µ.era. -r,i s /3071. ii s;
0.<PEuews, C1.1reuTpa,u,u.E11ov els -r1}v OtcrKo<.pJpov. 71pEµ.a.
 E. XOR'.\IA~ GAHDISEB

intended for the prize of victory. The position of the hea1l aml right
arm lead is similar to that depicted on the coins of Cos. But whereas on
the coins the body is bent sideways and the right leg is uprigl1t, on tlw

,·ase the whole figure forms a curve from head to toe, and is OYerbalanced.
On the Britisl1 }Iuseurn hyJria the curve is nut quite as rnarked, and

the moment sl1own is ~lightly later; tlie two vases illustrate also the two
different positions of the left arm which have alrea1ly heen noticed.
 THlWWI.:~W THE DISKO~. 33

A curious Yariation occm,-; in an early Atheuiau lekythos from the Pozzi

Collection," 5 to which ~Ir. G. F. Hill has called my atteution (Fig. :2:2 ). The
general position closely resembles that \Yhich we haYe been discus:sing,
but the diskos insteml of lying along the forearm is turne,l upwards so
as to re$t between the fingers an,1 thnmb.sG The vase painter frequently
makes mistakes in dr.miug bands, and such a mistake is the only possible
explanation of our present figure.
JHthner, i1lentifying the type of the Xaples amphora with that
of the coins, considers them to represent a distinct metho,l of tl1rowing
the cliskos, \Yhich he calls tho Kreis-sclrnnng.57 He c;npposes the diskobolos
to whirl his arm round from the front, right oYer his head, aml he supports
his theory by a variety of poetical quotation·,. Epeius burls the ,-olos
ow17<Ta<;, Odysseus the cliskos 7rEpt<TTp{,Jrar; ; in Pindar Xikeus hurls the
stone 7<,Epa KVKAW<Tair;. Even Propertius arnl Statius are called to ,vitness.
It is hardly necessary to point out the obvious appropriateness of these ex-
pressions to the ordinary method of throwing the ,liskos or any other object.

Fri;. 22.-.\.THEc>L\); LEKY rHo,. HucLOG~E. I From Le Jfusu.. )

To argue that they denote a complete rernlution cf the arm is the qui11tessence
of pedantry, inexcusable even if the expressions occurred in prose; awl it
is indee,l surprising that Ji.ithner, whose useful work is generally dis-
tinguished by great soundness ofjULlgment. shoukl have alloweJ himself to be
misled by a passage or two of the scholiasts into so unpractical a theory.
A ligl1t objeet, easily graspe,l, might be thrown a certain distance in tliis way;
certainly not a heavy, slippery object like the diskos, much less tl1e ponderous
Homeric solos. It is unnecessary to labour the point, especially [LS the
position which we are cliscussing form;; the natural sequel to that of ~Iyron's
d1skobolos.
I have compared the position to that of the Winged Victory; but the
diskobolos has no \rings, and unless he recovers !us e'iuilibrium by adrnncing
one foot, he must fall forwanl on the ground. The modern thrower 'in tbe
Hellenic style' does contrive to rid l1imself of the 1liskos iu tl1is attitude,
but tiie throw inevitably suffers; arnl there is absolutely no e\·idence that

, L,· .llusec, Vol. iii, p. 1,8, Fig. 1:2.

5
E; Op. ca. l'· 32.
H.S.-VOL. XXYII, D
3-i E. NOR}IAX GARDIXETI

the aucient diskobolos lrnJ to throw off the right fuut. Indee,l, the
evidence of literature and art is conclusive for the throw off the left
foot, the only rational method of throwing. 'The left foot' says Philo-
stratus, 'must be s1Hmg to the front with the right arm,' 50 and his ,YOnis are
confirmeLl bv
. the less definite lmwuaae
;:, ;:, of Lucian and Statins, and h.)' the
vases. A r.-f. kdix at Boulogne o'.l (Fig. :23) shows the earl,,· part uf

/-✓;,~
,' /,;,l
/ 11;;

)
/

=:]n' 01

FIG. 23.-R.-F. KYLrx. Bo1.;r.oa.:,F.

the movement. And the actual throw is vi.-idly portrayeJ on a b.-f.

hyLlria in Yienna no (Fig. ~± ). On both vases the diskobolos strides vigorously
forwanl with his left leg. Elsewhere the motive 1s more or less obscured, but
Six appears to he right in thus explaiui11g the figure of the diskobolos on the
Leyden Panathenaic amphora, though the grotesque exaggeration of this vase
discredits its eviclence.''1 The diskobolos, the jumper, and the spear thrower all
appear to lie miming, au acfrm perhaps introduced by the artist to giYe more
life to tlie couwntion of tlte processional type. If we make allowance for
this, we find the movements represented are really
typical of their respective performances. Possibly
we may assign to the same motiye the diskobolos
on a r.-f. kylix of Corneto, pub[i,;hed in the Jfon.
(
d. I. XI. Pl. ~± a11Ll also a wall painti1Jg repro-
! duced in Ji /1.,. Ch ius. Pl. cxxvi. In both th2se
cases the bending '--
uf the riaht
0
arm swro·e,-ts
,":'IQ ·-
some
doubt as to the adion, hut this rnay be a modifi-
Fr,;. 24 ,-ll,-F. HYDRIA. cation d11e to ;-pace limitation, such as we liave
YJE:,;x.\, notice(l in the representation of Myr,)11·s disko-
bolos c,n gems or 011 the coins of Cos. Of another
wall paintin!:t, figured in JI1 1 ;;. lJm·l11,nic", ix . .)2, there can be no doubt.
Perl1apc- a still later lll•.>mellt, jn~t before tl1e Lliskos ,p1its the rigl1 t l1au.J, is

~~ Y. --u1,1-.1, p. £1. JI~1('11. 8iE.

"' Le J/11,,•. Yol. ni. Fi,'.! . .J:2, ''' A,,,,J,. Zol. lSSL l'l. ix.
!" ..\!a::-ntt J[u-;, t'u, .Ku,i,.J ,1 ,td l,1tl1~,t,u~
 THROWING THE DISKOS. 35
represented in an exceeLliugly quaint terracotta fonrnl at Smyrna arnl exhibited
at the Burliu 6 tou Fine Arts C'lnb in U.;,-;:-;_" 2 The exaggernte1l emaciation of the
bo1ly and contorted attit11de are typical uf this clas" of grotesque. The position
is eYiLleutly influenceLl by ~Iyrnn's ,;tatue, but tlie left foot is aLlvanced and the
diskos ha,, alreaLly swu11g to the front.
The so-called bronze diskubuloi of Xaples are sai,1 to represent the
moment after the throw, but this interpretatiun seems to me impo,,.sible, in
vi0w of the position of the arms and the alertness and expectancy ex-
presseLl both by the figures aml the heads. aml [ have no doubt that they are
really wrestlers. ~IoreoYer. as tlie Llisko-; leaves t,he haud the right foot must
be ag,,iu ml vance,·l to prevent the tliro,Yer from falling forward, au.J in the
bronzes the left foot i,- ad nmceLl. Of tl1is final m,wement of the follow
through we have perhaps a representation in the right-hand athlete in Fi_c:·. ~:3,
but as the diskos has already left the hand, it is impossihle with certainty to
identify the position. Whether in this movement the thrower was allowed
to oyerstep the balbis or not, we cannot say.
In palaestra scenes we often see yonths carrying a disk,>s whose position,
whether at rest or i11 motion. h:1s clearly nothing to Jo with the ;:;.ctual throw;
similar types uccur alsu in the bronzes. Some of these have been alluded to,
and it w011lll be useless to deal with tl1em in detail. A wurd, however, may be
sai,l :1s to certain gen~, though the e\·iLlence of tliis clas;; of monument has
little iu,lepemlent value. The numerous representatives of ~Iyron's st'.ltue 93
have been already meutionell. Perhaps the inflneuce of this ,-tatue may be
traced on a Berlin paste X o. -±-"iti1 t 1 where the diskobolos is apparently on the
point of thrnwing the diskos, which is swinging down in the right haml, :otill
bel1i11Ll the body, while the left arm is swung fonrnnl; the body and head are
thrown backward, and the right foot is vigorously advanced. Furtw~"ingler
describes him as 'im Anlauf begriffen,' allll compares him to the diskubolos
on the Leyden amphora. The evidence for a preliminary run i8 non-existent,
anJ I prefer to assign the position of the right leg to the influence of }Iyron.
Another Berlin gem shuws a somewhat similar position of the arms, with the
left foot in advance. This gem is interesting from the fact that a flaw in the
stone was long interpreted as an elerntion, or mound, representing the bater
or balbis, regardless of the fact that it cut off the thrower':- left foot.
Fortunately we ba,·e a duplicate in which the flaw is wantingY" The dupli-
cate has also a peculiarity, in that the diskobolos holds in his left baml a conl,
a peculiarity repeated on the 1:3.:\I. gem 18lti. The corLl is possibly a boxm~
thong, but why it should be insertecl has nnt been explained. The dose
co1111ectio11 between the spear alld the diskos renders it nwre likely that
it represerns the spear-thr,mer's £i7Kv1u7 ur ameutum. It is curious tliat
such a piece uf evidence should ha\·e escapetl the notice of the advocates
of the hole anLl string theory of the diskos or solos;

"" Branteghem Coll. 223. u-1 2!,. xliv. 2.J.

83 Fnrnrnn;.:ler op. c,t. :div. 2o. 2; ; Ix,·i. S: " ,b. xliY. 2S ( = Krnu,e xiii. e. 5-1 l,,. :JO.
B.JI. 1.i,·11u, 1-12.
n2
36
A. snmmary of our conclusions may be useful.
1. The stance.
a. position of standing cliskobolos. Fig. 13.
or u. lliskos raisell in left haml levd with the slwnlder. Fig. 12.
or c. lliskos held in both hands le\'el with waist. Pl. II., Fig. 1.3.
From these positions, with or without a clrnnge of foot, the ,liskos is
swung ur raise,l to
2. Position with left foot forwanl ( nsnally) arnl cliskos in botl1 hamk
u. extemled horizo!1tally to tl1e fro11t. Figs. 3, ±, etc.
b. raised ab,we the bea,l Fi;·. 11.
3. The diskos is swung cl,:,wnwarJs, resting on the right forearm. Either
before or in the conrse of the S\\'ing
a. the left foot is llrawn back. Fig.."i.
or u. the right foot is mlrnncecl ''.Pl. III.) so that we reach
±. The position of )Iyron's diskobolos. Fig. 18.
."i. At the beginning of the swing forw:.ml the body is straighteneLl.
Figs. 20, 21.
6 . .A.ml as the iliskos swings dmrn, the left foot is vigorously aLlnmced.
Fig"'. :2:2, 2:3.
7. Fiually, after the ,Ji,,kos has left the hallll, the right foot 1s agam
ach-anced. Fi~·. 2:1.

1 am ngain imlebted tu ~Ir. Cecil Smith for leave to publish objects in

the Briti-;h ~Iu~enm. To )lessrs. J. L. )lyres, R. C. Bosanquet, G. F. Hill,
H. B. Walters, an,l Dr. Zahn my obligations are many. The excellent illu,c;-
tration "f ~Iyrnn';; Diskobolos is reproduced by kind permis:;ion of ~les$r;:.
)Ietbuen from )Ir. Walters's recently publishe,l 'Greek Art.' ~Ir. G. S. Robertson
lia:; kimll_v giveu me the benefit of l1is experience both as diskobolos and as
Hellanodikes in the re\·iveLl Olympic games, and it was a great satisfaction to
me to tind that the conclusions whicl1 I haLl arriveLl at imlepemlently from the
study of the e,·i,lence agreed with those to ,vhich be had been led by practice.

Tlie extremely interesting fragment uf a "'i.i.rzburg alabastron on

Pl. III. is frnm a photngraph obtainetl for rne by :Mr. Bosam1uet from
Dr. \Yolter5, which arriwd tt)O late for uotice in it,; proper place. The artist
lia-,, depicted a back view uf the position ,,howu in Fig. 17. The legs
unfortuuately are rni~sing. the light patch vi;;ible below the arn1 being merely
a ;:;tain (Ill tbe back,::;roun,l. The ,lrawing does not atl:ect am· of the views
put furwanl abu\·e. bnt Ho excuse is neede;l for the insertion ot" so original a
fragnwut.
E. XOR:\I.AX GARDIXEI:.
 THE PERSIA:N FRIEXDS OF HERODOTUS.

FRmr what sources did Hero(lotus draw the materials for his history ?
At what date or dates did he compose it? These inquiries have an endless
fascination for the student of HeroLlotus, which is not lessened by the fact
that they admit of no certain answer. The combinations which will be
suggesteLl in tliis paper have, so far as I know. not been ,mggested before;
but if, as is extremely likely, they have alreaLly been maLle, there is always a
certain interest in the fact that two inq11ire1s, ,rnrking inLlepemlently, have
come to the same concl11sions.
It is not necessary to give evidence of the fact that Herodotus himself
was highly satisfied with his own sources of information as t,1 Persian history,
and that he considered he could speak with authority upon it. (Cf. e.g. i. !).J.)
Xor is it necessary to give e\'i(lence for the Yiew that Herodotus had on some
points official or :-emi-official Per:-;ian information : e.g. in his account
of the satrapies in Bk. III., of the Royal Roml in Bk. Y., an,l of the Persian
army in Bk. YII.
These twu points will be assumed, and also that Herodotus is a trust-
worthy witness, that he reports truly what he has heard, witho11t exaggeration
or :-uppression, and that he had sume iLlea of the Lliffering Yalue of variou,-,
witnesses. The problem then is to find a Persia11 source frurn ,,-liich Herullotus
coulLl de:ri,·e :
(1) Infurmatiun that scerncrl to him trust1rntthy as to the rise of the
Achaemenid house, arnl its e;;t:lblislnncut on the throne.
(~, Official ,letails as to the resuurces and organization of the Persia11
Empire in the tifth century.
(:3;, Detinite information as to tl1e inner court circle of Susa. The ,-tury,
e.g. as to Ame,-,tris aud the wife of )fasistes (ix. lllS s7_.) is told by Hcro,lotus
with as much fnlness of detail aud w1th as complete a confidence, as the st<>ry
of the Philaiclae in the Chersonc,-e or that of Alexamler of )facedou.
It is not suggesb.:Ll tl1at these stories and others like them are to be
acceptcLl by ns as accurate, but only that Hero,lotus considered he had
full grounds for relating in detail e,·ent;; anLl motiYes which woulLl be
unknmvn to ordinary informants, outside of court circles.
:Sow it can hardly be supposed that Hero,Jotus, when himself iu the
East, ever penetrnte,l into the government offices, much less up the back-stairs
of the cuurt. Even apart from his igriorauce of all lang-uages but Greek, he
38

was 011ly in the position of an ordinary traveller, seeing the wornlers of the
b
oTeat kino-'so realm on sufterance. X o Persian .._,grandee, still less one of the
intimate court circle, would ban, nnbosome1l himself confi,lentially to an obscure
Greek, travelling in the company of merchants, awl not improbably enga~·e1l
in busiuess on his own accouut.
It may be maintained that Her0tlotus' informants were his own couutry-
men, who were either treacling as exiles the anteclrnmber,; of Susa or engageLl
there professionally, as was Democedes, or Apollonides ·:Ctesias, 29, 42., 1 the
immoral physician from Cos. This seems, however, less likPly, having regard
to two points :
( 1) The accuracy of HeroLlotus' informatiou as to Persian names, and the
fulnes;:; nf his details on many m:1tters which would be c1mte outside of the
sphere of interest of an orLliuary Gt eek. The information we get from Ctesias,
the Greek cuurt physician of the next generation, dues not give us a l1igh idea
of the sources of information open to, or of the accuracy of, the Greek
hangers-on of the Great King.
(2) Hero,lotus' ow11 tone is alwan that of one who speaks ,vith
authority, and \\ ]10 collsiders lie has sure sources of information. Of course
tbis secornl ar 0 ·ument will be ,rnrthless to those who look on Herodotus as an
"'
in<]uirer prepared to accept any information, and prepared also to m:1intain
it was the best information, simply because he had it.
Tlie assumption that HeroLlotus hall real and special sources of informa-
tion a~ tu Persian affairs, aml tl1e still more probable assumption that he did
uot timl these when himself in the East, leacl us to the conclusion that
Herodotus must have met nearer home persons qualified to give him accurate
and detaile1l iufurmatiou on Oriental matters, ullller circumstances which
permitted him to l1ue,;tio11 them carefully: such a source of information it is
usually supposed that he found in Demaratus (d. ~fatzat, Hames ,i. p .. 479
sefj_., anLl others\ who may well have furnished Herodotus ·with many of his
1letails as to Xerxes' invasion. The object of this paper is to suggest another
and even more importaut s•)urce for his inner l1istory of the Persian
Court.
The passage in Herodotus is of con~iderable importance ; he emls Bk. III.
re. Hill) with the wonls 'the son of this }Iegabyzus was Zopyrus, who ,vent
over to Atl1ens as a deserter from the Persians.'
The date of this Llesertion, and its significance will be considereLl later;
first it is necessary to emphasize the fact tliat Zupyrus, if Herodotus really
met him, is exactly the informant who s:1tisfies the conditions of our irn 1uin'
fur he wa-. 01Je who was certainly able tu give HeroLlotns the iuformati,;~
cle-;ired, and une moreover who wns likely to g-ive it just in tlte form in which
Herodotus reproduces it.

1 The n"frJfl'l1r•e,_, to Cte:-.i,h ,ll'i> ~.d v1 n to ( •. in.1 1·1·l'5...,ilil1• : valnel, . .,.,_ ,H t lie \\\Jl'k'i of C'te::,i,1s
1l nller's editi"li, 1,11!,]i,liP,! with the !11,t .. ry <>f ,tn·, a u itI,·al ,•,!Jn,,n in a che,q, a111l li.mJy
H, r.,,!,,tn, 1l'.Hi,. F, Ili.Jnt, 1 g l4 . Thi, ,e, m, t 11 1n1 ,,· 1 111Iil lie ot gr(•,tt t·o1J,·eni1·uce tn ,rnde 11 t~
the ed1t1q11 111°,t gtne11.1ly H~t:'d, bnt it b Yery "t G1.ie•.o-01i,·nL1l l11,to1y.
 THE PERSL\~ FRIEXDS 0F HERODOTCS 39

The reasons for h,>lding this are obvious:

(1) Zopyrus belonged to the inner circle of the Per,-;ian Court. He was
the grandson of Arnestris, tlte terrible wife of Xerxes, and the nepliew of that
monarch. Hence he would have knuwu intimately the whole Llark history
of court intrigues, ::wd his story a" told us by Ctesias ( especially 2!J. -1,2-3)
cot responds exactly to the picture of cruelty and lust 011 which Herodotn, just
lifts the curtain.
(2) He was the son of ~Iegabyzu,;, one of Xerxes' six generals in chief
a 6ainst Greece (vii. ti2-121). Hence lie was in a position to know the
full details of the Persian army list, which Herodotus gives us at such
leugth in Bk. VII. nloreover this connexion would give him the detaile<l
knowledge of the stages of the Royal Rowl which He1'0llotm, n~procluces
from sorne Pernian source in Bk. V. (cc. 52-3).
It may be added that the arrogant suggestion of an attack on Susa,
which accompanies the account of the Royal Road (v. 49), is quite in keeping
with the character of a Persian prince \\·hose Hellenic sympathies have led him
to desert his country. It is of course quite out of place in the 111011th of the
Ionian Aristagoras, who wanted only defence against the Great King.
(3) His gn1'r!dfather hatl been go\·ernor of Babylon, and of the resources
of this satrapy Her0tlotus had especially full information (i. lD~, iii. 02); it
must be added, howen~r, that Herodotus gives these as they were un,lcr the
satraps that succeeded Zopyrus.
It will be seen then that Zopyrns had Rpecial facilities for giving official
information on two of the points (i.e. the Army and the Royal RoadJ wliere
Herudotus preserves it, and that on the thinl point, the organization of the
Empire, he had also some special qualifications for giving information, though
not to so marked an extent as in the two previous cases. \Yhen we turn from
Herodotus' information as to the present resources of Persia to his accounts
of its past history, Zopyrus again fits in with the requirements of our inquiry.
Herodotus of courE-e had far too much information as to Persian history to
have derived it exclusively from any one 5ource. But on two important
episodes at least Zopyrus was a particularly qua.lifie,l witness.
(1) Herodotus' account of the conspiracy against the Pseudo-Smerdis is
in marked contrast to that of CtesiaR in the accuracy of its name-a, and
(perhaps it may be adLled) in the g·eneral correctness of its outline.
Now the grarnlfather arnl the uamesake of the deserting Zopyrus had
been one of the Seven Conspirators, and the story of that crisis in Persian
history must have been a tradition in his family, and HerOLlotus may well
have heard it from him. This supposition throws considerable light on one
of the most disputed passages in Herotlotus. If we assume that the historian
obtained from Zopyrus the famous account of the debate of the Seven as to
possible forms of government, we have at once an explanation of the cnrions
and surprising insistency with which the historian maintains the accuracy of
his version ( iii. 80, vi. 4:1), and also of its very nu-Oriental character. 1Iodern
critics rightly agree with the sceptics of Herodotus' own day in doubting the
authenticity of the speeches said tlieu to have bean delivered. Full of
-!O J. WELLS

interest as these speeches arc, they are interesting as giYing us Greek political
idea" ,,f the fifth centmT, an,l not ns repro lucing the ~entiments of Persian
grandees of the sixth century. Bnt the colouring is not that of Her0dotus
himself: it is clearly derived frorn s,)me informant, whom he considers of
specwl ,·rtlue. If we attribtite the whole -rer,,ion to an occidcntalizc,l
Persian. wh,1 was yet the grandson of one of the con;;pirators, we linse a full
and snfficient explanation at once of Herodotus' mistaken confirlence and of
the cnriously mi-;;place<l colouring whic11 lw.s offeudeJ critics from Herodotus·
own ,.by to uur own."
Agaiu if we suppose that Zopyrus was Herodotus' informant as tn tl1e
cunspiracy. we get a reasonable explanation of the serious blunder with which
Herodotus c,JncluLles his story. The historian is ignorant of the real claim of
Daiius to tlie throne, and makes his winning it tlie result of a trick (iii. 84/
This pe1Tersiuu is exactly what we should expect from a Persian whose father
and liirnself had alike suffernd at the hand,; of the Achaemenid family.
If auytl1i11c;· is clear as to the iuner hist.or~· of Persia at this time, it is that
certain uuLle l10mes re~ente,J the predominance of one royal family, and that
~Iegabyzits ,ms conspicuous for this iudepemleuce. I must return to this
point btcr, bnt ,re may notice the same colouring in the remark with which
Her,Hl"tn~ i11tr,xlnces !tis story nf Cyrus:' Following the report of some of the
Per:-:iau~, tl10~e I meau who Llu uot desire to glorify the history of Cyrus, but
to speak tliat whicl1 is in fact true ' (i. \).'5:. The story that follows corn:-
:-ponds tn tbis intr<>(luctiou: Herodotus ignores the royal descent of Cyrus
fr,,1n A,:liaettH:nes. rrltlwng!t in Bk. YII. 11 he has rightly recorded the
1iarncs "t tl1e ~lcliat•meni,l family. HH·odot,ns' infurm:1nt kllew the facts as
t<> Darin::-< acce:osiou, but diLl nut cl1,)05e tu ,lraw the attention nf the Greek
ltistori:Hi t" them.
The 1,rl(<•r episo,le of Per,-ian l1istory which here especially concerns
lb i~ tlte ~tu1y c,f tlte secnu,l captnre uf Babyiun in Bk. III (cc. l."i:3 ,CIJ.,·

It will lJe .,lJyiou,-. tu a11yu11c tliat tl1is accouut as a whole might well h,we
becu ,leriYcd frulll tl1e grnmlsu11 1Jf the man who is the heru of the stury, an,1
then, an: cert:1i11 pc,ints in it which look like a special falllily tradition,
'·!J· tlte ,kt.ti!,., a, to the mule pro,li,c:·y inc. 15:3, awl a:-; to the ,;pecial hononrs
tu Zup_\ nh 1n c. l1j 1l - ' HO one· uf tli,c> Persians :,,urpas:-cd him (i.1.'. Zopyru", in
gu1>d ;:en i,,c. citl1er uf those wh,i came after or uf tlwse who liad g,me bcf,)re,
except1u::; l'.\TllS aloue.'
Oft 111• lii,-,turic value uf tl1e i-ti,ry. I $hall ,-peak at the end of tl1is paper.
So far I i1aYc tned to ~h",r that Z,,pyrm the Lle:;erter is exactly the iufon 11 ,u 1r

~ I -,tdirnit tlt,lt tl1i-, t::q11.ui.tti11n 11t tl11 1 \11 11 l'1ot:l,'...;'.J1ILl..... 11h !tu:,1ty 1u:::. n·)t a b( r,qi of
knn,\11 ,lit11utlty ,l"' t1J tbt: . . l':--J1t'1 1 lt1"-. 1. . tu 1Hn11· L'\idd11e Ill it-.. Ln·,,u1, [U11l E, ;\I1•~\1•r (}~1t_~1l,. i.
-..,tt1..,t,t, t,,1 ,- th,t11 th1, \·ti•\\· tl1at . ., 1 • 1 •1, 111 tltuu :.! 11 1 -21 '\1•11 -.;1.y.-.. • )Lu--.., 111,1ke.., lh·1111L1n1-, a
au in-..t lllry ul t h1• ,·, Ilt!Jil"itt I h.11·.t1 ti l' ot --11111,l 1 ·t,ill, 1f h,_. iYafl~ll!e:--. tliat h1..: L1Jnl,l
Jf1_•1odot11-.. ,\·,,1k. ~L1as-.., (.'J. (Jf.,1 ,,,,-. -.-.:xii ;,~l 11111,(1 ;;,,. 011 t}n; 1111L~1, a-- hi~tuiirnI ta,-t..; iHVt:ll·
,',Prl·' 1dl tli, -..ti, 11,'..!th cit ,l. :--.11111>1),-,/•,l 1aLt1l, l 1
t10n-.. ,d' 11i-- ~,-,o,L t11d1d P1ot:1.~111',1"J • )iior1·o,·1·r
in J-.111 11:1 ..... aJ:.!llt> that th,, lli-..tn1i,111 b:1, Ll'le tl1 1 • rl1t·ory 1:.,!t1 11 l'i'"' Ht 1c.1lnt11•-i' iu-.,i-..tt•ft( 1• (tll Lb
iHtl'P•1n,_·, il .... 11:1• ut t}!'' · nt•~ 1tn·1: ,1r,....:n11:1•n; ... · uin1 l 1 'l1L1 1 y) \\'lil, h 1-- Slnd~i,. c1 Illu--t im1,11n,111t
( kaTa8d.\;\oi·res ,\(:j o• nt lii-- c 1 •llt,-m f" 1r:11 ,. 1\/ 1111 :.
 THE PERSIAN FRIENDS OF HERODOTD,

from ,vhom Herodotm, might have derived important passages in 111s work,
and that certain features in the narrative are more ea;;;ily explainell, if "·e
suppose he did so derive them, than on any other supp,)sition.
There is one more passage in HerOLlotus which may well have come
from Zopyrw,, i e. the accou11t of the unsuccessful attempt of the Persian
Sataspes to circumnavigate Africa (iv. -1:3 ). This account presents j 11st the
same features as some of those ,vhich have been already consi1.lered, i.,,. there
is an intimate knowledge of the relationships of the inner court circle of
Susa, and of the cruelty and lust which prerniled there. The offence of
Sata,;pes ,r::t'i committed against the daughter of Zopyrus tlie deserter, aml
may well liave been one of the causes which inflamed his hatre1.l and
jealousy of the Achaemenidae. Some suggest, however, that Herodotus'
source here is revealed in his concluding worlls; he clescribes liow the
sE-rvant of Sataspes after his master's death escaped to Samos, and there ,ms
robbed by a Samian whose name Herodotus knew, though he consi1.lerately
suppresses it. This part of the story must have been heard by Herodotus
in Samos, but it is not unlikely that he adds it as confirming from an
independent Samian source what he had himself learned from one who was
in the most intimate way concerned in the story.
But it is now 11ecessary to consider if Herodotus was likely to have met
the younger Zopyrus or indeed could hnYe met him.
To answer this question we must consiller the date of the Persian's
desertion. All our information as to this is deri rnd from Cte,,ias ( ~9.
33--!3). ::S-ow that author seems, speaking generally, about the most
untrnstwurtliy of onr ::tncient authorities, ancl in ltis account of the e\·ents
that now concern us, he is clearly wrong on some points, e.g. lie contra,.licts
Tlrncydides as to the name of the place where Inarus and the Greeks in
Egypt offerell their last resistance to the Persians : he calls it Byblus ( :W. 3-! ).
Tlrnc. (_i.109) ealh; it Prosopitis.
But it is obYious that Ctesias lia1.l means of knowing tlie inner hi,,tory of
the Persian court, however badly he use,.l those means at times; he was
physician there in the generation after the events he is describing; and, as he
had this tlepartment of his subject mainly to hirm;elf, he was not liable to
be misle,J ill his rletails as to conrt-,-cam1als by tlie burniug desire to con-
tradict Herodotus which w,1s so misleading to him in liis account of more
important events. A.rnl hi,; narrative as to ~Iegabyzns aml Zopyrus is
consistent in its main outlines with what we know elsewhere, and is contirmed
in one important point by an umlesignell coinci1.leuc2 with Herodotus. Ctesins
makes ~Iegabyzns die at the age of 76 (29. -H); this advanced age agrees
with Herodotus;' account of that veteran, and especially with the detail (i\·.
4:3) that he hall a gramldaugliter of marriageable age beft1re 46-5 B.C.
Ass11ming then, as is generally done, that Ctesias may be dt•rwnded on
for these personal details, we have the followi11g data fur detennini11g the
chronology of the family of Zopyrus. ~Iegabyzns rerluce1.l Egypt, and
receive1.l the submission on terms of Inarus arnl the Greeks in -154, probably
early in the summer of that year (so Busolt, iii. p. :330;,. The \·e11geance of
 J. WELLS

.Arnestris was JelayeJ:for five years, but in the end the safe comluct was violated,
Inarus was impaled and the Greek prisoners were executed. Tl1is must have
happened then about 4.j0, :Megabyzus, angry at the violation of the terms
arrnuged by l,im. proceeded to revolt in hi:- satrapy of Syria. and fought two
campaigns againsr his royal master. It may well be tliat the reneweLl attack
of the Greeks on Cyprus under Cimon ( spring of -!+!)) was connected with
this civil war in the Persian Empire, and that the reconciliation of the
rebel satrap with .Artaxerxes, which followeLl in the year 4+8, was a part of
the same negotiations which led to the agreement ( ,vhether definitely
couclntled or simply tacitly urnler-;tood) loosely called the 'Peace of Callias.'
or the ' Peace of Cimon.'
It is sure!)· permissible to conjecture that the Greek victories had their
natural effect at the Persian court and led to clivision of opinion there ; one
section of its grnn, lees ,voul,l urge that Persian policy should be modified,
aml that the victurious Occidentals should be conciliated: another section
,vonlLl be confirmeLl by disaster in the old national traditions. If such a
Lli vi,;,ion took place, ~Iegabyzus wa,; clearly the head of the Hellenizing
party iu Persia : t liis is seen in his conciliatory attitude in Egypt, and agrees
with the story of Cte,:ias (in itself improbable) that he had Lleclined to attack
Delpl1i \\'hen ordered by Xerxes ( :2fl. :27). The de }rdo suspension of hostilities
between Athens a1Hl the Great King marked the triumph of the policy of
}kc:abyzns; bnt so far as he per:;oually was concerued, the Great King was not
,li~p<>~eLl to overlouk his iwlepemlent spirit, and the too successful general,
lia \·in:; :Jnce more offemleLl Artaxerxes, by interference in his hunting, was
l)auisl1ed for ti ve years (:29. -!U--!l ). This banishment may be conjectnred
to have taken place before the end of 4-!8, in which case the final restoration
of }legabyz11'l to farnnr mmlcl fall about 44~.
Ctesia;; gins 110 hiut h"w soon his death followed, but goes on to tell of
tl11: llliscon<luct of his widow Arnyti,; and her lingering illness and death.
\Ye can only gness at the length of time require,! for these events, which
were immediately followell by the desertiun of Zopyrus, but tliey can easily
be tit tell iuto three year,;. am! the de;;ertion of Zopyrus will then fall in -!+O. This
year i-, prubable in it~elf, for it i;; obvions from Thucycli,les' (i. 115) account of
the Samian revolt that the war party at the Persian court had the upper
l1and in that year. That there was a connexion between the desertion of
Zupyrn,-. an,l the general relations uf Athens and Persia is not generally
n:cuguize,! : but it is probable iu itselt: and it is confirmed by the parallel
ennt;; of the uext :,.;ent>ration, when, if we may trust Andocides (de Pace :2!);
cf. Bnsolt, III. l:~3+, H 17 ), hostilities with the Great King were precipitated
by the Athenian alliance with the rebel Amorges in Caria (cf. Th. viii. 5).
Perl1aps tlie relation may be Olle of cause, am! not of effect as has been
,;ug(!e::;ted
.._.._ above, aml the dest·rtion of Zo}JjTUS rnay have led to the iutricrues
,) ..::,

uf Pi,,mtlrnes (Th. i. 115) agaiust Athens, not been canseLl by them. In this
<:ase we sl10nld have to antedate the desertion by a year, i.:'. place it about
4H. The point cannot be settle,l, but either date,•±± 1 or -!40, can be fitted in
with tlie tJarrati\'e uf Ctc;;ias.
 THE PEHSIAX FRIE:XDS OF HERODOTl:S -!3

The sequel of that narrative confirms materially the political un-

portance ,vhich has been assigned above to the conduct of Zopyrus. He
went. we are told !_Ctes. :2U. -!:3), with the Athenians against Caunus in Caria,
and there met his death when endeavouring to negociate the surre11der of
that town to the Athenians. This expeditiou mo:c,t probably was connected
with the troubles caused by the Samiau revolt; Pericles (i. 11G) himself
made a demonstration in the Llirection of Caunus in -!4-0, and we kuow from
the tribute lists that there was something like a general revolt in the · Carian
quarter' of the ~.\.thenian Empire at tl1is period (Busolt, iii ..55--!). So far as
concerns Zopyrns and Caunus, we know (if we may trust Ctesias) that Caunus
remainml for a sh,)rt time nncler the ::mthority of the Great King, for Amestris
was able to impale the uulucky Cauuian whose hamls hall cast the tleaclly stone
against her traitorous grandson. But Caunus was again llllLler Athenian
authority in -!:36 (I.C:-. L 2-HJ, when it figures at ihe heaLl of the list of the
' Ionian Tribute ' payers. Hence the death of Zopyrus must certainly fall
before this year. Perhaps we may suggest that the cruelty of Amestris worked.
for Athens more effectually than the arms of Zopyrus: it was not likely to
stimulate loyalty to the Great King, when his subjects were impaled for too
successful a resistance to a traitor becanse that traitur was of royal blood. It
seems therefore that we may date the death of Zopyrus with fair confidence ,tt
the end of 4-10 or early in 439. It must come in before the reduction of San10s,
and the restitution of the status-quo with Persia. Pericles, then at the
height of his iufluence, was not likely after this to provoke Persia by reckless
expeLlitious against Caria ( cf. Busolt, iii. ,j-!-!-5 ).
To sum up then this part of the argument. The desertion of Zopyrus
,va-; not a mere personal freak: it was the act of a Persian prince whose family
had shown Hellenic prejudices before, arnl was connecteci with political events
of great importance: it probably took place in 441 or 440, aml his death
followed within a year.
Before Lliscussing the bearing of these dates on the life of Herotlutus,
I must first refer to two other (and varying) dates which have been assigned
for the desertion of Zopyrns. Rawlinson ( ad loc.) says: 'this is probably the
latest event mentioned by Herodotus. It is mentioned by Ctesias ialmost
immediately before the death of Artaxerxes, cuu7 so belungs most likely to tl1e
year 426 or 42.j.' Tl1e 'and so' begs the whole question: there is )10 causal
connexion between what Ctesias says of Zopyrus and what he says of
Artaxerxes. And it is most <lifficult to fit an Athenian expedition against
Caria into the years 426 and 425. And morem·er had Herodotus known of the
death of Zopyrus, he would almost certainly have mentioneLl it; and it seems
that he must have known, had it happeneLl after his return to Athens about
430: this point, however, will be dealt with later.
Kirchl10ff refers incidentally to the desertion of Zopyrus in his famons
paper 'Die Entstehungszeit Jes Herodotischen Geschichtwerks' (Al,h. d.
K. A. dcr W. Berlin, 1878, p. 16), and calculates it. from the data given by
Ctesias, as falling between 445 aml 4;31 (which is obviously true), but''much
'nearer the latter date than the former;' this latter statement is, I think I
 J. WELLS

h,we shown, quite unproven. Kirchhoff uses il1e point simply to prove that
Hero(lotus wrote tl1e en(l of Bk. III. at a later perio(l than tl1e first two aml
a half Looks: the desertion, he argues, is one of the C\'ents of wliiclt Herollotus
,ms not aware wheu he went to Thurii, and of which lie beanl on his return
to Athens about -:b32. But Kirchhoff rtnite fails to consider the connexion
of the Zopyrus episolle with the general course of e,·ents, arnl ht.· omits also
to notice wlwt seems to be by far its more important bearing 011 the question
of the date when Herodotus composeLl hi,, work.
It is this point omitteLl by Kirchhoff tlrnt must now be considered.
Hero,lotus knows half of the story to!(l by Ctesias, but not the whole of it: he
gives us tlie 1lesertion of Zopyrus, bnt not his death in the Athenian senice.
~ow thi3 might well be thought to be a far more significant omission than any
of the others in Herodotns' history on which Kirchhoff lays such great stress.
I cannot thillk tlrnt, if Herodotus had kuown, when he wrote Book III. 160. the
tragic ewl of Zopyrus' cher1uereLl career, he would ham omitted to chronicle
it. It presents ,ill exact parallel tu the stury of Sophaucs at Plataea (ix. 75)
or of the diviner Hcgesistratus 'ix. 37), in both of which cases Heruclotns tells
the ~tory of their deaths, though it has no bearing on the context in which he
iutro<luccs them. Other instances conl!l he given, but thet-e are sufficient.
If, huwe,·er, we suppose that Herodotus left Athe11s for the Y\' est in -:1,-:1,0,
it hecurnes much easier to understand why no record is given of the subse-
qnellt story of Zopyrns. }Ioreover a good and sufficient reason can be
sng:,:c,te,l why the hi,torian $hould have started on his travels again just at
this ti111t:.
If auytl1iog can be stated as certain as to the life and interests of
Hero,lotns, it is that he hacl a close connexion with Samos, and a great
atfectiu11 ft1r that islawl ancl its inhabitants. Samos plays a larger part in his
l1i,tory tl1an auy ,,tht:r Greek city except Athi:ns aml petlmps Sparta, allll the
lllsturi:u1 i,; iurnrialily a' little Llin,l tu tlieir faults,' awl· nry kind to their
\·irt11e:c-. Hence it i,- surely not carrying cunjectnre far to suppose that
Herodotn:c- ,\·as ,leeply grieYecl to ~ee ~-\.thens and Sanws at deadly enmity,
awl hi;; uwn frit:wl, tlte poet Supliocles, in con111wnLl agaiust his former
Ioniau hutrn:. \\' e may therefore Lhte with sume cunfi(leuce Herodotus'
departme for Tlrnrii as takiug place i11 -:b-:bll.
It i~ tr\lc tliat Strabo ~p. l-j.5G) says that Herodotus' took part in the
culouy t,, Tlrnri1,' awl that Snidas (s.,·. 'HpoOoTO-:, says he went E', 1'0 0ovptov
ll1TOlKl'r;uµE1'0l' vr.o TC,)1/ '.-\.017va/wv-' when it wa-; being coluuized by the
Atlieuiaus ; · but en,u if it were necessary to attach great importance to the
exact wurd:3 uf thes1" authorities-au.I in the case of :--ui,las at any rate, the
w,tice (If Hernt!otn~ is foll uf dcmnnstrnble inaccuracies-their words are
quite cuu,-i,-tL'llt with the view that lie juincd the colony thre:e or four years
after It Lad beeu seut ont. ~u une woul,l hesitate tu co1rnt ,Jolin Han"ard
amou:,: tl1e · founders of X cw England: although he did nut sail with the
Pil_,;rirn Fathers in H5:ZU.
The c,,uuexi,rn of Herodotus anLl Zupyrns tlteu may be brietty cunjectured
to bt: a,; fulluw;;. Zopyrus arri nng iu Atlieus in -:l,Jl or 4-:bO would naturally
 THE PERSIA~ FRIEXD~ OF HER0D0T"CS

come into contact with one who like himself had been a Persian subject, and
who knew far more about things oriental than any otlier Athenian of his
time. We can imagine the historian eagerly drawing from this nobl,, Persian
full details as to official arrangements and as to court secrets. whicl1 he ha,l
failed to obtain wl1en himself on his tra,·el:, in the East. -we neell only
suppose that they spent some months together at .-\.thens; tl1en Hero,lotus
sailell fur the west, to avoill ~eeing tl1e ernl of a struggle between two cities,
both of which he hall reason to love, while Zopyrns a~ain turnell his face
eastward to meet his death. \Yhen Herodotus returned again to j __ the11s,
events hacl taken rtuite a new turn; and we can well umlerstaud why
Herodotus never completecl his story of Znpyrn~, even if we accept the
conjecture that he oweLl to him much important and ,·aluable infonnatiou.
Before I encl this paper, it may be worth while to consider the accuracy
of one import:mt section of the information which HeroLlotus, as \Ye rnppose,
<lerived from Zopyrus, i.e. the episode of the capture of Babylon which ends
Bk. III. It is unnecessary to recapitulate the well kno-.vn details in Hero-
clotns as to the desperate resistance of Babylon, the hopeless position of
Darius, and the self-devotion by which the ekler Zopyrus saveLl his king
from a most difficult situation. I prupose only to consider the two great
criticisms which are brought against Herodotus' narrative :
(1) It, is maintainell by many that he has completely misunderstood his
authorities aml that he ascribes to Darius a siege which really was carried out
by Xerxes.
(2) The whole story of the self-devotion of Zopyrus is rejected as a fable.
These two criticisms must be discussed separately.
The first criticism is practically that urgeLl long ago by Ctesias: lie, we
are told, relateLl of Megabyzus the story told by Herodotus of the elder
Zopyrus. Sayce (wl lac.) seems to attach some weight to the e,·idence of
Ctesias; but no one is likely, I think, to be seriously influencecl by Ctesias as a
witness against Herodotus or by Sayce as a critic of him.
Other historians who ascribe the siege to Xerxes are Xi_ilcleke (Llonbtfully
in E.B. xviii. p. 572) anLl Lehmann ( TVuch. fiii' Klass Phil. 1900, p. 9G:3).
The reasons are:-
(1) It is impossible to fit a siege of '20 months' (the duration giwn by
Herodotus iii. 153) into the narrati\'e of the Behistun Inscription.
(2) Lehmann tries to tit in Herodotus' '20 months' with the dates
of Babylonian inscriptions of the time of Xerxes. But his attempt, though
ingenious, will not convince anyone who does not wish beforehancl to be
convinced. There are at least two uncertain quantitie;; in his efttrntion.
In fact the evidence from the Babylonian inscriptions is actuaJly useLl by
Maspero (Hz'..st . .Ant. iii. p. 677, n.) on the opposite siLle to Lehmann,
£.e. to support Herodotus.
(3) The third argument is that the cruelty of the victor (HerOLlotus iii.
l.j9) after taking Babylon is more in keeping with the character of Xerxes than
with that of Darius.
It will be obvious that of these three arguments ouly the first is worth
 J. WELLS

anything. If the Behistnn Iuscription contradicts HcroLlot11s. no one ,,·ill

maintain his accuracy against it. But does it contradict Herodotus? Leh-
mann 1ut sup.) arnl E. ~Ieyer ({;-, dn ..:1. i. GU-; say tliat it dues; Dnucker
arnl }Iaspero (ut sup.) say that it does not. I will qnote the ,vonls of the
inscripti,)11. (col. II. par. I.)' says Darius the King. Then Xidintabelus with
the horsemen faithful to him fled to Babyl,m. Tlte1t I went to Babylon. By
the grace of Ormazcl I both took Babylon and seizetl tl1at Xillrntabelu!:o.
Then I slew that ~ i1lintabelus at Babylon.'
So far the narrative goes decidedly against Herodotus. Take11 by itself
it wonld seem to imply a speeLly c-apture of tl1e rebel city. But the next
paragraph points as lleciileLlly the other way. ' While I was at Baby 1011, these
are the countries which re,·olteLl against me : Persia, Su~iana, }ledia, Assyria,
Armenia, Parthia, }Iargiana, Sattagydia. Sacia.' Clearly the sifge of Babylon was
a lo11g business. It is not necessary t,) acce!)t Herodotus· 'twenty months,'
tlwugh thL;y may be accurate; but surely it is unreasonable to reject his whole
story, and suppose that he cotmnitted so gross a blunder, and made snch a
foolish confusion, !ts to an import-ant e\·ent that happened only some forty
years before his birth.
On tlie whole then the evi1lence against Herollotus' accuracy on this
point ;;,eerns qnite insufficient to outweigh the a 1n·ioi'i probability that he
knew ,ybat he was writing about.
\Yith regard to the story of the self-mutilation of Zopyrus, I hope that
I sliall not be thought unduly cre(lulous ,vhen I ,ny that it seem'l to me,
though no Lloubt exaggerate,], to cuutain a s ,lid basi,; of truth.
The arguments against it are : -
(1) It is not mentioned in the Behistnn Inscription. If it hall beeu
ever so true, would it have been mentioneLl? It wa,; much more creditable
to Darius the king to take towns by the ' grace of Ormazd ' thau by the
lllntilatiun of Zopyrns.
(::Z) But it is urged. no rnutil.lted man couM ham been set over the
province of Babylon. \Ye nee(l not take Herodutus too literally in Lis
details; Zopyrus probably made himself' mscless' and 'earless' pretty n,uch
iu the seuse in ,vhich
' Earles-, on high stood unaba~hed Defoe.'
But I ha,·e no doubt he g,we himself SOtlli; permanent scars. \Yho woulLl
ha,·e be,_•11 offewle(l by these but the B.ibyluuians, whose feelings Darius wa~
not very likely to spare ?
::3,' But it will be nrged tl1e story i~ a well-knnwn le~·end. Sir H.
R:mli11:,v11 \\'rites: 'Tlie story told by P()l_1aenns (aud Hero<lotusl i-. in its
1t1i11utest featnres idl utical with a certain starnlanl orieutal tale told by the
0

liards vf Pertoia, India, aml Ca~lnneer.' Ent all these stories are long
snh,-,e,1ue11t ti) Herorl,>tus, anLl may well be a;, rnnch echoes from !ti;;; 11arrati,·e
as is t!tat of Livy as to the self-lllutilatiun 11f Sextu,., Tan1uiHius '.i . .H).
Pulyaenus tells us that Zopyrus was cvpyiu,!.s the self-deYutiun of a Sacan
lti,.,aces wh > had triecl tu destroy iu tliis way tlie army of Darin,-. Tliis ston-
1
 THE PER8IAS FRIEXDS O_F HEIWDOTrs. 47
1s quite independent of HeroLlotus, aml may be held to confirm his narratiYe
as least as mnch as to refn te it.
For the ;,tory in its main outlines it may he urge(l : -
(I) Tliat apart frnm Hen.J1lotm a11Ll Polyaenns, it is tr1ld Ly Frontinus
(St;·at. iii. :3, who puts it in tlie time of Cyrus) allll Justin (i. 10). Ctesias
obviously told the same story, though in his violent antagonism to Hero(lotus
he misLlated it.
(2) That Zopyrns was made ruler of Babylon is an undonbteLl fact.
(3) If ,,·e can accept the story, it suits its cuntex:t well. Darin-, was in
a hopeless positioa, with an impregnable town to capture and an empire
falling into greater reYolt every Llay. The self-1levotion of Z,)pyrns had an
adequate motive allll an adeqnate result.
The second allil easy capture of Babylon by Intaphernes ( Belt. Inscrip.
iii. H) is easily explicable. The walls of the town had been breachCLl in all
directions, allil it was about as indefensible as Liege in Scott's Quentin
Dn;·warcl.
I am conscious that in maintaining the accuracy of Hero lotm as to the
siege of B:tbylon, I am distracting attention from the main argument of this
paper. The two points are only partially connecteJ. It is quite possible to
accept the view that HeroLlOttls Llerived important infornrnti,m from the
younger Zupyrus, even if we alsu feel ourselve,, compelled to convict
Herodotus of undne credulity in accepting the whole of his stories.
The first part of my paper I am conscious consists of a series of
hypotheses. In the fragmentary state of our evi,lence, no other method of
inquiry is po,sible. 1 hope, however, that some of them may be tho11glit to
throw light on a difficult aml important subject,
J. WELLS.
 THE FLEETS OF THE FIRST PUNIC \YAR.

AccoRDING to Polybius, there took part in the battle of Ecnonrns 680

quinr1ueremes and 200.U00 men, i.l.'. crews :W+,000 and troops 86,000; while in
tl1e next year, at the battle of the Hermaeau promontory, 5.30 ,,uinquerernes
were engagell. The only figures ~omparable to these in Roman history,
manifest absurdities apart, are those given by Appian for the battle of
Xaulochus, and perhaps those for Actium. At Nauloclms :300 ships of all
~izes :ire sai,1 to have been in action on either side, -nnd no Lloubt Agrippa's
fleet, at auy rate, did amount to this large number 1 ; while at Actiurn
OctaYian may have had anything up to 400.~ Bnt in Ortavian's time the
population of all Italy may have been 7 to 8 millions 3 ; the }Ie11iterranean
was almost a Rmrnn lake, and its entire resources went to furnish the fleets
fur the civil wars. But fur the generation next after that of the first Punic
war, the population of Roman Italy has been reckoned at only -:I, to +½
millions, that of Carthaginian Africa at perhaps 3 to 4 millions, 3 while the
)Ie1literranean supported several considerable fleets beside those of Carthage
awl Rome. More than one writer has seen that the numbers given for
Ec:wrnus are irnpossible 4 ; and it seems worth while making au attempt to
get at some more reasonablP tigures for the first Punic war.
As to the materials, if Poly bi us is to be corrected it must be from Polybius
himself, and uot from the later writers. 3 Apart from his bei11g a great
histuriau, he is far ne<1rer in time to the original tradition than any one else.

1 J. Krornayer 'Die Ent"·i,·kc·lnng <!er !'11m- the figure, for the Actinm carn1,,1ig11 are very
i"'t'ht 11 Fl0ttr•, · Plululutf''-:J 18£•7 ,, who lus gone uncertain.
int,, th,, ti,l.'.llri·s tnr the vi,·il ,ur,, a1·1_·e[>ts :301) for _: ~l'C J. B"1ud1, j)u_' E 1 1·un1')"U11u do· gr.~
the tied ot Sextn, P11mp,·y al,o. Bnt this s,•,·111, 1·,,111. Tl'clt _: also Di, Euolk>Tlfil!J Jt,1lin1s 111
t0 me illl['0'5i\.le : for Pomj'1'y·, 3 s,p1a,hn11, ,H _lf/1 ,·tluun111 B£ill'a!JI' :11,·ol/1.:n G1_s,·h2>J,t1. Yul. ;3.
.:\IyLie, t11talling 1;,;,, are rl,·,,·1 ihe,l hy .\ l'l'i.rn 4 Tlie tollowing lrrlps 0!1l· to re,1liw 11 ]1,1t

,1, , 0H,t1tnting the J.uger r,,nt of hi, tlcet :
nfci r ln-..u1,!..!' :3() at }Iylat' .lwl .:..n1w• at Tanro-
111cninm lie 1·,rnw,t han· Ji.1,l mon.- th,111 :25 1) at
the 111o~t at X,n1loi·h11-.., fo1 L111]{hn,!..!' l1t>t\\·ecn the
twu l,attl,·, w,i- 1>\lt of the '!ll•·,tioll. This
won!,! give a total of about 550 ,hi[>• Hl
action.
" J. K101u.iy,·r iu Hu·11a:, 34 (1S99J J>. 1. If
Oct.tYi,111 11.11! JIJIJ, and .\.11to11y 170 (pln, 60
,n,·h fignrr-, n11•a1J. On a ]'"]•nl.1tion of -1:2
milli»ns, th,· Briti,h Xa,·y lu, a per,111m,·l of
1~1.9S:3 (iuclwling C!Lt...,tg11anl awl 1uari11e-. 'r,
tu11l rnol,ili,e,l 319 Ybsd, ot all son, for the
111,rnoennh ot Jnne-Jnly. 1906; "·hili, in eri·"·
arnl tnJn]" two 11nin,p1ereme, r·,,rried ahont th«
s,rn1e number a, nne l,,ntle,hi1,.
; 1Ieltzer ha, $tate,l tliis /i, s--1,. de,· Kar/1,ag,..,·,
vol. 2, !'· ci6S, n. 49,,. But he m,k, s 110 0

Egy1,ti,tn '. tJ\"Cl' tj 1JO ~1ii1•~ \\'Pf!• Hlgaged. nut applii:,ttion of it to the nurnbt'l'S.
 THE .FLEETS OF THE FIR::,T PCNIC WAR. 49

Of the rest, Zu11aras (Dion Cassius) is confused allll gives no figures. The
epitomators of Livy, as tliey often <lisagree, mm,t be the subject of co11s1,ler-
able texLual corrnption; but even coul,l we resture LiYy, he must eitber
agree with Polybius ur Le of less authurity. There re11rnins Diodurn,.:. It
seems agreed that, while Pulybius is partly Fabius, partly Philinus, aml partly
neitl1er, Diudorus is certainly largely Philinus, ,.c. that he olten give:,; wltat is
snbstantially the Carthaginian version. X ow I regard it as certain that
Philinus would teud to exa!=;-;;ernte tl1e Roman number:,;, fur ob\·ious reasuns,
just as Fabius would the Carthaginia11; Dio,lorus may therefore be uf
occasional use as giving a superior limit for Romau tigures. I assu1ne
that, otltcr thinJs be,n:; e2ual, the smaller of two numbers is to be taken.
\\~hat, now, was the position when war bruke out?
Carthage had finally got the better of Syracuse in tlieir secular duel, au.J
was the greatest sea-power of the west. But it is easy to exaggerate to
oneself that pmver. 1Ieltzer gives an instrncti ve list of prior Carthaginian
fleet-numbers: -:1-80 ll.C., 200 warships; -:1-06 B.c., 120 triremes; 3U7 B.C. '.,war
with Dionysius I.), 100 triremes, raised to 200 the next year: :1GS B.c.
(again against Diouysimt), 200 warships; in Timoleon's war, first 150, then
200 war,;hips; in B11 .B.C., 130 warships; finally, 130 offered to Rome for help
against Pyrrhus. (I omit two sm:lll squadrons prior to tlic fourth century.)
Tl1ese numbers are chiefly from Diudorus, and may uot be accurate; but
anyhow they shew two thin:ss; first, that there was a trnllition that in a time
of supreme national effort Carthage could raise a fleet of :WO ships; secuudly,
that it was belieYed that the ordinary establishment of the Carthag111ia11 fleet
prior to the war with Rome was l~0 or thereabouts. \Yltether tliese two
beliefo existed at the time of, or whether they were a co11seL1nence uf, the first
Punic war may for the moment be left undecided.
Rome, of course, had possessPd, or had had the control of, warships since
the middle of the fourth century B.C., if not earlier.,; But a distinctiun must
be made, prior to the war with Carthage, between the true Roman fleet ( i.e.
the cluurnviral squaclruns)' aud the ships which, after the war with Pyrrhus,
were liable to be furnished under treaty by the Italiot towns. DuuYiri
navales were first created in 311 B c.; in 283 B.C. a squadron of 10 ships
under a dnovir was attacked by the Tareutiues anJ five ships taken 8 ; in 181
B.c. 0 and 178 n.c. 10 we find that the double <luurnviral sqmHlrun consiste,l, ou
each occasion, of 20 ships, each duuvir commanding 10. \\' e may perhaps
assume that the double duumviral squadron was regularly :W ships.
Such a squadron ,ms only fitted out whe11 reL1nired, aml then laid up again.
Polybius says that ,vhen Appius Clau<lius crossed tu 1Iessana the Romans

" Th,- view th,it Rome. prio1 to :WO n.c., u,e,l with (\11 thage, which c 11111<,t he Tw, ,· than
f} ,·eek ~h111s ouly. :,c~llb agL1in uJIEi11g into 01S P..1·., pre:,Uppu:,es Ho1nut \\.lI:'lliip~.
pro1ri111Pnc·e, 110 doubt a" a re.1,:t1011 ,lg,u 11:,t 7 Kot, of conr~e, nrnnne l l,y R 11 niau-..

)Ion1H1scn; ~ee c.u . .E. Speck, llufl1l1·l:;1J1'sdud<r,-, 8 Lh·. Pc1·. 1:2; ~\Pl'· :') 111111l. I, l.
3, i, § 715. But it is den1011-..tr.1h1y w1nug. "Liv. 10, :2•i.
Ron1e controlleil no Creek !,hips bl'foH.: :J:!I l:.c. 10 Li,-. 41, 1.

(treaty \\ith Xeapoli,); \lhile the tilst ll•·Hy

H.S -YOL. XXVII. E
50 W.W. TARX

had not a single ship of their own; no S([Uadron therefore haLl been fitted
out. But probhbly in tl1e uarnlia were at least L'i old sliips, the remains of
the :SL[uadrou of 2S:3 B.C. 11
They had, howeYer, afloat a squadron of triremes an,l pentekontors,
fumi,-l1ecl under treaty by Yarious Italiot towns,1" Tarentum, Loc1i, Elea,
::S-eapolis. These treaty cuutributions were Yery snrnll. In 210 B.C. D.
Quiuctius obtamE'll 12 ;;hips from· tlie allies aml Rliegium and Yelia and
Paestnm · in full discharge of tl1eJr obligations (Liv. 2G, 3~)). In l!Jl ll.C.
C. L1Yi11s got from ~aples, Rheginm. Locri arnl the sucii ejn.sdem jnris 25
open sliips due umler treaty, some being rostrat:1e, <;0111e specnlatori 1e (scont:s 1 ~
The treaty coutrilmtiun of Carthage l1erself in 1!.ll n.c. was ouly six
cataphracts ( Li\'. :3G, 4 a11Ll 12 ). )[e,;,;a11a. says Ciceru, had to supµly uue
slii1). The nhlioatinn of ltl1e,,·ium "·as one shiJ), that of Locri 2 (LiY. -12, 45 \_
~ 0 /

\\'._, cauw,t snppn,e that tliL' Romans got more than 2-'> sliips from the Italiot
tu,, ll:, in 2ii0 B c.
Th,_, Homaus, l1a\ in:;' n,,uh·eil to contest tl1e sea, built 100 '-I_Uiw1ueremes
:rnd :?II trireme~. Tli,, ~11 trireme;; mu,st repre;;ent tlie double duun1v1rnl
cmnmaud. 14 tiie 111H11ber tlie Romans lia(l preYinnsly been accustomed to
hnil,l \\ lto11 tlic:y Wcllltt.:d a tleet. The 1(111 quitH['.lCl't"llleS are probably correct.
:,t.:ein'..! that the first ltlt.:a,L1re uf tho Rnmaus, \\ lteu war broke out with
Auti,Klill'-, wa;; to dt.:lTt.:e li_lii '[llilll[llerem,·-. 1 -, thumJ1 tl1ey were never all
bllilt. Tl1e R,mia11s 11rn,=;t tilsn li:ffe ri:'titted any ul,l sliip-; in the 11a,·:ilia.
tlil'ir 1e 6 nlar upt.:rati"u at the lii•,;iuni11g c,f a \\':H (,,_:!- Li,·. :t'), 20; 42, ~7).
Tlie lforua11 rll'd tlic·tdure 1\·uul,l l'tlll~i,-t of 120 ~lii]'" 11e\\'ly built, su11w 1.5
retitted, ,lllil ~ume ~--> Italiut: po~srbly al,;u t\\'u ur three frorn :\Ias:ailia 1'•;
that is tn ~ay. ahotlt l(jli a!tngetherY Ub\·iuusly, Rome wa,; not goin:.: to
chalknge ( ',1rthac:·,. ,vith ddihL·ratdy i11fL•rior mmihor:s. th"n,:,:·11 an exag~eraterl
i,lta "f tlil' ~tr,·u:,;tl1 uf tl11· Cartlia,ginian m,vy l1a-; le,l most, wrilers to sn11p,)se
that ,-lie did ~•>: tl1e Ca1tlia:,;inia11 rll'd in 2UU ll.i'. ;;]1uul,l tht.:rofore be
,;u11w\vh:1t k,-,s, aud 11u d,,ubt the unmber was 1:311, the 11n111ber wltich
Pul.Yl,in;; .~1n·s tlic·rn at :\lylal' i p<,s~ibly takt.:11 frum 1Jnt!iu~· colun:11\ and
wliieh rig1t·l'S \vitl1, 11r el:-L' \\'a,- the c 111se 11f. th,· already rrnti,cil belief that

11 }tl11n1rn..:.1- JJ t11i11k•- t l1, 1inll

T,1r1-•1Jtiltt..., to ,'..!l\·,, i"i LIY :3:1. :20. In tlll' :1tL1ih nt nlf'l'('C anil
llf' thP!l ,li11,- ,ttt,·t ti:, \\~1'" 1tl1 l'nrhth; 1,nt
0
:-,;nia Ln-; h i:..1q1J11-, . . ('1l to n·prt -;l•nt tl1f'
1,n,baLly tl11-- ",t..., 1in~ tl11• 1 ,i....,, ...,...,p X1,..-.e. ...,uL.:--t1w·r 11f l'nl: Liu-.. tanh- ar•1•n1ati·'...-, anil tor
,;n:,1,i,·1,.., ,I., 1u11 r;,, r, 111 ~l111lt1·-.., IL d k. the naval \\,U \\IC!i _\.nt10, . . lrn-. th1· ,,,ly 1n ,,lneh
_\. III. .- t UJ(H). 1 7JJ. 11. -t. kn T.uenturu
1• 1
A1•1 ia11 a~lt'~•..., v nl1 :1ll1l 1·11rnplPrnt:1,t.s Ln-y
1

kt-]it ib 1nil1~1,eJ1o\Pn,·,· .'.1lirl Ii td a u•1ml1~•rnt --hq)-. !i:ake., tl11, ,tl1uo,t ,."1'l,ll:,. ll the lOU '[lli1;-
111 tlH' ,.,,.Hr.,l I,nr ii \\ u. En ll 1t th, y d11l hanil 'tllt'Iellll'" t f 2t_;H J:, li...: ftoru F,LL1u::i th,_ise ot
on:1 ,nm!-' ,hiji--, tli,· l:, n: 111-.. a, \\a~ tl1ei: 1 1 q2 }: t. !\If-' !]1J:-.
1_·u"t1)r11. J1trt11,d )\· l'l11ut 1111 n1. '' '1'110 ~Li--rl,,.t,1,q" 101ue,ll'u. :,icq,win2li
" l'<>lyl ,. J :.'.0. 11.,. 1 l'uh·li. :_1_ ~-i.-, - L1,· ~2. 19 : and iu 211
11 Tlt'' 1t1nni1•1 dJ•1Jt•11-... •1111r, 1'i,t:1_\ ti .. w !,.(. t 1u J 111,t· l tLt.: 1•11•J•t.u tu1 Jf. Ju1nus :-,;iL1nu,
11 1 1

.\J1p .,,'~11. :!:! 111JJ1\.11n,l \\lti1 f.1\'. .:t_;, 1:.!. a1J1l l'- LI\". :_!t_) 1!1,
I'r,•-.u111,ll1h tl1at nt P l~, L:•1-..
11
1· ~.,t11u:ly I .,tt,,d, 1u_1 impo1Lm, ,_, to tit,·
Ji I ilo ! tit llP',l.ll tl.,tt tltt•:- l ,i•l ,lll\·tltin~ to L1 1 tthat Fl,,nJ-. 1. 1"' -; ,,1y:; the tu1n,rn~ lnnlt
1ln \\ltl. ,ln11\i1i \\L1, ,llt lP•t bt-t1.r,l ot 1li11i g 1t;!) -..1![!1"' Ill _2ti0 !'.,.
iht· 11t11"l "; th,· :..::n,lt 1:,1.Lil ",u--.
 THE FLEET:--\ OF THE FIRST Pr~rc "WAR. 51

the ordinary establislnnent of the Carthagiuian ±iect prior to the war with
Rome ,,·as abont 130.
As regards the ope11iug of the naYal campaign, it is dear that in ch;-. 21
and 2:! of bo::,k 1, Polybius ha~ comliineLl two different acc,rnnts.1' Both com-
meucerl ,, ith Bornles capturing 17 Ronian ,-hips; ch. 21 then make;, Ha1111ibal
blull(ler into th0 Roman tleet ,Yith 3U ships a]lll l,,se some :3u (' more than
half'); but ch. 22 knows uothiug of tiiis; l1ere tl1e main Roman tieet, :-;till
far off anLl concerned at Buodes' Yictory. puts in (? to :\Ies,anal and e,111ips
itself with tlie corn1s. Tlie accouut of }Jylae diat fullows, tlie Cartliagi11ia11
confidence, tlie honours pai,l to Duilius, are all iuconsisteut ,ritl1 a pi iur
Cartlrngini:rn defeat; allll t11c battle of ch. 21 rnu,;t uml,rnbtcL1ly he. as Dr.
Beloch supposes, the Carthaginian \'tct~ion of }Iylae taken from Pl1ilinn:-s,1''
though Polybins may well be excuseLl for not recu~nisiug it. If ;c;o, it 1s ,some
cYiclence that (as we nrny. mdeed, suspect from Polybius) the 11ll<)le
Cartliaginian tleet ,ya,; not engaged in tliat battle
The Roman fleet at _jlylae. then, \Yas some 1--J.O strong, (about lGO le.;,s 17,:
against the whole or part of a Carthaginian fleet of 1:30. The Romam
took 30 ship;;; anLl the l1epteres, aml sank Hl. Their own lo,-,-; is 1wt gi,·cn,
but must kwe been less than l!); say 10. If they were able to refit :W out
20
of the ;:30 piizes, they \\'CH) prol1ab1y abont 150 strong the next year.
Ha11nibal, with the t:>0 ~hips left, returned to Carthage, procured rein-
forcements, (probably Boo,les' prizes and a few ol,l ships,) aml saileJ to
Sardinia 1Je1haps 100 strong. Here he lost' many' ~hips. but apparently llot
their crew~. As Polyl:,ins giw-, tlte total Carthaginian loss ill the ,rnr at
about .'iOO, we can see, by aLl,ling up tlie utl1er los'-b in hi.s tigure-.,"1 that he
must liaw taken the loss in Sardinia at ahout GO. Ent it will appear tliat ,1e

18 F. llen,,, Pl,ilulu:;11, 131_11,1901, p. 102. "·ho
has 111a,le the L,tc,t ,-~,llHi1nt1un ,,f P«h·l,ins'
suurcl'"· ~i,·cs C-11,. :!O -2-l ,1' all f1um Fal.in,.
Dnt ~ndt ~t 1e---u1t ~et•lli:-. tn 111,, Hl,-'lt·1y t11
c011<lemn lus rnetlw·l; f .. r tl,e lm·.1k i11 tlw
,e11se .. r tit,- Ha11at1\"C J.ctw,·en Ch,. 21 ctn<! :!~
i, l'<lt,·t1t t i ) ,u1ynue
1" 1;,-_ r;,,,-1,. Yul. 3. i. p. t\7, 11. 1. It this
l<e '", it i-; 11ot,,1rnrtl1y that l'hili1rns knom,
11otlung i)f tlt1• lio,1nlin~~lll'i1l,i~/', (•01Tus. n:0110.f:
antl no 11011:it Ihne was right in -..u~11Pt·t1nci; tlll-'
tr,1rlition,d arr·<>unt of this rnad1inc, \\ lncl1 i,
not 11t'ar,l of after E,·n,,mns, an,I II lllch ,eu11s
part ,)f the ,l,,Jihe1"c1te intr,J<]w·t1011 h\· Fabin,
of an element of \Ynll<ltt· rnt« this ILH: lor.
after all, ]. 0 .1nlrng nm! ,r,(oµ.ax_ia were the
olrlest form ul ,c:1-figlttrng kuo11u, awl the Cu-
th:1grni,rn-; wuul,l luYe been delighted with a11
arrangement that ,rnul,l have pre,·cJtteJ m01e
than twn l!<Jrnan, coming ahoa1cl at once. ~-011·
the AthvnLtnS ha,! u,e,l grapnels in -113 r:.,·.,
anrl they occur ,·ommonly m th,- se,_·onJ Pumc
w.u . ,rnd the Kopa~ was ptol.ul.ly ,rn impron,l
.~rn1,nel ou a pole, like _-\!.(ri1•11,1's ii,>1ro.1;. Dion
l'a~sin-.. :-.•) nnrlPr::-too,l it, tor Zo11<1ras .::i}1f'ak~ ut
thf' Rnnuns u-..ing x_e:Lpas 7reprn:/Ji,-rous a-t071pcis:
arnl ,\]'l•ian so nn,ler,ton.J it, tur \\ herea,
~\gripp,1'-.. .:.lup-.. :-ict Xan1,wltu".l u~i=- tht' O.p1raE
,les, llhe,l _\]']'- i,_ ,·. 5, ns,. flt jlylae the, ..
sall!t' ship-. hLtYe K0va~as ,Ji.,._ [,, 10/J . Th\-'
~uppo-.,e,l 11-ia11lin,:.;-l,ri«l.~t• llllBt t,-t,·l· Lt'ell
t.1ken liy F,d,rn, tiom the l,1iilg,_• or L,rl,l,,r .. r
the s,llnhw·a u,e,l \.y jfar.-allth lll atta,·krnc:
~.nai n . . e. I!O d1Julit cl lea.l I11d.d1ine. cl'"' it n111ri...:cll-..
ag~un .~01nt·wl1at altere1ll in tht' ~u·g,_,.., ut
ltl,o,les awl l',1·,i•:th l.i_,- :\l1thl,J,L1r,-, (,\)•)•-
Jllth. :2.6 cu1n11au,d witl1 73, Su111e ..,, tt o!
l Hlder for h_1,1t11i11g 01_1__ ur,. hn,,1_'\""I'. ,lt tht
l,attle of l'nn,ae Is\['!'· i,.,_·. 5, S~i- if tl1i, l,e the
llH~,1lli'lg of .Appun"::, Ulli(1ne U~l' of 1(0.Tcr.jpil-(Ta.,.
'" Al.out tit,_ J•U•)"-'l lion 1,.1itt.-,l ,1t'tc1
El;llUlllll"'.
· 1 \'1z. battle ol ,-!t. 21. ~<:,. j[yh,· 50,
TymLnis lS, E,nom1b al.. ont 100 til-oY.-1
JO\ ll,·nnae,1 114, _\,·,gnt,:s In,nl.w l:!<'1; 432
clltog1:ther.
E 2
reqnire some fnrther loss for Hermaea; and 500 is a very ronnLl figure. \Ye
may pnt Hannibal's ontsiLle loss in Sardinia at ±0; it may ha\'e been nearer
:20. lea\'ing him some GO to 80 sl1ips.
These ships encuuntereLl the Roman fleet at Tymlaris (:2."ii B.C. ). That
rhc Romans were in greatly superior nnmbers (\Ye ha\'e seen it might be
ahunt 1511, appears ftom the account of tlie battle 2"; and the only extant
fi;.{tll't:", c.; are at least C\'iLlence of a great t!1sproportion in strength. The
ltu111a11-; 111st nine ,-!tips, the ( \utliaginians IK.
Tlt,· C,u·thagi11ia11,; lta,l 11aitl the penalty of tlespising their enemies
Tit,·\ 1tnw st·t to work in earne;;t to heat tl1em. as did the Romaus to inn1rle
~\.trica; bt1th, says l'ulybius, rna,h_. a great effort. Tl1e results wer2 Ecnumus
:::iti i: <'. awl HL·rnwt·,t 1:;.-,:; or :;,j-1, 1u·.;.:'• Tltc tignn:-; in Pulybi11s r,re as
!11llo11s: En1<>11t11,, Jl,,111:ins :tW, ( 'artl,aginiaus :3.'51); Ruman loss :2-1, s11uk,
( 'arth:1.~i11iau 11111n.· than :li/ ,muk, ti-1, captured. Herrnaea, Romans :3.'50 (i.c ::J;J1)
I,~,- :2-!< s1111k pl11~ ·H prize:; refitted/> the -1,11 ships left in Africa taking part
i11 tl1t· hattl,·, l'artl1a.~i11ia11, ::00. ~t111le uf ,1hid1 liatl beeu built i11 a lrnrry
1 !'11I_, b. I, :lti : rlw llt>111:t11, t•:q,t11rl' 11-1,: 110 uther ln;;ses g1 1:en. On the
w,n- h1111u· The Ht>111ans e11c,)1mter a stnrlll. and ,.,ut of the :1li-t. all are lost
l>lll /-10.
Hen· an• two lii.~· d i~cn•11a11cit•,-.;. If the Rl)rnans had :1:iU ,-hips at Hertllaea,
tll\'11 l'ol.1 l1i11~· el'itl,,11t a,-;,;11111ptit,11 that they had 11t1 ln,;,;es: thcv ,-lttrnltl
1"11
lt:1\·1• hail +h+ :-hip, in tit,· ,-;tt>tllt, nl)t :rn+, i.1·. ;j."ilJ+ 114 prizes in tnw); wliile
th\· C:1rtliac:i111:u1:;, \\ ith :2.ill left after EL"11om11s, neerl uut ba\·e built in a
li111n·. t,1 ,-,,,('( :;11() t11 "l'a.
'l\, takL' tl1t· no!llall ti~11n•,; tirst. ~1q,pn,i11.~ p,,l_\ hi11,-;' acco1111t nf
lfprn1:t,•a tn lie 1·orr,·c·t, the ti,c:·nrc :{G4 fnr the ;;;tor111 (:2."in+II+, ;;]1ew,;, un
th,_. :1,:-11111pti<>11 t1f 11,1 H"man lo,-<t''-, that the Rnrnau tleet at Hermaea was
:!.ill.''' If"''· that at Ernom11s wa-; :2:l11 ::;?:W-:2-!< ,;11nk + 44 prizt·s rdittl'd.
a, ]ipf11r,· = :!.-,() [,;, th, 11, P,il., hi11-,' acc,11rnt .,f Ht.·rmaea cnrrl'Ct 1
0

:: Th,· c(l1,-...11l 1111111,,., ,dt,'r tlw ,·1wrn\· :1-. an d1ff••tt·nt prin'.Jlt--ttl 1.1' o'.'111uclron- 1 'lnl!l!:1Ilil-, of
1•,1--Y pn·.:,.. ~!1\11!.! hl:\\.1111 \\1111 10 ..,Jii1•--. th1~y th,· :!wl Pn1111• "'ll' 1'.1,u ha.rdly lit• eit1 ,l Ill
.,llff!•lln 1 l
him .~11,l -.111k q_ l.11t. tini-.ni:1.~ tlw --n1,1111Jt .
tL1...:,hq•. l, 1 ••tn,· t'l\~1:.:•·d \\1th tlw m:11n I~,-,m1n .:·l l\ilyl1. 1. ~~) .... ,l)"" thr•) retitt,,rl tht? ptIZt• ...
tlr•d. ,111,l ]n...,,•,;; --.1111k 10 L,k, ll If lw n:1 ,\It" all. \\ Lwh i,;; unlikch-, tlt1·11 0111\
·.:, }l,ily,1t·11. "· 7.!11: l!,qn:1TJ ... ~11 1\ ''arth. "i). tn·ty-f,, 1 1r \\•'lt' t tkt->n, nu•l thi! 1,,,,;,r pf th~, tn:.
.t 'fh,· 1l1tt• 1.., f,qrm1,\t,l\ Jlr,t lli,l(••rid lwn·. 11nn1L1•h !i"'Jt•,dr,,: ,l1,1·1J-,..;t••l f1Jr tlu• f ,utli,t•
ft1r t•1th,•1 y,·aI j..., 11i'' ri t,) ..,i•11nn-. 0L,1,•1't:n11 gu11:1n t~t•Pt :1t f>nomn--. 1..,cr1111,., ,•\·t.:·n 1n11J,•
F,,r .~ ,11T11liJ i1y 1,f t!i,· ,t1::i1rn,•1.t,, ..,,,,, R, 11 ........ 1,r,, 1 ,al·l,·.
11 , •d . . q H,·l,,, h. 1/1·. ,;,•\,•:,. :~ 11. 2·;1, wh11-,,,, :.,, Th 1• 1t·un l t•J' ·L-, 1) ~I\.·1 l! l,ir H,•J 11 ,\• ,l ,l,JI :-- Itnt
Jt•1..:.i,11-,f,,r :.:.-,1 a1 ~ ht:,!)\· 1Jt1\·111 ·1: :_:-. T!1t' i --~tf>W tl1 i .. tli•' --t<1Jn1 1111rn!11•r .... 1111111,I !,I-' tt3±.
,!itfi, 1,lt,\· h tl1, .. ' :2.-,.-, '.._'.I\ l/ol ll]ll• l,,r "/p•
I"" ~)\'1':i.n-:,, 1~••t·11, p1r1Ln,. tl11 -..111:1]'1--1 11nn1 1 ,,r 1 ....
..,,,,_:t• of, ·;:i, I'f' t ,111,l •ld•.., 1.ni '''J'l t!ll ·wLy ;!1• t,1 1,, f,1:! 11w,1l fi'll ,1 ... ,l f1(\ E:it11,1 111, ,i1
Ht!T!llf 1 til1dlll'1t t, j \l\ :.::,~. ,,!1.> :!..-,i ::1,\1 . . ... ,,11"' ... ,·11f 1, 11 ,,l tLr , 1 111<i-.1 ► y t,, 1,11
:n 1,l ;:1\
ti,f' n.. Ill.lll.., 1;1,r \\ i .. r ,\ \• 1 r l,, t,,i, ,n, ,,llltfl'...; Fut· ,,1°111-.. 1(.,," :.._t .-,. ~t;; f. .1 ~1,1 ~~.,, n~: ,111 .1
r 1,~,:1 1, 1.•1•ti t1,-1i11,-..1tl11,·,...:l· ;(1, tl,,· wt-:. ?"31lv1, :'.\l. l::.,! L· 1..-',! •l1 ... 1:::.::-.r . . th-,t tb-' 1•:i; J',,i\-
1

.111,l tli•·ll ,(''} i Pllr tl!I' r: ..... 1;,,t rJt:,1•'1 t1:· i l 111 !1 t•lli ,n11 111 1,· l. 1,·1 1,, 11 iD L ! "tl:..'."-'." ,t 1, 111
,',,r:-..·1:--t 1,1, on 11: ,,r•:1-r ,,, 1-..1n11-.. ln t/1,;;, \\ l!', '\ ::1 1 i1 1, .. ,, .... ~ t} 1"' ,~P~·,.-,, 1 • ,r t~ :, 1 .. ~ -i, 1 ,.t:'
: 1, • 11 ·1 i, : t l ,• , , , ... ;: ... i ,t :.:.-,;, 1 \, 1'' 1' , ,r, -.: ,
 THE FLEET:-l OF THE FIHST Pl'),'JC W..,\R. 53

It has been c1iticisecl on two grounds: one, because .Polybina gives 11+
Cartliaginiau shirs as c,tptnn,d au l uoue as sunk; the other, because he
dismisses iu tl1ree lines wl1at (on bis shewi1,g1 was a greater Yictory than
Ecnomus, to which he giYes ac;; many chapters. There was, too. another
(? Carthaginian) version uf this battle, ,d1ich makes it a stubborn fight
(Zonaias), the Carthaginians losin:..( 24 sl1ips (DiuLl<Jrus): au,l ]hue was
inclined, following Haltau.\ to take Polybius' EKaTov OEKaTt<nrapa, as a
corruption of Et'Koa-i Kat Tea-a-apa,.
Correcting Polybiu~· account of a Caithaginian luss b_y DiuLlurns is
bardly comincing work; but in fact tlicre is little .Jonbt that tlie battle was
a great defeat for Carthage. ~ ot only was she imputent at sea for years
after, but the consul Aernilms Paullus, who was in command, set up tl
colmnna rostrnta to celebrate the victory (_Li,·. -b2, 20j, and we only hear ot
one other such column prior to Augustus, that of Dnilins. As to the
captures, Polybius' phrase Jg Jcpooov Ka~ pq,Uwr:; TpEyaµEVOl ~hews that tl1e
battle was of the Drepana type : the Carthaginian fleet, in part hastily built
and manned by crews of whom some must have been inexperienced and the
remainder p)ssibly shaken by a great defeat, was surprised or caught at a
disallrnutage anLl jamme<.l against the shore, all, or almost all, the ships that
could 11ot make the open sea being captureLl.27 And Polybius prcsmnably
dismisses tlte battle in three lines just because he had given so much space
to Ecnomus, for he had to keep his account of the war brieU"
The Ro1nan numbers, then, are 230 Ecnomus, 2.jO Hermaca, 2;';0 + 114 in
the storm, nf which all were lost but so.~n The number :):30 for the Roman
fleet at Ecnornus no dl)ubt arose from reckoning in the transports :io and
calling the whole warships; the number :)50 for the Carthaginian tleet merely
shews that Fabius, as a goull patriot, l1ad given a number a little bigger than
that of l1is 01m side as he made it out. The hurried builrlrng of the
Carthaginians before Hermaea may have been from 50 to 1 OU ships, acconling
as from 151J to 100 escaped from Ecnomus; the figme, then, at Ecnum11s
woulLl base been at the outside 250 (100 bei11g lust), but might not have
exceeded 200. Apart frum the preference to be given to the smaller number,
if sufficient, oiher considerations all point to :ZOO. The Roman nnmber 2:30
shews th,tt tl1eJ expected to meet a fleet uf not over 200, ur else, looki11g to

eat!y ,niter with a sonml text hy a poor anJ
late co1t1p1ler. Reu,s, u. ,. awl Sreck, Han-
dcls'J'"ch. 3. ii,s 824-5, folluw )Ieltzer: l.,ut
une rnnnot 1H1te hi,lo1y merely hy takiug the
line uf least resi-tauce.
'" l'o"il,ly the 1rnmher 11-! com,•s from the
column. I\rhaps. tou, th .. reason why l'hilinu,
: DHJdorus) give:; the l:oman lo,s at Drepana
a, 11 i '"" tfl ,!Jt•\Y tktt tl,e Carthagiuians
had ha, l a full J'eYPnge for lfrrn ,aea.
2
' There i, an ex.id l'aiallel in Appi~u·,
accnuut of thl' war agaitist A11tinchu::i ; he dis~
n1ib~es in twu casual l1ne:5 the Yt>IY i1nporta11t
defe,1t of H,mnil,a] by tlie Rhu,li.rn, ,1t i-1,k.
,Yhid1 Livy give, ,1t length; ,rn,l tl,i, in a "al'
where hi:-, general agreement \, ith Livy over
the narnl operalio1,, is 1110,t marke,l.
c'!l If any Rnm,111 ,hi['5 were lo,t at Herma,·a,
the uumlier lost in the storm would lie fewc1,
80 anyhow rrmainin~.
"" This mast 1,e a eommo11 ,onree of confusion
in cla,,i, ,ti ,i- Ill 1110,ler111 tleet 11uml,e1,. Kn
figures iu autilplity art n1u1e exaggeratt:>d than
those ot rranspu1b: after such numlwi-, ''"
:,,000 a11,l l,oOO, the w1itt:r who cunfinecl him-
self to le,:; than four ll;!iue, mu,t have been
a,touude,l ,lt hi, ,mu mo,le1,,tio11.
 W. W. TARS

wliat they did later, they could easily have built more, ha\'ing some HO ships
aml 1(1 prizes in han1l to start ,vit,h. The Roman number :250 at Hermaea,
which came automatically ,,ithout builLling, wonlLl ha\'e been increaseLl had
Carthage ~he,vn ability to put :2511 to sea, anLl ahnust proves that the
CartlrngiHian m1mber at Ec11omm ,rns less; for it is to be 1cmembered that,
both before aml after Ecnornus, Rl)me, in acldit iun to her greater resuurces,
ha<l a very long start in building. \Ye have, too, the traLlitinu. whether prior to
or Llue tu tlli,; ,rnr, that :200 ships meant a supreme effort for Cartlrnge_:n
~lost important of all, perhaps, i:; the battle ibelf, whic.:11 points tu the
Carthaginians being outnumlJere,l; they trieLl enveloping x:.> tactics, awl faileJ
because tlieir centre was too weak for its ,rnrk. \Ye 11111st, I think, gi,·e
Carthage at Ecn,mrns :2111), as at Hennaea; anyhow not much twer. If the
Ro111au~ after Hermaea to11k off 1 l-:1, prizes in tow, there must have been a
few ships too ba,lly wuumleLl to tow::·;; if \\·e say lG, and ~-ive Cartl111ge some
70 not Yery ettcient sliips remaining. that is all they can well ha1-e had. 64
To coutirrne Polybiu~· tig11ros. After the tirst stunn, ntf Camarina, the
Romaus, ktviuc;· SU ~hips left,, built ~20, Lti~iug their fleet tu :300 (2-5.J, B.C.);
tltt~y captnre Pnnornrns (:2.5:{ B.t·.j: they lose LSU ships in a secnml ~torm, off
the Lllcauiau coast ,).j:3 1:.1_·.:,. a11Ll retire from tlio sea; in :2.:i:2 B.C. they escort
a cou,·oy tu Pa11oru11b with GO slti1,s; they again build .5u ship,;, making
:2UU iu ~-"ill n.c., in wliic!t year tltey form thl: siege of Lilybaeum; in :24,D n.c.
P. Claudius has 1:2:1 shipc; nt D1evrna, nu,l L . .Jutliu-, 1:20. In :2.51 B.C.
Ha,-;d111bal ,ail,; tu Sicily ,,ith :2un ,-;hip,; a11,l a large anny; after Drepana
Ad ltE•rlial recei Vl'~ a rei nfr!l eement of -:-o ships mi,ler Cat tltalo. Tltes,· are
:di tlto unmber~ ,c:tH'll lJ_,- p.,\ybiu~. It will lJe best to wurk back,rnrLls horn
1h,·{':1ll:t.
C'hndius' 1,lau was t" ,ail fwm Lilybaenm to Drepaua with croty sl1ip
lw had.,-, Pulybiu~ ,a.',-. ;311 escal'ed. aml tl,c 1·c;-,I. !):3. ,,·ere capturc>d: the
:1.cco11nt ,-.ho\\,; that ""me c,f them were urnch damaged. His fleet. th011,
umnhnl',l 1:2:3. ~\.dltct hi!·~ fntce i-- 1111t gi1·e11. It 11111,t kwe lJl'eu smaller
titan thL' Ru111an; tir,-.t, bc••·ctllSL' L'la11,li11,; tlt11:1gltt it fe:1:sible to attack him
llllder the c-at qntlt,; .,f Drepana: ~ecniully, her-an,,-, A,lltc,rbal's rict,,ry \\·,1s louke,l
up,1t1 ,1~ atl 1wexpl·Cte,l ,-,all·ati,-,u fur l\1rtl1:1gc; thirdly. bccallS•: in Pulybius'
1i,-t uf tlic a,lrnut.,~•-·, Otl tl1e Cartlia.~iuiau "ide tliat of 1rnmbers i~ not
inc-l11<ll:,l. At tltt· ,ame titne. it wa-; large en1,11~!t to, c,1pture tllL' bulk uf
t!tl' Rnlllc11l tll'd. ,r,. sllall 1111t lie far \\l"()llg' if we put it at }UI) at tl1e
<.ill hide. pos,i bl\' rc\t h,:r les--
.
\\'It\"
..,
l'lawliu ~ at ta,·k,:d is dear e11ono-l1u
·' he
mn--t ltan~ !tcarol tltat :\,ll11:rbal wa-; ab1111t t•> recl:iVe a reiuf;JJ l"l'lllL•lJt of
-;-u ,-,lii1'"· '1d1il'h Ill fact all"i\·ed after tlil: battk,., awl he ren properly

: 4 ..--\,"nrni:1'....'. that tlity 11',11 l1c1\--e 3..., 1u,tny ,l.S.

31 T!if ,htri,·uin-- ut ('otu-..,·, all t!tlH\l_!:!h \1I1011ey

aparti l,,,th :-it H11Ine ,uul l'.utlu,::1-· 1nn,t ltt\'1' :20<"1 ,l11p, ,H H,·rr11.t,·.1
lit-•e11, not shq1-.., Lnt Int ll tn lO\Y thi:m. 5
l'Jil_\ L. 1. 40, 1rd1.'TL Tei <JTu,\w I lllt'llti0n
3~ 'l hf• Rnn111i-, n.r,· Lti'"('riln_ 1l 3'- in Wt·d~t;
thh 3.9 it h (J1I11I11011ly .t--~lllllul ,tli,tt he }t_1ft a
f,n rnat11)IJ. 111Jt IIJ lint. -- 1n,uli,_in ,lt Lil: 11 1eum. a mn-..t n~eh.•~.., 111ovu~1l-
1

>• l·\·,.·n :it Jlr1.•11,11Lt. PnlyLin-., "1.y-.. t11elL' \\,F., 1ug-. as the L1 ·k:1 le \\J.' a Luln1c J.11·d1ow. ~uHl
1 1
)
1

SHl11t 1 r-1111111ir1:...:. a11 l ~ 1Jltt~ (;,hir,.., ,etrle,1

1
Iii, ~tnk1t1~ l!_q, 1_ rn,uth, 11 11 t ~ ·
 THE FLEET:-- OF THE FIR:-,T Pr~TC W.-\H. 35

supposed that if he L1itl Hut attark ,vhile he could, tliat able man wonkl
presently attack hi111 ill overwhelming force. Nu wonder he lust his temper
with the sacred chickeu,;.
After the battle, Cartltalo, witlt the 7() ,;hips he lta,l brought aml
:30 others:;,; given him by A,lherbal, attacke11 the 311 Roman ships that Juul
escaped to Ltlybaeurn with r:tamlius, :rnrl acc,iuntet1 for· a few' \o'A.£,a:, of
them, tnwing ()ff S•Jtne and de,;,tro_ving others. Di,:,Llu1us says lte captnred :'i arnl
sauk a fe\\·; and PltilillUS wo11l,l make the most ofit. Putting butlt accuuuts
together, we may say that Carthalo ca1t1tut have accounte1l fur more than llJ
of the 30. Cartlialo then to,:,k up hi;; station 11<)t far frnm Lilyb~teum, t•>
hinder the approach of the nther cuns1il, L. .Junins. 07 ,vlio wa;; c,_1mu1s:· 11p ,vith
a com~oy and 120 11 arships, wlticlt tigure included ships tliat lia,l j,,inhl !tirn
f1orn 'the camp and tl1e rest of Sicily.' J,
He haLl these 121J lnJ;,,.,, Carthal.,';;
attack on the thirty ships at Lilyb.1eum, and anyhow the surviving 2U co1ild
not rrnve ,inined hirn, as Cartlialo with lOU :ships lay bdween. ,J1mrns'
entire fleet was lost in a storm. At the end, tlten, of this disastrous year,
in which the Ruwans lost sume 22:3 ships, they ha,l some 20 0111,v remainin~.
);'ow u, work backwards. The Romalls bnilt .jQ sl1ips iu 2.'itl B.C.; in
2+0 B c. tliey had 2-:1,:3; their number, then, in 2."JO B.l' .. before the~· built, ,ms;
not L'>O, ac; Poly bins sa_n, but U):3. ThL'Y LliLl n,)t. therefore, lose 1:511 ship~ in
the second storm, off th,3 Luca11ian coa:-t. '.S'ow they l1:1Ll :SU ships left after
the fir:;t :;tonn, au,l are sai,1 to ha\·e built 220, making :3110 altogether. \Yhy
they shonl1l raise their tieet 10 t\11-.; uup:u,1llele,l figure at a time when
Carthage was q 11ite impotent nt sea does not appear. Dio,lorus gi\·es the
total Roman tleet after thi;; lJnilLling (uot the 11ew-built ships unly) as :fiO,
and we have assumeLl that PhilinL1s wa~ likely t•) exaggerate the Roman
strength. The real 111m1ber, tl1erefor,,, wa-; prnbably nnder 2."iO; an:! as we
lia\·e to acc .. unt for t\1e fi,n1re 221) in Poh·bius. there can be little ,loubt that
~ ~ ,

221) was the total, not nt' the newly built sl1ip;;. but ,,f the wl1olc Rom:lll
fleet after the building ::, The fleet. theu. in 2.H D.C'. wn, ~20 ships: the los-;
in the secon,l storm in 2.j:{ B.l'. was uot 1511, but 27 (220- 27 = 1!1:1,: 1 !);1,
with the 50 built in 2.jll B.t'. make np the 2-!<:3 reqnire,l for the year of
Drepana. The :;uppnsed !u,s of 1.,1) in the ,;;econd storm mn,;t, tlien, be n.
duplicate of the los-, in the fir,it storm; -1o :tnll if the Ruman;; ;;eut only r;o

'3li Pu1yl_,ins says the 11ri1.,_1-.. \\·1_·1•~ tctkcn to
l'a1 thage. Sollll---' wen: tLlluagt:tl; ii \YI.:' tclkl' tl11_·
s,1me prnvlrti,Jn as after E,·11 rnllk, tilJ t, i0
,1t the rno,t wonld lie "·orth 1chtti11:,: .. rnd
_.\.,lherh,1\ wnnlcl hitYP 1e111,,i11ing Jn,t aL0ut th..·
,mrne mnnher 0t ship, to t•>W tlwm.
'' Th,· F,,,ti shew thH lw ""' t'l.rn,lrn,·
i:olkagn1•. Pulylillh ~pt·,1k-, a_...., it lie Wl:'le hi,
sw·,-e,,01 au,l s,tilc•l tl,e llcC\t ye.tr 2.J,, r..,· .
but 1t ,eems n,,,-,11,.,1,ly cl,·.tr th.it th,· 11.\\",11
operati1111~ uwlcr 110th 1·u1J-...ul..., f1H111 fl!li'
t·onneett,,l seiluence au,l took 11l:t1·c in tht ~arne
year, 2-Hl n.c.
!11111 f1on1 Lilvl)(t1 uu1, th1•y lliU:it ha.Ye lit->t'll sent
,_,11 1wl'ote tl1e 1"1ttle ot' Dr,,[•illJa.
;,, The 300 ,,t· Polyl,in, llHl\' l.e c1110ther
111...,t~tlll't' ot t_·onln-..i11n ,lw• to tr,u1.-..pnrts or .s11-i1,-.;
1ithl·l th~tn w:l1-..li-ip~; li1r D1otl,>1u::- ~ay-.. tlw
Roma11, ,dJ[c,l tu the si,,l:!:e of Lih·b,tcllm \\ ith
:1-10 long ,hi]'' an,l ,;o ce{c,ui. i., '. 300 vc,,cl,.
t't·r1 n1i lw1·t11 in the l~u1n~t11 n 1Yy \nr the ltonrn.1t
-.:en·ic1·l in hotlt tlu· :,;~c"JtHl :.llltl thi1 1l Pu11ic· \\al-- •
LiY. ~'- 34: -'l.l'l' L,1,. 75.
"" _\.t tirst ,ight the lo,s in th,· ti1,t st<>l'lll
wonlcl sc·<.·m t,, he 170 ltom::rn ships and 111
p1iz, s; t,,r the piizes would, of ,·onr,e. ha\'P
1

13 l'ol. 1, ~,~. It, iu fac·t, any ,hip, jo'u,·,l l,ecn l'.ht ,,ff when the' ,tmlll hroke. But c,q
 W.W. TAR~

with a conrny rn 252 B.C. it was bccanse GO sufficed, and not becau-.;e tlwy
were retiring from the sea.
For that the Cartha;inian n:wy did not easily recon?r from the battle
of Hermaea seems ce1tain. They ha,l perhaps 70 not very efficient ships left,
aud ihe Romam did what they liked at se:1. They took Panorrnns; they
sent supplies there with only tjO sliips a-; escort; they blockaded Lilybaeum.
The Cartliagir:.iau,- in 250 B.C. could uot attempt to raise the blockade; they
had to confine tliemseh·es to nmning it: how little there was to fear from
the sea ;;:ide is shown by the Romans dividing their fleet, aml also laying up
part of tl1c blocka,liug fleet and using the rowers as hml troops. The
history of the secunrl Punic \\"ar seems to shew that Carthage could not, and
knew she could not, snpport at once a great fleet antl a great army; and in
~51 B c. she liad seut tu Sicily the army and the elephants with which Has-
drubal attempted to retake Panormus by lancl.H The destruction of that
army and the danger to Lilybaenm, however, compelled Carthage once more
to tnrn to her fleet; by 240 B.c. Adherbal had perhaps 100 ships, and 70
others were ready at Carthage: it was this grnwing danger that compelled
Clalltlius to strike.
Fur tlie period after Drepana tl1ere is little to say. The C,utha-
ginians ha,! s"rne 171) ships, less any lost at Drepana, plus some 61) to 70
prizes worth refitting. But after a little they laicl up their fleet, no doubt
because the crews were wauted for the war alread.v on their hands in Africa;""
nuder these circumstances it i-; wholly unlikely that any prizes were fitted
ullt. \Ylien the Rom::rn;: a:,;·aiu built they built 200 ships; these. with the
20 ur so remaining after Drepaua, which according to Zonaras had meanwhile
been nsed as privateers. wonl<l give them about ~'W in the final h1ttle 0f the
Aegates Insulae, The Carthaginian number is unknown ; Pulybius merely
says they got rea<ly 'the ships'; if we a~sume tliat they liarl 100 ships at
Drepana and no losses there, and co11H all(l dicl refit i"O prizes-all tlie rno"t
fan,mable l1ypotheses. in fact-they may have controlled 240 ships, as an
011t~i.!e number. But if they laid up their own fleet. it is unlikely that ther
ha,l fitk.l ont the prizes. They ha,l used np their trained crews; both tl;e
1011 e1, and the mariues wl10 took part in the battle were extemporised; no

do11br tl1'-'y were i11 part gut together from the crews of the transports; fur
that th,·re were 110 men to ~pare for tran--ports is shown by the wan,hips them-
seln·~ b,,i11~· loa.Je,l duw11 with :-stores fur thP army of Sicily. It is not in sncli

1u...:tra ,n ft_• fo1 tht·urniu.~· fur ~.\.Prnilins l'au llu~ ·
column. 011e d1Y1 ... 1nn 11111 ... t ha\-e got to harl1our
"·1tl1 lt~ 1•11ze~; cn11.;;e1111~ntiy thf' Roman ship ...
}n5t Wt·fl' rnnrt' thrin 170.
➔ 1 Tlw ~011 · ::,ll11i . . ' ,, 1th whif'h Ha-..drn1ial
,_·111-.."-f•1 i to ~H ily I1, dy L. 1. 3,; :1.1 ,. c1l1'r•i1 >lhl,Y tralJ-,~
l ort~. To --np1111-..1• tlLlt tl.t·y wet,· \\aJ,}111, . .
11uk,,.., 111)11,1 Iht' ,it' tl1f• 1'Y1•nt~ lid'o1e L1lyL,wurn
i11 :2.-i11 ;u1il :!Hl i:, , 1no11· 1•,uti,·111.irly ot tlt,,
l:11l1J.ut-.. b: ill,!.: np 1,,t1 t, it tlw1r tln•t. tlw a< ('otnlt
tn this that Hd,,!rn1,,1] d,d ;.:et !11, Lli-,,,e armv
,lf'fo"-:-:i; the R(1Til,lllS l1,1d Uc) naYa1 h1-.~· faeuig
.-\friea, an,l even if thn· had l,,1,l, the ,·nrnman,l
ot tlie ~f'a 1,ur:h ,h it W,t" with g,tlley:,; r,nely,
1t ,-~v,·1. 1)r . . . ,·t~11tf·<l ,111 aitlly ll'O~~iug 1n anut·nt
tirn,·,. Pumr,ey cotntll,tttd•·tl the ~c,1 ,1l>,olut,.Jv
,i-,, .1,~<111ht C,w.--,u ; ::'.!IJ J1 1 l tht• hbe1atur<:- a. .-,
a,..:,11u-.t £\1ito11y ..trnl Otta..YL.ill; ,Yl't iu ead1 c,1-..e
tlw ~\1liuti,· \Lb l'l'O::,H·d in to11_·1_•,
1
)le1t;;d·. vul. :2. p. ;3.JQ.
_:

• it \\ i11,· h 1-.. \ l..'1~ i11_·u111-.t.u1 t1,tl. It j.., 11n 1J11Jt·ct 11 •ll

1
 THE FLEETS OF THE FIRST PC~ac "WAH.

circurnstauces, and with rnch a dearth of men, that they cunl,J have got to
sea a fleet of 24-0 ships, the hu-geot in tbeir history. If \\'e give them their
own ships, 170, we shall be nearer the 1nark, with pel'l1aps 200, the numb•~r
of Ecnomus an,l HermaeJ., as an outside figure.B Ent thi,- time seamanship
was on the side of Rome; 120 Carthaginian ships were sunk or taken; and
the war was over.
If any read.er has had the patience t,) follow the foregoing analysis, lie
will alreally have seen the Lleduction from it; but for clearne'-s' sake I may
repeat the figures that ;;eem probable. In 2GO B c. the Rumans ha,l about
IGO ships, the Carthaginians 130. At Ecnoarns, Romans 2:30, Carthaginiaus
about 200 (with a possibility of a somewhat higher Carthaginian figure). At
Hermaea, Romans 250, Carthaginians 2UO. In 2-54 n.c., Romans 220,
Carthaginians about 70. In 249 B.C., R,)nrnns 243, Carthaginians about 1 -;-o.
At the Aegates Insulae, 241 B.C., Romans about 220, Carthaginians perhaps
170 to 200 at the outside.
The tradition, then, that a fleet of 200 ships meant a supreme effort for
Carthage dates from before the war, and was well founded; it was known to
the Romans; and the Romans, in their bid for sea-power, were not invading
the realm of miracle, but were acting on a reasonable, cool-headed calculation.
The.'· reckoned that, with their greater resources, they could keep up a tleet
of from 20 to 40 ships in excess of 200, that is, in excess of anything they
expected Carthage to do; and that if they di,l this they must win. Anrl
they did win; though their calculations were nearly upset by the gPnius of
Adherbal and the jealousy of the sea. Their victory was none the less a
heroic achievement because it was founded in a well-reasoue11 policy an,1
because the Carthaginian sea-power was perhaps not so great as we have
been accustomed to think.44
One other conclusion appears to follow from the figures. The Romaus
were throughout building to the Carthaginian numbers, not cicc i-erSll. This
does not necessarily mean that they could build more ynickly, fur they had
(so to speak) the whip hand in the matter of building from )Iylae to
Drepana; but it does mean that they must have known a great deal more of
what was going on at Carthage than the Carthaginians knew of what was

43
There is another. perhaps a better, way of
getting at the C.crthaginian fleet of 2H B.c.
In the \\ ar with the mercenaries the Carthagin-
ians had nothing but t1iremes awl pentekontors
(Polyb. 1, 73); they had therefore lost all their
quinqucremes at the Aeg,1tcs Insulae, including
cent., or even 60 per cent., arnl we come Laek
to tins, that,, t!eet of not on,r liO cannot Le
far from the mark. Of cour,e, if the 120 ships
lost were not all ,1uinqueremes, the argument
i~ even stronger.
41 If 200 ships or so was in fact Cart!Mge·~

1,resumably the Roman prizes. Suppose all the
120 ,hip, lost to have been quinqueremes, the
swifter ,bips alone escaping 120 is .:iO pe1
cent. of 210. ti0 per cent. of 200, iO Jwr cent.
of liO. SO ]•er cent. of 150. But we know that
in 219 B.L. the Carthaginian fleet of Spain c:on-
tarned 88 per l'ellt. of qurnquererne,, q,o,t.
p. 9); it is therefore mo,t uulikely that their
tleet of 241 B.c. contained as few as 5IJ per
effecti,·c limn. the limitation must hrr,·e had t"
do with the cr,-1rs, nf ,, hich we know litt e. It
has nothing t" clo. for in,tance. with the numhe1
of the v<wp,a at l'artluge being 220 ; for, apart
from Utica, the C<1rtlugiuians harl the control
of the Ll•icks built by Ag,1thocles at Hippagreta
,App. l,1/,. 110); and be,ides, a fleet could .it "
pmeh winter asho1e anywhere ,,e.g Liv. 3ti.
45).
58 -w. W. TA.RX

going on at Rome. Did Hieron provide for the intelligence of his allies, as
well as fur t!1eir commissariat? 45
The probability of the correctness of the ,-iew which I have taken i:=s
much enhanced. by a consi,ler,,tion of the figures hawlecl down for the
~ecollll Puuic war. I a111 not going into these in detail, but I may give a few
~alie11t points. The Roman-; began operations in 218 B.c. by :-ernling out
221) ,-l1ips}'' By 217 B.C. it was clear that Carthage was not guing to tight
at ,-,ea. In 21.5 ll.C'. the C:u-tl11~i11ians had 120 ,;]1ip., at sea,4• plus a fe,y in
Spain, P"""ibly lK. 45 In 2U !:J.C. tl1e Roman fleet is down t,) lS.5.4'1 In
212 u.c. the brc:•-•st Cartliaginiau tied of the war. 1:30 ships nmler Buunlcar,
atteinpts t,, relie1e S_n-acuc:e_-,n In 211 llC. the Rournn tied is raised to 21.5,
a 1ww :c;i111adron of :rn hein~- ti.tte,l ,mt allll se11t ti) Spain nn,ler 1I. ,Juni11s
S1Lm11s.--· 1 .c:iYin_:.,:· 1111_1 for S1c1ly. f;.j tur Spain, allil .5U for the ~.\.driatic; the
latter ,;11nailrun. huwe1·er. wa,; tie,l to watching Pl1ilip. and cnnld hardly be
c11m1te,l a, arnilab],, against C,trtlwge. Iu 208 B.C. there was a scare of a
great Cartl1a_:.;inia11 tied, the 11urnber, uf cuurse, being put at 21_11)_.-.~ Ro1112 had
already 2:-rn sl1ip3 tl1i~ yrar. /.,-. those nf 211 B.C'. plus 18 taken by Scipio at
~,~1\· Carth,1;,;," and tittecl out,;; all the ship:; in Sp.1it1, however, liacl been
laid up awl the crews adde,J to the army, while tl1e tleet nf the .A.drir,tic did
n«t count a~ a~·aillst ( 'artl1:ige. S·~ipio was therefore "nlered to e,1nip awl
,,_•11,l t<> Sardima 51! .,l1ip,, awl 51J ailllitiunal ships were fitted out at R,nne,
~i,ing, witli th,· tleet of :-;icily, 2UIJ sl1ip,-; .-, 2 ; while Silauus had in ad,iit1.,11 :30
'lni11,l11vn•111t·'l in :-;[>ain for wliich 11,_• h::ul crews, aml wliic-h ,rere a,-ailable
-;!J.,nlil tlie l'artli:1ginian fleel 1uaterialise.--,c1
Thr Pv,·nt,-; uf tbe yl·ar 20S B.C .. in which R1Jme el1nipped 2:311 ,,hip" t11
rned a tlm·atL'llt·d Cartl1ac;iHian tket of 21)1), do appear L'ntirely to ,-rnppurt
tl1L· cu11cl11:;iu11 cutllt! tu wit-Ii regard to the first Punic war.
U111· \Y<>rd as t11 t!te t,,tal lns:"eS gi,·en by Pulybin'l. ..:\.ss11min;.:- th:1t his
tic:t,rL·,-. for tl1e lo,-;~p,-, in the SL·parate battles are cu1-rect-awl ,Yitliuut this
a~,-;u11J[>ti .. u we cann<>t .c:u illt•> the ti_:.;11re,:; at all-the total uf :iIIU gn·el! for
tht< ( 'arth~_c:im:111 los~ i,; nut WlT wide of tlie mark: "" workt_-d ont i11 this

l~•Hll.tll .--11n:1,li1)J1 ... ,,t-111-.. La,·1-• l1,'1_•11 11Utllll!11-

ti) ~.i; .!..-,. ~/1 \\li1·tlu_·1 tlitlt· wen., ur ,n--n· 1111t
Lt1, ,l i,\ ,l t_',11'hctg111t.U! \\,l-. :Lttt r "'\"Lli'li-.,f_' lia1l ~o u~her l'a1tlt,1~111i:1.11 sl11p-, in tlu_' lw.rl1onr nt
1•,lJ1t'l (',ntl1,l'...'.t'; ~I.uu•l:u-- ln :.=1:; !; l'. lL1.rl tu ~yr,1.·'n-..1_· 1-r1tli Ep1,·yd1 . ,_
utt..r l1atrlL ti) l:,1n11l,•,11 ,,1:lt au 11tr', 11,,r fo111' :,, Liv. :2'1, 1\J.
,,, l'«h·h •. 11==.\J•I• A. 14~f.1y 21, 17. -,, Ln- ::"i, :22. Tr,,· ~o ,Iii!" nJ ~w1r,10 t!,at
Ln·y ,ldd-. :JJ t'l<w,......,
I 1w tlw Olt:!llt,Ll .J.-,. tLi• 18 tak1;11
ll1 1 ·11tii1J1 . . :-11,-·
_;- L1, ~ :. ·;~ .lt ~-cw (',utl1,t~r-. ,ll!d the :2.-1 tdkt~ll l1olH
.. ~ T/!1· l!lllli 1 at 1 [ ,1;,t111,·il ,Ji X1 \\ C'.i1tli,l'...'.1 H1n1llt ,) ,11111 IJ1•\·1·1 titt,·i-1 u11t
l 1qi,, !1. 11 1. 1 ;, -,; llol\ Ii. ]II, 1 /
4'' . , 1.-,,, !11r ~11•tl,\· afl i rlt•' .\,l1L1tr, 1 L1\. ·., In t•-,t lltl lt Ill~ tl1h tJ'c•m,-11,lnu .... •:fl\)! t 1 ~~o
21 111. 11ln, ·-:.-► 111 ~J',ll!J tli, n11.~111.il --•111 •d;,,11 ::-1111)-.., it n1 ht lu• l<:!111:1tdw1e l tl1 Lt tLP .l:{,,111au:-3,
1 1

1,t ('1i. :--=.i'llil". Tl "It \\'l'lt· ,d-..11 l!i :---.11[l]j ~5 \\elt· 1un, l!l 11t1t 11-.itl,!-!, -,Lt'.t IO\\·e1--, (Liv.
!•'.!/+•-. !,ll..:,1111,,111 Htrutl,_ 1 P,il_i,11. :. i,; __:L1\. ..!..l. 11: :2r_), :35 : ctl11l tl1a.~ -..J11lt' ()::· s 1111,J·',.
:2:2. 1~I ' l11it It l: ll-_. t l !Jill l 1t+l_i, 1..
)!)/ 11), l ~. tl1 lt u,_•w~ \\• u· 1,,es-..t·tl ~1•·1111ff,J-.. l\d) 11. 10, 17==
•!w,,· Wt!t llt'i t1tt,,l 1,tll. Lt\'. :.;Q 4~.I
 THE FLEETS OF THE :FIRST pc~·rc ,YAR.
paper, the actual loss may have been something like 450.:;:; But the total uf
7110 fur the Rom:m loss is mnch too high, even un Polybins' own showing:
fur it includes the 114 prizl:s taken at Hermat:a. ,rliich are thus reckoue,l
twice over. The Roman loss cannut ,,·ell h::ise been much uver 500. 3'j E,·en
~o, these are very large figure~; as large a-; f,)r the eighteen years precedin~
ancl incl11,liu~ Actium.
EYen, howe,·er, if the numbers arrive,! at in this paper seem rnnre
!Jrobable than the trailiti,rnctl oues, tl1c·rc ;-till remain two tlifticulties-the
•1nestion of light craft, an,! Pulybins' u~e of the word r.El'TIJpYJ,. Tlie Holllan
tigures are, of course, inclu;c;ive total~. compri-sing nil ship., under Ruman
cuutrul, Italiot or otherwise: it se0rns that the R1,mans ,lid n,>t call nn
Hieron·s navy at all. But a que::;tion arises ,d1ether the tleet numbers ,lu or
do not include ligl1t craft; also whether in the third century B.C. light l'raft
took part in fleet actions at all, a-, they umlonbtedly often di,l in the secc,11,l.
I am not going into tl1is here; bnt light craft ( by ,,·hich I mean lembi nllll
uther ship,- smaller than pentekontorn) raise many tliffic11lties in st 1dyillg 1

ancient fleet numbers, and may be responsible fur mauy apparently pnrpose-
less exan-O'erations.
C:-0
0
• The tleets of th,: fir;;t Punic war were of comse
accompanied by a few scuut;;_'i'' but wbether the,;e be inclurled or not. they
would be much the same for both si(le,;, and w11ukl not alter the proportiou;:.
It i-- necessary, however, to refer to P,)lybins' use of T.EVnfpq,. That thcce
large uumbers of quin,iuerernes were not di ![llinqlwre1ue,-, i,, now almo~t a
cornnwnplace. Other wars apart, we kno\\· that in this one Loth sides lia,l
trirernl:s"n arnl pentekontors,6 '1 aml the Canl 1 aginians 'luadriremes.'' 1 The ;:ame
usage of q111ng_11ucn11s is uot infreque11tly fonml iu tlie third l1ecmle uf Li,·y, 110
doubt taken from Poly bins: anrl Li,-y sometime;; supplies a sort ,,f prout· tliat
9.ni,17uucmes Jo not always uwan quin,1ncrernes. The real questic,n. of 1
:"

cs ~[yl.l,, 50. S,uJini,t :20 to -10. T,111,l.ui, 1 ", p11~.:;,n1 : an,l tlu- ex1,Llnati1,11 11111-s~ ln: tlut

Ee110111tb J(l(I, lle1111~te~t :-::omt.thing ov(•l' 11-!, r,-,lyx,,m,],h' ],attle flel t uf 100 ,l,i\" \\":lS ,ll'•
c,ay 10U. ~\t>g,tte-, Ins. l:!U: or alJollt -1:38 tll J~S 1·,,rnp,111ic,l l,y son,,- 100 licdtt ,,r,,tt, \Ylii, l, Li,·y
all tuli_l. l'olylmi,; ctcl,l, clUuther :JI) "r ,o for hc1-.. l!Ot gi\·L·U. ~\:- Wt' r'1lJ tn11-ndy k110\\" that
the ,nppu,e,11,,ittle l;,,f,,re ~Iylae. 10 ye,th ,,arlier l'l11lil' Y, ha,l fr•n~l,t :11 till sr:
Jti l}oot.le::; take'! 17, Tyudau-3, L1, EL uo111n"i :'.J 1
\Yc1tl'l":- wttlt ,l 111..:·t:t l'l/llLll.lllllf::!, l;'.ij l•·!l1h1 tll .~)J
tin,t storm (with HermaP:t) 170, ,c, oi1,l st,1nn 0
e:1tc11•llla,:ts. 11·e call ,cL· t!:at .\ppt,lll 1, 1,1,_,1,aL!y
27. year of PrepclllU 22-3=-!70. .hid some 10 1 1ght. l'.:;lH.:( ially a-, l1uly.\.tlli1lch W,l:, 1 ll~:l.'.!lllf.'.,

for }[ylal·, awl 311 nukno\l"n lu>a at tlie .-\e/-!,ltc, (tll L'llt:Ill_\' Jjl stroll:.!.: a1Hl iu1 011c1.: \\1: t:ur11-
IusuL1c. Polyhiu, gds hi, tiguie l1y cnu11ti11,~ 11htt·h· ,in--tt!y tlit· lcuge1 Itlllllli;r.
tlu• Ht·11n,1ca lllize-.. agau1, n.tlfl a,l,linp, annth,-r ·s l)ulyl,. 1, :,·3, t). ui. 1rpJ1rAELv EithlJ'fJ.€1,'ot
l:!3 for thP -..f•cn1ul <.;tonu.-UdittL"Ll i1rizr-.., 111akl" ;\Ell80L.

tht' Hnu1lu1 a11tl l',ltth,1,~1ni,111 U•t d~ 1il.-1•rla11 to '' l'olyl, 1. :20: Pnihu,· e,;!mn1t.
:iOB>C e,te11t, 1•0rluq,s 70 to ,,I) ,lup,. J'.,\.1·h. 1, 211; 1. 73.
;)7" l'l'1haps I 11::1} gi\1· 01:e in-,taw·i_• of what I " Pnl: 1.. 1, 47.
mean. lh,tle ot L'ury, lb. 191 Jl.,.; Li,·y an,! h.! F,11 111-..t.tlllt', Jht11-,,,Jlu-..· tleet liefo1r1·
-\.pp1L1n Ltt!tl'e e:-..a.L'tly a-, to the Hu1w1n ilt'L't, l,nt ~.\ r~t' n~i· 1-, titli1u1wp11·tt·rni·-.. l\11) 1,. S, -! 1111==
Li,y e:iH·., l'olyxent,_Lb 100 ,hip, ( 70 eat,l!lhra, t,, Li,· :!1. :31 : lmt )i,• lu, ,t 11iu,hii, 111,, fjy 2;,,
30 ar,ert,te ). while .\.1,piclll( Sy,', 2'.!) gn es him 2110. :J()) cllltl :2 tl'llt'Jll1•-... ,ll11l .J -..nulk1 ( Ltit j Liv. ~t).

Xo\v ~..\11pi,ln, who htnbelt wrote nu the Rornau :J9. 1,l ,lo llOt ,a,· thclt the ,111a]),,r eLdt are
ll:n-y, cl11e, not, as fl t ule, throw uanLl 11umber, lt't.?ko111..•1l in tlw tiO' ~\._:;din, Liv. ~l! H~ an1l filJ.
abvnt an:,how; ,fut the pror;f uf thi, sr,e tile ]'l',letor ll. A.cnnltu, l'Uts utl cll11l 1·Lt!•tut,·, j
Kinrna~t>r's artiek m I'!ulolo;1<1, h,,fore eita,l, i 'a1th.1s<iui:1u •1uinqnereme,, \\ith l.,IJO milite,
60 THE FLEET:-::l OF THE FIRST Pl·~rc 1L-\lt.

course, is Polybius' credit; and I think we can go a little nearer tli:n the
mere assertion, no doubt partly true, that lie usecl r.Evnfp11, simpl_\· fo1
· warship,' as some writen use Tpt17p17r;.
There can be no doubt that, for the Roman navy of the tl1irJ and second
centuries B.C., at any rate, the quinquereme was the standard warship, quite
apart from the first Punic war. If Rome engaged tu aiLl a foreign po\\ er, it
\\'as with quinqueremes_GJ If a victory was to be announced, a qninquererne
,ms sent.Gi Envoys anLl commissioners always sailed in quinqnerernes, usually
one apiece. 65 It was the typical Roman ship; and after 260 B.C. was Yery
likely almost the only type of ship built in Rome itself,6" seeing that tbe
treaty cities supplieLl open Yessds, tiiremes or lesser, and did not ( except
Carthage after :W:2 B.C.) supply cataphracts.
Fortuuately, we do possess one trustworthy piece of evidence of the
composition of a Carthaginian fleet in 21 !J B.c.; probably a Roman squadron
was very similar. ·when Hannibal set out on his march, he handed over to his
brother HasdruLal bis ships, corn,isting of .50 q ninqueremes, 2 quadrirernes,
and 5 triremes. 6• Polybius rather apol,)gises for being so precisE, but says he
took the Lletails from the inscription on bronze, which he had read, left by
Hannibal himself in the temple of Hera Lacinia. This would nuke the
proportio11 uf quin,iueremes in a squaJron sometimes as high as 88 per cent.o8
The Arcadian, mediterraneus homo, may be pardone(l for talking of a fleet as
a fleet of quiuqneremes when in fact 12 per cent. of the number were some-
tl1ing else ; while the philosophic historian \Yould certainly consider the dis-
crcp:mcy supreme!:· unimportant. \Yhen Polybius bas good authority
Lefore liim, Hannibal or an admiral of Rho(les, he gi,·es precise details;
elsewl1ere it may be that he is Scttisfied with conveying what he consillers to
be a substantially correct impression; a1cd, after all, he himself had seen a
fleet of the old Roman navy, perbaps the last of its fleets to go into action.
For that 11a\·y Ecarcely sunived tlie destruction of its great antagonist; and
Rome was content to fight with ships of Greece an,l Asia until the lex
Gabinia opened a new chapter in the history of the sea.

naut.:iequP, , l. about :24~ to a -,hip; tht' roice,•;,,
on a •1nrnqnererne were mo1e th,rn tl:at, au:ordrng
to PolyL1us.
,,, LI\". ~ ·, 2-1, t],,. treat} ,dth ..-\.etolia Tlut
(1u111<1uerenH. ., \\t:'t,• i11 t~tct s1·11t appeah fr::n1
Li,·. 2i, :_;2, 11here 011 l:i of the sh![" Sulp1c1u,
fell i,,, ~-()(J<I !1001,, over th,· Gulf of l\,rillth.
givi11g ,in av~1a,;e of '.2ti6 on a ship, wh1d1
Kr(IIHJ.,Yt:r ~1y, i~ tl11· lught'::it to Li_· fouud.
,,. l',_,lyl•. 111. )4=LtY. 2ti. 51.
,,-, l'ol_;li. 1:;, 2; Ln·. 28, l i : 2,,. 9; 30. 25:
3<J. :2ti: JI, 11.
,.; I think there i, no 111,ta11c,: «f any otiiu
t:, v·
1,ciu;:: Luilt..
h: l'olyli :3, 3:3 = Li.-. 21, 22.
"' If I nuy n11tu1e 01< 01 ,. rn· ,!"1·11 1,ar,dld.
the µlrt•·e of the qu1w1ue1eme ,ct tlu, t ll!e w,1,
exactly that of the 7 1 under X elson : the
quc1,lt ireme aIHI tri1eme correspondecl t" thP
smaller ship, of the line of 60 or fewer gun,, the
· light craft' to fngates au,! l1rigs, 11 hile the
heptereis and deke1e1s nf the Hdleni,tie po11er,
took the place of the ,hi1,s of 110 aud 120 :.;nus
liuilt 1,y F1.rncc· awl Spain. Though both
qniuquere111e and t111erue fought m the line, th,-
f1ct thdt Livy cLb::ie::; tn:·eUll~ among ~Li}'"
mmons lorrnae. a, OJ>['Ose•l t,, the •1u111,1uereme,,
,\.:,'., m.ijori, fonnae 3i. 23: 3ti, 41), shew,
-,·,me w,·ll-m,11ke,l di,trnction tJ>'tween th,- t11,,
nthet th,111 me1e ,ize; nu doubt the !we ol
,lin-i"n 1s b._-tween the galley, 111th little o,no
1 uwc(l }Jy nu~ 1u:.111 auJ tliu::-e with g1eat 1J,H:,
ru\\ed by ,:;,_,·,,r'.l.1 Il1ell,a 1_!i::-t1HLt1011 v.hich tn
a :,Iit:l'tator \\ uulil Lit lli'Y::t Lonspi1_·uou.s.
 I:'.\SCRIPTIO~S FROJl THE CYZICTS DISTRICT, 100G.

[RocTES follc,\ved: (11) Panderrna, Jlihallitch, Kernrnsti, Kavakly,

Snsurlu, Eski Jlanyas, Yeni Jfonyas, Alexa, Panderrna; :u:, Parnlerrna, Er,lek,
Karaboghn, Gnnen, Pomak Keui, Hantcha, Pamlerrna; r,:; Soma, B:tlukiser,
Jludania, Brusa.]

1. Panderma, rn printte possession: stele 0·40 x O·:Z5 rn., top broken,

,vith relief:-
(1.) "\Yor,-,bipper with sheep; altar; (r.) Apollo standing, with kitliara rn
left hand, patern in right. Below (letters ·Ol.j):
HAIO~.O.POI 'H:,\.1oowpo<;
AnOAA.O.NI ,A 7TOAAWVt.
The relief is uf a type very commonly fonml in the llistrict; cf. J.H.S.
xxiii. 87 (3!l), xxiv. :ZO y,, xxv. 58 ()3).

:Z. Kermasti, at the Konak. Two fragments of white marble epistyle,

consisting of llentils, frieze of bncrania, and double architrave : both frag-
ments have been broken across. The architrave is O·l:Z m. deep, the \\'hole
epistyle 0·30. The architrave is inscribed in letters ·(l:Z high ,vith apices arnl
broken crossbars in H. E : -
(o) 0·64 long, frieze missing:
HTOTTOAEIT..O.NTHNAr A0HNTH
E kT ..O.N 1.::i 1.0. NE YIX HM..O. I'
'.b) 0·60 long:
TONNAONAYTHikATEikEYAir
<J-_ »
(c, A t\iird fragment,, 0·3:3 long, in the garden of the mn::-eum at Brusa,
reads:
)AE..O.ITYXHNkAI
)P<f)YPOTT..O.AH~

The whole therefore nms:

1IEtA}JT07rOAEITW!' Tl]!' a.'ya011v n}[,;; r.]oAEW<; Tv:\'.1J1' Kai TO!' vaov aVTf]',
KaTE<TKEValTE[ll [
EK TWV lotwl' Ev<Tx1iµwz r.opef>vpor.WA-'Y)',.
1
 F. W. HA:-iLl'CK

These fragments probably came from an excavation nn the site nf

}liletopolis at the fifth kilometre stone from Kermasti un the road ti)
}lihallitch, where I have seen at various times a riuantity of Roman
architectnrnl detail including green marble shafo,, white lllarble twisted
columns, ebbornte circular ceiling panels, and various fragmeuts of archi-
traves, etc. The site was apparently plundered fur the bailding of the
rnosyue at K,n-,1kly, whe1 e tliere is a corresponding green m,uble colnmn
A Tyche. not specially charncterizell a~ a City Tyche, and never in a temple.
occurs on }li!etopolita11 coins of Cri~pina, ,J. Dunrna. Gordian III. (me,lallion,.
and Otacilia '.}liounet, ii. );°os. 363, :3tH, :3(;::,, 3';"1,i.

:3. luid.: Y el1,)1ri;;h marble slab, broken top and bottom, 0·3-5 m. left 1_

edge;-0·:Z9 (rig·ht edge, lngh, 11':W broad, ·OS5 thick: dowel liolc:s in botl1
edges: letters ·fll-·(lu75 liiglL From t110 :-queezes 1 : -

1
. l!1t lwtur is tno l,1,-1 ~tll f( 1 l 1,1,10 1 lnct1 11 Il. wL 1 111,· (11-- 1,_p,1w_ti> Lit\\l•_n tl.,. Lt,_~run> atui
tLll -..JJk! ttlOJJ.
 JXSCHIPTIOXS FRO.\I THE CYZilTS DISTRICT, 1906. 6:3

¢ J(;\01, /30,j0€1. r.i(p)a, E . . •

0]vµov KpilTEl. r.cunz• <plAocp[pol'El.
0 ;vva1 KO, upxl €,
a]otKa <p€V~f€,
a-aVTov EV r.ot[Et I
µapTvpEl Oa-La. Evr.poa-1j~;opo, "/ll'Ol v. ,)

5 ,'jl801•11, Kp1iTEt. (lT.OKp/vov €'/ Kalpw~l.

€]ux1;v voµtt;€. r.oz·Ei µET' EVKt..Ei[ a,.
11µapTtal' µETa[VUEl.
r, ]puz•otai• Ttµa ! , .
o¢0aAµou KpitTE[t.
a]8!K~,., µ17 xpw. cptt..Lav cpvA.aO-a-€. 11)
¢ ]1.\.!az, ,1~;11-r.a. /30VAEVOV xpoz•w[ l.
10 11]l'at8e/a, (11-r. axov. 7Tp[ a]a-a-E a-iw VO,LLWl.
T[o 2iK i]awv l'EµE.
Cof m• OLWKE.
OflOl'OtaV UO-KEl.
11pETIJV icr.aivE1. µ }78e1•0[,] Kamcppoz,[ El. 15
r.paa-a-E CLKaW. ar,opp17m KpV7TTE.
Tl]µi7v 1t11"obo,. TJo KpaTovµ cpo;:ov.
XPOVWl r,la-TEV€.
l.'5 ¢,.\.01, €Vl'0€l.
va'iE r,po, 17boz,1jv.
J]x0pov, czµvz,ov. r.poa-KvV€l TO 0EZo[v
a-V°f"/El'El', a.a-KE! Katpoµ r,poa-CEXo[v.
, , ' i!x0pal' OtaAVOt'.
]
K aKta, ar.exov.
E7Tl pwµi]l µ17) KaVx(.,J.
µta- ]011•0, "/LVOV.
~;11pa, r.poa-8.ixov.
2() T]a i°bta cpv'i\aa-a-E. XPW nvi a-vµcp.ipol'T[t.
¢/7'.wt xap/~ov. Evcp17µ/az 1 aa-K[ El.
vpptµ µEla-El. ,jrEvCo, a ia-xvvo[V.
c1r.Ex0Ewv ¢cV /f.
0

cvcp17µ0, ~;tz•ov.
7,l(J'TEvw[z·] µ17 (l .
ot'] KETa,
' ' .
EA.EEL r, \.ovTEl ll ... 30
0µ0\.0°1[ El ..

Tbe date of this curion:c; collection of aphorism~ seems from the ortho-
graphy and lettering to be about :3uO B.l'. Its pnrp,,se 1\·ill probably nt:Yer
be k11own unll·Ss the preamble of it or a similar inscription comes tu
light.
The follcrn·ing copies of inscriptions were courteously communicate1l t,)
me by ~Ir. D. A. Renjiperis of tLe R~gie.

+. Alpat Keni :

THro NAPETH~E a-Tpa ]nryov 11pETry, l[vE-

l<A I EYNO I A~TH~E Ka] Kat d,z,oi'a, Try, E[i, EUVTUI' /
 ->. }lelde (the site of }Iiletopolis;: stune with rig·ht edge br()ken.
ERRAL-\.OYAE
I TI~ LUUII~ L\. in<i> Anu(e,cuia
BEXDO}IITIO sn]b ( C )n. Domitio [Corbnlon- ?
EIEG e (l;eg[atns ! Caesar-!
S_-\.YGPROPR is _-\.ug: pro pr[aetme?
PFSCAASPRO
OHOXOR·C·AYS honor[i~J cans[a ?
~HPAnAPAXEIMA~ El' '_\µ]811p<,i -r.apaxEtµcia-[ a,
nONAION

Tlie Latin is eri,Jently ignorantly copied, but the mention of Armenia

:-ill!:tgests that the i11scriptiou refers to a legate of Cu. Dowitius Corbulo,
po~;ibly Ummidius Quadratus (Dessan PruSOJJ. Roill. /31)0), whose family later
held office in A~ra; but conjecture is unprofitable till a better copy of the
inscription is to hand.

Ii. }le Ide: letters \Yith upicL'B, A, E with disconnected cross-strokes:-

TITO[<p/ Tfro, <P:-\[aovio,

OYIOYA[ T LTOV ( V )[av 'Ao-[ IC/\.1]71"-
PEINAAr lCl6l], Ku ]pdv<,i ar.[ OTEA,Ea-a,
TEIMA[T.O.N[EBA[ TEtµa, TWV ~€,Baa-[ TWV EV T(fJ
AHTOnOAEIT.O.NIEP :\It:t ]A1JT07)"0/\.EiTWV hpp
XH[A[ Ka£ ,yuµvaa-tap ]x110-a, ?
-/. }Iclde:

O~H[MO]L o 61J[µa},
NAI0NnoMnHI0NrNA0 I']vatov IIoµmjwv I'va( l)o[ V
ONMArNONAYTOkPATOPA u1]ov :.\fa-yvov, aVTOKpaTOpa
)TPITONL.0.THPAkAIEYEP T]a TPLTOV, (TWTl)pa Kat €VEp-
ETHNTOYTE~HMOYkAI 'J ]ETl]V Tov TE 617µov Kal
THLALI ALnALHLEno Ti), ·_'\.a-ia, -r.<10-1]',, hro-
THNrHLTEkAl0AAAL 7)" ]TIJV ~,11, TE /Cal 0a:-\aa--

HLAPETHLENEkAl<AI (T };7,, apETIJ, €VE Ka Kai

NOIA~EI LEYA YTON

'lther lwnu1ary in~criptiuth uf Pompey iu Asia ha Ye been found at

Tltymbra" :111d in .\lytikne.; The pre~e11t datPs from the }Jassiug c,f tl1e
:Hanilian law 'liiJ B.l' . hnt Pompey i,-: 110t known t,J ha\'e been in thi~
district at thP timP, thungh a-WTIJpa Ka1 EvEp 1 ETl}v To v 6 ,j µ o v Evvoia, t't'EKa
El, ;;a uTol' ~cc·m tu imply persuual I datiuns. }liletup,,l i~ makes its first
 INSCRIPTIO-X~ FR<Hl THE CYZICU~ DISTRICT, 1906. 65

appearance in history as the scene of Fimbria's victory over 1Iithradates in

85 n.c. 4
The character of the above group of inscriptions especially the early (3)
and the important (7)' makes the attribution to Cvzicm
. of the lono- series of ~

inscriptions from Uluba<l more than ever problematical.

8. Yali Chiftlik: copy of ~I. _.\.lphonse Serafimoff.

ArA0HITYXHI 'A~;a011t Tvx17i.
AYP[W tP◊NI◊[ Avp. "'5..wrppovw;
~EWEnHk◊W 0Erp ET.T)KO(f>
Al◊NY[WkEBPI-N D.wvva~ KE,8pl]v[i~Il?
EYX APl[THP I ◊N EvxaplCTTl]plOV.

Dedications to Dionysus are scarce in the district (Lebas 1100, ~lihallitch,

Ath. illitth. ix. 17 (3), Pamlerma, J.H.8. xH. 57 (7,:, Gunen) : Bromios and
.'1 ystae are mentione(l in an inscription of Beychiftlik ( = Yali-chiftlik) B.C.H.
XXV. 874, (2O)==,Evorpavl}, i. 3;30 (l:?.).

9. Yeni Manyas, in the street: marble block 0·77 m. X 0·64 with relief
of wreath in sunk panel; below, inscription, 0·29 deep, in letters ·02 high,
much worn and defaced.
OY . • . LlHO
..... Oi'-1O0
THAIO~TH~

~TE<pANOY~E ~TO
~ANTAAILll.n N.n
~ .. <pANOOIN IA
H~ANT AAI Alf 1.n
l~TE<pANOY N BO
'\JO0ETH~ I .n~

The honorary charader of the momuuent is shewn by the relief and the
frecp1ent occurrence of crTecpavo, and aZ8[wc; in the mangled inscription.

Tchakyr<lja : -
10. In private house: fragment of slab with sunk panel; on edge, in
letters of late form ·03 m. high :
ICANTIOXOY

• C.I.G. 6855. Cf. .\femnon 34, Frontin. iii. 17. 5. Oro.,, ,-i. 2. 10.
H,S.-VOL. XX.VII. F
66 F. W. HASLUCK

11. Step of school-house: altar-shaped stone, 1·10 m. broad, 0·50 high.

Along the upper profile (letters ·035):
)CECTUTICT ~ 0·45 ➔ AI-MATIEI
V7rEu0uv Jo_- ecrTw T( ry):, T[ uµf3~pux,a- i!-yK }\.rjµan· El [ Se TL_- etc.

12. In private house: marble stele, 0·75 X 0·48 m., with relief of (from
left) four worshippers, sacrifice of bull, large plain altar. Below (letters ·02
high):
MEAEArPO~kAl0EO~ENO~ MEAfo-ypo_- Ka£ ElEo~EVO"
kAI MEN AN!:i.PO~o,nP nTOMAXOY Ka£ ::\1tvavopo, oi ITpoTOµaxov
!:i.llBPONT AlnlEYXHN ,j,d· BpoVTaLlt)l Evxrjv.

The stone is said to be from a site between Tchakyrdja and Hadji Paon.
The dedication to Zeus Brontaios is interesting in connexion with the
autonomous coin-types of Poemanenum, 5 Obc. Zeus head; Re·v. Fulmen.
Zeus Hypsistos Brontaios is mentioned in an inscription from Mihallitch
(Lebas 10:J9=11on. Fig. Pl. 133~ and p. 115=Rer. Philo!. i. 38=Ath. Mitth.
iv. 21. Tchinili Kiosk Cata!. 8rn1p. 126).

Pomak Keni (left bank of Aesepu~, half an hour below Gunen) : -

13. In the street: marble bloc:k, 0·91 111. x O 485, ·05 thick, letters ·04'5 ,.
much worn:
'I Al 0~ 111 El-'1O~nAP A Nr E AAlnA LI
)ILTHNAEYkEANkonroY~IN
HNAPINkAI. r. \ TINAAnr
nil lrl lllv IIOIITOYT1.
~IOY
FAno1 I Tf T
N ITI
'Io]uAto, (ITp)Ei'µo, 7rap{W''f€AAl 7T'O.CTl
T Joi', Tl]V AEVKE(a )v 1(07rTOVCTlV [ Dovva, ?
0]17v(a)ptv Kat , ,
The stone is said to have come from a site on the left bank of the
Ae;-epus opposite the hot springs of Gunen.
AEVKEa=(l) AEVKa[a, the ,\bite poplar, (2) crxoZvo, (Hesych.), rope: an
announcement engraved on stone can only refer to the former. The white
porlar was associated with Zeus anil Herakles tsee Frazer on Pans. v. 5. 5,
Boettichcr, Baumkultus, p. 44'1 sqq.) and the tree referred to may have been
one of special sanctity: it is noteworthy that Julius Primus does not forbid
the cutting. but makes a tariff-charge as if cutting was habitual. 6
5
J.H.S. x:ni. ;!:3 tf. k11 1JWll fruin a Cuan 111sui1Jtiu11 (E.C.H. xxiii.
0 _\ fe, ll 1·al ca lie, J .:l.vo,;o,~,r, UV Tl) S ,, Hpcts h :20,)_:.
 I:NSCRIPTIONS FRO~I THE CYZICl:-S DISTRICT, 1906. 67

14. In a garden: stele, 0·64! x 0 33, with relief of man on couch, woman
seated, table, and two slaves flanking tlie group: below (letters, ·015):
APTEMEI 'ApTEµEt[<,
ANTITTATPOY 'A z,n 7ra Tpo v
XAIPE xa'ip€.
Ha. The inscription, republished with a commentary by Dr. ·Wilhelm in
Beiit'age zur Alten Gescltichte (v. (1905:,, pp. 203-302), is still to be seen in the
'!hancel of the church of S. :Xicholas at Chavutzi (Kiepert's Hcrntcha). The
stone measures 0·85 X 0·63 m., the left edge being entire: my copy agrees with
Limnios', except that he omitted to note two upright strokes remaining from
a line above his first, and the possibly significant fact that his first line
~TP A .. is s0t back from the left edge of the stone, as if it had formed the
heading (STpa[ nr;o[ ?). X oticeable peculiarities in the lettering are (a) thin-
ness of strokes throughout; (b) tendency to cross the ends of coincident
diagonal lines (~, X, etc.), which gives somewhat the effect of apices;
( c) variation in form of letters: thus p in a-Tpa .. is written R, elsewhere P,
TT varies between fi and TT; (d) variation in size of letters: they are
normally (ll. 2, 3, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15) ·025 high, but rise to ·0:3 in ll. 4-8, 10, to
·0325 in l. 1 and to ·0J5 in l. 12. These irregularities suggest that the
names were added to the list year by year.

15. Tclrntal-Aghil, near Brusa, church of Theologos; slab 0·82 bY

0·6G: in tabula ansata 0·32 X 0·18, letters ·0:25:
EYBOYAE Ev,8oVA.€
0EO<plAOY 0EO<jiiX.ov
PE xa,]p€.
Below, relief of Henn in niche.
This stone was seen by Stephan Gerlach (1576) 'half-way between
Ulubad and Brusa.' 7
F. W. HASLUCK.

7 T,i,-ckischc" T1t!Jcb11ch (Frankfu1t, 167!), p. 257.

F 2
 TERRA COTT AS FR01I BOEOTIA A~D CRETE.

IT is proposecl in this paper to deal shortly with five terracottas in the

po~session of the writer, which seem of sufficient interest to be illustrated.
The first three are from Boeoti:t, the last two from C1ete.
As is well known, the most primitive Greek standing figures in terra-
cotta frequently take one of two forms-tlie col111nnar form, derived probably
from the tree trunk, and the flat broad form (,:mv[,), taken apparently from
the shape of a boanl of wood. These furms confirm the literary e\'idence that
the most primitive statues were made of wood. The first three terracottas
illustrate the latter type; in the sc>cond of them the boanllike form has been
adapted by a singular device to a seated figure.

Fig. 1. Primitive starnliug figure from Boeotia: height 0·2-1< m., greatest
brea1lth 0·8·:I< m., thickness 0·012 m. W 1th the exception of the head and feet,
the figure is absulutely flat. The arms consist of fin-like excrescences; the feet
are perhaps the best rernlered part of the figure; otherwise the forms of the
body are not expressed at all. The edge of the drapery, nowhere else indi-
cated, is sharply defined above the feet .
.More attention has been paid to the head. The primitive artist has
grasped the fact that the eyes are the most important feature of the face, and
has represented them by lar:,;e disks of clay surrounded by a deep rim. The
nose is long, narrow, ancl flat; the month is not indicated at all. The hair i~
formeu from one long string of clay, which is bouml over the foreheail arnl
('rosses bel1iwl the l1cail; thence it falls in a long lock, COY creel with a nmnber
of ;,mall irnlentatiun;;. on either sidl:' of the face.
The artist c'.early wnrke<l \Yith the simplest of tools, appa1cntly pinching
the cl.<y fur the most part witli Iii;, own hamh-thi~ is evicleutly the way in
whicli the uose has been formetl-anrl using also n poiute<l in;;trument for the
feet, liamls, and hair. There are traces of a slip of white material over the
"liole figure.
Such <Ta1•£,-like figures are common, especially in Bocotia. 1 I can find
no close parallel to the treatment of tl1e hair aml features.

Fig.~- Primitive scatetl figure fwm Buentia: height 0·145 m. The whole
,,-orkmanship of this figure, when c,imparecl ,Yith the last, seems to show that
 'l'ERRACOTTAS FRO}I BOEOTIA A"XD CRETE. 69

it is from the same hand. It is an interesting variety of the ordinary primitive

seated type; instead of the nsual solid throne or seat, the figure is sustained
by a support behind, rather in the style of a modern photograph frame. The

features of the face are almost identical ,Yith those of the first figure ; it has
the same owl-like eyes and bird-like nose, still further exaggerated. The hair
70 ED'IY. S. FORSTER

is remlerell in the same way, but not JecorateLl in front with imle:i.tations.
The feet and lower edge of tbe rlrape1y are not represented.
The figure hulLls a smaller figure clasped to tlie breast with the left arm,

FIG. 2.

which is far larger than the 1ight arm. Tbe features of tbe infant are those
of the larger figure on a ::,mall srale.
It is interesting that the partiality fur the boanllike form is so strong
that it has been adapted to the seatell figure. The seated female figure hold-
ing au infant is one which is common amoug terracottas of every period.
 TERRACOTT_AS FRO}I BOEOTIA A~D CRETE. 71

This type of propped seatecl tigme lia-; beeu found in several Grt>ek sites,
><:.g. at the Argi ve Herneum ~ aml Tanagra_'.3 The ouly parallel to snch a

;,
' :~.:~~/,
' :~;./
:).·
.... ·r,,..,

.~.,;-~J;~/-
~}
'.
;.~.
~ ..... ~-

. ~ :~~'
ft_
; ... ~;-,·
-"!~ •, lt41p,;,li',J~
',:,:.
... ·: ·, .
. ~--~-.::~.""
,•• .. ,.
- . - - --i'... ·-. _·'i.ilii--..
FIG. 3.

figure carrying a child is to be found in a terracotta from Boeotia at Berlin: 4

this is of a much later style.
2 '.Vaklstein, Excamtwn of the Huwu,n, Pl. 3 Athens, X ational )Iuseum, X o. 833.
VIII. Fig. 11. -1 Berlin, Antiquarium, X o. 83-18.
72 EDW. 8. FOR8TER

Fig. 3. Standing fignre from Boeotia: height 0·235 m., average thickness
O·Oll m. Here the form of the body is exactly similar to that of No. I, except
that the arms are longer and the feet are not indicated. The figure is coYered
with a slip of white material, on which are faint traces of red paint run-
ning perpendicularly down the centre of the body and horizontally at each
side. The head, which is damaged, sholYS a very considerable a<lvance. The
eyes, though not exactly in the right plane, are carefully rendered, and the
cheeks and chin are well modelled. The head is surmounted by a high polos
coloured red; the hair is scarcely indicatell.

-...·',.,._
... _., __ -
.- «
.. · ~~!
.' ~ '

...... -

;'::~._
, - - ...
~-

Frr.. 4

B,v analogy from ~culpture in stone, the figure seems to belong to the late
sixth century. It is interesting to see tliat the conserv[ttive instinct of the
Greek prefers the flat, shapeless furm of the holly at a time ,, hen art is suffici-
ently adrnncetl tu enable the far mure difficult fe::i.tures of the face to be
representetl with some sncces,. Iu this respect tlie rernlering of the human
1; ,nn in terra('utta differs frum th:. t in stune, 1d1ere perfection beg·ins with the
feet [Ind fin[tll_1· reaches the he[t<l. In works of scnlpture the [lrtist naturally
 TERRA.C0TTA.S FRO)! BOEOTIA. A.SD CRETE. 73
tried to excel in every part of the work ; in terracottas, religious consernttism
demandeLl the form to which it was accustomed, and it was only in the head
that the artist ventured to use Lis growing skill and knowledge.

The t1rn Cretan figures, which were found together in a tomb near Retimo,
are both e,1uestrian, and represent uncommon types.
Fig. 4. Group of two horses and driver: height 0·12 m., extreme breadth
O·l m. This group is made of dark, coarse clay, baked very hard and covered
with a slip of wlnte material. It represents a man mounted on a chariot;
but, owing to the exigencies of the material, horses, man, and chariot
are all moulded together. The chariot wheels, which are soliJ., appear on
either side of the back legs of the horses. The structure and attachment
of the chariot are not shown, and its presence is only indicated by the wheels .

_.f,r•c
- '
• :f .,

•>~ -~- . .l\'f.·..... -

_.,111111 -
;to

It:" ,~~

,. V ,o1-,,

~ .'
'
'
FIG. 5.

It represents no doubt a war or racing chariot, consisting of wheels with a

cross-bar supporting a platform on which the driver stood; the convenience of
a war-chariot which could be easily mounted or dismounted from is obvious,
and the racing-car preserved the form of the war-chariot.
Chief attention has been paid to the horses. Their heads are carefully
modelled, p:uticularly the ears and crest; their manes are indicated with black
paint, of which considerable traces remain. The head of one iR raised, giving
a pleasing variety. The legs and back are only roughly blocked out.
Less attention has been paid to the charioteer. His head is rudely
sketched, the large curved nose being the only marked feature; the forms of
the body are not rendered at all. On the left side there are indications that
the arms stretcheLl along the horses' backs. This fact and the pusition of the
7-! TERRACOTTAS FRO)I BOEOTIA .AXD CRETE.

horses' front legs, which are planted firmly on the ground befure tliem, su'm
to show that the group represents a charioteer reining in l1is hon,es.
Fig. 5. Horseman carrying faggots: height 0·145 m., extreme width U 115 m.
This group is of the same material as the last figure, aml was appareutly a],;u
covered with a slip of white paint, of which few traces remain. Here the hor,c
is subsidiary, and the chief attention has been pai,l to the rider. The horse is
of the form found on many Greek sites, and liltle attempt is nrncle at modelling;
the legs and tail are thick, the hPad small. The faggots consist of :-pikes of
clay, built up on the top of one another. The rider sits astride on tlie top, his
legs pr~jecting in front and his ham1s on either side of tl1e horse's mane. Hi,,
face is clearly intender! to be of a comic character. He wears a pointed beard;
the lips are thick allll the mouth large. The ears are shapeless excrescences;
the nose is large, and the eyes are formctl of disks attached to either side of it.
The head rise~ to a peak at the back. In short, the figure is of tlrnt grotesque
character which occasionally appears in Greek art of e\'ery period, from the
early sculpture:; of the Athenian Acropolis down to the late Hellenistic grot-
esque terracottas of Asia ~Iinor.
As is the case with the other Cretan terracottas, these equestrian figures
find their closest parallel among the terracottas of Cyprus. 5 They seem to
show that in Crete too is to be found something of the charm and nci'irde of
primitive Greek art of the mainland.
Enw. S. FORSTER.
------- - - "-----

5 -winter, op. cit. p. 15.

 ON THE 'LIST OF THALASSOCRACIES' IX EUSEBirS.

ALL students of Eusebius will feel grateful to 3Ir. J. L. }lyres for

his attempt in the bst volume of this Jounwl 1 to discm·er the original
text underlying the list of thalassocracies, prese1Tecl in the Ch1·onica of
Ensebius, aucl to reassert it5 value as historical eYidence. The problem
that }Ir. Myres has set himself is rendered difficult not only by the
general obscurity in which the sources of early Greek history are shrouded
and by our almost total ignorance of the l1istory of many of the thalassocrats
during the period assigned to them in the list, but by the complicateJ
;:1uestions of textual criticism which surround the Chronica, and which this
problem raises in a particularly aggravated form. While not venturing to
follow }Ir. ~lyres through the wealth of historical learning, which he has
brought to bear upon the subject, I have thought that I might be able to
contribute something by bringing my own studies in the Chronica into
relation to the general question.
From this point of view, §:3 in Mr. Myres's article, which deals with the
text and its use by Eusebins, is the most important. It is to be regretted
that Mr. ~lyres, whose article shows an acquaintance with the essays on
the Chronica contained in Von Gutschmid's Kleine Schrijten (1889), and with
Schone's TVeltehronik des Eusel.Jius (1900), has not devoted a little space to
the general critical problem of the Chronica, the more so, as he sometimes
<lrops into a phraseology not consistent with the views he quotes from
Schone. For instance, he frequently refers to the Armenian version of the
Chronici Canones as Eusebius, and to the Latin version as Jerome, as though
the Armenian version were identical with the original Greek in a way
in which Jerome's version is not. In one passage, p. 02 21, he distinguishes
between the Canon and the Chnmicon, as though the Chronicon were
identical with the Ghronographia, instead of being the title of the whole
work. A brief description of the Chroniw and of recent critical opinion
in relation to it may therefore be useful with a view to removing confusion.
The Chronica of Eusebius was a Greek work in two books, called
respectively the Cilt'onographia and the Chrunici canunes. The Chronug}"()phia
is a chronological treatise, consisting largely of excerpts from previous writers,
and is preserved in an Armenian version. The Clu·onici can-.mc'S or canons

1 For convenience of reference, :\Ir. ~Iyres's talile is repeated on p. i6 of this artide.

76 J. K. FOTHERIXG H~DI
_\ ll
!·-~---1
C ! - -D
---
I E ---
I F G H J
I 1J1u lurus I Syneellns I Eusebms Jcr,,rue s
''lli"ted by [-·J show:--1 Canun,
I
C.1nun. Eu~t.-
En-.cb1us 1 I th.tt the yea1s i ye,1r-; l11ns' ,Tt:r(•Ine . . ! Winek- Il,1.t'---s .111d
Cl,rum- I name b I fruru I from d,lte,, , Ja.te~, I ler'::i 111te1vab
t.011 I. g1ve11 I Allr,d1d.rn.l ~-\.1,r.lh:un. n.:ilucLtl I1 n.:ducL'rl. tu 'I rlyears
1te,s.
Jt),5 1I.ti, hut the I awl dnra-' ,1nd
p. ~:!j I numeral : hun uf / tivn uf
dur,1-1
t,, ye,u, JC,11-" RC'.
n 1_.
llU\V

I B.l'. pruiiu::,eel.
Schucne. orn1ttcJ. ' . . ea-pv\\'L'l, :"'e,1-puwer.,
---- - - -

11S4
0 [Cares] 128 1'8
848 812 1168 1174 1050 1046
Lydi (<iui f•t 92 [-] 92 [ -] 80 11S !12
)Iaeo11es1 92S 960 1088 1056 9134 954
l[ Pe)aggi 85 85 85 [-]
'°· ,.;I I
"'·f lOOi 85

" t
( 1009
- 1050 - 1 9tl6 - 879 869
~ =~ 10.15 j l 961 J
II[ Thiaccs ,9 ,9 -=-~~ 19 !Jl. 41 ..p._i 79
§J~ 1101 915 757 mo 790
3
IY Rhodii 23 23 L__j 23 23 23 23
1113 1123 903 893 734 767 757
y Phryges 25 25 or 6 25 25 (20) 29 25 25
1152 861 709 7-!2 732
YI Cyprii 33 [- ]
~
;: ;~
23 (32,1 ,:8 33 33 23
~:--- 1180 836 676 709
Yll Phoenices -!5 [-] §;:~ -!5 5? 45 -!5
]~~
[__J 123:3 783 631 664
YIII Aegyptii [-] [-] 3.5 26 61)
1268 i-18 605 604
IX ;',Iilesii 18 :s 18 18
1286 1296 730 720 58i
X [Cares] 61 [- l /?1 49 0
13-!5 13-!5 671 671 587
Xl Le,bii [96] 68 [16

HU ;,,::> 578
XII Phocaeenses H H H ..;,j H
14So ;,30 5::q
XIII s~mii [-] xn J,' 17
150:3 jl3 517
Xl\' L.1L"eda,·111onii 2 12 2 2 2

XY X.u.:'.i 10 10
_II 515

1;,05 I I _ 511
10
50,,
xn Erdricn,,·, l ;, ; 15 ¥'6 15
15:n l.c11S -!S5 503 -l\10
X \'II _\egine!tit> 1n 10 JfJ :20 10
-!SO

A B (' D E F (; lI J
1 t:- 1,,·t,if,df,·1.~11l Jfr. Jf!1,·c-.·-. 11rt,, /.;, J',,/_ X.\'f'I. 1'· '-S.)
 ON THE ' LIST OF THALASSOCRACIES. IS El7SEBI1.7S. 77

are a chronolugical tablt:, extelllling from the birth of Abraham to the

t\\ entieth year of Constantine, and are preserved not only in the Armenian
version already mentioned, but in the Latin version of Jerume, while a
few entries are reproduced in a Syriac epitome. The original Greek of
both books is lost, but can be restored in large measure from quotations and
parallel passages in Syncellus an(l other writers. Schone in his Weltch,-onik
des Eusebius !tas argne<l that of the two versions of the Chrollici cannnt's
the Armenian lins completely transformed the original arrangement of
columns and spaces, while Jerome adheres line for line to the arrangement of
his original. I have endeavoured in my introduction to the B,,,llcir,,1
Jlfanuscript of Jero111e's Eusebias (Hl05) to show that Jerome adheres not
only line for line but page for page to liis original so far as the part of the
canons down to the year of .A.braliam 150-1, (-512 B.C.) is concerned, after ,rhich
date he would appear to preserve only the ge11eral arrangement, not the
exact lineation anrl. pagination of Eusebius. Jerome does not attempt to
correct Eusebius, but bas made numerous insertions, relating mainly to
Roman history. The Armenian translator on the other hand neither amends
nor adds to his original, bnt often omits events, apparently by oversight.
Schone holds that the Armenian version is made frum an e,nlier, anrl
Jerome's from a later and revised edition of the Chronici canoncs of Eusebius.
His reasons for this are stated in his TVcltchronil~ etc. pp. 260-7. In
my introduction quoted above I ha,·e left this an open question, bnt further
study has convinced me that the differences on which Schone has based
liis case are with one exception of the same kind as the Llifferences between
those manuscripts of Jerome which retain the original arrangement and those
which, like the London manuscript, have substituted a different arrangement,
drawn up with no great care.~ The single exception is the inclusion in
Jerome of a column of :::\Iycen::1ean kings, which is absent from the Armenian
Canons, though such a list is foul1ll in the Cll1'onogmphia. It is impossible to
base a theory of a separate edition on tl1is one instance, since the Armenian
translator, who, as we have seen, transformed the arrangement of the book,
111ight easily have ornitteJ a column by acc:ident. 3 It wonkl therefore appear
that the differences in arrangement, like the differences in text, between
the two versions, are for the most part tlrn result of errors on the part
of one or other translator or of some copyist. The kiml of error that is
most common in manuscripts of the Ch,·,.mici cr1n,-1nc~ is fur entries of event,,
while retainiug their position in relation to other entries of events in
the same column, to be shifted upwards or downwards, so as to stand against

2 Am·,ng the iust,1nce, cite,l by ~chone are (1800), i. 1 S5.

the Jiffercnccs in the J.1tes of Rt1man bi,h0p,.
011 which much has l,een \\Tttten. I am
convin ·eel that the 1,eculiar <!ates of the
.A.11neniau Ycr,ion are simply du,: to s,:ril,,1!
enors, and ,lo not go back to Eusel,ius himself.
Ste Mr. C. H. Turner\ artide on the E,nly
Episcopal Li&ts, Journal of Th,,olo:1fral S/1!(/frs
3 The Armenian Yer,ion al,o omit, the
column of .Medi,rn kings, :1\thnngb this column
i, essential both to the chronolngi,·al system of
the mJJk au,l to th? arrangement of columns
un,l ,p,1e·t"', as prcse1Tcd in Jerome. Tl,e
orni,,iou of t1", }[yce1iaeau co'unrn woul,l not in
ihclf di,Jn,:atl' any of thP otlier colmuns.
78 J. K. FOTHERINGHA~I

different years, and, ·where there are two columns of events, to change
their position in relation to entries of events in the opposite column.
It is therefore important in considering suggested corrections of the text to
observe how far they involve alterations in the order of entries occurring
in the same column or space.
The thalassocracies occur in two places in the Chronica, (1) in the
Uhronographiu, represented by the Armenian version only, (2) in the
C'hronici ca nones, represented by the Armenian version, by Jerome, and,
according to Von Gutschmid, whom we shall see reason for following, by
Syncellus. There is no reason for suspecting either translator of Eusebius
of having attempted to do anything else than render the text as lie found
it. In the case of Jerome tlie amanuensis wou!Ll, as far as 512 B.C., simply
keep each entry in the place where he found it in the Greek. Syncellus
might, consistently with the principle of his work, introduce material from
some other source, and in two instances he inserts alternative figures which
may have been obtained elsewhere, bnt he does not appear in the present
instance t,J have adopted any date from outside Eusebius. But while there
appears to have been no attempt to improve on the figures given by
Eusebins, it is, as Mr. Myres has pointed out, by n,) means clear that the
dates for the thalassocracies given in the C'hronici canones were calculated
by Eusebius from the list given by Diodorus which appears in the Ghrono-
graphia. Ensebius may have somewhere found the <late of each thalasso-
crn.cy already correlated to the dates of other events which appear in the
Ghronici canones, and may have placed his entries accordingly. We are
therefore faced with three possibilities. \Ve may have in Ensebius a single
scheme of thalassocracies derived from Dioclorus, or we may have two
separate schemes of which one only i::i derived from Diodorus, or we may
have, as Mr. Myres supposes, one scheme drawn from Dioclorus, and a chaos
of dates not calculated on any fixed principle.
Before examining the dates in detail it may be well to see how far
~Ir. Myres's table accurately represents the evidence before us. Columns
A, B, and C, giving the order of the thalassocracies and the length of
each as recorded in the Armenian ver5ion of the Chronographia are
correct. B:1t in column D, giving the figures pre,erved in Syncellus, a
few errors may be noticed. Thus Syncelln~ actually gives ninety-two years
as the duration of the Lyllian or Mn.eonian thalassocracy, agreeing with the
Armenian version both of the Clu·unogmphia and of the Canons. He makes
no mention, however, of the sixth, seventh, eighth, and thirteenth thalasso-
cracies instead of merely omitting the figures as ::\Ir. Uyres states. In
column E, which giyes the figures presel'l'ed in the Armenian Cunons, Mr.
Myres's only mistake seems to be in the case of the Eretrian thalassocracy,
where he has substituted 1505, the number standing opposite the record of
the event in Schone',; edition, for 15H, the date pointed out by Schone's
index letter. "'ith column F, as nn accurate reproduction of Jerome's figures
given in Schone, no fault can be fouwl, except that the forty-five years as-
signeLl to the Phoenicians are to be fonnd in one manuscript only, and are
 ON THE 'LIST OF THALASSOCRACIES' I~ EU8EBIUS. 79

rightly regarded by Schone as no part of the genuine text of Jerome. It

will, however, be seen hereafter that different figures are sometimes to be
found in the Bodleian manuscript from those which appear in Schi:ine's
edition. In column G, in which the dates of the Armenian Canons are reducetl
to years B.C., the only errors are those which result from the error in column E.
Thus the Lacedaemonian and N axian thassalocracies should last eleven years
instead of two, and should be dated 502 B.C., instead of 511 B.C., while the
Eretrian thr,lassocracy should last for seventeen yean only. In column H, in
which Jerome's dates are reduced to years B.C., 1Ir. :Myres has made three
small errors in subtraction. Thus the forty-one years of the Thracians should
be fifty-one, the twenty-three years of the Rhodians should be twenty-two, and
the fifty-two years of the Phoenicians should be fifty-three. Here again the
use of a revised text of Jerome might necessitate a few slight modifications.
In column I, giving \Yinckler's dates, I have discovered no error, while in
column J, where ~Ir. Myres gives his own dates, there is one trifling error in
addition. Thus the date of the Rho<lians, to whom twenty-three years are
att1ibuted, should be 7D0 or 780, not 800 or 790, and the dates for the Lydians,
Pelasgians, and Thracians should be correspondingly reduced by ten years, and
the interval allotted to the [Carians] increased by ten years. X one of these
errors, except those in columns D and E, affects the documentary evidence,
but they are all instructive as furnishing an example of the kind of error
to which we are all liable in transferring f:ignres from one setting to another.
It will be observed that Mr. Myres has nowhere copied a figure incorrectly,
but he has once overlooked a figure, once copied a wrong figure, and four
times made a slight error in calculation. We neecl not hesitate to attribute
similar errors to the ancients.
The fig11res given in the Armenian Chi·unographia present little difficulty.
All except two are confirmed either by Syncellus or by the Armenian
Canons. The two exceptions are the thirty-three years of the Cyprians
anrl the forty-five years of the Phoenicians. Forty-five years are, however,
attributed to the Phoenicians in codex F of Jerome, a manuscript which is
notoriously the result of a deliberate recension. As the figure forty-five does
not belong to Jerome's text and cannot be obtained by simple subtraction, it
is practically certain that it was obtained by a reference tu the original Greek.
This renders it probable that F is also following the Greek in attributing
thirty-two years to the Cyprians, who are assigned thirty-three years in the
Armenian Chronogrnphia, and twenty-three years in Jerome. In the text of
F, they are spread over the period 1150-1181, and are thus made to last
thirty-one years. The figure thirty-three attributed to the Cyprians is there-
fore the only doubtful figure in the list; but we still have the lost figures for
the Egyptians, M1lesians, Carians, Lesbians, and Samians to make good as
best we can. ,vhen we consider the state in which the Armenian Chrono-
graphia has descended to us, we can infer nothing as to the original from the
absence of some of the figures from our existing manuscripts. It is probable
that the right margin of some ancestor of the existing Armenian manuscripts
was torn. As the extant fignres of the Armenian C'hronogruph ia are with the
80 J. K FOTHERIXGHA::\I

one exception mentioned confirmed by figures deriveJ from the Canons, it is

probable that the lost figures would also agree with the figures of the
Canons.
Syncellus, as being in the Greek language, has a special value for the
reconstruction of the lost Greek Canons. That his data are in this case
Jerived from the Canons, not from the C'hrunogmphio, is clear from the way
in which they are introduced, interspersed among historical eYents, and
generally among those events which stand close to th1, notic:es of tlie
different thalassocracies in the Clm,n ici ca iu,nes. 4 ::\Ir. Myres urges that
Syncellus rn LlSt have usetl the C'lu·onog;·11phia for his figures for the :N axians,
because, as he thinks, the N"axians were omitted from the C'ano11s. B11t this
omission is merely an inference from the date assigned to the Eretrians in
the .A.nuenian C'ww,1s, wliich Mr. ::\lyres took as 130.'5, hut which, as ,rn have
seen, shoulil be l:iU. The phraseology in which Ensebins reconled the
variuus thalassocracies differs witlely, and a comparison of the notices in
Syncellus with those in Jerome will show how closely Syncellus followed the
t3xt of his authority. The following tabL:o contains the text of all notices of
thalassocrncies, common both to Syncellus and to Jerome:-
Jero1i'w.
Au3ol oi Kal M,dovEs Lydi mare obtinuerunt.
E8ai\auuonpd.T71cra11 tTr, ~,8'.

. 1
TIEAa<T')'O< {3 e0a,\.a.<T<T01'p0.T'l/<TO.V
ET7J 7r€ •
,
Pela~gi mare obtinuernnt.

TpLToL E0ai\a.cruo,cp&.T1J<Tav T,,rtio mare obtinuernnt

0p~1<ES fr11 o0'. T!,r.,ces ann XVII II.
0p~l(ES E0ai\acra-o1'pd:rovv. Thmces mare olitinuerunt
TiTapTOL €0ai\a(J'(J'OKp0.T1JUa.V Qnartn mare obtinuernut
'pJQw,, KaTCT. OE Ttvas 1rE,u.1rTot, lTr, wy'. lthoJii aui'1 XX III.
<PpVi'e:s rrfµ:rr-ro, E0aAacr<ToKprlT71crav Quinto mare obtinueruut
€Tr, KE', Ka.TO. OE -r,Yas ET'l'f ;-'. Phryge, ann XXV.
'E0aAa,riroKpd-r'Y}11av Al-y,v1]Tat X \'II mate obtinuernnt .\.eginetae.
lT1} ~'. ann xx.
It will be obser\'etl that in six iustances out of the seven tlie two agree
in the relative order of the subject and the ,·erb. The double entry of the
Tl1racian tlialassocrncy, triple in Jerome, is p.ll'ticularly strikiug, and it i~
,-,ig11iticant that the pl1raseology of the two entries varies in the same ,,·ay
in hotli writers. This makes it clear that the entry was alremly duplicated
in Euoebiu~. Such duplicate entries are common: tlie expla11ation probably
is that in addition to the date which he hall himself calculated by dead-
reckoning, Eust.>Lins fuuud in ~ume source a date already correlatell to some
neighbumiug llate in liis table. The only fignres peculiar to Syncellus are
the ubviun..;]y incorrect twelve and se\·en attributed to tl:e Laceclaemonians
arnl Eretrians respecti,·ely, ancl the altcrnati,·e figure six for the Phrygiaus.
\Vith this last we mu:;t compare the alternative ordinal Y for the Rhodians.

4 From tl,e po,irwn of the tha!a,,u,·1a,_1e-; in

text <>f Eu,el,rn, "hich he ha,! behire him. 'l'hi,
relation to 1wi,'..;hl1ounng t'\·e11ts in Syncellu..;, ,vii! l,e fvuuJ u,eful in ,letenmnrn;; Euscl,iu,
\\'(' g,•t a va~ne in1iic,1.tion of their 11o~ition in the <lat,, tor the .\egiud,,11>.
 Important Notice.

FACSIMILE of the CODEX VENETUS

of ARISTOPHANES.
THE SOCIETY FOR THE PROMOTION OF HELLENIC STUDIES

THE ARCHA::OLOGICAL INSTITUTE OF AMERICA.

T HE photographic facsimile of this important

~IS. ,,·as undertaken jointly by the A.rchceu-
lof,6cal ln'.-ititute of _-\merica and the Society for the
Promotion of Hellenic Studie:-., \\·ith the permission
of the ConTnment of His ~Iaje-.;ty the hing of Italy,
and \\·as issued to subscribers Zlt the end of 1902.
The Code"- Venetus ~Iarcianu::-i L'CCCLXXIY
ranks \\·ith the Cudex R~n-ennas as one of the t,n>
mo::;t important manuscripts of _-\ristophanes no\\· in
existence. In age it i:-. some\\·hat later than the
Ran::nnas, belonging· to the latter part of the r 1th
century: in tex.t it is not inferior, though it contains
only se,·en plays a-.; against the ele,-en of its ri,al :
\Yhile in respect of the -;chulia \\·ith ,,-hich ib margins
are filled, it is ,ery greatly superior. It is indeed
especially on account uf the scholia that a reproduc-
tion ,,·Zl:-- called for: for ,,-hile the scholia of the
Ravenna:-;, though less ,aluable, han.: been edited
in full, those of the \-enetus, ffhich are of prime
importance for the critici::-im of _-\ristophane:-;, han_;
nen~r been adequately publi:-;hed Since the ap-
pearance of this ,-olume, the Codex Ra,·ennas has
also been published in facsimile by ~Ir. Sijthoff of
Lei<len at the price of £ r 2 ; and th us the most
important materials for the text of the great comic
dramatist han: been pbce<l beyond the reach of
destruction.
The plates, 3-t4 in number, h~ffe been executed by
the collotype process by the Oxford C ni,·ersity Pr~ss
from negati\·es taken by ~Ir. Bertani of Yenice. .--\
full palzeographical introdu:::tion by ~Ir. T. \\-..--\llen,
Fellcrn· of ( >ueen's College, ( >xford, is prefixed to
the facsimile.
The attention of Scholars and of Librarians 1s
dr~rn·n tu the fact that unly 200 copies \\·ere produced
of this important facsimile, of \\·hich t\nJ-thircls \\·ere
disposed ()f immediately on publication. .--\ fe\\- copies
are still on hand, and application should be made
\\·ithout Lleby in < >rcler that a copy may be secured.
The Facsimile uf the Laurentian Codes. of Sophocles,
produced by the Hellenic Society some t\\'t::nty years
ago, has long been out uf print and is practically
unobtainable. The price at \Yhich copies may be
obtained is £7 in portfolio, or £7 7s. bound in half
muruccu.

(.-\:\' ORDER FUR.\I J:-; :\l'l'E:\'DEU.)

 ~OCIE! Y FUR PR0'.\10[10'.'- OF HELLi:,!C STL'DIES,

ST. =\L-1.RIT','s 5','RE[T, Lo'\"oo:--:, \\'.C.

Please se11d me cup ~/ t!1e Pl1oto-

grap11ic Facsimile ~I the CODEX rTEl\7 ET[lS
of L4ristophaJ!es, issued bl' tlze American
~,/rcll(eological Institute and tl1e Hellellic
Society, price
Ill Portjolio £7 : 0 per cop_y. 0
·"

£7 : 7
"
I e11close remi:!i!llCe jor tl2e tl}il()!t!Jt
'"',,.., Lr: :-:-ED
.;_,;~
 Thi,, may be due, as Ur. Myres sug~esb, to the inclusion in some lists of tl1e
Cariaus as the first tlrnlassocrats, ur it may be explained by tJ1e donhle
reckoning of the Thracians. tlie immediate predecessors of tlie HhOLlians.
"\\' e now come to tlie figures presel'Ved in the two Yersions of the ()h;·oiw•(
c1 1,1onN;, and are immediately confronted by th•: exten~ive .. missions in the
notices preseuteLl to us. That no such omissions existe,l in tlte Greek text
of the C11w,11s is dear from the fact that eaclt thalassocracy is to be funml iu
at least one of the three documents, Syncellus, the Armenian C1rn1;,1s, atHt
Jerome. The omission of sen~ral notice,- from the· .A.nneuiau Yersion nee,l
occasion no snrprise, siuce, as we have seen, omissions are Yery frequeut in
that version. The omi~sions frvm .Jerome do not adruit nf such au easy
Explanation. Either these notices could nut have stood in the same column
with ordinary events in the Greek E11sebius, or there must Im.Ye been some
moti,·e for passing them over when copying the notices of or,liuary events.
A probable explanation is afforded by the difference of inks of which traces
are presen-ed in a few ex.taut mannscripts. Qrdinary notices in Jerome are
iu black ink, but in the Bodleian nrnnuscript, a fifth centnry manuscript of a
fourth century book, all the notices of thalassocracies are in red ink except
that of the Lydians, which is in black, and that of the Cyprians, which is
omitted altogether. The Fleury fragment!> (S), perhaps also of the fifth
century, haw the notice of the Pelasgi in reLl ink, but tl1e notice of tl1e
Lydians anll the second auLl tl1irLl notices of the Thracians in black. Else-
where they are defectirn. The notice of the Pelasgi is also in red ink in :X, a
descendant of S, nnd there is an erased entry in large retl letters at this place
in the Valenciennes manuscript ,A, seventh century), but there is nnw n,,
notice at all of the Pelasgian thalassocracy in that manuscript. Finally. in the
London manuscript (L, tenth century), in which, ns we haYe seen, the general
arrangement of the work has been tran8fonned, the notice of the Lydian
thalassocracy is in red ink, while the notices of the remaining thalasso-
cracies :-ire in black ink, but the fir;;t notice of the Thracian, and the notice:=;
of the Rhodian, Cyprian, an,l Phoenician thalassocracies, are maLle to stretch
across the columns, wherea,, onliuar_\- events are confine<l to a space marked
out for them. "Te may, therefore, safely concln,le that all the thalassocrn-
eies were originally entere,l by Jerome in re,l ink. It is in:possible to say
wliether this use of re,l ink goes back to Eusebius. Jerome seems to assert
in his preface,5 that the alternation bet\\'een re,l nml black columns "·as
introduced by him to reme,ly a confu-,ion that ha,l arisen in the Greek
manuscripts. But it Lloes not follow frnm this that the distinction of colours
was altogether new. Anyhow, the red ink in which the notices of thalassu-
cracies were written:nrn:=-t indicate something which distinguished them from
other entries in Eusebins, allll which pre\-etitcd them from being copied ont
along with the other entries. It is p,)~-;ible that they were entered by Enscbius
in the 111argiu. This would explain their omis-.ion by Jerome even after
tl1e place where the arraugement of the wurk is altere,l (011 u.c.). The

H :S.-YOL. XXYII. G
 J. K. FOTHERI~UI-LDI

theory that these notices were inserted by Jerome separately from the uther
entries will explain not only the umission of some thalassocracie:-. but the
displacement of others. "\Ye shall see reason for thinking that the Lydian
thalassocracy ha5 been displaced not merely in relation to tl1e columns of
figures ( the Jilo re!7nom 1,1 ;,, but in relation to other entries in the column for
events. The Rhodian thalassocracy has been inserted in the colnmn which
Eusebius usually reserves for sacred history, and the Aeginetan tl1alassocracy
has been inserted in tlte place which ouglit, apparently, to belong to the
:Xaxian. The use of red ink or ,vhatever feature in Eu-sebins is repre;;ented by
the red ink in Jerome was probably intenlled tu iwlicate that the tlialassocrncies
belonged to the chronological framework of the book or at least formed a
chronological system by themselves; it at all e\·ents differentiates tl1em frorn
the ol'llin:uy isolated events that appear in the two columns of events. This
being so, we shoulrl expect the intcrrnls between the dates assigned to the
thalassocracies to currespoml with the recordeJ duratiorn uf the thalassu-
~rac1es.
But in the Armenian Canons there is not a- &ingle instance where the
intervals given in the text exactly agree with the differences between the dates
either of two consecuti\-e or two more distant tltalassocracies. Iu the general
confusion of the chronology of this .-ersion, such a discrepancy need not
alarm us. The case ,rith Jerome's nrsion is slightly different. The critical
apparatus now arnilablc for the text uf this version is sume,1 hat larger thar,
that possessed by Sclwne. The dates gi\·en iu the Budleia11 mauuF<cript for the
t halassocracies differ from Schijne's in six instances. Tims the Bollleian
11ianuscript has 101G fur the first notice and 1034< for the thin[ notice of the
Thracian thalassocracy, llOU for the Rhodian, ll:23 for the Plirygian. 1234 fur
the Egyptian. awl 134<, for the LesLiau. Of these tig1ires all except the first
are well supported by other rnanmcripts and are certainly tlie trno text
uf Jerome. For the first notice of the Thracian thalassocracy the hest
wanuscripts otl1er titan the Bodleian yary between 1010, Hlll, and 11112.
The Bo,lleiatt 111:rnnscript als,) omits tlte Cyµrian confelleracy, but there can
be 110 doubt that Schone is right in inserting it and that he lias insert8Ll it
against 1he right date. The Bodlcian manm,cript further a~signs se\·eutce11
instead of eigltteen year,; to the ~lilesians, but it rneets witlt no support, and
is certainly i11 l'rrnr. If we adopt the readings reeommcnrletl abo\·e, we
fi11d two instances i11 each ,,f ,rhiclt the length uf a series uf tlt:da-;soeracies,
obtaiuetl hy ailtling their imli\·itlual dmati,ms, agrees with tlte intc1Tal
between tlie date:; assigned for tlte cunnnencemeut awl the close of tlte
series. But in onler tu effect this, we 11rnst a,lopt the figure ::l:~. ,1·liicl1. as \r,~
lian· seell, wa,; probably borrowed by F from the Greek, fur tl1e d11ration of
tLe Cyprian tbala~sncracy. and tho tignre 01 a-;si.~uell by the Armenian Yersi,m
tu the Caria11 tlta!ass,H.:racy, the duration uf \\·liidt is 11ot ~pec1rie,l by ,Jcrurne.
Tims from the beginui1,,g of the Rl10dia11 to the cud of the Cyprian tltala;;,soc-r:1cy
the umnber of years ,-ltould be :23+:2."i+:3:2=Sil= 11SO-J 11)11, and from tit;,
Leginning nf the }Iilc,ian to the end of the C'arian thalassocracy the nurnber
shuul,_l be l,',; + ol = i'!I = 13-1-i' -120:-;, Tltere i,; tl1erefore reason for re()'arrliiw
,'j •':°I
 0~ THE 'LIST OF THAL\.SSOCRACIES' IX ECSEDirs b3

1100, 1180, lt6\ 13417, as not merely ,Jerome':-; dates, but Eu,;ebins's, on the
assumption that in Eusebim the interrnls between tl1e dates agreed "-ith the
specified durations in each case. It is now possible with the assistance of the
figures already verified by tlJA agreement of the Armenian Glu·o,iog,·1!111tia
with Syncellns to reconstrnd the earlier part of the chronological scheme of
Eusebius as follows:-
D
Date m ye:u ...
,LltlOil lJ.,te H L
o! Abnltaw

LLyJ1. g~ S44 1172

I I.
PPlas~i. ~~ (l:}tj lfJSt_i
I! I.Thra,·e,. ;-g 10:21 9(f;,
IV. Rhurlii. :2:3 1100 9lti
Y. Phryg,·,. ~5 112:3 s~,:i
YI. (_'yp1ii. :):2 11 J '3 5dS
YI!. Phueui,:e,. !;, ]181) s:itj
YJII. Aegyptii. J''•J 1:2:25 ;~1
IX. ll!Jles1i. lS l:2d3 ; ,:15
X. (_'ares. 61 J:286 j:](1
XI. L·sbii. tjS '.') 1:3 ➔ 7 ti6fl

It will be obserrnLl that while the dates given in Jerome a11d the
Armenian do not agree in a single instance, the dates gi\·en aboYe, which
have been made tu agree with Jerome in four instances out of seYen, also
agree with the Armenian in one instance out of fin:. Furthermore, except
in the case of Jerome's date for the Pelasgi, this table nowhere implies
that an event shonlLl ha,-e been sl1iftetl by more than ten years either
in the .Armenian or in Jerome·s \-er.,i,-,n from the date supposed to haYe
been assigned by Eusebius, a11Ll in tl1c majority of caces tl1c irnplied
shifting is very slight. Jerome in hi-, preface seems to fluggest that some
such confusion had already arisen i11 copies of the Ca;1,;n,. and, as \Ye
have seen, it is an exceedingly common error so l,)ns· as it <lues 11ot affect
the order of notices in a column. That a shifting of tw" yE,ar-; has taken
place at the beginuing of the series is manifest. I1111neLliatdy after the
notice of the Lydian thalassncracy, against the s:ime date 8-!::?, ,\-e read · }lycenis
post necem Aegisti Orestes reguaYit mm. X\~ .. , while s'-',-'-'utee11 ye:1rs later,
against 850, 6 we read' }lyce11is regna\·it Tisamenns ±i.lius Ore;;ti--.' It follow,-
tlterefore that either the accession of Tisame11us has been f-hifte,l ,lownwanb
or the accession of Oreste,;, aml with it the Lydian thab-.:,,,cracy, has been
shifted upwanls.
The Pelasgic thalas,-ocracy stan,ls in the Armenian C1!11 ,11, uext before the
Peloponnesian inrnsion of Attica, ,Yhich is followed by a ll<)tice of the Amazon
im-asion of Asia; in Jerome it comes much later. ~uw there are two
notices of Peloponnesian invasions of Attica about tl1is place in Jero1m·.
h11t t.he Olle tliat stands against the year !)37 is tb· oue that i,-
fvllowerl by the n<ltice ,,f the Amazot1s. If then the Armenian n,1st011 has
retaiueLl the original order of the,-e 1wtices, E11sebius rnnst ltav,· placed the
Pela,;gic thalassocracy in or shortly before D!37, a date which agrees\\,_. ll with tl1e

6 :Su tLe ]l._,,lle:an rnannscnpt. The Fleaiy f,agmeub ha,-,; ::,~11.

Ci 2
84 J. K. FOTHEHIXGR.:\.:U

one ,,ugge,,teLl in the table abo\·e. It will be rememberetl that the clrnuge in
tli(• orcler of events which must here haw taken place in ,Jerome is highly
improbable except on the theory here a.lnmeed that the thalassoc-racies ,rere
added after the other events had been reconled in their proper place:;.
Tlie erroneous Llate for the Thracians in Jerome may be explained on the
supposition that his scribe entered the event against the figure x·rnI or
XXIII insteml of XXVIII in the column of Lacedaemonian kings, an easy
mistake in a confessedlv . hash·. work.• The secuml and thirLl dates for tlie
Tl1raeian:--, to which no numerals are attachetL olwiously do not belong to tl1e
series of dates 1111der discussiou. The date 112.:;, which is only two years
in error, needs no explanation. Sch11ne·s elate 112:~, deriwcl fro1n the
wortliless Bern rnauuscript. is ouly rigl1t by accideut. The date ll.j2
woul,l seem to liarn been :=<l1ifted a little further than usual, but it shonltl
be obsel'\'t'1l tliat F bas 1150, and that there is a very long notice umler
tl1t" yectr 11+2 i11 ,Je1ome, ,d1ich may han' made it difficult for '-ome of
l1is copyi,-ts to begin a new notice under 11-t:::i. 123-4. instead of 1220
for the Egyptians may be the Hth year of Psamrnis instead of the 9th
year of Osortlion: such a change could be malle the mure easily if the
notice original!:· stooLl in the margin, against the Egyptian column. It
is interesting to obsenc that Scholle qnotes ABFP in favour of thi,; passage
stamling in the margin in ,Jerome's version instea<l of in the column for
e\·ents. The substitution of 1:2% for 1~8G admits of an eyually simple
explanation. ,Jerome has erroneously entered the death of Bocchoris at the
liamls of Sa bacon against the first:, ear of Sebichos (l~D-4.) insteaLl of against
tlie fir,,t ye8r of Sa bacon ( 1282). The Carian thalassocracy, which is the next
entry, appear:s tu lia ve been sl1ifted along with the death of Bocchoris. Thus
it retains it,- proper place in relation to uther entries in the same column, bnt
i,- dated tl'11 years to,, late. That both errors were made by Jerome, not
Ensebills, is prove,! by a reference to the ~\.rmenian Yersion, where both
e11trie..; appear iu tl1eir proper place.
So far then a'3 eacl1 sncces,-ive thalassocracy i;; note<l in Jerome's C!lno11.,.
tltere is no difficulty in restoriug the text of Eusebius aml explainiug
tlie error,; tliat kwe crept into it. The remainrler of the series can best
be restcm:cl by beginui11g at the end and working backwards. It is clear
frum the wurds in 1d1ich tl1e la~t t!talas,-11cracy ( that of the Aeginetansj
i~ euteretl in the C(/111111~, clusi11g with' us•111e a,l transitum Xerxis,' that the
list was rnea1tt to end with the expedition of Xerxes. This last thalassocracy
la-,kd ten years, as is proveLl by the concmTent k,tim,my of the Armenian
Cluo,W!Jn1p/i I//. the Armenian l'11110,1 ,, a11tl Syncellus, and it therefore>
f,,ll,,w,; that ,Jero11w·s ve1sion is ;;er:onsly in error in making it begin in
130,'i (508 B.<'.). The 1late gi\·en in tlte ~.\rmenian Co,1,,n,. 13:H ( =485 B.C. ),
i~ exactly ten yean bL·fnn· tl1e date of Plataea aull )Iycale as presen-ed
in Jerotllt'. tllt)U'..:-\l lnily ti1·e ytar;, befur,' tl,e tl.1te as:-;igned to tlie destrnction
of At hen,. It i~ tlt,·r"t::f,ire c- ,n~istPnt with tit,_• pri11cipk~ u11 which Eu:,;ebiu,.:
arrang·ed Iii;; chronulogy, anti, as we :shall -,ee pre~el!tly, it is co11fin11eLl b\·
other figure,;. Iu Synccllns the notice of this tliah1.c;socracy immc,liatel,v
follows a notice of Gelou, which is place,! in .Jerome agaiust the year 15:311,
a piece uf evidence of little import:rnce in itself, but ,·alti:-tblc as contirming
tlie Armenian C11n•,ns. Takiug this date a,-; a starting poi11t, arnl \Yurkiug
with the figures ,)f tlie Armeuia11 Cli,·u,10g,'ilj1lu·11, which \H: han: fouwl to b~
cu11rirmed by fignres derivetl from tlie C//111,,u;, \Ye obtain tlie following
,e11es : -
11,He rn , e,tl'~
, ,f .\..lJra'ham

XI\'. Lae,·,Llcrn"mi. l ,,04

X\'. Xaxii. 10 1:;00
X YI. Ere ti i,·nse,. 15 1;;1,;
X \'II .\e,"rnetn.e. 10 15:.31

Thi;; gi,·es us for tlie Lacedaemonians a date differing by ,me year

only, and for the Eretrians a date differing by two years only. from those
of the Armenian Cmu,11s. As we have alrea,ly seen, small errors like these
are the almost necessaff result of the method in whicl1 the C11;w,1s are
constructecl. It is also important to ohserrn that the date thus obtained.
for the X axians differs by two years only from Jerome's date for the Aeginetan~.
This renders it probable that Jerome or his amanuen;,is, after taking hi-,
eye off his Greek original, while reLl ink wa.;; being snb-stitnte,l for black,
-allowed. it to be caught by an eutry similai to the one which he wishe,l
to insert, anll so the Aeginetan thalassocracy w,t-s entered where the Xaxian
thalassocrncy should have been. It is also possible tliat the entry may
have been made either in .Jerome or in the Greek manuscript nsed by him
under 1.508 in<otead of 1.')()G, because a long entry under l,j05 0ccupieJ
the whole space belonging to the years 1-50."i, 1506, awl 1507.
It is difficult to determine with certainty the dates assigned by Eusebius
to the Phocaean and Samiau thalassocracies. The dates 1-±-H aml 14:SU in
the Armenian Canons agree so ,Yell with the 4-J, years' duration of the
Phocaean thalassocracy that it is impossible to suppose that they contain an_,.
serious error. The date 1-H 1 receiws continuation as au approximate date
from S_yucellus, who mentions the Phocaean thalas-;,1c1"ctc_v i111me,liately after
the seven wise men ;'.14:38 in .Terome) and immecliately before the Nemean
games (H-!4 in Jerome). \Ye are therefore compelled to abanLl,m ,Jerome s
68 years for the Lesbians, while the 9li years of a ;;iu!,;le Annenian rnannscri pt
are, as ::\fr. Myres obserws, cci.lcnlated from the tlates a%igne,l to the
thalassocracies in the Armenian version, and are therefore of ll·J n1 l ne for the
text of Eusebius. At the same time ,ve ha,·e nu e\·ideuce for the duration
of the Samian thabssocracy apart from the date a~signe,_l to it in the
Armenian Ca,w11'1. ~-\.cconlingly, the ltate.s 144:1 aml 148G c:umot b0 checke,l
by means either of earlier or of later dates in the serie::;, awl a-, the Armenian
Cununs cannot be trusted for an exact year, b:)th ,!ates may contain
a slight error. In any case, one of the two must be wrong, since, as they
stand, they would give a <luration of 45 instea,l of 4-t yeMs for the Phocaean
86 J. K. FOTHERIXGHA~I

thalassocracies. The Samian thalassocracy i,, certainly connected with the-

tyranny of Polycrate,, which Jerome dates HS+,s but, as 1Ir. )lyres observes,
this date was probably taken by Eusebius from some source other than bis
list of thalassocracies. It is also interesting to obserYe that the notice of the
Samian thalassocracy appears in the Armenian Canons between that of
Pythagoras ( 1487 in ,Jerome) and that of Hipparchns ( 1--1-89 in .Jerome). By
combining the,-e last two dates with those quoted aborn from Syncellus for
the Phocaean thalassocracy, we get H4-:3 arnl H87 or 1--1-H and 14-88 as the
dates of the Phocaean and Samian thalassocracies, of which the former pair
most closely approximate to the dates given in the Armenian Canons; but
the calculation is rather precarious, and we must be content to leaw
the exact dates assigned. b_v Eusebius to these thalassocracies an open
question.
"\Ye are now ill a po::;ition to complete our table of thalassocracies,
leaving the exact duration doubtful in two instances. The complete list will
be as follow~ :-
Date in , ear~
DnratioH Dute B c.
uf .Abriham

I. Lydi. 92 84-1 lli2

I I. Pt•1asgi. 85 1,313 lOSO
III. Thrnc,, 79 1021 995
IY. Rho,lii. 2:J l1011 910
V. Phryge,. 2.-1 11:!:J 89.3
n. l'ypni. 32 11-18 868
Yll. Pl1oeui, e-. ±5 llSO 836
VIII. APgyptii. -1:3 12:2;, 791
IX. ;1[ih·si1 18 1268 7-18
X. Ca1t•'-l. 61 12Stl 730
XL L,·sbii 96 ( ') 1!347 669
XII. Phoeaci•n.-,e--;. H 1-1-1:3 ,,, 5,3 \ I)
XIII. Samii. 1i ( I) J-B7 (') 5:!9 I')
XIV. Lact•rt1e-1noni1. 2 1501 512
XY. Xaxii. 10 150tj 510
XYI. Eretri"nses 15 l;,16 500
xn1. At<ginetae 10 1531 -185
-15tl -475
69,

It i"' i11q1,1rLant to notice that tLe series thns obtained is calcnlated

e11tirely from tig11res derived ultimately from the Cwwn,, the Cluonogmphia
ha\-ing been u,e1l for corroboration only; but as the series accords almost
exactly with the extant fignres of the C'hr11,1ng,·111)7t1(1, it is probable that
it correctly ,-,upplics the tigures missing from the surviving manuscripts.
If we wisl1 to go behind Eusebius to his authorities, we must set aside
the dates ~ive11 ab,Ae aud. conce11tratc onr attention on the durations, aml
we 1m1'it ren1e111h::-r that the series onght to end, not in 475 B.C., bnt in
481) r:.r·., the trne date of the expedition of Xerxes. It ought in consequence
t<> cxtewl b:1ck t > 1177 1:.c., unly four .;rears after the date as'-'icrned
0
by
•

S :,;,-, tl,,, l\n llei111 awl llerlin lll~llltS< rq,ts nro ,

 OX THE 'LI~T OF THALASSOC'RACIE:-,' IX EC:-\EBIC:-,. 87"

Eusebius to the fall of Troy; and one is tempte<l to suppose that the
compiler ganJ some explauation of the three intervening years, so as to
bring his li;,t back to the fall of Troy itself, and to complete a total of
7UO years.
It will be observe,l tliat from the Plwcaeans ,mwards the duration of
t•ach thalassocracy, according to the figures gin•n in the table abow,
correspomls with its duration as obtained by ~Ir. ~lyres. Nor is it possible
to ,iispute the historical facts with which Mr. ~lyres connect; each of these
t halassocracies. It "ill also be obserrnd that there is a tendency for a thalasso-
cracy to en,.l in some disaster to the power that held it. Thns the Phocae::m
thalassocracy ends in the capture of Phocaea by the Persians in .5:H B.C.,
the Samian thalassocracy with the death of Polycrates in or about .j} i B.C.,
and the Eretrian thalassocracy with the fall of Eretria in 4!)0 B c. The
Lesbian period should cover the years 67 4-.578 B.C., the period in which tlie
ancients were accustomed to place the glorious names belonging to Lesbos,
inclmling Lesches at the be,;inniug, followed by Terpantler, Arion, Pittacus,
Sappho, and Alcaeus. It is not eaRy to explain a Carian sea-power in
7:33-6i 4 B.C., but it may be connected with the Carian mercenaries in the
service of Psammetichus. There is, however, no difficulty in explaining a
Milcsian thalassocracy in 75;3_7;3.3 B.C. It is the age of colonization. The
beginning of the thalassocr.1cy is connected in Eusebius with the foundation
of X aucratis, aml is immediately followed by a notice of Thales. The notice
of the foundation of Trapezus 9 in ,.3.5 B.C. probably belongs to the same
system of chronology, with the accuracy of which we are not concerned. It
is important tv note that the foundation of N aucratis in Egypt is the starting
point of this thalassocracy. The compiler seems to have regarded this eYent
as a symptom of the downfall of Egyptian sea-power and the establishment of
a )Iilesian power in its place, and it is significant to obsene that the
Milesians are in the list preceded by the Egyptians. -we ha Ye thus three
successive thalassocracies, the Egyptian, the .Milesian, and tl1e Carian,
:_issnmed from eYidence (more or less slight) of power in the Egyptian
delta.
The importance of the Egyptian thalassocracy seems to lie mainly in its
tltHrnfall. The period assigned to it, 7%-7-5:3 B.c., is not marked by any
events in Egyptian history, famous among the Greeks, except perhaps the
reign of the Egyptian Hercules (79D-7D2 B.C. in Eusebius) and the reign of
Bocchoris, ,vho seems to have enjoyed a celebrity quite ont of relation to his
real importauce, and whom Eusebius dates 77D-73."i B.C. It is interesting to
obserrn that the 43 years wl1ich Eusebius assigned to this thalassocracy,
according to the text as restored in this article, correspond closely with the
4-J, years which he attribute3 to Bocchoris. On the other hanll. the llates
both of the Egyptian Hercules and of Bocchoris profess to be ba,-ed on
Manetlw, whose system of chronol"gy does not seem to have come into
genernl n,e till after the time of Diodorus, from whom the list of thalas-

'' So th,· j,rm,nian \·e1siu11 ,1n,l Syn~elln,. Jerome has 'C'yzi,·tb. ·

 ,J. K. F<1THEHl:\UHA~l

~11crac1es is LlerincLl. It may tlierefure be necessary to ~d aside the,-e

,;nichronisms as mere coinci,lences.
· "\Yith the Phoenician thabssocrncy we appear to be uuce more upun safe
ground. The perioLl 8Jl-7nG B.C. contains the dates assigneLl to the
foundation of Carthage by Trogu-; Pompeius, Yelleius Paterculu~. Timae11s,
an,l Servius. 10 It ought also to include the date cited by Josepl1ns 11 from
Tyrian sources. He gives a detailed scheme uf Phoenician clll"uunlogy from
Hiram to Pygrnalion, and a total of H:3 years arnl 8 months for the perioLl
from the buililiug of the temple at Jerusalem t,1 the foundation of Carthage.
According to the receive,l chronology, Solornou·s temple was begnn in 1012
and cornplete,J iu ltJQ.j B.L'., but it is clear from Assyrian references to Ahab
anLl Jehu tl1at these dates ate 4:3 years too high. This would re,luce the
'l\riau L1ate of the foumlatiou of Cartliage to 1012 or 100.3--1:3-14:3=826 or
S lH B.C. The period in which the most famous event of Phoenician
maritime history falls was naturally made a perioLl of Phuenician tlrn,las-
s,1cracy. But before the Phoenician period all is darkne:--s. The only
ta11gib!e en,nt that iL seems possible to c01rnect with nuy of the earlier
se,l-pvwers is tl1e Thracian conrlnest of Bebrycia or Bithynia, \\'hich
Eusebius places in D7 :2 IF'., and which therefore falls ,1 itl1 in the Thracian
tlialas-;ocracy. It is at all events clear that tl1e list as Eusebins fouml it was
cuirelated to tl1e general chronological tradition which he follows, and the
presumption is that the list was arr<>nged to conform to ,ome of the better
kuown ,lates i11 tliis tradition aml that utlier dates were maLle to conform t 1)
the list.
It is Lliffie11lt to ,-;ay wlteu the list was drawn up. }Ir. 11Iyre<s argurne11ts
tor a tilth ccutury date are far from cum·incing; onr list bears little resemblance
to any -;clieme presuppose,l iu the uarrntive of TlrncydiLle,-. 1" Hi,s :-ketch
of nautical history mcludes western as well as eastern sea-power, and wliere it
gi,·es date,; they do 1wt tally with th,J,.,e of uur list. He begins ,vith a
Corintliian sea-power, anLl mentions the building of triremes for the Samians
by a Corinthian ship-builder at a ,late (7ti-,I. D.L'.) which the list places in tlie
Carian period. The Corinthian sea-power woul,l seem, according to h1--,
narrative, to lw.ve been continnons. It is trne that he knows of Ionian f>ea-
power •later' than tl1e Cvrinthian in tl1e time of Cyrns and Carnbpes, thus
tacitly denying a ~Iilesian sea-power in the eighth century B.C. Of the twn
Ionian state~ that he meutions, the ~amiaus are indeed connecte,l both by
Thucydides aml by the exta1tt list witl1 the reign uf Cambyses, but the only
event that lie cuuuects with the Phucaeans by name, the foundlllg of 1Ias"alin,
1·alis onhide the perio(l of their ,-;ea-power as gi\·eu in the list. It is possible
that the surrny of sea-puwer iu Thucy,lides may liave sugge'-'ted the idea uf
framin 6· a list .,f thalassocr,1cies. I1t tliat case the present list, which is not
maile to conform tu Tl111cy,litles, is uot the earlie:-;t. But it seems Yain to
pursue the in,Jliiry further. Thi-; artide will have served it~ purpose if its

11 , ••• \p. i. 1,, ]., .

. c i. 1 :;.
 OX THE 'LI::iT OF TH.\LA:--:--OCTIACIE:-:i. I~ ED,EBil~:-:i. 89

attempt to <letermiue the tignre,-, in the list which Euseb:us derin·Ll frotn
Diudorns is successful. I do not regard the list as of any great historical
value. There may be rnmething behirnl it which has not yet been Lliscu\'ered;
but iny11iries into its value are bouml to be fruitless, unless the restoration of
the list is regarded as a problem of textual criticism, irnlependeut of hic.torical
explauation,;.
.J. i{. FuTHERI.\GHA.:11.
 PEPARETHUS AND ITS CO!~AGE

[PLATE IY.]

THE Plate which illustrates this article represeuts a series of silver

coius, Nos. 1-8, which bear a strong family likeness. They are all tetra-
drachms of the Euboic standard, and each displays on the ob,-erse a peculiar
bunch of grapes which would have excited even the info,ntine ridicnle of the
humblest painter of Dutch fruit-pieces. Two of these coins, Pl. IV. 2 and 8,
both recent acquisitions of the British }luseum, are unpublished, and present
new types. X us. 9-11 are bronze coins of Peparethus.
In type and style tlie most remarkable of the1,e coins is Pl. IV. 1 =
Fig. A. This piece was fonnd in the island of Cos, bnt }Ir. Barclay Head,
who fir.st made it known i11 1801,1 attributed it in a very ingenious and learned
paper to Cyrene. This attribution carried with it the assignment to Cyrene of
the types here tigmeLl as PL IY. 3 (and 5), 4 (and 6), because all three
types were found to be united together by a concatenation of dies. In a
paper printed in tl1e ~Yumisnu,tic Chronicle,~ shortly after l\lr. Head's, I ven-
tured to point out-without suggesting any better attrihution-that the great
difficulty in this classification was that all the known coins of the African
city bore as their type the silphium-plant, or, at least, a leaf or seed
representative of that plant: it seemed difficult to fit into the Cyrenian
currency a buuch of grapes, a winged figure, a helmet arnl a head of
Herakles. A distingnisliecl numismatist, M. \Yadt1ington, to whom at the
time. I mentionhl the proposed attribution, told me that he thought, in
spite of ~Ir. Head';; excellent article, these grape-coins would turn out to be
Euboean or )Iaceclouian.
Writing in this Jonm11l in 180i ~Ir. Hill suggesteLl the Macedonian
Chalcidice as the probable home of the coins. About 1904, a specimen with
the helmet n•\·ersc was procnretl by its owner near Salouica. Subsequently
)Ir. A. J. B. \Yace obtained in Scopelos, i.l'. the ancient Peparethus, the
island lying beyond the coast of Thessalian )lagnesia, specimens of the
helmet arnl Herakle;; reverses; and in 19Uti another specimen of the
Herakles was slwwn at the British Museum by its owner, who stated that
it wa-, found in the same island.

' I 892. ]' :!O.

 PEPAHETHr~ AXI> ITS COIXAGE. 91

Fiually, in 1806, the British Museum acquiml the coin Pl. IY. 2 =
Fig. C. Thi-, coin bears the letters f1E already seen on the bronze coins of
Peparetltu;;, displays like them Dionysiac types, and was found in Scopelos.
It~ attribntion to Peparethus is, thn:0, hardly open to doubt, arnl the coin has
1111mismatic importance as showing that this island coined sil\"er, as well as
bronze money. and that its coinage began somewhat early in tl1e tifth century.
Unfortunately tliis inscribed coin cannot be held to p,·0ce that the grape-
,·,)ins previomly referred to belong to Peparetlrns, for tlie buncl1 of grapes ou
ih obver!'-e is not identical with the bunches on the other coins. It seems.
however, to strengthen their attribution to this island, an attribution first
;;t1ggeste,J by the provenance of some of the speci11Hms. In this paper I shall
therefore ,·enture to adopt as a probable hypothesis the Peparethian origin of
all the grape-coins. except, perhaps, in tbe case of the coin PL IY. 8i3
The island "·hich chose the bunch of grapes as its principal badge,
though lesc- famous tlian Naxos or Thera, was in legend declared to have been
cnlonize,l by Cretans nmler an appropriately named leader, Staphylos, the
son of Dionysos and Ariallne. Dionysos was its principal divinity, and
Staphylos is still the name of a bay of the island.• It is first mentioned in
the Homeric Hymn to Apollo. In antiquity it was well wooded; it grew
cum arnl olives and exported a· well-known wine. 5 At the present day it
sends a light, red wine of its production to Constantinople and the Black
Sea ports. There were three towns in the island, namely, Peparethus, the
most important place, now called, like, the \\ hole islanll, Scopelos; Selinus,
and a harbour-town, Panormus.
Coming 110w to the more precise attribution of our coins, it is probably
uot rash to assume that the chief minting-place was the town Peparethus.
\Ve may assign to it the inscribed coin with the seated Dionysos, ~ o. Y. 0
(Pl. IY. 2) au,l the brouze coins, Pl. IY. !J-11. One would suppose also that
the coin, Pl. lY. l, with a fine figure-subject (Fig. A) was likewise issued from
the same rniut. But to what mint are we to assign the Herakles-head, the
helmet and the ivy-wreath, each of which lrn.s a buuch ut' grapes as its
obverse '. There seems some llifficulty in assiguing so mauy reverse-types to
the same town dnring a period (apparently) of about forty ur fifty years; and

· Pepar,•tlrns is ll<>t the only proYen.,m·,·
record,·J. for thes,· c,)ills. They hal',· l1ee11
found in Cns. in ::\Ltce,loni<t (Salouica), and in
Thessaly. Co, m.,y ~.,fely l.,e rulell out as the
mint-place of the,e ,,oiu,, for tht•\· in no w,11'
amalg;mat,· with the aln·,1,ly wdl-kn0\n1 serie·,
of Coan rnouey. S0111,· <:<>,1,t-town of Thes,aly,
or, Ul'ttl'l', .,f ~Ia,·,·1]0111,t W<>t1l,l h,l\'e a fair
-' On Pe1,aretlrns, see Bn1,i,rn, ,;,•orniphie
,·o,i Griaht,1/ancl, ii. pp. 386 I. : C'. Frc,lri<'h,
• Ski,1thos uwl Peparethos. i11 .llitthed. ,,r,:h.
Ind. (.-\them) xxxi. (1\106) p. llll f. and r2fer-
ences there ; cp. 1Yace. 1&. I' l ·211 f. · ~kiathos
nntl Skope1os'; )lurray\ Jlu1ullio11/:J:)t' Urcr,_·,,.
T•P· \131 f.
5 On the wine, Demo;,th. [,, L.,u,t. p. \135 ;

claim to tlw eoins. if the att1i1..ution to
Peparethus is unacceptable. The helmct-
rcwr-,, i, rather distindinly ~Iaee,loniau
awl th,· \\ inge,l tignrP (Fig . •\.) ha, been
COlll[',ll'C<I (Ly ~Ir. Hill. .T.H.S. 1S\1'i. ]'. 79)
with the wiugr•1l tignrP ,, ith ,t \', 11·,tt 1t ou ,t
Macc,lonian (')min.
Soph. I'hiloct. 548; Heracl. Pout. Fr'.lgrn. 13;
a\th,·11. i. p. 29 a awl f; Pllll.1, If S. Xi\',
,. 76.
" The Roman numerals refer to the <lcs:rip-
tin list of the coin-; given at the c11<l ,,f tl11s
fllti1•'.l•.
 W_AH\YICK \\'llUTH

I :1t fir:;t thought tlrnt thL' Hernklcs ,rntl hd111et typ._.-;-specirneu, uf wl1iclt
were ascertained by :'!Ir. "~ace to ha\'e been fuUllll on tl1e f-ite uf Selinus-
rn1ght be attributed to that town. Thi,- pnwena11ce, !10,\'cver, in a small
ishml, is not decisive as to origin, and beariug iu rniud the ,rny in which
tliis "eries of coins is linked together by the interchange of die:-;, I think tlie
safest cour:;.e is to .;;uppose thrrt they ,rern all struck at a :;.iugle 1uiut-place,
namely the tO\rn Peparethns.
The only exceptiou lllay be the coin :No. VI. iPl. IY. 1:,;, It has a
specially marine character. On the ob,·erse, four dolpbins are aLlded to tl1e
simple bunch of grapes, al](l the reverse is a dolpbiu-ri(ler. These types
might suit the harbour-town Panormus, but, on the other hand, this coin-at
present uniL[Ue-is stateLl to liave been fouml in Thessaly, at Demetrias, near
Yolo, and the additiou of tl1e dolphin-; to the bnnch of grapes, ,Yhich seems
to be the badge of Peparetlrns, rather suggests that tl1e coin Lloes not bel::rng
to this island but to an adjacent island or, perhaps, to some corist-town of
::\Iagnesia. \\'here Dionysiac types are already known from the coins.

Il11tc (I ,al tz;1"-"--l Lm·e already mentioned that ,.,e,·eral coins in om

series show a cnrious coucatenation of dies. The importauce of systematically
studying the identities of (lie,- has lately become rno1e widely recognized:
Dr. Ri_:gling, for instance, in his recent aclmirable monograph ou the coinage
of Terina has carefully notPf1 the relationship of the rnrious dies. and gainerl
tliereby good clues to the exact clirunological sequence of the coins. In tlie
present cnse, it ,rill be fouml that the rlie for the grnpes-ob,·erse of tlie
,,·ingecl figure coiu (Xo. I.,, lim, been use(l for the obverse of a Herakles coin
(Xn. II. A). Again, the grapes-die found in conjunction with the Herakle3
eorn, II. D is used as tlie obverse uf Ilf. (tl1e helmet type>. aucl also for the
obver:-e of IV. 1 the i,·y-wreath type). Tlie relation of the dies may be set
forth as follow--, identical letters indicating iLlentical dies:-

:'.\o. I. · \\'iuged tigure,: 01,c. a. Ra. .\.

II .•\.. 'Hc1aklf':--, a, n.
II. n. Herakles .. ;:3. B.
I[f. 'Hel111d .. /3. (_· .
l \'. I ,·y-1, reatli. .. ;3. J) •

Tl1is ex:11ni1J:1tiu11 of the die, sng_s:·e;;ts that -Xo~. I a11,l II..\. :,re 11early of
the ~ame date. In the Hernkles-setics. II. D i, later (but nut much later)
tlian II. A. The helm,·t-type HT. and the i,·y-wrl'atl1 typl' IY. are both
cuutempurary, or nearly cuute111puiary, with the Hl'rakl,__.,,_type II. D.
-Xo. \'. :--eated Di,,1Jy-.;o, and ~, •. YI. dolphin-rider dn 11"t share m
thi., i11tercl1auge uf llies.
~n. I. ·l'l. n·. l=F1~ .•-\ 1fr. Hill !ta,- well sngge;..te,l ~ tl1e 11ame of
Ag·un-a 11wll' p!rsu11ifi,.,ltioH c1)!Jl'SJH)1Jtling t,, ~ik,:-for the re\er,e type.
This 1i ttle rn 1111111g fis:·11 r, i~ exc-c11t, ,l 11 it!, all the 111i11nteu,·s, c,f gem-
0 0
engraYi11g, but i,; foll of elastic vigour. In some respects it recalls the
Poseidon l'i' the coins vf Pvseidonia' aml has some affinities with the Kike of
of Elis H arnl the rnnuing ;\ike of Cyzicus.1'' All these are early coins, and I
think uur _\.g"n ca11 hanlly be later than cin:. R.C. 5U11--!!JU. The type is,
appareutly, not Dionysiac, nIHl it is hard to rnggest tl1e reason of its choice.
X o. II. ·Pl. IY. 3 aml .j : Fig. B_. The Hernkles head lias an aspect
unusual on coin:-::. It is llelicately treated but liac; the bulging eyes and
sim!Jeriug ~lllile fouml iu represeutations of Hernkles 011 early vases and other
monuments. It may be cnmparecl in style ,rith the Diouysos head on an
archaic cuin ,,f Sicilian X a rns. 11 This type (in its earliest manifestation,
Pl. IY. ;3 nrnst be placeLl ~oon after tlie Agon coin :X o. I. ;i, of \Y Iii ch it has
borrowell the ob,·er::-e-dil:'. Perhaps tl1e elate is cin·. RC. 400. The variety of
this coin PI. IY . .'i , where the ubverse-Llie is changed so as to present three
bunches of gral'es. rnust be somewhat later, n.c. JDU--J.S:5: 1: •
.::S-o. III. ·p1. IV. J and 6) introduces a new rewrse-tl1e helmet, but
the obverse die is borrowed from No. II. D (Hernkles). "\Ye may date it,
approximately. B.C. 4i:i5-J80. The significance of the helmet is 11ot obYious:
it is a type tliat is chiefly familiar on Macedonian coinsY
~ o. IY. <PL IY. 7} The reverse does not, so far as I know, find a
parallel in any other coin-type. We might be content to explain it as a
mere Dionysiac emblem, but it may perhaps be preferably described as a
votive wreath. "\Ye know from Athenaeus 18 tlrnt tlie Peparethians dedicate<l
at Delphi a golden ivy-wreath-<TTE<pavov XPV<Tovv KtTTOv ITe1rap17(/(c,m The
date of this dedication is not knmn1: in the same sentence some other
Delphian dedications are reconled including a Jarn el-wreath of the Ephesiaus
and four golclen <TTAE~f'Y(Dia offered by the people of Sybaris. If we could
assume that all these wwtlicuwtu "·ere made on the same occasion. the date
of the offering could be approximately fixed as not later than R.l' . .ilO, tho
date of the destruction of Sybaris. This iYy-leaf reverse is joined with au
obverse-Llie borrowed from the helmet-coin ,.Xo. III.,: so that it must be
nearly contemporary; cire. B.C. 480 (?).
No. Y. (Pl. IY. 2; Fig. C). Seated figures are rare on archaic coins and
even until the age of Alexander the Great: notable instances are the seated
Zeus of Aetna,1.1 ci,·c. B.C. 476-413 l and the Harmonia (?) seated on a diphros
on a coin of Thebes, ci,.,_,_ B.C'. 446Y Our seated Dionysos shows the heavy
treatment of the fifflUeC,
fournl on archaic sculptured reliefs of a similar

8 Head, 1,uu/,_· t J Coi11, ,:f A,1cie,il8, Pl. YII. II. ,.

1:.! Sye,1u110", Juurn. ,.,_·,11trnot. d'orcli ...Yum.
12
" P. Ga1,luer, T11p,·s, l'l. III. 14. 19iJ:,, l'· 341.
111
"\\'roth. B. :II. l'at Jfv,;,,, Pl. n·. , JJ Tht,orompus ap. Athen. x1i1. 605 n. ,·.,
a11,l 9. 1p1ot1•1l l)r Rou:3e. 1;1u·l 1:otu·1· 0/Fu·i,1:,s, l'· 2Sl~
11 Hill Cui,,, ,,f ,1,1,·. Si,_·ily, Pl. I. 3. C'p. 14 Hill, Co,n.s of a,,,·. :,,,·,l11, l'l. IY. 13.

aba the l,,a,l ut' a \Lt! I i"r on a Lyci~n coiu. 1'5 II,·c1d, Gu,,1,, tu Co1,-1IS rf A11thnt.~· 1 I'L
B.L. 500-J•j'J in ll1ll, D. 1'1. Cat. L!1:iu. l'l. XIII. 1;, awl H. :IL Cit. Cc,111'!1/ 1/,,e,·•·. I'· i:!..
 WAR"'ICK WROTH

c\1arncter, and migl1t, independently of its obverse. be !'laced Ye1y t·arly in

the fifth century. It is accompanied howeYer, by an obve1 se which is plainly
later than any of those previously described, for on tl1is ubYerse the buuch of
grapes is less crudely represented and an inscription ( rE;, makes its
appearance. I would therefore elate the coin circ. Re. 4811-470.

The coi11 ;\O. YI. (PL IV. 8) as I base already remarked is probably
not of Peparethus. The four dolphin-- encircling the bunch of grapes were
presumably suggested by the coins of Sicily, on which they appear first, at
Syracuse, in the time of Gelon, i.e. ci;·c. B.C. 485. 1 '; The dolphin-rider on
the re\·erse is 11ot satisfacturily preservetl, but I am inclined to thi11k that
it is a female figure wearing a long cl1iton like Europa on her bull on the
metope of Selinus or on the early coins of Cnossus: a ;;wle dolphin-rider is
already known fron1 an earl:, coin (sixtl1 or seventh century?;: attributed by
Srnronos to the island of SyrosY Tbe date of our coin may be provisionally
tixed as circ. B.C. 480.

Between cii'c. B.C. 470 and 400 there is a broad gap rn the coinage of
Peparethus. During this period the island was no doubt s11bo1dinate to
Athens. 1" The bronze coin IX figured Pl. IY. 0 may be placed ri!'c. B.C. 400.
It displays a bearded head of Dionysos of good style. 2\'o. X. (Pl. IY. 10)
shows a bearllless Dionysos, perhaps of the third century.
~ o natiYe coinage cau be assignell to the island during the fourth
centmy. In B.C. 377 the Peparethians are named among the allies of the
Athenian ( \mfederncy. In B.C. 3Gl the town of Peparetlrns was besieged by
Alcxawler tyr::mt of Pherae aud it is interesting to know tbat two of his sih-er
coins have been disco\·ere,1 in Scopelos. 1~ The island was afterwanls laid waste
by cornmaud of Philip II. of )Iacedon becaltse the Pcparetl1ians lrnd seizetl
the i~hn,l of Halonesns. At the eml of the thi)(l century ( B.c. ~UD-200) the
town wa5 coutemletl fur by Philip Y. of )Iacetlou, by Attalns of Pergamum,
awl by the R11ma11;;. Tl1e coin (Pl. IV.11, rlo11bt1ess belong~ to the secon,l
or first ceutmy B.C. The worsl1ip of Atl1ena, who:;e l1ead appears on it, is
ku0\n1 from otl1er ~,;mTes to ha\·e pren1iled at the towns of Peparetlrns arni
Sehnn,.;.
In C'<mc\11:-ion, I set forth the 1letails tliat will be looked for liy
11umis111atie reade1,;, SDllle of wlwm may be able to carry fartl1er thai1 I ha\·e
,l"ne the dating a111l attribution of this interesting but rather difficult series
of cuius.

'" _\ ,in,c:J,, ,\.,]pl,in ",\, th,· l,a,lge ol (',.,_,,; lliiti,h :\[n,eum in 211.u,_·h H•Uti. _-\_ nut•· .,1
a111l 1111 the cn111 .... it Q.l'COHlpclllit-- the .-l1stin1'tl\e thes,• wa, ma,le l,y ~Ir. Hill. a; fo!lcw, -
TY]"'' of th,. Y,tl'I«lb t,1w:1, nf the· ;,bn,l. 1. l_lb,·. He;i,l of Hecah· r. h~ir rulled; in frout,
i;- .luu,·,1. u1f1 r,1ut. ,l'a,·,·h. ,11'i11. 1900. }'·.-,!I; ,llll1 lio'.,liug tor,:h. F..,,,. AhEEAN~ Lio11'~
"1'· lk:ul. n. ~I. Lit C/11'/U, ]>. Ii, h,w-l r. ; l>d«,r, ,loul,le-axe, .-R Size ·7. 1\"t.
19 :-; .. ,, /.1/. I. Iw1,:x of _\thcnidll T1il_,nt.lly Si:.'. g1ains (srn11hr to B. :\L Cat. 1'/icssaly,
l'l. X. 1:!). :!. Ubr. Wh,el. 1:~t· A .>\E dou\J;t'-
:ue _'!{ Size ·-i. Wt. 12 6 c:rains.
 PEPARETffCS AXD ITS COIX.\.GE.

I.- 1Vingcd Figure Type.

Our. Bunch 0f grapes. Border of dots.
Ra. ·winged male fignre (Agon ?), naked, running r.; wears boots with
tags; in each hand, wreath. Scprnre compartment of dot--. Wliole in
incuse Sf[Uare .
•-R Size 1·05. Wt. :Wl graius. Pl. IV. I and Fig. A. In BRITISH
}Ic;sEU:\r, ac<1nired in 18!Jl (B. Y. Head, ~Y11;,z. C/11·011. lK~!l. p. l: Pl. I.

:3 'Cyrene '; Wroth, .1Y11m. Cluo!l. 1:-;v:2, p. 1!1; Hill. JJI.S. 1S!J7, p. 70,
· Chalcidice' !). F,,uwl iii Cos together with X os. I I. B a11d III. B, an
archaic tetradrachm of Athens, and an archaic tetrnLlraclun of Mende.
Obverse from Rame die as No. II. A aml II. B aml II. C.

II.-llucd·lcs 1'!Jpc.

Obr. Bunch nf grapes. Border of Llots.

Rcu. Hearl of bP.ardecl Hcrnkles 1. in lion's skin. S,1 nare c,rn1pnrtment of
dots. \\"hole in incnse square.
A. In Srn H. WEBER's COLL., Loxnox. .R Size •!).""i. Wt. :2G.5·5 grain~.
Pl. IV. 3 awl Fig. B. P,·ncu,-ccl f,·0111 O,·,,,-c,_., OZ,r. from same Llie as
~o. I.
B. In )Iuseum of Fine Arts, BosTOx ( origiually in t lie Urceuwell Coll.) .
.iR Size ·!). '\rt. :2G,l,3 grains.' :B.
Y. HeaLl, X111//. C/1,·u,1. 18!H, p. 1.
Xo. ii. Pl. I. 4 = Regling, S,u,1ml,11ig rr,,N,,1. Xo. 1--HO; PL 3:?,
Fig. 1410. The wt. is there stated to be lG·,G grnrnmes., Fo11nd 1n
Cos ,vith ~ o. I.
OT.Jc. from ,-,amc tlie as Xo. I. (/jol'. and ,·,_-c. same dies a-; II. A.)
~G WARWICK WROTH

C. In A PRIY.\.TE C\)LLECTioX . •R 8ize ·!J.'5. \Yt. 17·15 gramnws . . :--voruuos,

J,,1,nud i,denutf. tl'a!',k 1w1,1. l!l0.i, p. :33tl, ~o. 4-; Pi. XI. 22.) Found
011 tin· ,;de c/ Sd1,ws i,1 P1 1m,·dlws anLl ubtaineLl in the i!:,la]l(l by }lr.

A. ,J. B. W ace; the statement, Svoronos, 1.,'. p. :{4-U. that this coin (anJ
III. A. infra; were found in Skiatl10,-;, is based on a misapprehension.
'Information from }lr. \Yace. 1
Obr. from same tlie as Xo. I. 11/,c. (arnl ,·n-. !) same Llies as II. A
arnl II. B.

The ol,c. of II. D aml E next to be described rliffers from tlie ouu.
uf I I. ~.\. B, C'. i11 l1aYing a small bunch of grapes on each siLle of the
large buncb.
D. Iu Bnrrr,m }Il·si-:u~r, acL1nired in 1:::i,2 from Edwanl '\Yigau's collection .
•R Size 1. '\n. 2:iG grains. Pl. IV. 5. (Head. ~Y11111. C/irn;z. 18Hl, p. 1,
~ o. iii. Pl. I. j_) Pi"oununce Ii nlmu1cn.
Ee c. from same Llie as II. A and II. B.
E. D,rn~ le e,·,11u,1crcc, 1906. ..:R Euboic tetradrachm. Pound w Scupelos-
::Peparethm:.
Ok. and Ne. from same dies as II. D.

III.-Hd111ct Tyre.
07,r. Bunch of grape,-, flanke1l by two smaller bunches. Border of dots.
Rc'c. CreEted Corinthian helmet r. within incuse square.
A. In A PRffATE CoLLEcnnx. .R tetraclrachm. '\Yt. 16·,5 grammes.
(Svorono:s, l.c. p. 33D, ~o. 1, PL XI. ID.; Pl·. IV. 4. Found on the .site
of 8d1,ws in P,patdlws, and obtained in the island by Mr. A. J. B.
\Yace. .'Information from :\Ir. \Vace.)
0/,c. from same Llie as X o. II. D.
B. Ju BRITISH 'l\In-rnnr, acquired IH!)l. .R Size 1·05. Wt. 253·4-.
;Hea<l. .\'111,1. Chi'uil, 18()1, p. 2, Xo. i\·. Pl. I. 6; wt. stated as
2tn·:{ gr:,ins.) Pl. IV. 6. Fu,rnd i;i Cos with Xo. I. etc.
oic. arnl /'Cl'. from same die~ as X o. III. A.
( '. In A PmYATE CoLT,ECTIOX ! .R tetradrachm. Wt. 16·50 grammes.
by a native of Thessaly,
}\.111i11l, ,,.-po,
VOTOV TOV 'Or,..vµ,,.-ov. (Svoronos, l c.
p. 33D. Xu. 2: Pl. xi. 20.J
Obc. arnl i'U. from same dies as Xo. III. A.
D. Du,1-; le 1"011u11c,·,:c. J:{ tetradrachrn, shown at the British Museum m
l !HI+. Ul,t11iw·d nC"1' Salon11:11.

] V.-Ic_11-1c!'adh Tppc.

Ui,c. Bnuch of grap 1!s tb11kc1.l b\- t11 o smaller bm1chcs. Border uf Jo.ts.
(Flaw i11 die. "ll r.;
 PEP.ARETHrs .AXD ITS COIX.AGE. 97
Rev. Ornamental Jevice consisting of a pellet surrounded by dots and four
ivy-leaves arnmgeJ diagonally. (\~oti,·e ivy-wreath?) .Square compart-
ment of dots. \\'hole iu incuse square.
In A PRIVATE CoLLECTIOX. A{ tetradrachm. \Yt. 17·68 grammes.
Fuund by a native of The::,saly, r.poc; l'OTOV TOV '01cvµ,r.ov, (Svoronos, l.c.
p. 330, Xo. 3; Pl. XI. 21.) Pl. IV. 7. (Casts of this and of Xo. III. A
have been kindly supplied by :\I. Svorono~.)
Ouv. frt)lll the S'.ltlle dies as Xos. II. D, E.

Y.-Scatcd Dio;1ysos Type.

Obv. Bunch of grapes, with slight indications of smaller buuch at each
side. On I., rE (the E repeated through double-striking). Border of
dots.
Ra. Dionysos with long beanl and long hair, seated 1. on Jiphros; himation
over lower limbs; in outstretched r., kantharos; 1. hand, resting on side,

. ,,....._.-.,,_
HI' t ~...~
,?Ii~ ./

-✓ -~

tlJ·
: .
r ::; :c"~

';!,)_
T'l,_,_-

-◄
F1G. C. (Sc,lle 2 : 1. I

holds thyrsos. Sqnare compartment of dots. Whole in inc use ::, Jtrnre.
1E plated with silver. Size 1·05. Wt. 2:20·3 graius. Pl. IV. 2 and
Fig. C. In BRITISH McsEmr, purchased in lDOG.
Found in Scopelos (Peparethus ).

YI.-IJolphin-ridcr 1ffjlt'.
Obv. Bunch of grapes, around which four dolphins swimming.
Rei•. Figure riding 1. on dolphin (apparently a female figare wearing long
chiton girt at waist); the type within an incuse square to which it is
adjusted diagonally.
In BRITISH l\IGSEG)T, purchased (together with No. Y.) 1906.
)R Size 1·2. \Vt. 23!) grams. Pl. IV. 8. Funnel at Dcmdrias rn
Thessaly.
II.S. VOL. XXYIL H
98 PEPARETHrs _.\.XD IT:-:i COLXAGE.

Yll.-IX.-B;·onze Coins of Pcpareth11s.

VII. Oi1'. Head of bearded Dionysos r., wreathed with ivy.

Ra. r E Kantharos; wreathed with vine-leaf and two bunches ot
grapes; circular incuse.
BRITISH ~frsEDI, acquired in 1G06. 1E Size ·55. Fuuiul
in Scopcfos. Pl. IV. 9.
YIII. Obr. Head of beardless Dionysos r., wreathed with ivy.
Ra. r E Kanth:u-os.
BRITISH }lrsEU1>I, acquired m 18!.ll. .iE Size ·45.
Obtained in Gtcm? Pl. IV. 10.
IX. Obt. Hea<l of Athena r. in helmet.
Rer. TT E Bunch of grapes.
TT A
BRITISH }11:::SEU)I, acquired in 1891. . iE Size ·55.
Obfoi1wl in Greccc? Pl. IV. 11.
(For other bronze coins of Peparethus, see Gardner, B.~L
Cat. 1'hcssaly, etc. s.i-. Peparetlms; Macdonald, H1lntu Oat. I..
p. 460.)
,YARWICK WROTH.
 A SARCOPHAGUS OF THE SIDA~IARA TYPE IX THE
COLLECTIOX OF SIR FREDERICK COOK, BART., AXD
THE IXFLUEXCE OF STAGE ARCHITECTCRE
rPOX THE ART OF A~TIOCH.

[PLATES V.-:X.II.]

I~ the collection of Sir Frederick Cook at Doughty House, Richmond,

are nine fragments of a large sarcophagus of surpassing interest for the
modern scientific history of art. They were identified some two years ago by
Mrs. Arthur Strong, who is engaged upon a new illustrated catalogue of the
Richmond antiques 1 which is shortly to appear in this Journal. iirs. Strong
at once communicated to me the existence of a sarcophagus of so much
importance for the studies I hall initiated in my book Orient oder Rom, and,
by the courtesy of the owner, I at the same time received a set of
photographs of the nine fragments.
I shall first describe the fragments, determining at the same time, by
comparison with kindred examples, the Art gronp to which they belong, and
shall then endeavour to make clear their significance.
Of the nine fragments, which are all about the same height (3 ft. 3 in.)
and thickness, eight are decorated with single fignres executed in high relief
and almost detached from the background, resembling, in fact, statues in
niches. One fragment alone, which J will take first, forms an exception.
A.-Fig. 1 (height 2 ft. 7½ in., breadth 1 ft.). Here we see a door, in the
opening of which is a table standing on four lion's feet; upon this is a
circular altar, whence flames seem to rise. Over the door-lintel with its
straight moulding is a r , shaped upper member that displays, under
broad dentils, a scroll-work of peculiar character. This panel supports a
projecting impost and is decorated with the same scroll-work disposed

1 The Richmond collection is, of course, in-
clude,l in .\Iichaelis' .d. acicnt Jiarbles in Great
B,·itain. At the time when this 1,ook was
pu blishe<l, the sarcoi,lrngus now <lescribe<l was
not yet in the collection. It was purchased by
the late owner, Sir Francis Cook, about twenty-
two years ago. :'.\Irs. Strong has been unable
to discover the previous history of these frag-
rncnts. According to Sir Frei!erick Cook's
house-steward they had been for 01·er fifty
yecHS in a ga1den in London, and were quite
black with London di, t when they were first
brought to Richmond. Till two years ago two
of the fragments remained in the Doughty
House C'onsern1tory.
H2
100 JOSEF STRZYGOWSKI

symmetrically to the centre. The door thus described stands in f1011t of a

pediment, which rests on spiral-fluted columns. Below the pediment is a
scallop-shell. Above this shell appears an architnwe broken in the centre.
Like the geison, it is composed of a fillet from which hang irregular dentils.

r1,. 1.-Ft:.\G)[E:-; l' A uF Till: Co01;: S.\r,COPIIA(:l',.

It is fillell up by twu huge met11be1,-. burrowed from an egg-rnonlding and

these reappear on ea::h si.le of the ~hell. The pediment terminates at the
top with a border upon which a tendril is canell, nut in relief, but in a
new coloristic manner. Above tlie fillet are horizoutr.1 <'-..)-sliaped Acroteria.
 A SARCOPHAGrs OF THE SIDA~L\.RA TYPE 101

There exists a whole series of sarcophagi, all of which display on one

uarrow end the same door in front of a shell pediment, and also correspond
in ornament and in technical execution with the fragments at Richmond.
We can best form an idea of what the RichmonLl sarcophagus, when

FIG. 2.-THE Srn.-1.,1.u:.-1. S.UlCuPIIAGl".<.

complete, was like by reference to the huge sarcoplwgns discovered at

_-\.mbar-arassy, 1~5 kilometres west-south-west of Konia (the ancient Iconium)
in Asia ~Iinor, now in the Imperial Ottoman )Inseum at Constantinople,
arnl known as 'the Sidamara Sarcophagus' (Jf1.,u11111c,d, Pi 1.Jt, ix. Plates
XYIT.-XIX.).
 JOSEF STHZYGOWSKI

Fig. 2 shews all the details tlescribe1l in Sir FreLlerick Cook's fra~ment.
Here, however, the central design is flanked on the left by a woman, on the
right by a man, and the whole is enclosed within two columns snrmounted by
tall imposts. Similar examples are to be fonnd also in the Louvre/ in the
Giardino Colonna in Rome, 3 at Athens, 4 and at Ueskeles in Asia olinor. 5
B.-Pl. V. (breadth 2 ft. 1 in.) reproduces the first of three nude figures
of youths. The figure is shewn standing in front view; the weight is on the
1·ight leg, and the left leg is at ease; the head is turned in profile to the
right. Long curls fall down to the shoulLlers, over which is thrown a
chlamys. The left hand catches the drapery up in a knot and holds
downwards a bough laLlen with fruit; the right is lowered and grasps an
object of uncertain shape. It cannot be determined with certainty what
it is that the youth holds in such a peculiar way-possibly a staff. 6
In the corresponding examples also, this hand is always broken away. It
is so in a sarcophagus at Ismidt 7 (Nicomedia), and in a fragment not yet
published, which I found in the front gar.-len of the Turkish gymnasium
(Idadie) at Smyrna. Its size is 0·.50 metre X 0·71 metre. Fig. 3 shews a
quantity of fragments; below in the centre is the same youth, with sides
reversed, but with both arms in the same position. Here too the figure stands
beneath the same rounded pediment in front of the scallop-shell, and between
the same characteristic columns as in the Richmond fragment. The head is
unfortunately broken away. On the sarcophagus at Ismidt the head is
turned b the left, but the figure is placed beneath the same rounded arch.
A parallel may perhaps also be found in the central figure of the Colonna
sarcophagus.8 Since, in the fragment B, the left-hand capital is fully
sculptured on the return face, the fragment must belong to one of the angles
of the sarcophagus.
0.-Pl. VI. (about 16 in.). This ' statue' closely resembles B and is
almost identical with the two reliefs at Smyrna and Ismidt. The figure
stands resting on the left leg and looks to the left, while the left hand is
raised and hiJden under the chlamys. Behind it is the pediment with the
scallop-shell, and on the right the capital of a column.
D.-Pl. VII. (ab. 1G in.). This nude youth differs from the others in so
far that he is not standing in full front view, but is turned somewhat to the

2 ::'ilichon, JUlangesd'Arcl,iolo1fr, x:sxi. p. 81.
3 ::'i[urioz, Jlonu,nenti d'Arte, i. 3.
• ::',[enrlel, Bull. de Cot'!'. Hell. xxvi. p. 2:36.
5
The same, p. 2:35.
6 lllrs. Strong does not coHsider that the
fragment now plastered up at the Lottom on
the left of B can belong here. Though the
foot fairly suits the pose of E', right kg, so it
woul<l that of many another figure. :'.'iloreon·r,
if the foot is placed correctly in relation to B,
then the J-,ase of the column is out of line with
the shaft. By the side of the l.,a,e may be set'!!
the hoof of a horse. ::'iirs. Strong accordingly
thinks the fragment may belong to a lo,t
Dio,curm, as on the left of the Sidanrnra and
Selefhh sarco[Jhagi ; or seeing that this ba,is
differ;, in shape from that of the othe1 columns
u,ually found on the long si,les of these sareo·
phag1. that it may belong to one of the shorter
,i,les (cf. SiJamara, the short side with the
huntsman. Jfon. Piot, ix. Plate XIX. 2).
7 Reproduce,! by ::'ilu11oz, L' ..frt,:, ix. p.
133.
8 Jf,hll1t,u.'nli d'.1,•/,_', Tai'. i. 3, l,elow.
 A SARCOPH.AGlJS OF THE SIDA)IARA TYPE 103

right. The curly head is turne<l to the left in three-quarters profile, and
round it may be seen what appears to be a laurel wreath (? ). His movement
is directed to that side as thougli by stretching out l1is left arm, which is
raised under the chlamys, he had to overcome some resistance there. The
identification of this figure as a Dioscurus woulLl be in keeping with the
whole attitude, which we may compare in this respect with the corresponding
figures in our group of sarcophagi. Fig. 4 shews as a parallel example one of
the Dioscuri on the sarcophagus from Sidamara. B,meath the roundeLl arch

,
. ' ·. - :. ',, :- ~-~-
.. . l
j r\
'

,.-·..;.·
'

..,.. ___ ~. :}
'· ~
.--.....: .k·~
____
...,.
6. ~

.
.
,

--
. ~ -
...
-~
~-.
-
... ..... ~7';' ••

• r

FIG. 3.-SAnCOPHAGl"S FRAG)[EXTS Ar S)IYRXA.

the figure stands in its niche. The pos1t1on or the legs is the same. The
treatment is somewhat broader, that is, flatter, but the movement corresponds
exactly, only that the head is more raised. Here, however, the Dioscurus is
reining in his horse-to the left the hind-quarters of the horse are indicated
in low relief; to the right, beside the youth, the forepart of the horse is seen
in a rearing posture, cutting across the column. His lifted forefeet are
carved in bold relief and only united to the body of the sarcophagus by
 JOSEF STRZYGO\YSKI

means of 'puntelli.' These 'puntelli' also occur on Sir Frederick Cook's

fragment, one below on the pedestal, the other above on the chlamys, in front
of the shaft of the column. Thus one thing only is lacking, and that is the
horse itself, of which no traces exist behind the figure. It is just possible
that it was placed round the corner on the adjoining side of the sarcophagus,
and, as a fact, this figure belongs to an angle of the sarcophagus, for the right-
hand capital is sculptured on its return face. But in that case this sarco-
phagus would differ from all the others of the group. We already find
the Dioscuri on the oklest example in the Riccardi Palace at Florence, 9 then
on the great sarcophagus from Selefkeh in the Imperial Ottoman Museum, 10

":~

- ::; e '--~ ',,~v

.,.,..._,,
. .,
~
. ,;a.
, .-;"..:
~"..i•

:/':~
,- :'f
_:.,:~
.,,-

Fm 4.-Droscn:i;s FI'.0)1 THE SID.ULlRA SARCOPHAGl:S.

and on the Achilles-sarcophagus in the ~Iuseum at Konia. 11 It is significant

that ~Irs. Strong discovered on the fragment B (PL V.) the hoof of a horse.
E.-I pass now to two male figures in flowing drapery. Of these the most
important from its moti,·e is illustrated on Pl. VIII. Here we have under the
same typical rounded niche a beardless man, in front view. Both hands are
lowered, the left hand hohling a roll, tlie right dragging one corner of his
mantle to the left. At the same time he looks e::werly o
to the rio·ht
O
•> his
curly hair is cut short. Over an ample cliiton he wears a mantle which is
9 Strzyµ.ow-,ki. 0,·,',_,,1t ud, ,· I:om, p. 52. 11
Eull. ,/,: C'u,·,·. Hell. xxvi. l'• 225, Fig. 5.
111 The -:-aml·. 11. -li.
 A SARCOPHAGl""S OF THE SIDA:\L-\RA TYPE 105

thrown first over his left shoulder; it is next brought ronnJ his right hip and
i,, then drawn, with a strikingly exec11t,:d twist, on~r the wrist of his left
hand. Finally it is gathered below into energetic horiz,mtal folds, Even
this strikingly original figure, concei\·ed, one might say, in the spirit of a
master of Donatello's vigorous individuality, has it-, analogy on the sarco-
phagus discovered in Asia 11iuor. The motive of tl1e fold crossing over
the body and over the wrist is to be found also in Fig. :2, the man standing
be,-i<le the doorway in the Sidamara sarcophagus. This particular iuotive,
however, often recurs. It is otl1erwise with the fold below drawn acro~s
horizontally. To my mind it is cudous that this original n.nLl pecnli:ir dnipery

..•"·· ·.
) :\,J
1·#j
tr,1,}' ?
' I
'
fE'- ..;

''
. :Y.~,I
'a-J
,
• '
\
'

-·.....,Ji:', .. .-i;...,,..

f w. 5. -SAllLUl'HAGt:~
-:a,.. •• '', . :flf,!1." . .
-\,)~

n:01; :'lELF.FKEli .H
-.~ , ..•
' . .' ~ ...;r.,i:.,.,'IM,

('n~, r..1.:,. f!XOPLE.

/

,1lso should recur in precisPly idelltical form on the great SZlrcopliagus from
Selefkeh at Constantinople. Fig. :; shews oue of the bro,1l1er sid1:s of this
monument. In the centre we seen. nu(le yonth hol,ling a bough in hi;; left
!mud, like B of the Richmnnll sarroplwgns; then on each siLle a female figure;
finally, at each of the ends, a drapeLl male figure. Even in the retluced
illustration, and thongh this figure starnls LfUite at the extreme enJ, we
cannot fail to recognise that it is identical in every partic1ilar-the supporting
leg and the leg at rest, the turn 0f the head, the position of the arms, the
left liand holding tbe roll, arlll hst, not least, the two horizontal follls in the
drapery, Lille above the other.
F.-Pl. IX. (Ii i11.). This ti~ure produces the impre.-:sion of a Henn: the
upper part of the bod:~ is closely compressed, while the mass of drapery
dimini;;hes toward:s the feet. The arms aud hands are entirdy covered by a
pallinm which falls dowmrnr.Js with a grnu1l vertical 5\\'eep. T!ie right arm
106 JOSEF STRZYGOWSKI

umler it is raised to the breast; the left is placed in front of the body ; the
head ,vith its short curly hair looks to the right. As yet I have found no
parallel for the bold scheme of dra,pery on the Asia Minor sarcophagi.
Finally we have three draped female statues.
G.-The finest of the three (PL X) might just a-; well stawl on the
Camp:mile or on Or San ~Iichele at Florence. There it would be appreciated
at its true artistic value, but being on a late antique sarcophagus it
finds no favour. The slender figure stands erect and taper-like; tl1e turn of
the throat and head do not introduce a sense of movement so much as add to
the impression of dignity and repose. Her right arm rests in a folLl of the
mantle; the left hangs clown, holding a roll. Here too the principal charm of
the composition resides in the drapery. The view reproduced in Pl. X.
shews clearly how the upper portion of the mantle passes over from the left
to the right shoulder, turns back again below it at an angle, and crosses to the
left hand. The drapery is stretched perpendicularly ornr the left arm. An
€xact replica of this beautiful figure occurs on a sarcophagus at Brussa 12-
withont, indeed, the great distinction of style of the Richmond example.
The angle formed by the folds of drapery over the right hip is here mechanic-
~lly copied and becomes a mere caricature. The left hand again is lowered,
holding a roll. A similar figure occurs on the Colonna sarcophagus.
H.-Pl. XL A figure with dignified and expressive action such as a
Gothic artist might have chosen fur ~Iary in the Annunciation. This
woma11 turns to the left, but leans back slightly to the right with the upper
part of her body. She grasps the folds of her mantle together in front as if
alarmed, a gesture which suits the serious expression of her face; her left
hand ren1alns caught in the folds over her breast. For this in1pressive
<?reation I know of no parallel among any of the sarcophagus sculptures
hitherto discovered in Asia ::\Iinor.
J.-PI. XII. Here we have a woman, in front view, with her head,
over which her veil is drawn, turned to the left. Her right arm emerges
from her short-sleeved chiton and is brought across her breast to her left,
,vhere it rests on the veil ; with her left hand she gathers her veil together in
a bunch wl1ich she raises towards her left. This figure is not uncommon-
the pose is such as we find repeated four times on the two longer sides of
the great Selefkeh sarcophagus in the Imperial Ottoman Museum; the women
on each side of the central figure always holtl the ends of their mantle
together with their left hand as in the Richmond example. Fig. 3 shews
tliat one of these four statues that most nearly resembles our figure. The
woman stands to the right between the central figure and the youth at the
corner. She holds her arm as in the Richmond fragment, across her breast,
but the whole action looks like a ,veak imitation, whilst the decided power
displayed in the Richmond figure seems to give evidence of an original
crPrttion.
 A SARCOPHAGUS OF THE SIDA)IARA TYPE 107

The foregoing description and comparison with corresponding sculptures

prove beyond a doubt that the nine Richmond fragments belong to the type
of sarcophagi from Asia l\linor to which I first drew attention in Orient
oder Roni, pp. 40 f. My object then was to assign to its proper group in art
a relief with a figure of Christ, purchased in Constantinople for the Berlin
Museum. No pieces of Christian sculpture have been adclerl to the group
then spoken of, but the number of antique examples has meanwhile so much
increased that we may safely say there can scarcely be any of the larger
museums that does not possess a fragment. 13 Therefore when I undertook to
publish the Richmond fragments, it was not to add a new piece to the
sculptures already known, nor because here was a specially well preserved
example such as the sarcophagus from Sidamara, but because, from an artistic
point of view, the fragments belonging to Sir Frederick Cook occupy by far
the most important place and thus can best enable us to enter into the spirit of
that side of the Asia Minor sarcophagi which till now has been neglected by
everyone, namely, the statuary motives. I myself, in 1903, in my book
Orient oder Rom, only went into the subject so far as was necessary in
order to elucidate the fragment in .Berlin with the figure of Christ. My
chief object then and afterwards in my work on Mschatta 14 was to determine
the special style of ornament which decorated the architectural setting and
to investigate its origin. I should like to refer briefly to this before I enter
upon an examination of the actual architectural structure and of the statuary
types.
Only in one of the Richmond fragments (B) were both the columns on
either side of the figure preserved, everywhere else only the column to the
right. It almost seems as if the sarcophagus, perhaps discovered intact, had
been purposely broken into pieces in order that it might be more easily
transported abroad. All these fragments have the same architectonic back-
grounds. The spiral-fluted shaft of the column stands on a Hellenistic
plinth 15 and a peculiar base; the lower moulding projects broadly, in shape
like a plate, while the upper moulding is flat between two broad fillets.
These characteristics are common to all Asia Minor sarcophagi. The capital
is not quite so uniform ; we have here, it seems, an important evolution
which may enable us to fix the date of the sculpture. The capital in the
Richmond fragments spreads out to both sides almost square over the lower
row of acanthus leaves, and displays four remarkably large vvlutes side by
side. On the oldest example-the marriage sarcophagus in the Palazzo
Riccardi (Fig. (3 a)-the acanthus is spoon-shaped, and the sarcophagus in the
Colonna garden also deviates somewhat from the Asia Minor type. I here
reproduce one of its capitals ( 6 b); the acanthus leaves lie flat without the
elegant curve of the profile or of the lobes. The effect is obtained more by
13 Cf. the examples brought together by xx,·i. pp. 79 f.
14
8trzygowski, Orie,,t oder Rom, ss. 40 f., and Jalubuch der l.:oniglidt prcussi~chen Kunst-
Bvz. Zeit,;chnft, x. 726, and xv. 419 ; ~lui'toz, sa11w1l,rn1c11, I\'0J, pp. 205 f.
13 Cf. Golti11y1schc gelehde Anzcigc11, Hl06
Kuoro Bull. di Ar~h. Christ. xi. 81 f., and
L'Artc ix. 132; )Iichon, Miiangt'S d'Arclu,ol. l'P· 911 f.
108 JOSEF STRZYGO"\YSKI

means of the dark triangular hollows between the little lobes than by the model-
ling of the leaf itself. A similar tendency in the cutting of the leaves is to
be observed in the decoration of several blocks found in the theatre at
Ephesus (6 a). These display on their semicircular face the same Yertical
acanthus divided down the centre by the lotus (Fig. 6 c). Here the purpose
of the flat rendering and of the effect of the dark interspaces is still more
striking. Then follows the type which is represented by the Richmond
fragments and the bulk of the Asia :Minor sarcophagi (6 d). Hitherto the
foliage had been carved with the chisel; now it is exclusiwly worked with the
borer; the modelling becomes of entirely secondary importance by comparison
with the deeply bored interspaces. The leaf itself in its actual shape really

FIL;. ti.-DEYELOl'llEXT OF THE SARCOI'l!AGC~-C.\PIIALS.

exi,,;ts no longer; only an impression of it is produced by the coloristic contrast

between the white, jagged edges of the leaf and the dark background. This
technique, with the intemled impressionism of its decoration, is to be found
in the entire group of Asia ~Iinor sarcophagi. Later we find it abandoned
in favour nf a methO(l which became common in the Prokonnesos just out-
side Byzantium; here the chisel completes the work of the borer. This type
is well represented by the capitals of the fragment of tlie Christ relief at
Berlin (6, ), where the acanthus as~umes a novel, thickly jagged, form_G
 A ~ARCOPHAGrs OF THE SIDA}IARA TYPE 109

To keep to the ornamentation of the Asia Jiinor sarcophagi m general.

Look at the impost abwe the capitals (6 cl). What has happened to the
Greek egg-moulding in the upper bol'ller ? The dark backgrounJ dominates
the circle in the midLlle and the strips at the side, and the ornament below
with the trident is meant to represent tbe ancient Lesbian cymatium '. How-
ever, the whole member, slightly cmTed at the sides on which these two
strips appear, is scarcely recognisable, owing to its projection, as a part of
the ancient architrave. But as little can it be doubted that the gable-lines
of the pediment with their dog-tooth moulding are the purely decorative
transformatiun of an antique design. How this transformation, which

FIG. i.-RELIF.F AT BERL!~.

probably originate(l in 1Iesopotamia, was accomplished, and how the

oriental decorative style of composition in white and black came to sup-
plant the Greek method of modelling the foliage in light ant! shadow, can
be studied in my work on ~Ischatta and in an article of mine on the
' Fate of Hellenism in the formative Arts.' 1~
In contrast with the important revolution wrought in the rendering of
the forms in ornament where we see the motives handed Llown from Greek
17 Die Sthick.sal,' ,lrs Helhnis11uu, "t°,1 de,· liildewlcn Ku1tst in . .\ ..cue ,.T11lu &zid,c,· flir d[Uj klos"Jische

Alttrll,w,1. x,. pp. 19 1.

110 JOSEF STRZYGO"WSKI

art conceived in an entirely novel style by means of colour instead of form,

the figures oh our sarcophagi keep wholly within the range of a period of
ancient art long previous to the time of their production. I fixed the date of
the Christ relief in Berlin, from which my researches in Oi·icnt oda Rom
started, in the third or fourth century, the sarcophagus in the Palazzo
Riccardi is assigned to the Antonine period, and the greater number of the
examples in our group must have been prolluced in the interval between
these dates. They all belong, therefore, to a period subsequent to the
Christian era, yet the figures on them do not adhere to that picturesque
illusiouist tendency in art observable in those Hellenistic reliefs produced
in the centuries about Christ's birth, where the aim was to evoke the
illusion of space, nor do they folluw in the steps of the Pergamene and
Rhodian 'Barocco' of the preceding period. They are typical examples of that

FIG. 8.-SATICUPILI.Gl"S FRAGl!EXT IX THE BRITbH .I.IcSEU~r.

Greek plastic art which flourished before the time of Alexander the Great,
aml which sought to solve the problem of the figure in plastic form either
as nudes standing in repose or as highly perfected systems of drapery. It
is the art of the fourth century which again makes its appearance in the
types of statues on our sarcophagi. That is the point on which the
fragments of the Richmond sarcophagus furnish us with such excellent
evidence.
This fact hall already struck me in the Christ relief in Berlin.is The
Saviour (Fig. 7), in attitude and drapery, shews the type of the ancient
orator, the best known example of which is the statue of Sophocles in
 A SARCOPHAGrs OF THE SIDA~IARA TYPE l 11

the Latemn. The head of the Chri~t, moreover, closely resembles that of
the Prnxitele::tn Enbuleus. A similar head, somewhat resembling the Eros of
Centocelle anrl also reprncluced 1n the ancient Christian statuettes of the
Goo,1 Shepherd, is shewn in the fragments B and C', the two youths
standing quietly in front view. In position anJ bearing also they correspond
with that group of fL;ures which we like to associate with the name of
Praxiteles. With the exception of a
few alterntions necessitated by the
composition ,vithin a niche, B might
be reganled as a copy of the Hermes.
Types like those of the Dioscuri, which pi,·
frequently appear on our sarcophagi
us corner figures, trace their origin
back into the fourth and even the fifth
century, and are exemplified in the
fragment C. It is not impossible that
the Richmond sarcophagus, when it
was still perfect, displayed as the
principal figure on one of its longer
sides a seated statue, such as we find
on the sarcophagi of Sidamara and
Selefkeh. The British ?iluseum pos-
sesses a fragment of the same kind
:'Fig. 8). \Ye have here a composition
in tlattened relief showing a bearded
man reading from a roll. In front of
l1im stands a 1Iuse with the tragic
mask. Her head-dress points to the
Roman period. The type itself, how-
ever, again belongs to pre-Alexandrian
art and has it origin in the reliefs on
Attic tombs in the style of Pheidias.
The chief eviJence for the purely
Greek origin of the types of statues
on the Richmond fragments is fur-
nished, in my opinion, by the draped
figures. Original works in the style
of B energetically clutching the folds
of his garment like some prophet
of Donatello's are incredible in the fIG. 9.-::\frsE Fl:O)I THE llfA~T[~EA~
Roman period. This fignre evinces so BAsrs.
mt.ch individual creative po11 er that
it can only belong to a period of unusual acti\-itv in the tlomain of
form-problems in statuary. A similar moYement to th~t of the folds in the
herm-like figure F-the encl of the mantle drawn from the right shoulder
straight across the breast and over tlie left hand-is to be founLl 011 one
 JOSEF f-:iTRZYGCf'.Y:-;KI

of the 1Iuses of Praxiteles on tl1e basis from 1Iantinea. Xotice on 011e

of these reliefs (Fig. !J, from the slab with the three ~Iuses standing) what
economy of line prevails in tl1e arrangement of the principal fol,ls ronrnl
the breast and Yon will then umlersta11tl why I Yentnre to ass1g11 tu the

f[(;. 10.--THE 'JLu·1:u:s- uF HEI:LL LA~LnL · il>1to,le11

beautiful llraped figure G, as regarlls its type, a place near Praxiteles. The
so-called 1Iatron of Herculaneum in the Dresden Albertinnm confirms me in
this view (Fig. 10). In thi, single statue, as in Sir F. Cook's fragment,
the chief form-value consists iu the arrangement of the folds on the left
 A SA.RCOPHAGGS OF THE SIDA.1L-\.RA. TYPE. I 13

breast. Tl1ey seem to be drawn tight between the shoulder, the raised right
hand and the left, which is held down. The position of the head and legs
in the Richmond fragment has been changed for the sake of tllat
correspondence between neighbouring pairs of figures which is usual in the
Asia Minor sarcophagi. The veil, too, is absent, as the pileus frequently is
in the case of the Dioscuri. .Amelung rn considers this type of the statue
from Herculaneum to have haLl its origin in the school of Praxiteles, and
P. Hermann, who has daily opportunity of studying this grand work in the
Albertinum, confirms this opinion in a letter: 'Tl,e Dresden sta ·~ a
faithful copy of a sculptured original of the fourth century, most probably of
the circle of Praxiteles. Head and body belong inseparably to each other
and form a complete artistic whole. In the Roman period this Greek type
sometimes served for portrait statues, and would be given a portrait head in
the place of the ideal head belonging to it. This, however, is nut the case
with the example from Herculaneum.'
This comparison brings us back once more into the 'milieu' to which
the figures of this sarcophagus belong-to the time when artists subsisted
on their Greek heritage from the pre-Alexandrian period, and were actively
employed in copying ancient types. Presumably, therefore, the types of the
two draped female figures H and J are likewise not new creations by an
Asia Minor sculptor of the Christian era. They go back to a school which is
represented by an original; the sarcophagus, namely, with the 'Mourners '
(Les Plenrenses), discovered at Sidon.20 There, too, we find the same division
of the walls of the sarcophagus into separate niches in which are placed, each
one alike and by themselves, the separate mourners, as iri our Asia .Minor
sarcophagi.
The sarcophagus of the Mourning ,Yomen was found at Sidon in Syria ;
the details of its sculptures leave no doubt of its connection with the art of
southern Asia Minor. It now remains to prove that the Asia l\Iinor
sarcophagi also belong to this school of plastic art, and depend from a centre
of which till now we knew very little, namely Antioch. For to the sphere of
influence of this Syrian metropolis belongs also the region on this side of the
Taurus whence the art tendency noticeable in the Richmood fragments may
have travelled to the west of Asia Minor just as well as to Macedonia, Greece,
Italy and Rome. For the present nothing can be determined with certainty,
but it is my firm conviction that the Asia l\Iinor type of sarcophagus had its
origin neither at Ephesus nor in any other district of western Asia Minor,
neither in Greece nor Rome, but in the angle which lay nearest to Meso-
potamia, and had Antioch as centre of culture. In proof of this I should like
to bring forward certain considerations.

rn Die Basis des Pra;dteles rrns JJ,wtineia, pp.
26 f.; S. Rei1ud1, howev~r, ascribes it to Ly-
:,ippus (Ra. Ard,. 1900, ii. pp. 380 f. ), likewise
Collignon, · Ly,ippe' (Les Grands Artistes,
p. 21, p. 88 '. A rnichlle view is taken by
)Iichaelis iu Springer's .Kunot:1eschiclllc, i.
H.S.-VOL. XXVII.
('Alterthnrn '), pp. 281) f.; cf. abo "\Yormanu,
.Kunstgeschid,ie, i. 1'· 454 ; E. Strong in
Classfral Raicu:, 1901, pp. 187 f.
~° Cf. Hamdy Bey awl Th. Reinach, L,J
Sarcopha:1cs de Sidvn.
I
114- JOSEF STRZYGOWSKI

In favour of the neighbourhood of Mesopotamia is the composition of

the ornament by means of dark interspaces, while in proof of the Antiochene
district of Asia :llinor I think I can appeal to another characteristic to which
I haYe not yet called attention; namely, the peculiar architectural frame
in which the Attic figures are placed. Their shoulders are surrounded
by scallop-shells as by an arch. But these shells are simply a shape borrowed
from Nature for an originally purely artistic form-the niche. Where is the
home of the wall niche that ends at the top in a flattened quarter sphere? It
is unknown either to Egypt or Greece, those two great master-powers of wood

FIG. 11.-XICHE I5 CEMETERY OF TEE TULt:NIDS, NEAR CAIRO.

and stone building. .A priori, therefore, it might well have originated in the-
East; and this is supported by the fact that the art of Islam, in the final form
in which it penetrated from Bagdad into the West, makes such an extensirn
use of the niche that the entrance of all secular and sacred 1\Iohammedan
buildings develops into the typical niche form of the 'Sublime Porte,' and
also the Mihrab, which takes the direction of the national sanctuary at Mecca,
is gi\·en in this same shape. Even the shell is to be found in one of the
oldest examples; Fig. 11 shews this Islamic form. I found this shell-niche in
the year 1895 in the cemetery of the Tulunids, which lies to the south of
 A SARCOPHAGUS OF THE SIDA)IARA TYPE. 115

Cairo outside Bab-el-Karafa, and of which Makrisi, as early as the year 1420,
reports that there were many oratories there, into which holy men were wont
to retire. 21 The Mihrab of Imam Schaffai, situated near the mausoleum, the
chief holy place of this district, was probably the last remains of one of these
oratories (it has since disappeared). In my photograph the shell can be
plainly seen; it was rendered in stucco, and the ornaments in the spandrils,
which complete the pointed niche in a square, are carried out in the same
material. This frame motive itself as well as the tendril-work is of typically
Persian origin. Evidences for this can be found in my work on Mschatta, in
another on the miniature painting of Lower Armenia, 22 and above all in the
stucco decoration in the mosques at Cairo 23 brought there from Persia by the
TuluniJs, the Fatimids and the Ayyubicls. I merely make use here of the
Mihrab, which repeats the type well, in order to shew the reader the
further development of the shell-niche on the ancient soil of Mesopotamia,
whence it probably had also made its way into the ancient architecture of
Asia Minor and of Syria. There is the original home of the brick wall 2!
divided on the outside by flat, on the inside by rounded niches. This style
of wall construction, translated into stone, first makes its appearance in
the great temple buildings and Nymphaea of Syria and Asia Minor. It is
probable, therefore, that the group of sarcophagi which developed this motive
as its type belongs also to this group.
It has never yet been noticed at all that the key to the explanation of
how and where this style of sarcophagi could have developed is supplied by
the Christian ivory carvings. At a time when the foundations of the study
of Christian antiquities is about to be laid, unfortunately on a philological
basis,25 I am glad to be able to shew what very surprising disclosures plastic
art alone can lead to in this direction. It is significant of the methods of
classical archaeology that it has got into this channel, not with the help of
my labours, but just now in the footsteps of Literature. It still clings more
than one would think to letters instead of opening its eyes to the forms and
figures of painting and sculpture.
Fig. 12 shews the front of the celebrated throne of St. Maximian at
Ravenna. In the centre stands John the Baptist in front view ; the weight
of the figure is on the left leg and the right is at ease. The saint raises his
right hand to bless in the Greek fashion, and holds a disk with the lamb in
his right. He is flanked by two evangelists on each side, who each turn
towards the central figure ; their gestures are varied, but all carry their
symbol, a volume, which they hold in their left arm. Examine closely the
motives of the splendid drapery, which are varied in each figure, and the
richness of the folds with their individual arrangement, and you ,.-ill come to
the conclusion that these five figures disposed round a central figure are m

21 23
"\Vnstenfeld, Geschichte dcr Koptcn, p. SO, On this point see Franz Pasha. Cairo.
B. 4. 04 Strzygowski, Klcrnrrnc,i em ~\·euland der
22
S!Jstem. alphr,b. Hauptkatalog der K. lf,1fr. Kunstr;,schfrhte, p. 38.
Bihl. ~ll 1'iibmgen, xiii. 'Y erzeichnis der ar- 25 Von Sybel, Chdstlicl,e _cl,ztikc, 1906.

menischen Hamlschriften,' Tu\Jingen, 1907.

116 JOSEF STRZYGOWSKI

attitude and drapery really nothing but the longer side of one of our Asia
1\finor sarcophagi (cf. Fig. 5). It is true that in place of the monolithic
stonework which permitted lhe architecture to form a continuous frame round
the figures, the subtle technique of incrustation has been introduced into
ivory carving. and to suit this technique three rectangular frames are joined
together. Between these, however, narrow pieces are inserted just as in our
sarcophagi And hand in hand with the introduction of framework came
another innovation. The niche architecture on the sarcophagi, with its
projecting entablature. had brought about as a necessary consequence that

-- ~ =- ·,,
~--,-■,.,-■,•

FrG. 12.-FJto)t THE Tm:oxE OF Sr. l\L1.xnrux, RA n::sx.-L

figures in niches should alternate with those which stand in front of the
straight architrave connecting the niches. The ivory carver composed panel
by panel, and therefore executed the niche motive singly for each figure-but
yet he couhl not emancipate himself from the customary arrangement of
broad and narrow spaces. This scheme, which is inexplicable for ivory carvina-
considered by itself, affords the cleareilt proof tlmt the sculptor of tli:
pulpit of St. Maximiau i,,. clo;,ely connectt?d with the art of the Asia :Minor
sarcoplwgi.
 A SA.RCOPHAG GS OF THE SIDA1IA.RA TYPE. 117

Now the throne of St. Maximian, as I have shewn elsewhere,26 is of

Syrian origin. Its sharply cut tendril-work decoration, with dark interstices,
points to this. I thought of Antioch itself as the place where it was pro-
duced, and can now support that assumption by its relationship to the Asia
Minor sarcophagi on the one hand, and on the other to a monument which
will also disclose to us most remarkable eviLlence with regard to the origin
of the \Yhole group and the question of date. I allude to the beautiful ivory
diptych in the British Museum carved with the figure of an archangel and
bearing the legend .6.EXOY nAPONTA l<AI MA0WN THN AITIAN.
(Fig. 13.) The decoration in this case leads
us to presume that it is of Syrian origin.
Place it now beside the Asia l\Iinor sarcophagi
and the throne of St. l\Iaximian, and we shall
find that it has points of contact with both.
The arrangement of a single figure in a niche
containing a shell is the same as on the sarco-
phagi. Closely related to the statues of the
throne is the beautiful bold motive below-the
roll drawn round the hips. There we see one
end of the mantle laid broadly across the body
to hide the lap. The same trait occurs in the
two apostles who stand nearest to John on the
pulpit. The beardless apostle to the right
shews almost exactly the same motive ::ts the
archangel ; in the bearded one to the left, on
the other hand, this mantle is drawn across the
body down to the left knee. While there is
no doubt that the throne is later than the
sarcophagus, whose scheme of composition it
evidently presupposes, the archangel diptych
exhibits a motive which has an appearance of
great antiquity.
Look back to the sarcophagi. The figures
there stand between the bases of the columns
on the lower border. The arrangement on
the throne is more individual, because there
attention lrns been paid to the profile-edge of
the three large panels. Now the form of the Frn. 13.-LEAF oF Ivop.y D1PrYcu
ground in the London ivory diptych is quite IX THE BRil'ISII }h.'SEc)I.

unique. Between the deep fluted pedestals six

steps lead right up to the height of the bases of the pillars. \Yhat did
the sculptor mean by this unsuitable motive? He was thereby only getting
inrnlved in contradictions, for as a sculptor of merit, and for the sake of the
representative cl1aracter of bis figure, it was important for him to place his

ti
" Ja.'ubnch dcr prcussi,chtn l,11,1stsanuaZnngrn, 1904, p. 299, · }Ischatta.'
118 JOSEF STRZYGOWSKl

archangel as near as possible to the surface of the panel, that is, immediately
in front of the spectator. But the steps required that the archangel should
appear on the platform above, that is, standing in the space far behind the
pillars, pushed back, in fact, into the room. Instead of that he presses forward
right in front of the shafts of the columns, and his arms an<l even his wings
hide both shaft and capital. As a consequence the lower part of the body
would have to be represented retreating towards the background. The sculptor
partly gets himseff ont of this dilemma in a most nahe manner. He cannot
quite bring the foet into the plane of the composition-the figure must
remain upon the platform-that is part of his fixed idea. So he lets it stand
up on the platform with its heels, while the soles are stepping down on three
steps at once. This exaggeration of the feet seems to him preferable to
giving up the whole motive.
Why this stiff-necke,l obstinacy ? Rieg], in characteristic fashion, finds
a definite artistic intention hidden in the motive. He thinks the artist
'conscientiously avoided representing a definite momentary kind of standing
on the steps, and endeavoured rather to set this act of standing before the
eye of the spectator as objective type and in order to characterise the feet,
by means of their upper surface, as giving the effect of depth.' 27 I have often
enough taken my stand against this sort of theorising, and may, I think, in
this case declare for once emphatically how mistaken such well-meant
explanations are, when they so entirely neglect historical facts, as Riegl does
in this instance.
Precisely as the curious arrangement of the five figures on the front of
the throne of St. Maximian betrays in respect of the Asia :Minor sarcophagi
an atavism manifest in certain inconsistencies, such as the alternation of broad
and narrow fields, so here the sculptor of the London ivory diptych does not
advance with a will towards the discovery of new motives, but shews himself
retrograde in his weak adherence to traditional ideas. The six steps between
the pedestals in front leading to the background of the relief are not his
invention, bnt go back, together with the motive of the doorway to which they
lead, to presupposed facts, the demonstration of which must for the time being
be sought for at Pompeii. Suppose a theologian were making researches in
the houses there in onler to elucidate the motive of the steps, and came in
the Casa di Marco Lucrezio, for example, to the steps which lead up from a
fountain to a statue standing in an arched niche, he might well imagine that
the artist of the ivory relief, by analogy with the cascade and its flight of steps,
had wished to convey that the archangel, like the water which we suppose to
flow down the steps, was the bringer of life. As a matter of fact the Good
Shepherd and Daniel were placed in this fashion by Constantine the Great

27 Alois Rieg!, Spdt,·umisclic Kirnstindustric,

p. 122: the artist 'hat cs geflissentlich ver-
mieden, eine bestimmte momentane Art des
Stehens auf den Stufen darzustellen, da sein
Strcl>en vielmehr darauf gerichtet war, das
Stehen iil>er den Stufeu an sich, als ol,jektiven
Typus, dern Besehaner vor Augen zu ftihren und
die Ffose verrnittels der Obersicht ah tief-
raumerfullend zu charakterisieren.'
 A SARCOPHAGUS OF THE SIDAnIARA TYPE. 119

over the fountains in the centre of the squares of Constantinople. 28 By

similar combinations the Indian figure of the boy on the water-mound on which
animals are feeding and drinking received a Christian interpretation.:!ll
Another might discover the flight of six steps of our relief in the six steps that
lead up to the temple of Isis at Pompeii and its vestibule. As th~ cultus
image in its day was shewn with this architectural approach, so the
sculptor (we might say) introduced his Christian archangel, steps aud fa~a<le
with columns going back therefore to antique temples raised on a podium.
In reality the key to the origin of our motive lies much further away
from the path which is usually followed in tracing the moti\·es of Christian
art, and many a Christian archaeologist
,Yill probably tear his hair out with
horror, when I propose to prove that
the archangel in the London relief has
been placed here like a real actor on
the stage. Perhaps some may be more
inclined to reflect seriously on what I
am about to say when I mention that
lately a theologian has tried to point
out, in the Archiv filr Religionswissen-
sclwft, ix. 365 f., that the sculptured
screen (the ikonostasis) of the Ortho-
dox Church had its origin in the Pro-
skenion of the ancient theatre, and
that characteristic features of the
Liturgy, such as the efa-ooot, were none
other than the acts of the Hellenic
drama, so that when we "\Vesterns
reproach the Orthodox Church for its
theatrical services our reproach is in
the truest sense justified. Karl Holl,
as I shall point out, was quite right
in making these assertions.
For the archangel on the steps a
convincing analogy is to be found at
FIG 14,-PORTIOX OF POlIPEIAX 1VALL·
Pompeii in the wall paintings of the P.U~TIXG.
fourth style only. There one often sees
(best in the stucco decoration of a wall in the Stabian Thermae and in some
paintings in relief which are now in the Bronze Rooms of the Naples Museum)
figures between columns, represented standing in a doorway to which steps
lead up. The annexed example is from the so-called Palaestra (Reg. VIII.
ins. 2, No. 23), Fig. 14.30 We see between the projecting side walls with their
29 Cf. Rumis,;he Quarlalschnjt, iv. 102. after von Cube, Die Romische 'scenae j,·ons'
29 Such groups in ivory are to be found in in den pompeianischcn Trandbildern, Berlin,
nearly all museums. 1906.
3 ' Thi; illustration and the following are
120 JOSEF STRZYGOWSKI

columns five steps and then two more leading up to the nude youth who
appears above in the doorway. The sculptor of the London diptych also
imagined the side walls to recede in a similar way. He would otherwise not
have placed the archangel's sceptre on the pedestal to the right, and by thus
correcting the columns have moved them back somewhat into space. The
number of the steps, which, as in the Pompeian picture, get smaller to the top,
also almost coincides. The fact is that for such flights of door-steps in the
Campanian wall paintings five steps on an average are used.
I do not mean to assert, in quoting this analogy, that the ivory sculptor
had actually copied a Pompeian picture or any antique painting at all. It may
be fairly clearly established in this instance that between Pompeii and the
diptych there is a third connecting link-the ancient stage. This can be
proved with the help of those monuments which are most closely allied to the

FIG. 15.-RELo:ssnn:c nu.N oF Pu~IPEIA1' ST_.\(.;J<: .L.\<, ADE.

0

archangel relief, such as the front of the throne of St. Maximian and the
Asia Minor sarcophagi. The five figures side by side are distinctive of thern.
These figures are placed-on the throne and on tho sarcophagi-within and
between the three pairs of colt1mns which are connected either by a rounded
area or by a pediment (Fig. 5), and which, as the archangel relief with its steps
shews, were meant to indicate doors. But what are these three doors united
into a whole by a projecting entablature? That is the actual division of tl1e
stage wall which Holl has accepted for the ikonostasis of the Greek Church
and which-a fact I have not yet mentioned-Puchstein has assumed to be
the mOLlel for the Pompeian wall paintings of the fourth style mentioned
above.
Lately von Cube, at the suggestion of Puchstein, umlertook, by co11-
fronting what is preserved of the extant ruins in the theatres themselves with
 A SARCOPHAGCS OF THE SIDAJ\IARA TYPE. 121

what can be made out clearly from the wall paintings, to reconstruct these
stage walls. I give here (Fig. 15) an example done from the very fanciful
wall picture introduced into the upper part of the architecture in the
triclinium of a Porn peian house (Reg. I. ins. 3, No. 25 ). e see here the ,v
three doors with five steps each; in the centre the Aula regia, to the side
the Hospitalia. They are flanked by columns on pedestals, and where the
pairs of columns come close to each other statues stand in the narrow inter-
space. If these are restored from the originals or from the ivory tablet in
the case of the doors also, we shall have first the wall painting itself (Fig. 16),
which is the foundation of von Cube's reconstruction, and then the long
fa~ade of an Asia Minor sarcophagus (Fig. 5). For it is obvious that if we
reconstruct the upper part of this architecture, not entirely from the painting
as von Cube has done, but according to a reasonable architectural point of

-.:.... J.'--
"\·

•'-' •"; .. . ~
·~ - ,,,
.... :.: : ~

; . ···--·-::. ll-~-'-.-.,::-.. ,-11, =- '•i'..,:

)I

~-·c.•.:~_,~·
.,, ,;
~j, ~
~ ,l-.
lu
.·- '
.~
r~"j:'~-

. ~-- .: . .

.FIG. 16.-POl!PEIA:-- W,ILL P.UXTISG.

view, then arch and pediment would come over the doors and not between
them. It will be well, therefore, when recoustrncting the stage walls of
ancient theatres in the future, to take iuto consideration the long sides of the
Asia Minor sarcopliagi. But if the question arises as to where this theatre
architecture penetrated into painting and sculpture, aml if it is urged that
this could only happen in a great city, then probably the innovation should
be referred to Antioch rather than to Rome. It is from Antioch that
the fourth style of Pompeian wall painting 31 and the type of the Asia 1Iinor
sarcophagi came; from thence also, or from one of the islands lying off the
Syrian coast of Asia :\Iinor, come the Ra\'enna sarcophagi, which reproduce

31 Cf. St1zygow,k1, Gvtti,1ui,chc gclchrte .dnzci:.en, 1906, pp. 910 f.

l ·1 ·1 A SARCOPHAGUS OF THE SIDAMARA TYPE.

the type of the theatre fa<;ade in its latest phase, posterior to the throne of
St. Maximian-the type, namely, with the five arcades of perfectly even
width. Finally, from Antioch comes also the ivory throne itself and the
archangel diptych in the British Museum, in which the motive of the theatre
steps has been so strikingly preserved. Just as in Japan there were times
when painting and sculpture remained entirely under the influence of the
theatre, so also in ancient art. It appears that this was the case at Antioch.
We find the fashion had penetrated to Italy with the fourth style in the time
of X ero. In the period of the Antonines it dominates sarcophagus sculpture
in the central district of the eastern Mediterranean; in the archangel relief,
the Ravenna throne, and the Christ relief at Berlin it encroaches on
Christian art, and is destined afterwards to celebrate its final triumph in the
Ravenna sarcophagi arni to live on unrecognised up to the present day in the
ikonostasis of the Greek Church.
To conclude, I return again to the Richmond fragments. They belong
in every particular, in the decoration executed with the borer, and in the
beauty of form of the statues and the strict adherence to the architecture of
the theatre wall, to the best specimens we possess of the Asia Minor Echool
of sculpture which had its starting point in Antioch. Whether these
sarcophagi were produced at Tarsus, as Sir William Ramsay 32 thinks, or
,vhether, as I supposed, the marble points to the Prokonnesos 33 (therefore to
the ancient Cyzicus), and whether the Richmond fragments come, as
Th. Reinach 3-1 concluded in the case of the Sidamara sarcophagus, from the
mountains north of the Taurus, or-as the export of Greek marble sarcophagi
to Ravenna led me to suppose-from one of the islands lying off the coast of
Asia Minor, are points the decision of which is reser.-ed to the researches of
the future.
The sample sent to me by Mrs. Strong shews that the marble of the
Richmond sarcophagus comes from Greek quarries. It is grey in colour and
crystalline throughout. I also have samples of the sarcophagi from
Selefkeh in Constantinople, of the Christ-relief in Berlin, of one of the
sarcophagus fragments in the Louvre, and of the sarcophagus in the Colonna
gal'llen. The last two shew pure white crystals. On the other hand, the
Richmond sample comes near in its grey cololll' to the examples from
Selefkeh and the Christ-relief from Constantinople in Berlin.
JOSEF STRZYGOWSKI.

(Translalld from the· author's MS. by Jlrs. Arthur S ,·ong.)

J" Revue des Etucles aneienncs, 1901, p. 358 ; 3-J Orient odc1· Itui11, p. 54.
Stud,ts in the History of the Eastern Prunnccs, 3! Jlunu,ncnts Pio/, ix. 1'· i.
1'· 60.
 THE 'LIST OF THALASSOCR.A.CIES' I~ EUSEBIUS: A REPLY.

~IR. FoTHERIXGHA:\r's paper, if I understand it rightly, divides itself

into three parts. He corrects certain errors in my tabular statement of
the ~widence, and in my commentary on it; he criticizes my suggestion
that the 'List of Thalassocracies' may represent a fifth-century docu-
ment; and he reconstructs from materials comprised wholly in the existing
texts of Eusebius' work an outline of the Eusebian view of the 'List,'
as he understands it; the gist of which is that he thinks that Ensebius
not merely incorporated in his Oanones the names of all the states contained in
the ' List,' but also intended to space the thalassocracies according to the
numerals contained in the Excerpt. From this he infers that, where the
numerals in the Excerpt are lost, they may safely be restored from the
intervals indicated in the Canones ; and from this, finally, (1) that the Excerpt
was not mutilated when Eusebius incorporated it in his Chronographia,
and (2) that it represented, in its missing section at all events, the same
chronological scheme as underlies the rest of Eusebius' work, and not,
as I had been led to suggest, a different, earlier, and more accurate
system.
,vith the permission of the editors of the Jmirnal, I submit a brief note
on each of these points, in the order irnlicated above.
(1) S1mcfry errors of transcription and reckoning.
I hope that my use of the word 'Eusebins' to denote 'the Armenian
version of the Chronici Canones ' and of the word ' Chronicon' for the
' Chronogr(lphia' bas not inconvenienced anyone besides Mr. Fotheringham :
still more that he has not been misled already by the occurrence of the word,-;
Ch1·onicormn Liber I. instead of Chronographia at the top of p. 226 in Schoene's
edition, on which the Excerpt from Diodorus is printed.
In the matter of the relative value of the Armenian version and Jerome's
version of the Oanones, I should gladly bow to Mr. Fotheringham's great
knowledge of the Eusebian texts, were it not that on :Mr. Fotheringham's
own showing, Jerome's version is more erratic in its support of ~fr. Fother-
ingham's theory than even the Armenian version is, and requires even
more ruthless emendation before it can be taken to represent a text
of the Canones which shows signs of having utilized the numerals of the
Excerpt.
 JOHX L. :MYRES

For 1Ir. Fotheringl1am's correction of my errors of addition and

subtraction in columns H and J, I have to thank him very heartily; and
I am glad to be able to agree with him that they do not affect my argnment.
In columns E and G, I have copied the wrong numeral between
places XV and XVI; and the corresponding correction which must be
made in my article, on p. 92, 1. 9, invalidates the argument contained m
11. 9-11.
The numeral 45, which I attributed to the Phoenicians in column F,
rests, as ~Ir. Fotheringham says, on one manuscript only ; but it is defended
by ~Ir. Fotheringham himself as a genuine piece of the Eusebian text. The
only difference between us, if I understand his criticism rightly, is that
he does not think that its preservation in nlS. 'F' is sufficient to assign it to
Jerome's version of that text.
~leanwhile I am glad to find that :Mr. Fotheringham's experience
of 118. 'F' of Jerome leads him to prefer 32 to 23 as the Eusebian numeral of
the Cypriotes in place VI: for in the event of my interpretation of places
VI-VIII being upheld (pp. 121 and 122 n.) the date 742 B.c. has several
advantages over 732 B.C. It has, however, of course, the superficial
disadvantage of having approximately the duration of a conventional
'generation of men.'
The errors which :Mr. Fotheringham has discovered in my snmmary
of the evidence of Syncellus, in column D, are more serious. After some
trouble, I have discovered how I came to make them, but that concerns
no one but myself, and does not mitigate the blunder. I have accordingly
to cancel the sentence on p. 90, 11. 10-12 of my commentary on column D,
and to substitute the words 'But in places VI-XI inclusive, and in place
XIII, he omits both the names and the numerals.' I must also cancel
the statement on p. 127 that 'Syncellus is silent' as to the duration of
the sea power of Lydia : abo on p. 92, I. 17, for' like' should be read
'unlike.' But the other references to Syncellus in my article are, I be'.ieve,
unaffected.
I have also, obviously, to modify my inference that Syncellus was using
the Ch;·o1w:1raph ict rather than the C'anoncs; and to lay less stress on my
suggestion that the text of Diodorus was already mutilated when it came to
the knowledge of Eusebius. My argument, however, from the misreading
prese1Ted by Pliny (p. 10.)) remains untouched; and the question in what
way tl1e missing numerals m-e to be supplied is not affected one ,my or the
other.
But while admitting that )Ir. Fotheringham has mar1e out a i'trong case
against my suggestion (p. !!2, n. 21) that Syncellus was rel_yi11g on the
Cluu;wgmphia rather than on the Cmu,11cs, I do not see tliat l1is ::onclrn,ion
follows necessarily; at all eYents it does not preclm1e the idea that Syncellus
had tl1e Chrunograpl1ia as well as Cmwncs before liim, and ,1c1s in fact using
both If l1is copy of the CanOiiCS bad contained a mention of the Xaxians, it
is difficult to see why he should ham made his mistake of ten years in regard
to the Lacet1aernonian seapower; and in face of this rnist'.lke, it is difficult to
 'LIST OF THALA::lSOCR.\..CIES' IN EUSEBIUS: A REPLY. 125

argue that Syncellus' copy of the C'rmoncs mentioned the .Naxians at a point
where all known versions of the Canones omit them. On the other hand the
<::ircumstance that, lower down, Syncellus doe;; mention the N axians, and
gives them their proper numeral 10, seems to me to sugge;;t that at this
point at least he 1·s using the Clu·u1W!Ji'llpllia, at all events as a supplementary
authority.
The only reason why tbis question, whether Syncellus hatl access to the
C'hronogmphia or not, was worth further di-;cussion, is this. It is only by the
assumption that Syncellus used the Oanones exclusively, that )Ir. Fothering-
ham is able to make good his generalization that 'each thalasso:::racy is
found in at least one of the three documents from which the Eusebian text
must be reconstituted.' This assumption of course he can only demonstrate
by showing that Syncellus was not indebted, on any given occasion, to any
other source such as the Glaonogmphia. But the considerations which I have
stated seem to show not merely that Syncellus had access to the Okrunogi'Ciphia
but also that his copy of the Ganrnies credited the ten Naxia11 years to the
Lace<laemonians and consequently did not contain the name of the N axians at
the point where he puts them: and if this was so the Naxians would seem to
offer a clear case of a thalassocrat state which was not mentioned in any of
the three documents in question.

(2) The List in the Excerpt, and the Thalassocracies of 1.'k1icyclides.

I do not quite understand what points Mr. Fotheringham means to
indicate in reply to my suggestion of a fifth-century date for the list, as
showing that the retrospect of seapo,ver given by Thucydides disagrees with
the evidence of the list. Thucydides does not as a matter of fact give any
·dates' at all; and the circumstance that at a time which .Eusebius (not
Thucydides, nor Herodotus, nor any early writer) dates as falling within a
'Carian' seapower, a Corinthian built ships for Samos, would only prove
anything, if Mr. Fotheringham were prepared to maintain that during a
• Carian' seapower neither Corinth nor Samos was allowed to have ships at
all. To admit the existence of an 'Ionian' seapower 'later' than the genera-
tion of Ameinocles does not seem necessarily to exclude an earlier one; if
only because there was more than one state in 'Ionia.' :Moreover the very
<::ircumstance that Thucydides, when he exceeds the data of the Excerpt, does
so only by including JVestern seapowers, goes far to explain both the omission
-of such a state as Corinth from the List, and also the preponderance of
Levantine states in it. The List is clearly a sequence of Eastern }leLliterran-
€an seapowers: and consequently not only Corinth but Corcyra, Cumae,
Syracuse, and Tarentum, as well as the Carthaginians and Tyrrhenians, are
absent naturall.r. The reported 'seapower of Sinope' is another case in point,
for Pontus is excluded likewise. Also if the List were really a document of
the periotl of the Delian League, and compiled under its influence, as I have
suggested, no 'tendency' would be more natural than disparagement of the
seapower of Corinth: a motive too which would have no obvious explanation
€xcept under fifth-century circumstances.
126 JOH~ L. ~IYRES

The "\Yest, in early Greece, as in Thucydides' own time, was a kind of

'high seas,' common to all. Even in 445 B.C., the very treaty which recog-
nized formally the existence of Leagues, which in the Aegean and on its
shores were practically inclusive, left an open field in the West, where Athens
and her rivals might compete freely for adherents. In Greek thought, the
first 'tbalassocrat' in the \Vest was probably Dionysius of Syracuse.
(3) The Eiisebian ' Canones' as materictl fo1· the 1·estoration of the List in
the Enerpt.
Mr. Fotheringham's ingenious reconstruction of the text of the Eusebian
Canones, so far as they are concerned with the thalassocracies, is a definite
and valuable contribution to the study of the Eusebian text; and clears up
many points which are obscure to those who are unfamiliar with its history.
His object clearly is to show that, even in the present unhappy state of the
Canones, enough similarity remains between their allusions to thalassocracies
on the one side, and the names and numerals preserved in the Excerpt on the
other, to justify the hypothesis that where the numerals are lost in the
Excerpt they can be restored from the allusions in the Canones ; that conse-
quently there is no need to go outside the Eusebian text for materials for
snch a restoration as I have attempted; and that the List as restored by Mr.
Fotheringham's method agrees with the Eusebian chronology, instead of sup-
plying materials, as I had suggested, for its correction.
A question of method confronts us here at once. To reconstruct the
text of the Canones on the hypothesis that its true intervals would be repre-
sented by the numerals of the Excerpt, and then to reconstruct the Excerpt
on the hypothesis that the lost numerals would be represented by the
intervals in the Canones, seems to me to be an argument in a circle.
On Mr. Fotheringham's own showing, aberrations of a year or two must
be assumed to exist in the Eusebian dates almost throughout; and he makes
out a good case for textual aberrations of as much as ten years. Two points
therefore arise. First, bow, in the absence of such a clue as is afforded by
the Excerpt in the Ghronogmphia, would it be possible even for Mr. ·
Fotheringham to divine whether he ought to allow, in the case of any
given event, for a rise of as much as ten years, or for a fall of a similar
amount ? With the clue at hand, it is comparatively easy to suggest how
this or that textual obstacle may have produced the actual discrepancy; but
·what evidence is there even for the existence of a discrepancy, in the cases
where the Excerpt is defective?
1Iy meaning will perhaps be clearer if we take an actual instance. That
Eusebius had some reason for putting down events at the point where they
occurred, in the original text of his Ganones, is in any case probable. That he
should have thought that there was an Egyptian thalassocracy from 796 B.c.
to 753 B.C., as Mr. Fotheringham suggests, is also probable, both for the
reasons which ~Ir. Fotheringham gives, and for those "·hich were C,aiven lonO'
~ C,
ago by Dr. Goodwin from non-Ensebian evidence as to Hellenic ideas about
Egypt. But nothing of this seems to me to prove anything as to the lost
 'LIST OF THALASSOCRACIES' IX KCSEBH,TS : A REPLY. 127

Egypti'.l.n numeral iu the Excerpt; and unless it is possible to show that the
lost numeral agreed with Eusebius' calculation of the reign of Bocchoris, my
suggestion that Eusebius either neglected, or did not know, the lost numeral,
remains unanswered. On the other hand, even if it were possible to show
that the Eusebian date for the Egyptian thalassocracy was based upon the
lost numeral in the Excerpt, and that this numeral was 43, as )Ir.
Fotheringham conjectures, all that would be prornd -would be that in
regard to Egypt the compiler of the List was working on some lost
Greek tradition about Egypt: nothing would have been gained either in
proof, or in disproof, of my suggestion that the numerals in places YI-YII
correspond with certain actual sequences in Oriental history. .Meanwhile,
even the consistency of the Ensebian data can only be tested in cases
where there is something to compare ; and in the case of the lost numerals
this something does not exist.
It was not, however, the consistency of the Eusebian data with them-
selves that I was mainly concerned to discuss in my article ; but rather the
accuracy, or the veracity, of the Eusebian chronology in general, when com-
pared with that fragment of pre-Eusebian chronology-whatever its date-
which is prcsened in our mutilated 'List.' ·when every numeral in a series
of seventeen items is liable even at the hands of its defenders to ruthless
conjectural revision; when the limits of such revision range in individual
instances from as little as two to as much as ten years; when the effect of
these errors is cumulative as we recede from the starting-point, and ·when the
starting-point of the list itself is admittedly five years wrong, it is per-
missible to doubt whether there can be any very positive evidence that
the original Eusebian dates conformed at all closely to the numerals of
the Excerpt or e\·en that the general spacing of the Thalassocracies in the
Canones stands in any very close relation to whatever chronological scheme
the Excerpt may have embodied when it was entire.
That the thalassocracy-entries in the Canones formed a separate system
by themselves is of course proved directly by the existence of the Excerpt,
and is independent of any considerations derived from the use of red or black
ink. What even Jerome meant by the use of red or black ink is far from
clear; and what Eusebius meant by those features in his Ca nones, which
suggested the use of red or black ink to Jerome, is obscurer still. Least of all
is it clear from )Ir. Fotheringham's discussion, or from any other sources with
which I am acquainted, whether it was the Thalassocracy list which (with
other such lists) formed the ground work of chronology upon which the other
events were spread about in their probable order, or whether the thalassocracy-
entries (whether made in the margin or interpobted) represented rather a
late phase of the compilation, and only found place in it at all, when the
other Eusebian data had begun to give cumulative proof that any given state
could only be credited with seapower between such and such dates. If tl1e
former theory be accepted, then either Ensebius did his work very badly, or
his text needs re-writing, in the way .Mr. Fotheringham has proposed, till it
conforms to the data of which it is compounded; if the latter, it is a matter
128 JOHX L. )IYRES

of indifference what the text of the Cwwnes may han, cuatairn:d, for r.J;
l1ypothcsi the numemls of the Excerpt ,Yere only retained when they
happened tu fit the Eusebian theory of history.
As tu the Armenian version, meanwhile, Mr. Fotheringham is brougl1t
to the same conclusion as myself, that whatever the system may have been
which these entries were intended to embody, they are scattered about in a
manner which he rightly attributes to the 'general confusion of the
chronology of this version.'
As Mr. Fotheringham's argument for the consistency of the Eusebian
data has led him to discuss certain other Eusebian allusions to states which
had seapower, I may perhap3 be permitted to illustrate from these allusions
the discrepancy between Eusebian chronology in general and our present
knowledge either of fifth-century Greek chronology, or of the actual cnnrse of
events as determined from non-Hellenic evidence either documentary or
archaeological. By way of preface, note only that Mr. Fotheringham's argu-
ment, beiug confined (with one exception 1) to Eusebian data, cannot lead to
any conclusion as to the veracity of Eusebius, but only as to his consistency;
,vhereas my own object has been throughout to test by nou-Eusebian evidence
the respective veracity of the Excerpt and of the Canones..
nlr. Fotheringham's instances refer only to four thalassocracies (besides
Egypt) in or above the damaged part of the List-viz. to those of Caria,
Miletus, Phoenicia, and Thrace.
(a) It is difficult to see how the Carian mercenaries in the service of
Psammetichus, ,,ho did not begin to reign till 664 B.C., could be connected,
as ~Ir. Fotheringham suggests, with a Carian seapower which began in
735 B.C. and was over by 674 B.C., unless we are to assume th&t we have
here also one of those ingenious derangements of the entries by at least
ten years.
( o) In the case of Miletus, the more Milesian events Eusebius puts into
the neighbourhood of his Milesian seapower (748-730 B.c.) the worse for his
reputation as a historian. His date for Naukratis (748 B.C.) is as utterly out
of accord with fifth-century tradition 2 as it is with the archaeological evi-
dence as to the earliest occupation of Naukratis, and with the other
Egyptian evidence as to Bocchoris and the improbability of an Egyptian
seapower earlier than 664 B.c. Similarly, a chronologer who, in face of
Hdt. i. 74, was capable of putting Thales into the year 747 B.C, was capable
of any imaginable muddle. Except from these late chronologers, we do not
know much about the foundation-dates of .IUilesian colonies like Trapezus (or
was it Cyzicus, as Jerome says?), which the Canones assign to 756 B.C.; and
we know even less about the way in which the chronologers fixed these
dates. Mr. Fotheringham seems to incline 3 to the view that the Thalassocracy-

1 The 'Tyrian' Jate for Carthage, quoted cance of red ink (p. 81) "·ith his treatment of
from Josephus, c. Ap. i. 17, 18. the Pelasgic thala,soeracy (p. 83), which ,eems
" HLlt. ii. 178. to proeecJ. ou the opposite hypothesis.
J But compare hi; Lli;cm,,ion of the ,ignifi-
 'LIST OF THALASSOCRACIES' IN EUSEBIUS: A REPLY. 129

list formed part of the framework of the Oanones; and if so, it would follow
that the other dates were accommodated to it. But if so, these other dates are
useless to determine the Eusebian view as to the proper place for the Milesian
seapower-i.e. to show the extent of the interval, if any, which separates
it from that of Phocaea below the gap in the list.
One point more, in regard to the foundatiou of Trapezus. If, as seems
admitted, the foundation of Phocaean :Massilia in 600 B.C. falls outside the
periocl of Phocaean seapower, what becomes of Mr. Fotheringham's
argument as to the connexion of Trapezus, if foundetl in 755 B.C., with a
seapower of Miletus which did not begin till 748 B.C.? It is the case of the
Carians of Psammetichus over again.
(c) The same criticism applies to the references to Phoenician
seapower. To argue from a date for Solomon's Hiram to a date for Dido's
Pygmalion is smely to confuse history and mythology. Jn any case, if I
understand Mr. Fotheringham correctly, the Eusebian date for the Phoenician
seapower has been adjusted to Josephus' 'Tyrian' date for Pygmalion, on the
hypothesis that it was in the days of Pygmalion that Carthage was founded. 4
But who started this hypothesis ? There is nothing, so far as I know. to
support it in any Greek author before Alexandrian times, or in any extant
non-Hellenic author, and it disagrees by something like two centuries with
everything that is known, from the examination of Punic sites in Africa,
Sardinia, or Sicily, as to the upward date of Punic adventure in those lands.
The date, on the other hand, which I have proposed, on the clue furnished by
the List, by the limiting dates for Egypt, and by the Assyrian record, fits all
this archaeological evidence without difficulty, and disagrees merely with
post-Alexandrian chronographers.
(cl) The Thracian conquest of Bebrycia illustrates, once more, the
uselessness of a chronological enquiry which does not go outside the,
chronologer's materials. Was the conquest of Bebrycia put down under
972 B.C., because this <late fell within the Eusebian limits for Thracian sea-
power, or were the limits of Tbracian seapower adjusted to include the
Eusebian date for the conquest of Bebrycia? To argue from Eusebian data
alone is either to reach no conclusion or to argue in a circle.
To his mention of Trapezus already noted, Mr. Fotheringham adds that
' with the accuracy' of this chronological system ' we are not concerned.'
But it is precisely its accuracy, which, from the standpoint of my article,
"·e are discussing. My whole contention is, in fact, that we know enough, by
this time, from Egyptian and other non-Hellenistic sources, to be able to
assert that neither Eusebius, nor Trogus, nor any other Hellenistic or
Graeco-Roman chronologer knew anything of value about such matters as the
foundation of Trapezus, except in so far as he used at least a fifth-century
source: that between the filth ceutury and Alexandrian times a thorough
-- ------ -~--- - --- - - - - ---- ---- -----------

• Kote meanwhile that ,,e haYe been dealing
here with only one out of a nurnl,er of elates
for the foundation of Carthage, ranging from
10-12 B.C'. (J~rorne: 1038B.C'. Arm.) to 1013 D.C'.
H.S.-YOL. xxnr.
(Jerome 1015 n.c. _-\_rm.) anrl 853 n.c. (Jerome:
850 Il. c. _-\_rm. I : and that the J,ite for \Yhkh
:\Ir. Fotheringham cites Josephus does not seem
to appear in the Ca,w,1c, at all.
K
130 'LIST OF THALASSOCRACIES' I:N" EUSEBilJS : A REPLY

obscuration of tradition took place; and that it is only by going back either
to fifth-century historians, or to quite non-Hellenic data, that "'e can hope
to re-construct the early history of Greece. ·whether the Excerpt from
Diodorus seems, or not, to preserve an echo of this earlier Hellenic trallition
is consequently a matter on which Eusebian evidence proves inevitably
nothing; especially if it be proved, as Mr. Fotheringham contends, to be
based itself upon that Excerpt.
If I were to attempt, in fact, to fix my position, on the whole question, in
a phrase, in face of ;,Ir. Fotheringham's criticisms, I should do so best,
I think, by a re-arrangement of his own peroration. 'Inquiries into its
value,' I should say of the Eusebian List, 'are bound to be fruitless, unless the
restoration of the list is regarded as a matter of historical explanation,
independent of the problem of textual criticism.'
J OHX L. )I YltES.
 :XOTICES OF BOOKS.

Homer and His Age. By .AxDREW LaxG. Illustrated. Pp. xii+336. London:
Longmans, 1906. 12s. 6d. net.
:\Ir. Lang here return& to contentions ad;-anced some years ago in Homer w1d the r,,J1fr.
His &timulus appears to have been supplied by the appearance of ~Ir. Leafs Iliad in 190:? ;
and now he once more goes full tilt at the Separatists, asserting that these are much more
discrepant and incon&istent in statement than the Homeric lays themselYes, and criticisin~
them in the light of more or less recent archaeology and )f a 'literary judgment,' ,Yhich
is fortified by a wide knowledge of early epic literature in other languages than Greek.
Briefly he sets out to show that the discrepancies in Homer are not greater than would be
made by any one author in an age of vigorous and moving culture ; that the efforts made
to convict the poet or poets of archaism fail ; that the arguments used to prove archaism
in some passages or connexions and realism in others are absurd ; aml that the lays do
represent very fairly a single cfrilisation. He sees no difficulty, in view of recent Cretan
disc0Yeries, about supposing the poems to have been written down at an early age--an age,
in fact, much earlier than the Cyclic poets, not to mention Peisistratns ; and by the way he
makes much of }fr. Leaf's change of view concerning the relative probability of a Homeric
School and of a Peisistratean Recension. Judging by the idea& embodied in the Cyclic
poems, Mr. Lang would put the stereotyping of the lliacl (with which he is almost
exclusively concerned) some way back behind 800 B.c. He makes a good defence for unity
both in authorship and time ; but he seems to have overlooked, in adrnncing ar'"uments
from the Cyclic poems, and comparing other Epics. one important fact, viz. that culture in
Ionia (where there is much reason to place the origin of the poems) had not necess,u-ily the
same history as in Greece ; and that poems might have arisen at the same time on the twc,
sides of the .Aegean, reflecting incongruous, but, in neither case, anachronistic ideas.
What would have been archaistic in Greece in the seventh century was not necessarily
archaistic in Ionia. ,vhile regarding the Greek lands as endowed with too uniform a
civifaation in the post•::Hycenaean Age, :llr. Lang also seems to treat the · ~Iycenaean ·
remains too much as one, and not to take sufficient account of possibly wide intern,ls in date
between, e.g. the later Palace at Cnossus, the Enkomi Treasure, and the 'Treasure from
one of the Greek Islands' in the British l\Iuseum. When an author has to l,ase his argu-
ments on the multifarious and often provisional statements of archaeologists groping their
way towards the light in the dim ages before history, and does not know the Reolien
himself, his foothold is often perilous in the extreme.

Pour mieux connaitre Homere. Par ~IrcHEL BRJtn. Pi•. viii.+ 309. Paris :
Hachette et Cie. [1907.] 3 f. 30.
M. Breal brings to the study of the Homeric question an acute mind trained in other
fields; and, as usual in such ca;,es, his contribution is fresh. original, and ,timulating~
K j
13:l ~OTICES O:F BOOKS
He brushes aside the theory, which at one time found considerable favour in Gernwny,
that the Homeric poems, so to speak, grew of themselves, without any particular author: a
theory which only ha, to be stateLl in clear language to lose whatenr plausil>ility it <lerived
from nebulous circumlocutions. Newrtheless he does not assign them to a single author.
His argument is that they are the product of a highly developed cfrilization, and were written
by a gronp of professional poets at some wealthy court in Asia Minor. Their supposecl
simplicity of manners is conventional archaism ; their language is a mixed literary dialect,
which drew elements from variou,; sources. 1\1. Breal finds the necessary condition;;
for such productions in the court of Lydia in the seventh century, and Lelieves the poem,;
to ha,e been written by a group of Greek poets, under Alyattes or Croesus, for recitation at
the great games. This exposition of hi~ ,·iews occupies only 130 short pages, and is not
worked ont in detail; but his arguments are quite sufficiently indicated, and are clearly
and attracti,·ely expres~ed. The rest of the volume is occupied hr 1--U short articles on
~ingle Homeric words, on the lines of Buttmann's L,.rilog11~, but on a smaller scale.
It is a book to be recommended to Homeric students, and has the merit of being very
readable.

Anthologia Graeca Epigrammatnm Palatina cum Planudea. Eclidit H. STADT-

:llUELLER. Yol. III. pars 1, Palatinae l1bri ix epp. 1-56:3, Planncleae 1. 1 continens.
Pp vi+Z>S-l. Leipzig: Teubner, 1£106.
Select Epigrams from the Greek Anthology. ELlited with revised te:xt,
translation, introLluction, and notes, 1,y J. "\V. :.IACKAIL. ~ew edition. Pp. xi+433.
London : Longmans, 1906. 1-±s. net.
The same. Greek text only. Pp. 175. 2s. net.
The satisfaction with which scholars will receive a new part of Stadtmuller's critical edition
of the ~.\.nthology will be seriom-ly clampeLl by regret at the death of the editor before the
cornpletion of his ta~k. The present instalment, though of full size to rank as a volume
by itself, is describeLl as the first part of vol. iii, and it appears before the second part of
vol. ii. It is needless to describe Stadtmiiller's work, which is imlispen,able to all serious
5tudents of the Anthology. U nfurtunately it appeared too late to be used by Prof. :.Iackail,
59 of whose ~electecl 500 epigrams come from the portion of book ix included in the
present volume. Textual details are. however, the lea~t important part of Prof. Mackail's
"ork, the appear,mce of which in a new edition is very welcome, bince the original edition
( 1890.i has long been out of print. \Yithout forgetting SymonLls' excellent and inspiriting
e,say, it may safely 1,e said that Prof. :Mack1il's selection, with its prefatory essay and
notes, forms the best introduction to the Anthology on it, literary side. The new edition
differs only slightly in contents from its predecess:,1· (ten epigrams have been omitted anLl
twenty at.lded), but it has been carefully revised throughout. The only clr<1.wback is its
price, which will compel many who would have read it with profit and interest to deny
themselws that pleasure. It i, some compensation that the Greek text is now separately
issued in a cheap and attractfre form, which will make a clelightfnl pocket companion;
lrnt it is a pity that Prof. :.fockail's introLlnction shoulll not be made more generally
accessible.

Isocratis Opera Omnia: recen,nit E. DRERCP. Yol. I. Pp. cxcix+l9o. Leipzig:

T eul,ner, HJ0o. 14 111.
A critical edition of l,ucrak, has lon~ been needed, aml the appear,mce of the fir,t vol nine
ot Dr. Drerup's Wt>rk ;;,hows th,1t the ,Y<1nt is in a fair way to be supplied. It cuntains
the text of the first thirteen or,1tion-.. with teali11w11i,1 and critical apparatm, and full
prole~-mieu,t. The btter iudu.Je not only a rlescription of the textual rnaterials
hnt a ,h,cmsion of the Llates aUt.l authenticity of the orations eornprise,l in this ,·olurne.
 NOTICES OF BOOKS 133

Textually, Isocrates is remarkable on account of the existence of two papyrus manu-

scripts of considerable length, which carry us back to a stage in the tradition before
the two main families of vellum ~ISS. diverged. One of these, the ::lfarseilles papyrus
of the In Nicoclem, comes into use in the present volume ; the other, the British ]l,fu~eum
papyrus of the De Pace, will be of service in a subsequent volume. Dr. Drerup can be
tru:;ted to make full use of it, since he has examined the original at length ; and since his
results have been revised and extended by )Ir. H. I. Bell (whose complete edition of
the papyrus appeared in the Journal of Phifology la'lt year) there need be no hesitation
in accepting them a, trustworthy. The continuation of Dr. Drerup's edition will be
awaited with interest.

Paralipomena Sophoclea: supplementary notes on the text and interpretation

of Sophocles, by Lewis Campbell, ::II.A. Pp. xv+287. London: Rivingtons, 1907.
5s. net.
In this volume Prof. Campbell puts on record his final opm10n on a large number
of passages in Sophocles in which his original interpretation differed from that adopted
by Sir R. C. Jebb. In some cases he frankly adopts Jehb's view; in others he shows
cause fur maintaining his previous opinion ; occasionally he offers a fresh explanation
altogether. .Admirable as Jebb's edition is, it stands to reason that it cannot be finctl in all
respects, and no one has a better right than Campbell, whose life has been spent in
the study of Attic literature, to express dissent and put on reconl alternative views.
And the tone which he adopts towards his great rival (or let us rather say colleague) is in
all respects adrnirable. Since the book consists wholly of short notes on a great quantity
of passages, it is obviously impossible to discuss it in detail here ; but it will have
to be taken into consideration by future editorc, aml it comes opportunely, since
the Oxford Press will soon, we hope, be including Sophocles in its series of classical
authors.

Bacchilide: ep1mc1, ditirambi, e frammenti, con introduzione, comento, e appendice

critica. Di A. Taccone. Pp. li+218. Torino: Loescher, 1907. Lire 3.50.
English students do not in general require any further edition of Bacchylicles than J ebb's ;
but to those who desire a smaller or a cheaper book, which nenrtheless contains a full
commentary on the poems, Taccone's work may be recommended as serviceable and
convenient. He has made full use of the previous literature on the subject, so that the
reader is placed in possession of the views that other scholars have taken of the restoration
or explanation of doubtful passages. The editor's original contributions are not large, bnt
he has carefully considered the work of others, and his edition should be very useful to
Italian students.

Adonis, Attis, Osiris: Studies in the History of Oriental Religion. By J. G. FRAZER.

Pp. 356. London : l\Iacmillan, 1906. 10.~. net.
In the preface to this hook Dr. Frazer explains that the studies of Oriental cults are an
expansion of the corresponding sections in the Golden Bough, and will form part of the
third edition of that work. A careful student of the author's previous books will perhaps
be prepared for the general conclusions; but the expansion is so considerable that readers
of the Golden Bough will find it necessary to revise their ideas of Adonis and other kindred
tleities in the light of these later studies. :Xot only is much of the material new, but there
is also some difference in the treatment: in method, Dr. Frazer lays greater stress on the
effect produced on Oriental religion by the natural features of the East ; in tone, there is
134 KOTICE8 OF BOOKS
a distinct change from the first (and, to a less extent, from the secoml) edition of the Golden
Bough. Dr. Frazer is no longer content to allow the many analogies between ancient cults
ancl modern Christianity to speak for themselws, ancl he frankly states his own conclusions
on some of the fnnclamental <loctrines of the Christian religion.
The general argument of the book may be briefly stated in the author's own words
'under the names of Osiri,, Tammuz, Adonis, aml Attis, the peoples of Egypt and western
.Asia represented the yearly decay ancl revival of life, especially of vegetable life, which
they personified as a goll who annually diecl and rose again from the cle ,d. In name ancl
detail the rites varied from place to place: in snbsl.'tnce they were the oame' (p. 5).
It is impossilile, howe,er, to do justice in a short notice to the learning aml wealth of
illustration which support the argument. An interesting feature is the explanation of
{3Ustoms or m~·ths concerned with the burning of gods or kings, as po5sibly clue to 'a
conception of the purifying virtue of fire, which, by destroying the corruptible and perish.
ahle elements of man, was supposeLl to fit him for union with the imperishable ancl llivine'
(p. 100). Dr. Frazer suggests that, as men might attain to didnity by burning, so the
g,ds the1melves might lie refreshed and renovated by the ordeal of fire. The account of
the myth and ritual of Attis contains much that is new ancl striking, and the repulsive
part of the cult gains a fresh significance from Dr. Frazer's exhaustive treatment. His
conclu5ion, tliat the spread of Oriental religions in the ·west was one of the chief causes
that un,:.errninell ancient civilization is no doubt true ; but his attack on the 'selfish and
immoral ,loctrine' of' the commune of the soul with Goel and its eternal salvation as the
only o1ject worth living for' (p. 19--l) 'IYill seem to many a prejudiced am-l unfair present-
ment of the i,le.tls of early and mellieval Christianity, which Dr. Frazer has in mind
(p. 195). The final chapters, on Osiris, are a nry valuable contrilmtion to our knowledge
of a subje,.t of :,:re,lt complexity.

The Cults of the Greek States. By L. R. F AR_sELL. Volumes III., IV. Y ol. III. :
pp. xii+ 39:2, with 3,"'> Plates ; Yol. IV. : pp. viii +45--l, with 51 Plate,. Oxford :
Clar~ndon Press, 1907. 3:2.,. net.
After an interval of more than ten years Dr. Farnell ha; published a second instalment
of his 'Cults,' the new volume, dealing with the Earth-goclllesses (Ge, Demeter, Kore-
Per;,ephone), l'o;,eiclon, and .\pollo. The work has grown heyoncl the bounds which the
author originally contemplated ; three volumes in all were proposed in 1895, whereas in
the preface to vol. iii. it is announced that the book will be completed in five volumes, the
fa5t to di,cuss Hermes, Dionyrns, and minor cults. In vol. i. there was room for Zeus,
Hera, an,1 Athena, while Demeter aml Kore have practically filled an entire volume.
Except in the matter of expan,ion (awl this is a ,listind g,tin), Dr. Farnell has preserved
all the features which marked the two earlier volumes, the chapter clevotecl tu the cults
being followed liy ch tptero on the monuments an,1 ideal type of each deity. It is
noticeable that Dr. Farnell now bys somewhat greater stress on the results of anthro-
pological ,tu,ly : 11uotations from :.\[annhardt, Lang, and Frazer are certainly more
uumeron, than before, e,pecially in the treatment of Demeter ancl Kore, where, in,leeLl,
the evi,1ence of the comparatin methud c,mnot be neglectell. He lloes not, howewr, over-
eotimate the importance of anthn,1,,,l11gy, an<l remirnh us that 'its application to the lti~her
fads of ,;tu· religions histury might be combined with more caution ancl 111<,re special
knowled.~e than has always been shown hitherto' (pN:.f p. iv). The author himself is
eminently cautious in hi, own treatment of Demeter and of prol,lems counectetl with the
The,rn,Jplw1i,l ,lllll Eleu• inian rny:,teries. He will have nothing to tlo with a corn-tutem,
remarking tl1,tt there is uo eviclence for its exi:;tence in Greece (iii. p. 137 J ; he does not
l,elieve that the Thesmnph,,ria can be explained by the theory that the invention of
agriculture au,l the cnltirntion of cereals were due to women; ancl he is e11ually sceptical
with regarJ to the matriarchal hypothesis, by whieh :.\Iiss Harrison and other, account for
 NOTICE8 OF BOOKS 135
the Thesmophoria, among many other rites in Greek religion. His own view is that 'the
psycholo;:;ical explanation is more probable than the sociological' (p. Ill); women were
in charge of the Thesmophoric1 because they are apt to be more ecstatic and orgiastic, and
so holJ. a stronger magic, whereby they are more in sympathy with the earth-goddess,
whose generative powers resemble their own. His criticism of the matriarchate question is
a useful correctfre to a theory which, as applied to Greek religion, has lately shown a
tendency to run riot. Equally sane is the discussion of the Eleusinia, a problem
exhaustively treated within the limits which the .rnthor imposes upon himself. On the
question, is there a secret worth discoYery, and, if so, can it be di'3covered l Dr. Farnell
eomes to the conclusion that the fast, the mystic foocl, the passion-play, ancl the o1jects
revealed to the mystics prOLluced, not a sense of absolute union with the dfrine nature, but
at least a feeling of intimacy and friendship with deities who were powerful in the nether
world, ancl coLild there reward their worshippers. The a-raxv, TEBEpia-µ.<vo,, on whid1 so
much stress has been laid, was not an object of worship, but one of the number of things
reverentially displayed.
The greater part of vol. iv. is assigned to .Apollo, whose origin ancl cults are discussed
with goml judgm mt. The title Av,mo, appears to belong to the oldest stratum of Apolline
0

religion, aml as it can only mean 'wolf-god,' it implies a re,-erence for the wolf in a
hunting or pastoral stage of society ; but here again Dr. Farnell points out that this
respect need not be totemistic (p. 116). On the original significance of ~~pollo he is very
guarded, holding that the orthodox theory of an Aryan sun-god is a priori very possible,
but cannot be proved ; the ordinary Greek, until the time of Euripides ancl Plato, did not
identify or associate Apollo with Helios, aml Greek cult giYes little support to the solar
theory. Dr. Farnell acknowledges that the reaction against the extravagances of the sohr
myth may be pushed too far; and it is perhaps a question whether his own treatment of
Apollo is not a case in point. The appellative <I>o,Bo, is certainly connectecl with cpcio~, ancl
is most naturally explained as the epithet or name of a light-goLl. 11hen the author
remarks that no one would maintain that the Samkrit 'DeYas' are all sun-gods, he seems
to miss a distinction : if, in one mythology, all gods are called 'bright ones,' the title
may well mean 'hea,-enly '-a common appellative of a class; but if, in another mythology.
a similar name is the exclusiYe property of a single god, it is hard to resist the inference
that this god was the 'bright one' pm· e:ccelle1u·e, i.e. the rnn. Again, Dr. F,unell
depreciates the evirlence affordecl by the name of <I>o[;31), of whom he says that 'nothing in
her legend or genealogy clearly reveals any solar trait.' There is of course no question
about ,ol111· tr.1its ; but if PhoelJe is a lllnm· goddess, as is implied by her later .identification
with Selene, we have thus indirect evidence that in primitive times the sun aml moon
WeTe callerl <I>o,Bo, and <I>o[,':11) respectively. It is however a fact, as Robert has alread>-
pointe,l out (Preller-Robert, (iriech . .11!Jfh. i. p. 231), that the sun-theory rests on no
evidence from cult, popular poetry, or art ; and it is well for us to Le reminded that the
identification of Apollo with the sun really belongs to the same kind of ancient speculation
that deriYecl Hera from the air. In any case, the true importance of Apollo lies ill his
greatness as a political, social and ethical diduity, and in these respects Dr. Farnell's
admirable account leaves nothing to be desired. The 'ideal types' of Apollo are chosen
and discussed with Lliscrimination, and show that the author is as som11l in art-criticirn1 a,
in clealin~ with Greek religion. Scholars will welcome the completion of Dr. Famell";:
task, which is promised for next year; meanwhil., we may congratulate him on a work
which cannot fail to be rankecl among the most important of contributions to our
knowledge of Greek religion.

The Art of the Greeks. By H. B. ·w--1.LTERS. Pp. 2,7 ; 112 plates, and 18 figs. in
text. London: :Methuen and Co. [1906]. 12s. 6d. net.
The author makes a general survey of the leading branches of Greek art. ~\fter two
chapters devoted to preliminary consiLlerations, he discu:>SPS in turn tb.e Architecture,
136 NOTICES OF BOOKS
Sculpture, Painting, Vases, Terracottas, Engraved Gems, Coins, and :\Ietal work of the
Greeks. In each case, the elementary facts are stated, as far as may be, in chronological
sequence.
The illustrations are for the most part half-tone blocks, printed as plates. In many
cases, the results are brilliant.

Studies in the History and Art of the Eastern Provinces of the Roman
Empire. 1Vritten for the Quatercentenary of the UniYersity of Aberdeen by seven
of its Graduates. Edited 1Jy W. ~I. R.u1SAY. [Aberdeen University Studies, Ko. :20.J
Pp. xvi+391. 11 Plates, 3 :\laps, and numerous Illustrations in the Text. Aberdeen
l'niversity Press, 1906.
The tit'e sufficiently explains t!te motive for the appearance of this book, although it is
somewhat misleading as an indirntion of the contents, seeing that they are confined to Asitt
:\Iinor, and indeed for the most part to Sir William Ramsay's special preserve, Phrygia and
the surrounding districts, Pisiclia, Lycaonia, and Isauria. The volume fa a remarkalJle
monument to the editor's genius for exploration and for inspiring others with his own
enthusiasm for a subject from which interesting results can only be extracted by the exercise
of much painful research. Of the seven contributor~, the names of :\liss :\Iargaret Ramsay,
Mr. Callander, and Mr. J. G. C. Anderson, as well as of the editor, are familiar to readers
of this Joumal. :\Iiss Ramsay's contribntion on Isaurian and East-Phrygian Art in the
Third and Fourth Centuries after Christ is, in fact, a development of her recent article on
that subject. It is the only one of the articles of much interest to the student of ancient
art. It is a conscientious and useful piece of work, but it is doubtful whether its value is
not diminished Ly the exaggeration of the importance of this local art. In the conclusion
that · the mountain land of Xorthern Isauria . . . was the place of origin of a new kind
of tlecoratfre art, which spread widely over the Roman world ' we recognize an alarming
development of Dr. Strzyguwski's theories. .l\Ir. J. G. U. Anderson has an important paper
on Paganism and Christianity in N. Phrygia. The editor contributes a Report on
Exploration in Phrygia and Lycaonia, and also prints his Rede lecture on the War of
)Ioslem aml Christian for the posses,ion of Asia Minor. His most valuable contril,uti{Jn
is on the Tekmoreian Gue~t-Friemls: perhaps an Anti-Christian Society on the Imperial
Estates at Pisiclian Antioch. Some brief contributions in verse (English, Latin, and
Greek) give to this Fnfrersity publication a characteristically British touch. Though
some of the facsimiles of inscriptions leave much to be tlesirell, tlie printing and
illnstrat:ons are good, aml the volume a~ a whole thoroughly ,rnrthy of the occasion.

The Roman Forts on the Bar Hill, Dumbartonshire. By GEORGE l\IAcnoXALD

and ALEXA.~DER PARK. With a note on the architectural details by THOl!AS Ross.
Pp. xii+ 150. With 4 plates and 54 illustrations. Glasgow: Maclehose, 1906.
5s. net.
This is a clear and al,ly written account of one of the most interesting contributions that
recent excavations have made to our knowledge of Roman Britain. Consitlerable praise is
due to :\Ir. Whitelaw, the owner of the prope1ty on wliich the camps are situated, who
carried out the excavations at his own expense ; and he is also to be congratulated 011
having entrusted the Report to ~Iessrs. Macdonald and Park. He must already have felt
amply rewarded when, on the very first morning, the workmen struck a well which harl been
filled np with a most extraordinary collection of antiquities. ~o ,,nch exciting find was
made in the ,ul,sequent excavation, but the plans of the Antonine fort and of Auricola's
amp which preceded it were recovered in rnwe detail. Two inscriptions (one being a
 NOTICES OF BOOKS 137
dedication to the Emperor Pins, and both mentioning the first Baetasian cohort) and some
cmious, apparently prophylactic, bust~ of freestone, not to speak of architectural fragments,
are among the stone remains. The most remarkable of all the relics is an admirably made
chariot-wheel of eleYen spokes, found intact in a refuse-hole. The authors give good reason
for ;upposing that this and similarly made wheels are not Roman but native in origin_
Among the other remains are a fine set of leather shoes of various kinds ; a small series of
denarii (mostly shams, made of tin, apparently for the purpose of dedication to the gods '.) ;
and some remarkal,le instruments of deer-horn, ~irnilar to others which were found to the
number of thirty-two in the armoury of Carnuntum. So far no one has succeeded in
explaining the object of them instruments, and the problem may be commem1ed to the
consideration of readers of a mechanical turn of mincL The Report is well illustrated,
and more interesting- reading than such reports usually are.

Antike Denkmaeler in Bulgarien. Edited by E. K.1.LIXKA (with nine colla-

borators). Vienna .Acarlemy, 1906. (Schriften der Balkankommission, .Anti,1uar.
.Abt. IV.) 220 pages, 162 figs. and many facsimiles.
This volume is a provisional Corpus of the architectonic, epigraphic, and sculptural
remains of Bulgaria, classified according to subject matter. -171 objects are admirably
catalogued, with adeyuate illustrations of all the sculptures; with facsimiles or illui,trations
of all the inscriptions and with~copious indices.
·with the exception of a single item (Xo. 333, the early Greek stele of _-\.naxanc1ro~),
the who'e of the works described appear to be of a late and provincial class. They are
now made conrnniently accessible, and it is poi,sible to take a general view of the extant
antiquities of Bulgaria.

Geschichte der Meder und Perser bis zur makec1onischen Eroberung. [Handbli.cher
der al ten Geschichte.] Yon Justin V. PR_-tsEK. Erster Band. Geschichte der Meder
und des Reichs der Lander. Gotha, 1906.
This, the first volume of a History of the :\Iedes and Persians, is divided into two parts.
The first deals with the Kingdom founded by the Medes. Here the chief points of
interest to the student of Greek history are the account of the Cimmerian invasion and
the discussion of the relative value of the authority of Hecataens, Herodotus, aml Ctesias
of Cnidus, the last named the physician long resident at the court of .Artaxerxes. The
seconu. part is devoted to the rise of the Persians anll the foundation of their Empire under
Cyrus. The fall of Croesus and the expedition of Cambyses to Egypt are the events
which touch most closely upon Greek history. The volume closes with the revolt of the
false Ban1es arn1 the death of Cambyses. The book is rnluable as presenting from the
standpoint of the Orientalist many events which are generally regar,lell solely from the
G1eek point of view. The second volume will carry the history of Persia clown to the fall
of the Empire of the Achaemenidae before the victorious Alexander.

Hat Dorpfeld die Enneakrunos-episode bei Pausanias tatsachlich gelost,

oder auf welchem Wege kann diese gelbst werden? Einige Bemerkungen
zu Judeich's Topographic von Athen.Yon Alexander :'\Ialinin. 35 pp. Wien. 1906.
This pamphlet on a threadbare theme justifies its existence by a new suggestion_
::'il. Malinin points out that in Paus. 1. 1-l. 5 the temple of Eucleia is described as avciO,,µ.a
Kat roiirn a1ro Mryac.w, though no reference to the Persians occurs immediately before. In
fact the nearest reference to the Per~ians is in I. 8. 6, the passage about the statues of the
138 KOTICES OF BOOKS
Tyrannicicles. Hence he infers that the chapters between han been interpolated; and it
so happens that those chapters just contain the whole of the 'Enneakrunos-episode ' : if
they he omitted, the description of the agora is continuous. Thus Dr. ~Ialinin claims to
ha,·e found indications of the wrong in:;ertion of the 'episode' in this place. If he would
go on, and point out where is the place in which it ought to be inserted, he would have a
complete and consistent theory as good as any that has been suggested on the matter.
Xaturally those who see no need for assuming the insertion of the 'episode' will not be
-c@vinced by his explanation.

Urkunden dramatischer Auffuhrungen in Athen; mit einem Beitrage von

G. KAIBEL; heransg. von _-\._ WrLHEL}I. Pp. 279. 68 Abbildungen. [Sonderschr.
des Oest. Archiiol. In&titutes, Bd. YI.] Wien : Holder, 1906.
'This volume, as its title and the name, of its authors alone suffice to indicate, is of capital
importance and in,li5peusable to all students of the history of Greek drama. The epigraphic
documents dealt with fall into three classes: (1) the li&t of Yictors at the Dionysia ( I.G. ii.
{)71); (:2) the Didaskaliai (l.G. ii. 97:2-976 awl 1315; (3) the lists of victors,-tragic and
comic poets and adors-(I.G. ii. 97,). The first is the famous list which in the fir,t few
lines mentions Pericles and the poets :\Iagnes aml Aeschylus, recording the latter·s Yictory
with the Per,ae in 473-:2 B.C. Dr. Wilhelm leaYes the headline in the form rrpwr]ov Kwµo1
lJcrav rw[, -1wvvcrw,, rejeding with good reason Koehler's restoration Tw[v rpayw,ciwv Ka, Twv
Kwµwd3wv, but not deciding between the many other possibilities. Three new fragments
are added to this list. The mention of :\Iemmder in tLe list of victors (ii. 977) enables Dr.
1Yilhel!a to give an interesting note 011 the date of his first appearance (he first repre-
senteJ 3:2:!-1, was firbt succe&,ful with the 'Opyry, in 316-5) amt on the elate of the 'EuvTov
T,µwpo{,µ,vo,, showing that the king mentioned in Terence Heaut. 1 l'i is not necessarily
~\lexancler the Great. Kaibel's contribution to the volume is an interesting dis,:u;.sion of
the chronological proble1m invulveLl in the lists of Yictors. A series of appemlices
deals with varioll', side iHsues, and with recent works by Capps and Foucart bearing on the
history of the drama. The vn'.ume is characteri"ed lJy the thoroughness and acumen which
is to be funnel in all Dr. Wilhelm's epigraphic pul,lications, and i, mlrnimbly printed and
indexed.

Histoire Sommaire des Etudes d'Epigraphie grecque. Par S. Ca_1BERT.

Pp. Hiti. Paris: LerlJUX. 190G.
M. Cha1Je' t's accuunt of the stwly of Greek imcriptiom from the earliest times (he begin,
with Hellanicus) to the pre.,ent ,hy is very rea,lable, :-;ivin:,; somewhat more than the dry
bones of what does not at first sight seem a Yery attracti\·e subject. The origin an<l metho,ls
of the various attempts at a Corpu, are folly explainell, a111l the treatment generally is
sympathetic. Perhaps the writer is a little unkind to Fourmont. who, as 1Yilhelm has
recently shown. is not in all re,pects so hLtck a, he ha, l.een painted. Some minor inac-
cur\1cie,, especially in forei::!n names, tne noticeal.1le. Of books about or lJearing on inscrip-
tinns which are mentinEeLl not at all or not in their n;itural place, we may note Bechteh
111t1no;.:r,1ph on Ionic in,criptiom, Kern's Jloyoe.,ia, L,wy's inscriptions of sculptors, II.
J. Rose's Jw;,:1·ipli11ues G,·11ff111: ce/11.,tis,i1,l(le, the third e.lition of ::\Ieisterhans by Schwyzer,
von Scala's T,wtties, and Kirchner's P,·o.,upoumplii(/. Cu,t's Jfisto,·!t of the Society ,f
lJilett,1,di is later than :\Iiclrnelis' accunnt, awl the British School at ~\thens has a Gonrn-
ment g1,rnt.
 ~OTICES OF BOOKS 139
The Syntax of the Boeotian Dialect Inscriptions. By EDITH F. CLAFLIN.
(Bryn ~Iawr Diss.) Pp. 95. Baltimore, Lord Baltimore Press, 1905.
Mi5s Claflin's stn<ly of the Boc0tian Inscriptions from the point of view of syntax is a
Yery careful piece of work, the real Yalue of which will perhaps be more apparent when she
or other scholars may have with e<[ual patiencP similarly analysed the inscriptions of other
{lialects. It will then be po~sible to obtain a true perspectiYe of the syntactical peculiarities
of the various dialects. The present analysis re.eals comparatively little that is peculiar to
Boeotian ; partly, it is true, became the brevity or official character of most inscriptions
h mlly aclmits of much syutactical elaboration. In § 9. --! it is a little surprising that the
writer should hesitate to decide between Yocative and genitive in the gran-inscription
I.(;_~-/.. 149: KaAAia A1yi(0)0oio- TV a' ,i) rrpacr[cr' Ji] rrapoa&im. The genitive seems to us
undou hteclly the right interpretation. The reason for the use of the genitiYe in elating lJy
months might have been mure clearly stated in § 9. 29: a phra,e like 0vvapxw ,!pxovros
fLELvos 0ELAov0iw of course expresses aIL extended period, not a point of time. It is
interesting to note that while JrrcHcre is common in artists' signatures, the i111perfect does
not occur.

Corolla Num.ismatica. ::S-umismatic Essays in Honour of BARCLAY Y. HEAD. Pp. xvi

+386. Oxford University Press, 1906. With frontispiece, 18 collotype plates, and
:39 illustrations in the text. 30.s.
That this sumptuous Yolurne is of the nature of a Fest.,clirift is sufficiently clear from its
title. The recognition it implies has been richly merited ; ancl it is pleasant to find that
the 'little crown' is in every way worthy of the purpose it was meant to setTe. ~fr. G. F.
Hill has acted as editor, while the individual essayists number thirty in all. The continental
<:ountries best representecl are Germany and France, but tributes come also from Denmark,
Greece, Italy, and Switzerland. The Yariety of ,ubjects hancllecl is naturally y<;ry great.
There is hardly a sicle of ancient nurni,matics th,1t is not tot1ched upon, ancl consequently
no reader is likely to be sent empty away. In point of time, discussion ranges from the
.'Hycenaean age to the clays of the Byzantine Emperors. Its geographical limits lie between
Gaul on the one hand and India on the other. Esoter:c disquisitions on problems of
metrolugy and technique are agreealJly diversified by excursions into the less arid domains
of history and archaeology. .Ac; a rule, each of the essays ha'3 an importance of its own
in the present state of our knowleclge, while a few of them are probably ,lestinecl to be
permanently valuable. It is eminently fitting that so noteworthr a collection should be
as,ociated with the name of ::'!Ir. Head.
In the circumstances it is not possible to gi,·e, within reasonable space, any detailed
illllication of the character of the contents. Selection on the grountl of merit mi~ht l,e
in1·iclious. \Ve shall, therefore, restrict ourselve, to merely mentioning two or three of
the papers that may fairly he regarded as typical. Xone will attract more general intere;;t
than :M. Babelon's publication of an obol bearing the name of the Athenian tyrant Hippi,t,.
Prof. Dressel's reconstruction of the temple of :'.\Iatitlia an,l the Lasilicas of ::\latitlia. and
:'.\fa1 ciana is Yery tempting, although it depen,h upon the rehabilitation of a meclallion
<:ondemneLl as false l,y Eckhel. Colonel Allotte de la :Ftiye°i; ch,~ification of the coins of
Pe1si,; marks a distinct atlvance towa1ds the solutiun of a most obscure and ,liflieult series
of •1ue~tion~. \Vhat M. Paul Perdrizet has to S,ly of Xicopo!is ad ::'!Iestum deserYes the
particular attention of students of mythology. :'.\Ir. A. J. Evans ope:::is up new vistas in
his account of Minoan weights and mediums of currency. Dr. Gaebler traces the history
of the famous coin collection of Queen Christina of Swetlen. But we must forbear, adding
only that for the numismatic enthusiast there is scarcely a dull pa:,se in the book. The
~•)llotype plates are good ; and the portrait of )Ir. Heatl, which forms the frontispiece, is
ex,,ellent. In the nature of things the compilation of an imlex was impracticable.
uo SOTICES OF BOOKS
Die antiken Mu.nzen vonMakedoniaund Paionia. By limo G--1.EBLER. Erste-
_.\.Lteilung. Pp. viii+ 196. With five collotype plates. Berlin: Reimer, 1906. 19 111.

It is just twenty years since l\Iommsen formulated his colossal scheme for the pn h-
lication of a complete allll articulatell description of all kno,yn Greek coins. Work
was begun shortly afterwards under the supreme direction of Dr. Imhoof-Blumer. The
fir~t lialf of Vol. I. appeared in 1898. Xow, after an interrnl of eight year,, we h,n-e-
a secoml instalment of this monumental Corpus. It forms the opening section of Vol. III.,
the coinages dealt with being the national and proYincial i~sues of :ifacedonia, including
_.\.mphaxitis, Bottiaea, and Beroea. The book fully maintains the high standard set l,y
Prof. Pick's Dacien und Jioesien. Dr. Gaebler is to be unreservedly congratulated. X ot
only has be estalilished a remarkable series of conclusions on a hasi5 that promises to he
irrefragable ; he has set them before his readers with a lucidity and a precision that call
for the wry warmest praise. His Introlluction is peculiarly hard to summarize, for it
,loes not contain a single superfluous word. But its contents are so full of interest t bat a
l,,ire d.-;11tne must be attempted.
Philip II. had signalize-cl the consolidation of his power ]Jy suppres,ing the nriuus-
autonomous mints throughout .Macedonia. Co1wersely, when Philip Y. found J,irnself on.
the eve of a dea<lly struggle with Rome, he sought to enlist national feeling on his
si,le by ,anctioning a revirnl of the national coinage. This national coinage came
to an eull with the u\"ertlirow of the kingdom in 168 B.C. The vietorious Romans JiYided
the country into four administratiYe districts or 'regions' (µ.Epi1Je,), of which the 'first'
and the 'secoml' ,truck both silver and bronze, while (so far as we know) the 'fourth'
struck lm,nze only arnl the 'thinl' never struck at all. The coinaf(e of the 'regions'
lJegan al,out 158 B.c., and the output of tetradrachms from the 'first' distiict must h:,rn·
been enormous. In 150 B.C. occurred the revolt of Anllriscus. The praetor, P. Jm·entius
Thalna, who was despatched against him, opened the campaign by seizing Amphipoli~,
where he struck tetradrachms with types borrowed from the preceding series, lmt showing
a marked llitference in style, and bearing an olive branch (Bal\Xo,') as a 'canting badge.'
Presently Tlialna was totally defeated Ly Amlriscus, who in his turn proceelled to ;.trike-
tetradrachms at Amphipolis. The olrl types were &till used ; but the obnoxiom ' LEG["tas
pro ff WU store] '-wi1ich the Romans had introduced-was banished, and the heall of
Artemis was bound with a laurel-wreath in token of victory. After the o\·erthrow of
_.\.mlriscus by IJ. Caecilius :.Ietellus in 148 B.c., :.Iaceclonia became a Roman province.
Dr. Gaebler gives a careful list of the names of all the Roman magistrates who are-
known to ha\"e lJeen associated with the go\"ernment of Macedonia from 1-±8 B.C. down to
the reign of Philippus Senior, and we are thus providell with a convenient epitome of the
v,,rious cl1anges that the form of administratiun underwent. During the repulJlican er,i
the right of mintage was occasionally exercised by the Roman governors, as, for instance,
L. Fulcinnius and C. Publilius, 11uaestors of .Metellus Macedonicus (1-±8-146 B.c.).
rnder L. Jnlins Caesar (93-92 B.c.) and C. Sentius Saturninus (92-88 B.c.) tl1ere was a
renewal of the silver-mining industry, and tetradrachms were minted very freely. The-
bulk of this money bears the name of Ae,i!las, as quaestor. But there are two ,;pecimens
signed by l,is succe,;sor, Q. Bruttius Sura, as legat11s pro quaestore.
Unller the Empire the ::iiacedonian coinage falls into two great classes,-imperial
pieces proper, and pieces without an imperial portrait. Dr. Gaebler has lJeen alJle to-
accumulate for this period a mass of material that is practically exhausti\·e, and the-
dedudiom he has been able to draw are correspondingly illuminating. Apart f1om their
direct bearing on :.Iacedonian hi;.tory, they have a wider interest in rnnnexiun with the-
general 11nestions that cu1tre round the Kotvov and the vtwKopia, institutions that are more-
familiar in Asia :.Iinor than in Europe. The peculiarly 'agonistic' character of the later
coinage is well brought out, wl11le an Appendix describes about thirty v,trieties of gold a1111
:;ih-er medal,; or medallion, which also appear to have l1een connected with the dywvES" <Epoi.
The huge gold medallions uf the Tarsus fiml, for example, are to be associated with the
aywv <Ep,,r celebratell in honour c,f the vEwKop,a granted to Beroea in the reign of Elagahalm.
 NOTICES OF BOOKS 141
It is matter for consideralJle regret that a discussion of the 'Aboukir' medallions i, re-
legated to the Snpplement. The Plates approach as near as may be to perfection.

Die Griechischen Miinzen der Sammlung Warren. By Krnr REGLIXG.

Pp. Yiii+26--l. With 37 photographic plates. Berlin: Reimer, 1906. --!Om.

The 1769 <+reek coins herein described helonie.J to :\Ir. E. P. Warren of Lewes. They
include 1016 that once formed the singularly choice cabinet of Canun Greenwell. It wa,
orig1nally internlecl that the whole shouhl pass into the Boston ::\Imeum of Fine _-\rts. But
this intention has only been partially fulfilled; some of the coim remain in Le,1·es, others
"ere soltl in London in 1905. Prior to the collection being thus broken up, it was decided
to compile a permanent record uf its contents. Those respon,il,le were fortunately alJle to
;cecure the sen·ice, of Dr. Regling fur the purpose, and the result is the handsome yo]ume
now un,ler 110tice.-a book that no student of Greek numismaties can afford to neglecr.
The issues of the best period, from all parts of the Greek world, are fairly well represented.
But ~pecimens of the electrmn of Cyzicu, aml of the gohl and sih·er of Sicil:·, Abtlem,
Lampsacus, anLl Cyrene are spe~ially numerou~ and important. For the most part the indi-
Yidual coins haYe l.1een selected from the point of Yie1Y of one who combined the instincts
of the collector with the ta,tes of the scholar. As a result, we get many examples that are
Yery fine, a comideralJle number that are rare, and a few that are nni,1ne. Reglin;:!'s de-
scriptions are characterized by the care and thoroughness that were to lJe expected from so
competent a numismatist. P,uticular Yalue attache, to identifications of dies with tlwse
of coins published elBewhere. Useful notes abounLl, and there are frequent references t0
recent numismatic literature. Taken all o,·er, the P,ate, are goo,l.

Terina. Progran1111 zum 'iVinkelmannsfeste. Br Kear REGLIXG. Pp. 81. 'iYith 3 Photo-
graphic plates and 2 cuts in the text. Berlin : Reimer, 1906.

The beautiful series of diclmchms struck at Terina is a great fa,·ourite with all loYers
of Ureek coins. Xearly twenty-fh-e years ago (1883) many of them were illustrated in a
paper pnhlishecl in the N11mi.snwtic Chronic!~ 1,y the late R. S. Poole. The present
monograph is far more complete than anything hitherto attempted. It is practically an
exhaustiYe list of all known specimens. The number of distinct nuieties catalogue,!
(apart from plated coins) is 84. Guided by stylistic considerations, comlJined with
a minute strnly of the dies, Regling distributes these o, er seYen periods cowring the
years between 480 and 356 B c. The most interesnng of the periods is that generally
associated with the handiwork of an engrm·er <I>. The opinions of other numismari,t,
regarLling this artist are pas-;ed in review, ancl at least one fresh piece of eYidence is
addncecl. The final conclmion is that it is an abbreYiation of the name Phrygillo,, antl
that the little bird, which appears l,oth at Terina and at Thnrii, is a 'canting badge'
(<f.,pvyil\o~). An examination of the type, suggests that the ,1·ell-known female figure is
neither a nymph nor a Siren, but Xike,-an explarrntion that has already had it, ad,·o-
cate, : ant pecnliarities in the representation are to l,e acrnnntecl for by assuming a
'syncreti,m' with the city go,l,less, Terina. Inci,lent,tl:y, cil'ca 300 B.C. is fixed upon a,
the mo,t prohal,le date for the is,me of the silver tetrobols. The bronze coina:,:e also
1eceive, brief Lliscu:osion. --\ltoiether·, thi,, • Programm' is an excellent bit of work. The
Plates are aclmirable.
 ~OTICE:::l OF BOOKS
Grammatik der griechischen Papyri aus der Ptolemaerzeit : Laut- und
Wortlehre. Von E. 1-InsER. Pp. xiv+538. Leipzig: Teubner, 1906.
So long ago as 1898 Prof. ::iiayser published, in a Heilbronu Programm, the first part of a
grammar of the Ptolemaic papyri, dealing with the vowel phenomena pn:sented by them.
Since that date the materials have gre,,tly increased, mainly throngh the puLlication of the
Tebtunis papyri and the third part of the Petrie papyri (the Hibeh papyri were published
too late to be taken into account), and Prvf. ::iiayser has now rehandled the whole subject
on a larger scale,-a scale so large, indeed, that it is not likely that any word in the
published Ptolemaic papyri has escapeLl his notice. The present volume deals with
phonetics and accidence ; a second i, promised upon the syntax. In a department of
learning where the materials are constantly increasing so rapidly as is the case with Greek
papyri, it is impossible to expect finality; but as a very full conspectus of the extant
phenomena Prof. ::iiay,er's book will be a u,eful work of reference for some time to come

Life in Ancient Athens. [Handbooks of Archaeology and Antiquities.] By

T. G. TcCKER. Pp. xiii+212. With 85 illustrations and a map. London:
::iiacmilhn aml Co., 1907.
Thi~ i:3 in many ways r1uite a remarkable little book. It is written in an extremely fresh
and attractive style, which is well maintained throughout. It is quite unpretentious :
not a single reference to authorities is giYen in the body of the work. Yet there are
abnmlant eY:tlences that the author has an intinrnte acquaintance with Greek literature-
and no slight knowledge of Greek archaeology. The period dealt with comprises the-
fifth and fourth centuries B.c., aml all the varied interests of Athenian life at that period
both JJUblic and prirnte, are vividly presented. The different chapters descTibe the-
buildmgs the .Athenian saw around him, how he spent his time day by clay, what he wore,
how he brought up liis children, what was his religious belief, arnl other similar interests
of life. The main characteristics of ~·Hhenian art are briefly dealt with. Perhaps we
should like to have heard a little more about the average .Athenian's attitude towards
Imperial •1uestions. It may be noted al,o (a triYial point) that the spelling of place-names
in the map does not al ways agree with tlut adopted in the text. The illustrations are,
with one or two exceptions, excellent.

The Princes of Achaia and the Chronicles of Morea. By Srn REN::S-ELL

Honn. 2 vols. Sm. Pp. 655. London: E . .Arnold, 1907. 25s. net.
Sir Rennell Rodd unfolds an interesting story of mediaeval Greece, which has probably
lJeen known to English reader,; chiefly through the more limited 8tudies of Finlay, Tozer,
and Emy. Gil,bou, who hatl not the necessary material, cliomissecl the subject with a
lordly >oentence :-· I shall not pnrrne the ohscure and Yarious dynasties that rose and fell on
the continent or in the isles.' The author of these volumes has natmall,v made full use of
the inntlual>le researches of Carl Hopf, but he has made investigations of hi, own with
great enthusiasm and patience. He gives in an appendix an account of the mediaeval
Chronide of Jloreu, a record truly p1osaic as a poem yet indispensable, though at time-;
treacl1erous, as an authority. Prof. J. Schmidt's edition (Lomlon: Methuen, 190-1) is
referred to, though it seems to have lJeen published too late for the author's ready me_
(There is a still more recent critical study of the Chronicle by A. J. Adamantin, published
at A.then", 1906, and noticed in B!J:. Zeit-,chrif't, 1907, p. 333.)
Sir Rennell deals with a period that extend~ from the Latin conynest of Constantinople-
in 120-! to the fall of the Eastern Empire in the middle of the fifteenth century. "\Ve have
the whole history of the princetlom of Aclmia-practically the Peloponnese-and glimpse~
 ~OTICES OF BOOKS 1-!3•

of the rulers of Epirns aml Thessaly, of the Duke$ of Athens, and of the rather distracting
governors of Euboea. The scene is often L1id in such classic lands as Elis and Arcadia,
with a Greek and Slav population in the background. French knights like the Yille-
hardouin,; aml the sinbter Charles of Anjou, or his l;ailies, impose on alien peoples tlie law
of the \Vest-not harohly, imleeJ, yet without en,luring result,. Points of feudal eti,1udte-
are referred to the French King; the Pope intervenes; the Doge of ,-enice is e,-er on the
alert ; and the Eastern Emperor plays the part-sometimes a ,mall one-fur which he has
been set clown. The most iuteresting portion-; of the work, for the general reacler, are those
describing the conquest ];y the Yillehanlouins. Sir Rennell "-rites nry well, though his
narratise at times-perhaps inevital,ly-rather tends to dry chronicle and the narration
of family hi;,tory. There is always howenr a u,eful statement of facts dearly set
forth. The l;ook contains some genealogical table~ and an interesting map of n11.,diaeval
theece, where the reader can find CLirenza and Clairmont and _lndravid,1, and other place-;
famous in Frankish story. Perhaps the author may some clay l,e ab'.e to give us a
supplementary volume, or at any rate a portfolio of illustr,1tions, with letter press, con-
taining pictmes of some of the old strongholcls that form such a romantic feature in the
feudal scenery of ~Iorea; and a selection from the coins, and possibly some other
illustrative matter, would be welcome.

BLf3AL081JK1') Ma.pa.a-Aij. M,Aernl r.,pl TOV {3,ov Kat TTJS ,AW(J"U'}, TOV 'EAA1JVLK01J Aaoii, l''lrO N. r.
IIo'll.irov.
IIa.poL,..,a.L. A', pp. r.' +600, 1899. B', pp. 127 +6s9, 1900. r·, pp. 686, 1901. t:..', pp. 686,
1902. 'Ev 'A8ryvatr, rvrrot, II. c.. :EaKEAAapiou. Price, each volume, 8 f.
These four Yolumes are a first instalment of a ~omplete collection of m0tlern Greek
and Byzantine proverbs, brought together by Professor Politis from all sources, puhlished,
unpubli,,hed, aI!d or,11, and fully annotatecl. The most important word has been taken in
each proverb, and the collection arr,mged alphabetically nude, these headings. The scale
of the work is very large, and the last proverb in the fourth volume is entered under a.
heading no further down the alphabet than d'll.,w. General conclusions on the whole
subject are pwmised at the completion of the work. In the first volume, before beginning
his own colh,ction, the author has printed seven unpublished collections of Byzantine
proverbs from MSS. at ~Iunich, Corfu, Athens and Jerusalem, and a bibliography, which
includes foreign as well as Greek proverbs. The work is far from being a mere compilation_
of material already pnblishetl. Besides the proverbs he has collecte,l personally, he has
used lists of pro\'erbs sent to him for this purpose from all parts of the Greek-spe.1king
world. Of the~e the most important are 3386 from Lesbos, and 2371 from Cephalonia.
Each proverb is explained and illustrated by comparisons cl,awn from a wide field.
Owing to the lack of a dialect Dictionarv of modern Greek, and the number of
unusual or local words nsed, these explan;tions are not the least valuable part of
the work.
The proverbs are recorded, as far as the sources allow, in the local dialects, and,
whilst they mrnvoidably, if only from the inacle-:1uacy of the Greek alphahet, fall short
of complete accuracy in this respect, none of the native colour has been removed by
any translation into the purified langua~e. The source~ used are so wide and the arr,mge-
ment so methodical that, as far a, modern proverbs are concerned, it does not seem
possilJle that it can be superseded, and no fresh discoveries of Byzantine MS. collections
are likely to add mnd1 of importance. The remonil of the Xational Library caused the
work to l>e broken off in 190-!. The interval has been employed on a collection of IIapa&orrELs
or modern Greek traditions, and, when this is finished, the publication of the Proverbs
is to be resumed. The volumes are well printed in the same format as the rest of the
Bi,!3'11.w81K1J '!'tlapa(J"A~.
 1-U NOTICES OF BOOKS
BL~AL061JK1J Ma.po.a-AfJ. ~IEAeraL r.Ept TOV {3iov Kat rijs yXwa-<T1)S TOV 'EAA1)VLKOV ;\aoii, vr.o
~- r. IloAITOV,
Ilo.pa.8oa-ELS, Mipos A', pp. 1-628; M,pos B', pp. 629-13-18. 'Ev 'A0~vms, T1J7l"OtS II. ~- ~a/CEA•
'11.apinv, 190-!. Price including M.fpos ~·, 20 f.
These two ,olumes, of which the first contains 1013 legendary stories, and the seconcl
notes on :Xos. 1-6-±J, will Le followed Ly a third containing the rest of the notes ancl the
Prolegomena. The whole is to form a part of the MEAfrm, which Professor Politis is
publishing in the ~Iaraslfs library. The appearance of these books, with their goocl printing
ancl moLlerate price, is clue to the enlightened generosity of Mr. Gregorins :Maraslis.
The traditional stories in this colleciion are both from published and from oral
sources. The latter are transcribed as they were told, in the genuine popular language
untouched by the written tradition, and more or le,s coloured Ly the peculiarities of the
local dialect. Those taken from printed source~, many of them foreign, h,we heen recast
in the popular form, in which they might ha,·e Leen r2counted by pea,ants using their
local dialects. Tlie,e latter are marked with an asterisk. This distinction will no doul,t
be mentioneLl in the forthcoming Prolegomena : at present it can only be made out hy
noting the nature of the source as given in the notes. It is oLYiously of capital ,alne for
anyone who would use the book as material for the study of the dialects.
The traditions are arranged under twenty-nine heads :-legend, historical nnd local,
legends of gods, saints, and heroes, of the stars and elements, of plants, animals, and wilcl
beasts, of dragons and serpents, of treasures guardecl by negroes, of ghosts and haunted
place,, of uncanny creatures, Kalikclntzaroi, ~era.ides aml Lamias, of witches, of the devil
and apparitions, of sicknesses, of the fates, of corpses, vampires, death, and the underworld,
with a final "ection containing aetiological stories.
Such a collection cannot from the nature of the sulJject he complete, and anyone who
has enjoyed a part of the confidence of Greek peasants could add a few more items, but it
gives samples probably of e,ery kind of legend. The author has done good service, not
only in printing the large number of legends he has himself collected, but in gathering
together the published stories, which were scattered o,·er a great mass of literature, much
of ,it Yery inaccessible. The skill, with which he has retold these in popular form restores
to them much of their life, sadly lost in foreign books, or in the purified language of
modern Greek writers.
The legends themselves, as products of the popular Greek fancy, are of as much
interest as the Romaic folk-ballads, anJ sometimes deal with the same subjects. The
taking of Saint Sophia, the hero Digenes, the woman lJllried beneath the bri,lge, appear in
tradition and folksong alike. The mass of materi~l, both in text and notes, bearing on
popular mythology makes the lJook imlispen;calJle for the ,tuclent of Greek folklore, aml
the charm of the stories will appeal to the general reader with wme knowledge of modern
Greek. The notes are very full, and embody comparisous and illustrations drawn from a
wide field.

Tlie j;,/lo,ting bool:s lial'e alsu been reaice,l :-

Atkinson \'I'. D.). A Glossary of Terms used in Engli&h Architecture. Pp. xxiv+320;
:!65 cut,:. Lon,lon : Jfotlrnen, 1906.
Duff (J. W.). Homer aml Beowulf. Pp. 25. 1906.
Ferrero (Gugl.). The Greatness and Decline of Rome. Tran;.!. by A. E. ZnnrERX.
2 vol, .. pp. viii+328, vi+38!:J. Lundon: Hein211umn, 1907. 17.s. net.
Gilliard 1Charles). (Juelques Reformes de So,on. Pp. 32-l. Lau,anne: Bride], 1::07.
Hoste '.M. R.). Xausiraa. Pp. xi+56. Lon:lon: Xutt, 1906.
Juvenal. Satires, eLl. A. F. CoLE. Pp. xii+ 382. London : Dent, 1906.
Plato. Jienexenus, hl. J. ~\., SH.I.WYER. Pp. xxxi+:36. Oxford: Clarendon Pre;.;.,
rn11u. 2,.
Schmidt (M. C. P.:,. Kritik Ller Krit1ken. Pp. :37. Leipzi~: Durr, 1906.
Sophocles. ~-\.ntigone. Transl. by H. WmrEu·,,·. P1,. l +-~6. Oxford : Clarendon
Pre--. 1!)06.
 EARLY SELEUCID PORTRAITS.
II.
[PLATES XIII., XI\T.]
Ix a recent number of the Jmirnal 1 I had occasion to indicate some of
the difficulties surrounding the identification of the royal portraits that
occur on silver coins accompanied by the simple inscription BA~IAE~~
ANTloXoY, The object of the article in question was to advocate a
change of tactics in dealing with the problem,-to urge the desirability
of concentrating attention on well-defined groups which should be sub-
jected to a close and comprehensive scrutiny. As an illustration of the line of
treatment proposed, there was selected for detailed examination the set of
coins composed of tetradrachms on which the diadem ,rnrn by the. king is
furnished with wings. ,n1ile certain of the inferences tentatively suggested
on the strength of this examination have not been uniYersally accepted,2
the more positive anrl important of the conclusions reached remain uucon-
troYertecl. I would single out the following points as being now fairly "·ell
established :-(1) A large class of coins previously assigned to Antiochus Hierax,
or alternatively to Antiochus III., really belongs to Antioclrns II. (2) The
pieces of which it consists give us a portrait of Antiochus II. which we may
confidently adopt as a ' standard' likeness, a criterion that in his case was not
previously aYailable for purposes of classification. 3 (3) }Iost of the gold money
of Autiochus II. was struck in Central Asia at a mint or mints which had al5o
been active under his father. ( 4) Whether 1Ye shall ever be able to rec,)gnize
the portrait of Hierax or no, the majority of the tetraclrachms with the winged
head form part of his coinage, having been minted at Alexandria Troas.
(5) These tetradrachms, taken in conjunction with a number of others
of similar 'spread ' character, issued from the mints of Cyzicus, Lampsacus,
and Abydus, gives us a fair idea of the 'sphere of in±iuence' which Hierax
dominated before :!:W B.C.
·where a first experiment has proved so fruitful in interest, it is perhaps
justifiable to embark upon a second. And there lies ready to hand
another group of coins sufficiently marked in character and sufficiently
limited in extent to make investigation comparatively easy. I mean the
rare tetradrachms which have on the reverse a figure of Heracles resting.
The hero is seated with his lion's skin beneath him, while his right hand
grasps the upper end of his club, which stands upright in front of him.
This type constitutes a striking innovation in the coinage of the Seleucidae.
It is intrnsive, in the sense that the familiar figure of Apollo on the
1 J.H.S. xxiii. pp. 92 ff. J.H.S. xxY. pp. 101 n:, and H. mu Fritze in
2 Discussion has chiefly centred round the Berl. Phil. Wochensdir. 1906, Xo. 27 (p. ,31).
portrait' of llierax; see A. J. B. '\Yace in J S,,,..Bnµbury, .Num. Glu·on, 18S3, p, 78.

H.S.-YOL. XXVII. L
146 GEORGE 3IACDO:XALD
omphalos is speeLlily restored to its place of honour. That the variation was
a local as well as a passing phase of numismatic fashion was long ago
pointed out by Dr. Imhoof-Blumer, whose single remark upon the subject
is the truest and most valuable obse1Tation that has so far been made
about these tetradrachms: they were all struck in Ionia or in Aeolis. 4
Other numismatists besides Jmhoof have had their attention turned to
our group. 5 In no case, however, have the materials for comparison and
study been anything like complete. As a consequence the results obtained
have been inconclusive or unreliable. Bunbury and Babelon, for instance,
were at pains to argue (as against Gardner) that the type of the seated
Heracles was peculiar to Antiochus IL So far as the coins then known are
concerned, it is certain they were right. But the discovery of the piece
which stands first upon our list has given an entirely Jifferent aspect to the
question, and has at the same time finally disproved the view of Six, who
believed that the whole of the Heracles tetradrachms belonged to the reign
of Antiochus Hierax, and that they represented the coinage of' Alexander,
brother of Laodice,' having been issued by him while he was holding Sardis
in the interests of his 'nephew.' 6 The identity of the head upon the
following is so clear that we need not hesitate to attribute it to the first of the
Antioclii.
ANTIOCHUS 1.
1. 7 Head of Antiochus I., r., dia- BA~lt\EQ~ Heracles, naked, seated
demeLl ; bor<ler of dots. ANTloXoY 1. on rock, his hair
bound with taenia; underneath
him is his lion's skin, one end of
which is brought up so as partially
to cover his r. thigh ; his r. hand
grasps the handle of his club, which
stands upright in front of him,
while his 1. is placetl behind him
on the rock ; beneath 8 m;
to 1.,
beyond inscr., one-handled vase
r., below which, one above another,
[ol and ff!.
Pl. XIII., 5=B.~I.=G,c,·k C:,;i,1s c,f rt Trl'/l-knou-n A;nateur, Lot 230 (Pl. vi1)=Regling,
Sa,n;alung iVcuren, l'· 202, Xo. 129i (Taf. xxx.).
• Jlonnaics g,·,_,,_,ij_Ues, p. 426. Cf. Bunbnry, are Euboic-Attic tetradrachms. Where di!le1ent
Xw,1. C:hron. 1883, p. iS, footnote. ,i,ecimens are catalogued under the same
5 Gardner, Seleucid K111gs of Syria, pp. xv. f;
nmnber, it is to be under,toocl that they are
Bun bury, l.c. pp. 77 ff.; Babelon, Ruib rlc Syn'e, from the 5ame dies on both sides. ·where the
pp. lx. ff. ; Six, Ku111. C'llron. 1S9S, pp. 233 f., mathematical sign of e,1uality is employed, it
etc. means not merely that the specimens thus con-
6 See J.H.S. xxiii. p. 116.
nected are from the same dies, but that they are
7 For convenience ofreference the coins in the identic.,l.
particular group under examination are . s ~he 1'.se of the word 'beneath' in a desciip-
numberecl consecutively, in-espective of the hon implies that there is no exergual line.
king whose portrait they may l,ear. All of them
 EARLY SELEUCID PORTRAITS. 1-!7

This remarkable tetrndrachm, formerly in the Warren Collection, is now

in the British 1'Iuseum. Mr. Talbot Ready, through whose agency it was put
upon the London market, informs me that it was found some seven years
ago in the Lebanon. Though it has been published twice previously, it has
not yet attracted the notice it deserves. As a glance at the Plate will show,
the rugged features of Antiochus Soter are unmistakable. The coin was
therefore struck not later than 261 n.c. And it came from the mint of Cyme in
Aeolis. The one-handled vase on the reverse would of itself have been sufficient
to prove that this was so. It was the ' town-arms' or 7rapau17µov of Cyme.
As such, it figures as a symbul on silver coins of various periods, notably on
tetradrachms with the types of Alexander the Great, 9 and on the familiar
' spread' tetradrachms of the second century B.C.; on PLATE XIII., 2, for
instance, it will be seen between the legs of the horse on the reverse. On bronze
coins it occurs not merely as a symbol but also as a type; in such cases it
shares the usual fate of the 7rapau17µov and is relegated to the reverse,10 as on
PLATE XIII., I. Standing alone, then, the one-handled vase upon No. 1 woulJ
have furnished ample evidence of origin. But there is a link that is even
closer and more interesting. The two monograms that are placed below it
obviously denote the uames of magistrates, and one of them is very uncom-
mon. Now exactly the same combination appears on the reverse of an autono-
mous silver coin of Cyme, which is also, as it happens, in the British Museum.
The following is a description.

Head of the Amazon Cyme r. ; hair l<Y (above) Bridled horse standing
rolled and tied with riband; r., with 1. forefoot raised ; between
border of dots. its legs, fFt ; in front, loJ •

Pl. XIII., 6=B.JI.C. Troas, Acolis, ancl Lesbos, p. 109, Ko. 58 (Pl. xx. 16).

This piece, which has a weight of 10·47 grammes, is one of a very rare
class. It was originally published in 1892 by Mr. Warwick Wroth, and was
regarded by him as a didrachm of the Persic standard, probably belonging to
the period from 250 to 190 B.C. 11 Curiously enough a second example, struck
from different dies and weighing only 9·36 grammes, was made known in the
same year by M. Babelon, who considered it to be a light Rhodian tridrachm,
minted between 258 and 202 B.C.12 A third specimen, bearing different
monograms and weighing 10·55 grammes, had been described nine years earlier
by Dr. Imhoof-Blumer,13 who, however, expressed no opinion as to its age;
it was then in the cabinet of Sir EJward Bunbury, and is illustrated in the
Sale Catalogue of his collection. 14 It will be noted that there has been a
tendency to assign this autonomous group to the days when the hegemony

" !lli.iller, Nos. 943 ff. iv. 12.

l\JGuin Types, pp. 123 ff. lJ Jionnaies greequM, p. 2i2.
11 N11m. Chron. 1892, p. 17. 11 Second Portion, Lot 131 (PLATE II.\
12 Rei-. S1t111. 1S92, p. 116, Xo. 12, Pl.
148 GEORGE MACDONALD
of Western Asia Minor had passed from the hands of the Seleucidae. The
connection now established ·with No. 1 of the Heracles series pushes it back
to the reign of Antiochus I. It is true that the identity of monograms may
be a coincidence ; in certain Hellenic cities the monetary magistracies would
seem to have been hereditary.15 But I think a comparison of the two pieces
concerned-they are placed side by side upon PLATE XIII.-will convince any
experienced eye that they are practically contemporaneous. Special signi-
ficance attaches to the presence, on the obverse of both, of the border of dots,
an adjunct that fell into disfavour in this part of the Hellenic world about the
middle of the tl1ircl century B.c.rn It may appear strange that regal and
autonomous coins,-of different standanls too,-should have been issued from
the same mint in one and the same year. But, although we know too little of
the circumstances of the time to hazard an explanation, attention will be drawn
presently to what is possibly a par,.1llel. Meanwhile we must content ourselves
with noting that the gap in the mintage of Cyme is less absolute than was
formerly supposed. 17
Apart from this fitful and uncertain gleam of light, the discovery of
No. 1 has an important bearing on the discussion of the remaining tetra-
clracl1ms of the Heracles group. Although these have hitherto been assigned
by general consent to Antioclrns II., they fell to him only as ultimus lwens.
' It must be admitted,' says Bunbury, 'that the reasons for attributing this
particular group of coins to the second Antiochus, imtead of his predecessor
or successor, are extremely slig lit.' 13 ~ ow we are for the first time in a
position to pro;-ide a solid basis for the attribution, and so to secure a fresh
set of well-authenticated portraits of the king. That the whole series is
homogeneous does not aL1mit of doubt, and will become even more evident
as \Ye proceed. This being so, the identification of the head of Antiochus I.
gi.-es us a fixed point. The younger head can only be that of his son, and
the probable period of issue is circa :Wl B.C. The new king ,ms at that
time twenty-four, an age that agrees perfectly with his appearance, not indeed
in all of the portrnits, but certainly in those of them that we can, upon
ot!ier grounds, accept as being 'standard' likenesses. The nature and cause
of the ;-ariations hinted at will become apparent immediately.
Inclusirn of X o. 1, I ham succeeded in bringing together twenty-five
different varieties of Hetacles tetra<lrachms, sewral varieties being repre-
sented by more tlian one specimen. It is an agreeable duty to acknowledge
the kindness and courtesy of owners and custodians who ha.-e furnished me
\Yith casts. And it is a further pleasure to add that the cost of supplying
adequate illustrations has been met by a grant from the Research Fnnd of
the Carnegie Trust for the Universities of Scotland. Some general rema 1 ks

1·, SeeJ.H.S. xxiii. p 101.
i,; J.II .~. xxiii. !'- 115-wheie, Ly the "·ay,
tl,ere is an oi.viou, rnispriut of ',econd' for
'thinl..
17 In lSS, Head rerna1ke,l that between 500
aml 190 B. c. the city 'clocs not seem to hai'e
struck any money "·hatever. · r His'. _Yum.
l'· 4,9.)
19
-Yw,,. C'l,ron. ISS3, p. 'i'i.
 EARLY SELEU-CID PORTRAITS. 149

will facilitate the proper understanding of the detailed descriptions that are
to follow. To begin with, it will be found that the Heracles coins of
Antiochus II. group themselves naturally into three classes, each class
characterized by a distinctive mark or marks enabling us to assign it to a
particular mint. A peculiarity common to all three classes calls for very special
notice. At the head of each are ranged one or two pieces unexceptionable
in style and execution. Those that succeed them are simply more or less
degenerate copies. The result is an apparently wide variety of portraiture, the
:real meaning of which only becomes intelligible when we have something
like a complete sequence before us. In every case the earliest coins were
produced by skilled engravers; as the original dies wore out or broke, they
were replaced by imitations which betray the hand of inexperienced workmen,
but which were destined in their turn to serve as models for even lower depths
of deterioration. "\Ve cannot, of course, be certain in any instance that we
possess all the links in the chain. But the surviving evidence is quite
sufficient to demonstrate the broad truth of the statement just made. The
same phenomenon has been observed elsewhere, in connection with the
money of cities that have no continuous minting tradition stretching back to
fairly early times. Crete supplies quite a number of examples. 19 And it is
significant that the process described manifests itself very clearly in the
small group of autonomous coins of Cyme to which we had occasion to
allude a page or two back; 20 the British Museum piece is admirably
executed, that in the Bibliotheque Nationale is not nearly so satisfactory, the
Bun bury specimen is a long way behind both. It would seem as if cities
that took to minting at a comparatively late epoch were in the habit of
importing from well-established centres, not trained workmen and designers,
but pattern dies; these dies were used as long as might be; when they
ceased to be serviceable, reconrse was had to the talent of local 'artists.'
However that may be, the phenomenon we have been discussing introduces a
fresh complication into the problem of Seleucid portraiture. It is obvious
that, where it occurs, the only likenesses we can regard as typical are those
that open a se1;ies. One other remark is worth making before we enter on a
consideration of the individual varieties. The list will be found to illustrate
two of the technical points to which attention was drawn in my former
paper. 21 The border of dots on the obverse is, as we might expect from the
date of issue, universal; and the obverse die had, as a rule, a much longer
life than the reverse. Having thus cleared the ground, we may proceed to our
enumeration.

rn See Svoronos, .i.Ym,z ismatique de let Crete 20 See supra, p. 147.

ancienne, Atlas, passim. 21 J.H.S. xxiii. pp. 99 f. and p. 103.
150 GEORGE MACDONALD

ANTIOCHUS IL
Class A.-Stnick at Cyi;ie.
Subdivision (a).
2. Head of A.ntiochus II., r., dia- BA~I.AEO~ Heracles seated 1. on
demed ; border of dots. ANTloXoY rock as in No. 1; no
taenia; although there is no ex.
line, the ground is indicated run-
ning from the edge of the rock below
the hero's feet; beneath, one-
handled rnse 1., and M; between
legs of Heracles, A; to r. of lower
part of rock, 41.
Pl. XIII., 7==Grcek Coins in the Hunterwn Collection, Vol. III. p. 19, No. 1.

3. Similar. Similar; but 41 beneath r. end of

Pl. XI II., 8 =Berlin.

I rock.

Subdivision (/3).
4. Head of A ntiochus II. r., dia-
demed; border of dots.
Pl. XIII., 9=E . .ll.C. p. H, Ko. 8.
BA~ I A E Q ~ Heracl2s seated 1. on
ANTfoXoY rock as on No. 1; he
wears taenia, and there is no at-
tempt to indicate the ground; to l.,
beyond inscr., one-handled vase 22 I.,
with traces of monogram below
( &. '/) ; to 1. of lower end of club,
P.. ; to r. of lower rart of rock, q:2.

5. Similar. BA~I.AEQ~ Similar type; to r. of

ANTloXo[Y] lower part of rock q2;
no symbol and no other monograms
visible.
Pl. XIII., lO==Auclions-CataloJ Hirsch, XIII. p. 277, Xo. 4439.

G. Similar; style slightly less refined; BA~I.AEQ~ Similar type; style

dots in border larger.
Pl. XIII., 11 = Berlin (Imhoof, illonn.
ANT Io X o Y slightly less refined;
to 1., beyond inscr., one-handled
vase 1. ; beneath, E m; to 1. of lower
end of club, A; to r. of lower part
of rock ~-
grecq., p. 236, Xo. 28); Berlin (Lubbecke).

~:: H,·re (and in ,e\·er,1! other cases) my already published. All such corrections and
de,cription differs in some details from that at.lditiom have been 111ost carefully nrified.
 EARLY SELEUCID PORTRAITS 151
7. Similar. BA~IAEQ~ Similar type; to 1., be-
ANTloXoY yondinscr.,one-handled
vase (?); beneath, +;
no other
monograms visible.
Pl. XIII., ll2=Paris (Babelon, Rois de Syrie, p. 28, Ko. 20i).

8. Similar; style again less refined ;
features larger and coarser.
Pl. XIII., 13=Berlin (Prokesch);
(Bunbury).
BA~IAEQ~ Similar type; to 1., be-
ANT Io X o Y yond inscr.,one-hamlled
vase r. ; beneath, .t:p. and ~ ; 23
to 1. of lower end of club, P..
Berlin (Lobbecke)=.,Ymn. Ch,·on. 1883, PL iv. 4

9. Similar; but features considerably BA~IAEQ~ Similar type; style

altered. ANT Io X o Y rather better; to 1., be-
yond inscr., one-handled vase 1.;
beneath 4l and ~; to 1. of lower
end of club, M.
Pl. XIII., 14== Copenhagen.

10. Same die as No. 9. BA~IAEQ~ Similar type; to 1., be-

ANTloX oy yond inscr.,one-handled
vase r. and, below it, l'f1 (?) ; be-
neath, 4>.
Berlin (Prokesch).

This completes our list of the varieties included in Class A, and it may
be convenient to glance back for a moment and take stock of its more
prominent features. In view of the testimony adduced in dealing with Xo. 1,
the attribution of the whole of these tetradrachms to Cyme surely needs no
justification. The one-handled vase is clearly discernible on the reverses of
all save No. 5 and No. 7. And in each of those cases the character of the obYerse
forbids us to separate the piece from that which immediately precedes it. 24
Besides, even as exceptions they can be readily accounted for : on No. 5 the
part of the field usually occupied by the mint-mark is off the flrrn, and on
No. 7 it is double-striking that has rendered the symbol unrecognizable. Our
scrutiny of the dies has reYealed eight different ·obverses and nine different
reverses. Taking the latter first, we may note that the average level of
execution is decidedly high. There is none that is not at least passably good.
Further, they fall into two groups corresponding to the subdivisions indicated
in the list. Nos. 2 and 3, which belong to Subdivision (a), are intimately
connected by the identity of the monograms that they bear, while other details,

23 The precise details of this monogram are a 9 and 10) are almost certainly from the rnme
little doubtful. They are quite clear on No. 9. hand; and so with Nos. 6 and 7 (PLI.TE XIII.,
2
! The obverses of Nos. 4 and 5 (PLATE XIII., 11 and 12).
152 GEORGE }IACDOXALD

such as the placing of the symbol in the exergue and the attempt to inL1icate
the ground, suggest that both are from the hand of the same skilled
engTaver. The remainder of the reverses present ana1ogous points of resem-
blance not merely to one another but also to the coin of Antioclrns I. Heracles,
for instance, wears a taenia, and the mint-mark, instead of being placed in the
exergue, is put in the field l. The style varies too much to admit of our
assigning the whole set to a single engraver, but it is safe to say that one of
them ltas been a model for the rest. It has to be added that, while the bulk
of the monograms undoubtedly denote magistrates' names, there are two of
tliem to which a special character seems to attach; some form of q)_ occurs
on evny reverse die from No. 1 to No. 10, and f1.. appears on Nos. 2, 3, 4, 6,
nnd S.i5
If we turn now to the obverses, we are impressed with the large propor-
tion of "·ork that is almost first-rate. Nos. 2 and 3, which belong to Sub-
division (a) (PLATE XII., 7 and 8), and Nos. 4 and 5, which stand at the head
of Subdivision (/3) (PLATE XIII.,!) an(110), might all have served as' patterns.'
The restraint and refinement they display are very noticeable. A coarser
touch obtrudes itself in Nos. 6 and 7 (PLATE XIII., 11 and 12), and this
becomes more pronounced in No. 8 (PLATE XIII., 13). It extends even to
the dots that form the border. Finally, on the die that is used for the obverse
of No. !) (PLATE XIII., 14) and No. 10, the size of the neck and chin is
suddenly so much reduced that the whole cast of the young king's features
u11L1ergoes a change. One is almost tempted to think that the engraver of
this die must have had before him-in addition to No. 7 or No. 8-one of
the prototypes or 'pattern' pieces belonging to Class C (PLATE XIV., lOf.),
and must have endeavoured to reconcile what seemed to him to be conflicting
likenesses. At all events, a survey of Class A as arranged upon PLATE
XIII. discloses a g,reat contrast between its two extremes. Yet the declension
is not nearly so rapid or so striking as in either of the two classes that are
still to come.
ANTIOCH"C"S II.
C'foss B.-St,·uck at Jlyrina.
Subdivision (a).
11. Head of Antioch us II., r., dia- BA~ 1AE ~ ~ Heracles seated 1. on
demed; border of dots. ANTloXoY rock, as on No. 1; to
1., beyond inscr., amphora; to r. of
lower part of rock, ~-
Pl. XIV., 4, ==-B.JI.G. p. 15 Xo. 9.

12. Similar type; style much coarser; Similar, with ex. line; style much
dots in border larger. coarser; no monogram to r. of rock
bnt in ex., r:t. '
Pl. XIV., 5=B.Jl.C'. p. 15, Xo. 10 {Whittall); St. Petersburg (Hermitage).

c.5 Its absence from X os. 5 and 7 m,1y be part of the field is off the flan.
only ,1 pparent. In both ca~es a condderable
 EARLY SELEUCID PORTR~UTS. 153

Subdivision (/3).
13. Head of .Antiochus II., r., dia- BA~IAEQ~ Heracles seated l. on
demed ; border of clots. ANTloXoY rock, as on No. 1; to
r., beyond inscr., amphora; be-
neath, q2 and head of spear ( or
arrow) r.
Petrowicz Coll. =l{irni. Chro,1., 18S3, Pl. fr. 5 (Bunl,ury); Yienna.

H. Same die as ~Yo. 13. I Similar.

Pl. XIV., 6= Leake, .Kum. Hell. Suppl. p. 4.""

15. Similar; style much inferior. / Similar.

B. JL (Whittall); Berlin (Lobbecke).

16. Same die as ~Yo. 15. Similar.

Pl. XIV., 7=B.?!L

17. Similar; head larger; features I Same die as ~Yo. 16.

varied. I
Pl. XIV., &=Cambridge (::iicClean); Berlin (Prokesch).

18. Same die as No. 17. [ Similar.

Pl. XIV., 9=Berlin; Paris (Bahelon, Rois de Syrfr, p. 28, No. 20S).

It will be observed that the link between the various members of

Class B is the presence of an amphora in the field. The analogy with
Class .A makes it natural to interpret this as a mint-mark, and the clue thus
given is easy to follow up. .At :Myrina a similar amphora was used as a symbol
on tetraclrachms with the types of .Alexander the Great. 27 It occurs in a like
capacity on the large 'spread' pieces issued during the second century B.C.,
as will be seen from the fine specimen figured on PLATE XIV., 2. It was,
in fact, the 'town-arms' of .Myrina/8 and as such it supplies a reverse type
for bronze coins of the third and second centuries B.C. : witness the example
repro,luced on PLATE XIV., 1. It is true that an amphora is a more common
numismatic object than a one-handled vase. The attribution of Class B to
Myrina may, therefore, for the moment seem less certain than was that of
Class A to Cyme. Bnt the fullest confirmation will be forthcoming presently.
The subdivision of Class B int0 two sections was suggested by an exami-
nation of the coins themselves; it is evident that there were two 'pattern'
pieces of somewhat different styles, and that each of these was made the basis
of imitations. Subdivision (a) contains only two varieties-the prototype and
an inferior copy. That this was the relation between them will, I think, be

~b ,vhen Leake secured his electrotype, this 27 )liiller, X o. 933, ff.

coin w;i,s in the Borrell Collection. I have 23 See ,vroth, B.)LC. Tl'oas, Aeolis, and
been un,ible to ascertain its present whereabouts. Lcs~os, p. l,i. Cf. snpra, p. 147.
154: GEORGE MACDONALD

conceded by any one who looks carefully at the obverses as they are shown on
PLATE XIV., 4 and 5. The testimony of the reverses is less clear. The
presence of the exergual line and of the magistrate's monogram beneath it,
as well as the absence of$, proves that the reverse of No. 12-the execution
of which, by the way, is particularly coarse-was not modelled upon No. 11
alone. The engraver had also before him one of the coins belonging to
Class C; compare, for instance, PLATE XIV., 11. At the same time he did
keep No. 11 in view, as is clear from the position of the amphora in the field
and from the fact that it is a rock on which Heracles sits. 29 It is worth
noting that No. 11 bears no local ma,gistrate's signature at all, for ~ cannot
be a local monogram, seeing that it is found on everyone of the corresponding
coins from Cyme.
The monogram jnst mentioned is prominent on all the coins belonging to
Subdivision (fl) at Myrina. The latter comprises six distinct varieties,
including five reverses. The intimate connection between these reverses
does not admit of doubt. Monogram and mint-mark always occupy the same
position, and beside the monogram there is always a spear-head pointing
towards the r. The last-mentioned feature is at first sight rather puzzling.
Six made it a reason for as;,igning the coins to Sar<lis.30 All becomes plain,
however, if we realize that it is not a mint-mark but a magistrate's symbol.
In fact, if we so interpret it, we get the promised confirmation of our
attribution of Class B to Myrina. The oldest known coins of this city are
small silver pieces of a high degree of rarity. The following is a description
of one now in the Fitzwilliam Museum at Cambridge; it weighs 1·88
grammes.

Head of Athena r., wearing Corinthian M y Head of Artemis, three-quarter

helmet. face towards l., wearing earring
and necklace; quiver at r. shoul-
der; in fieltl r., head of spear (or
arrow).
Pl. XIV., 3=Leake, Kuin. Hell. p. 85.

The British Museum possesses one, the Berlin Museum two-a precisely
similar piece (from the Imhoof Collection) weighing 1·50 grammes, and
another (from the Lobbecke Collection) weighing 1·7:S grammes and
differing from the preceding only in the absence of the qniver. 31 These
coins have been assigned, on grounds of style, to the early part of the
third century B.C. If my interpretation of the spear-head be correct,
it enables us to date them more definitely still (circa 261 B.C.), and

"" See infra, pp. 156 f.
3" lfom. Ghron. 1898, p. 233. His Yiew was
that the whole of the Hcrades tetrndrachms
were struck in the Sardian mint, but that they
also bore the symbols of some of the citi~s in
,,hich they ,nre intended to ci1culate, &uch as
Cyme and Phocaea.
:n See B.l\I.C. L!1cia, etc., p. 69, Xo. 2;
lmhoof-Blumer, Z. f. N. xx. p. 282, where the
Lobbecke coin is figmed (PL x. 21). There 1s
another-according to Imhoof, a slightly earlier
-group with the s1me types, lmt without the
spear-head ; two specimens described in Z. j. N.
iii. pp. 321 f., weigh l ·85 and I ·SO grammes
re5pecth-ely; cp. B.l\I.C. ibid. Ko. l.
 EARLY SELEUCID PORTRAITS. 155

also provides us with the parallel which was spoken of above in discussing
the curious but unmistakable link between autonomous and regal money at
Cym.e. 32 If the Cymaean coins are Persic didrachms, these may be
Persic diobols.
There is little more to be said about the reverses belonging to Subdivision
(fJ). They are all fairly well executed, perhaps the least satisfactory being
that which is associated in :N"o. 14 with the 'pattern' obverse. But they
present one point of considerable technical interest. In Nos. I 5 and 16
we have an example of the same reverse die combined with two different
obverses. This is an inversion of the rule that is general here and elsewhere
in the Seleucid series. 33 An explanation may possibly be found in the compara-
tirnly low relief of the obverses concerned: the dies would be more liable to
breakage. Be that as it may, the circumstance is important as establishing an
intimate connection between two portraits that we might otherwise have
suspected of representing different individuals (PLATE XIV., 7 and 8). We
may now safely attribute the lack of resemblance between them to the fact
that both are somewhat clumsy copies of the 'pattern' (PLATE XIV., 6). As
for the 'pattern' itself, it is-like the corresponding head in Sub-division (a)
-quite a creditable piece of work. The artists who cut those dies had a
conception of the features of Antiochus II. that does not differ markedly
from the ideal expressed on the best executed pieces of Class A, and that is
also easily reconcilable with the more realistic 'standard likeness' discussed
in my former paper.3-! In this respect they form a contrast to the engraver
whose work has next to be describerl.
ANTIOCHvS II.
Class C'.-Stri1ck at Phocaea.
19. Head of Antiochus II., r., dia-1 BA:rlt\EO:r Heracles 1. as in No. I;
demed; border of dots. AN Tl o X o Y but his seat, instead of
being a rough square rock, 1s
shaped like a tub or cauldron; rn
ex., E and 1-f .35
Pl. XIV., lO=B.JI.C. p. 8, Ko. 2 (' Antiochus I.').

20. Similar. J Similar.

Pl. XIV., 11 =Paris ( Babelon, Rois de Syrie, p. 28, X o. 209).

21. Same die as 1Yo. 20. j Similar.

Petrowicz Coll. =Bunbury Sale Coialogue, Second Portion, Lot 454 (Pl. iY).

22. Similar; of much inferior style; BA:rlt\EO:r Similar type; of much

dots in border larger. ANT Io X o Y inferior sty le; no taenia
visible ; in ex., A and 3.
Pl. XIV., l!a =YiPnna.
at See supra, p. 148. " 5 These monograms are only partially visible.

~3 See J. H.S. xxiii. pp. 99 f. But they can easily be completed from the two
;)-1 J.H.S. xxiii. PLATE I., 3 and!'>. pieces that follow.
156 GEORGE ~IACDO~ALD

23. Similar; style still farther dete- BA~ I AEr.~ Similar type ; taenia
riorated. ANTloXoY doubtful; ex. blank;
to l., beyond inscr., hea(l and neck
of griffin 1. and, below it, ~.
Pl. XIV., 13 =Berlin (fox).

24. Swne die as _,_Yo. 2:3. / Similar.

Berlin (lmhoof, 11lonn. v,-ccq., p. 426, Xo. 29). 36

25. Same die as .l{os. ~3 f : Similar.

Paris (Bauelon, Rois de Syrie, p. 29, X o. 210).

It -will be observed that there is no common mint-mark to bind together-

the members of Class C. And yet its homogeneity is beyond all shadow of
question. The seven varieties it includes involve four different obverses. The
first two of these (PLATE XIV., 10 and 11) appear to be from the same hand.
They are so nearly alike that it requires a close examination to distinguish
them. They are remarkable for the excellent workmanship they display, and
also for the peculiar characteristics of the portrait they present. The deeply
sunk eye and the long straight nose give the face a look that we do not usually
associate with Antiochus II. So much so is this the case that Gardner in
his Seleucid Kings felt justified in assigning ~o. 19 to Antiochus Soter. 37
His proposal met ,vith opposition from the ontset, 38 and it has been fim,lly
disposed of through the discovery of No. 1. Its rejection leaves us with the-
alternatirn of seeking the necessary explanation in the idiosyncrasy of the
artist; but if he has erred, he deserves to be forgiven, for he has produced a
striking head. "\f o. 22, thongh of much inferior style, i~ of quite exceptional
interest. No obverse in the whole group under discussion bears the stamp of
imitation in such an unmistakable degree. Its position on PL~-\TE XIV.
(12) is well adapted to bring this out; it is plainly a crude attempt to
reproduce the head immediately above it. The mechanical treatment of the
loose ends of the diadem is specially significant. Of the die that served for-
the obverses of Nos. 22 ff. (PLATE XIV., 13) there is little or nothing to be said ;
it illustrates a still lower stage of degradation.
It is, however, to the reverses that we must turn for the most convincing
evidence of the homogeneous character of Class C. They number seven in all,
three (Xos.19-21) of good workmanship,and the rest (Nos. 22-25) very much
inferior. Here, just as in the case of the obverses, it is evident that the
engraver of the 'pattern' piece or pieces had ideas of his own. Heracles is
not seated upon a conventional rock, as in Classes A and B, but upon an
object that has some resemblance to a tub or cauldron; and tf1e lower part of
the field of the coin is cut off by an exergual line. These features are faith-

3o lmhoof deEcribed the symbol, which is 37 Op. cit. p. xv.

obscure, as ' un buste de cerf.' 35
Sum. Ghroil. 1883, p. 22 and p. 78.
 EARLY SELEUCID PORTRAITS. 157

fully reproduced on the imitations. I do not think any mysterious significance

attaches to the former. I doubt whether it is meant to be more than a con-
veniently rounded stone. Certainly, if it is a tub or a cauldron, it must be
supposed to have a very stout lid; Heracles is sitting well back towards the
.centre. Ottfried J\fo.ller called it a 'Kessel,' 30 and Babelon and Six ham
spoken of it as a 'cui-e.' 40 The two first-named saw in it an allusion to
the cleansing of the Augean stables. ,vhatever its true character may be, its
chief value for us is the fundiou it discharges in holding together the
varieties we have grouped under the heading of Class C. It is the strongest
-of the several indications that point so conclusively to a common origin.
And we can eYen determine the mint. Although the engraver or
engravers of the 'pattern' pieces did not deem it necesrnry to denote the
issuing city by a symbol, the influence of fashion was apparently too much for
their successors. On the la::at three ren=-,rses (Nos. :!3-25 ), in the field beyond
the inscription-the Yery position so often occupied by the one-handled rnse
at Cyme and hy the amphora at J\Iyrina,-we find the head and neck of a
griffin looking to the 1. We need not hesitate to interpret this as the mint-
mark of Phocaea in Ionia, the first important town on the coast to the south
-0f Cyme. The griffin, either in whole or in part, was a popular coin-type there
from the sixth century B.C. onwards; the reverse type of the fourth century
bronze piece which is figured on PI ATE XIII., 3 is exactly the same as the
symbol on ~os. 23 ff. The analogy with Cyme and Myrina is so complete that
no further proof appears to be required. I am tempted, however, to put forward
what seems to me to be an adLlitional confirmation; if my suggestion is accepted,
one hitherto unintelligible feature of Classes A and B will be satisfactorily
explained. It will be recollected that some form of the monogram q2 was of
practically nniversal occunence on the reverses of the Heracles tetradracluns
struck at Cyme aml at hlyrina. Is it not probable that it represeuts the first
two letters of <PwKatfwv, aml that it was placed upon the coins of the other
towns in token of the alliance that found expression in the i~sue ? This con-
jecture receives considerable support from the fact that the monogram actually
was, though to a less extent than the griffin, an acknowledged badge of
Phocaea. It is even employed by itself as a reverse type, one of the surest
indications of a 7rapa<1-r1µov ;41 see, for instance, the third century bronze piece
illustrated on PL.A.Ti.; XIII., 4. And it appears on Alexandrine tetradrachms
-of the city as a mint-mark, both alone and in company with a seat12 "'hether
any of the remaining monograms used in our group have an analogous signi-
ficance, may be doubted. But we may note in passing that Po, which is as
unknown to Class B as is ~ to Class C, occurs on four out of seven reverses
.at Phocaea, and on at least five out of nine at Cyme.

Our survey of tbe separate classes being thus completed, it ouly remains

3" Denkmaelu clcr altcn Knust, i. Xo. 231:l.
40 Les rois cle Syrie, p. lxi. ; and .1.Yum.
.(Jh1·on. 1S9S, p. 233.
41 Cf. Coin Types, pp. 12:3 l[
42
)Iilller, X os. l"iS3 and 989. Others, al-;o of
Phocae,1, show the forepart or the hc~d of a
griffin .
158 GEORGE :\IACDO~ALD

to draw attention to certain general conclusions. It seems clear that about

261 B.C. something of the nature of a federal union subsisted between Cyme,
Myrina, and Phocaea. Cyme had minted no money since about 500 B.C,
}lyrina had never had a mint at all, Phocaea had issued neither gold nor
sih·er nor electrum since the expedition of Alexander the Great. Now, pro-
bably simultaneously,43 the three cities begin to strike Seleucid tetradrachms
,vith a reverse type of a new and very remarkable character. And just about
the same period autonomous silver makes its appearance for a brief space at
Cyme and at l\lyrina. The significance of these circumstances cannot be mis-
interpreted. They point to common action on the part of the three towns
under the aegis of the Seleucill monarchy, action too that must have had a
successful issue, for it was not when defeats had been experienced that Greek
states took to striking money. It is not possible to conjecture with any degree
of confidence against whom the efforts of the league may have been directe:L
Perhaps it was Pergamene or Egyptian aggression that had to be repelled.
Or we may have here an echo of that struggle against the Galatai that won
for Antioch us I. his honourable title of 'Saviour.'
And this may help us to see a fresh significance in the figure of the
resting Heracles. The type was subsequently imitated by Euthydemus I. of
Bactria (222-187 B.C.). It is found also on Spartan tetradrachms, some of them
autonomous, others bearing the name of the tyrant Nabis (207-192 B.c.).
Whether it has any special meaning on these, ,ve cannot te!l; it may be
merely an imitation. But, so far as regards the Seleucid tetradrachms,
some other explanation is required, and the most plausible hitherto available
has been the ingenious suggestion of Babelon.-H He connected the sudden
appearance of Heracles with the dominance of Aristos and Themison,
the Cyprian brothers who were boon companions of Antiochus II. and to
whom that king surrendered much of his own power. 45 Pythermos describes
Themison as masquerading in a lion's skin with a club and bow, and allowing
himself to be hailed at festivals as 0eµfrrwv i\IaKeDwv, 'Avnoxov /3aa-tA.EW<;
'HpaKA.~-;. 46 With the discovery of No. 1 this explanation falls to the ground;
the type is older than the reign of Antiochus II. Is it going too far afield
to recall the analogy of the anti-Spartan league of cfrrn 3D-:I< B.C., when
Byzantium, Ephesus, Samos, Iasos, Rhodes, and Cnidus banded themselves
together in the cause of liberty? 47 This latter confederation chose as its
cliaracteristic coin-type a representation of the infant Heracles strangling the
serpents that threatened his destruction-a fitting enough symbol of a resolu-
tion to throw off a yoke that had grown intolerable. Is it not conceivable
that the Heracles at rest may have been meant to commemorate some great
struggle that had been brought to a successful conclusion?

43 _\lthough only Cyme is definitely known
t,:, have minted with the head of Antiochm I.,
it i, quite likely that the other two cities did
thl' same.
" Rois de Syrie, p. !xi.
;s Phylarchos, apwl A then. :x. 43S d. \F.H. G.
i. p. 330). Cf. Aelian. T'ar. Hist. ii. I.
40
A pad A then. vii. 289 f. (F. H. G. iv.
48S).
" See 1Vaduington, Rei·. ~Yum. 1863, 223 ff.,
and \ for the most recent discussion of the
subject) Regling in Z ;: K. xxv. pp. 20, ff.
 EARLY SELKGCID PORTRAITS. 159

The pages of written history have been scanned in vain for any
allusion to the anti-Spartan league of 394 B.C.; the evidence for its existence
remains solely numismatic. In the case of the alliance which our study of the
Heracles tetra<lrachms has brought to light, a similar search has not proved
so absolutely barren. In his description of the successful campaign w::iged
by Attalus against Achaeus iu 218 B.C., Polybins (v. 77) 48 thus opens his
account of the manner in which the tiLle of public opinion in the Hellenic
cities tnrned in favour of Pergamum: ~Hcrnv OTJ TOT€ µera0Eµevat 7rpor;
llVTOV, 7rpWTOV µev Kvµ71 Kcit "i.µvpva Kat <'PwKata • µera 0€ Tavrar; K.T.'A.
That is the traditional text. ·wilcken, however, has already pointed out that
!µvpva is an obvious corruption for Mvpwa. 49 His grounds for proposing
the change are twofold. In the first place, it would have been geographically
abQurd to have 'sandwiched' Smyrna between Cyme and Fhocaea. Tn the
second place, the participle µeTa0iµevat would have been quite inapplicable
to the conduct of the Smyrnaeans, who had successfully resisted both the
threats and the blandishments of Achaeus ; a few lines further down
Polybius goes on to tell how Attalus exp'Y]µUTUI€ To'ir; 7rapa TWV !µvpvatwv
r.pea/3evra'ir; <pt"\av0pwr.w,, Ota TO µai\.l(j"Ta TOVTOVr; T€TrJP7JKEVal TTJV 7rp0<;
aurnv r.{aTtv. Wilcken's emendation has been generally accepted and
hardly requires the additional support it now receives from the knowledge
that, forty or fifty years before the events narrated by Polybius, the three
towns had concluded a formal alliance. How long that alliance may have
endured we cannot say. But it would at least appear- that in the crisis of
218 B.C. the memory of 261 was still sufficiently strong to ensure joint
political action.
I shall conclude by noting one other point where the numismatic
evidence we have marshalled can be brought to bear upon history. This
time its value is negative. Like so much else that happened in tht' third
century B.C., the earlier stages in the growth of the Pergamene kingdom are
wrapped in considerable obscurity. Strabo (XIII. p. 624) mentions that,
Eumenes I. inflicted a heavy defeat on Antiochus I. at Sardis. :Modern historians
have assumed that his victory was the signal for a wide extension of the
boundaries of Pergamum. It may have been so. But not all the inferences
based upon the passage can be justified. Niese 5') tentatively and Beloch 51 with
much more confidence have assigned to that date the boundary stone inscribed
opoi IIep"faµrivwv, which was found between Cyme and Myrina, 5~ and which
must therefore have been erected after the territory of the latter city had
been incorporated in the dominions of Pergamum. Our coins forbid the
entertaining of any such suggestion. They show that at all events during
the earlier years of the reign of Antiochus II. Myrina still continued to
acknowledge the suzerainty of the Seleucidae.
GEORGE M.a.cno:~c.\.LD.

;s I am indebted to ~Ir. E. L. BeYan for 50

Gesch. du Gricch. mul .liaked. Staaten, ii.
directing my attention to this passage. p. 85, footnote 5.
49 51
S.1·. ·Attala;' in Pauly-,Vissowa, Ratl- Griccl1. Gesell. iii. (i) p. 6H, footnote 2.
E11tycl. iii. 2162. 52
B.C'.H. v. p.283.
 I~STRU).IE~TAL l\IUSIC I~ THE ROl\IAN AGE. 1

THE cultivation of instrumental music remained in a backward st·,te

among the Greeks in the fifth and fourth centuries, B.C. This was certainly
not due to any want of taste for music as a whole, for no race ever valued it
hio·her than did the Greeks. The reasons seem to have been, first, the
"'
bondaoe of the instrument to the voice, second, the unsettled state of the
0
musical scale, and thirdly, the dislike of the Greeks for over-elaboration in
lllUSlC.
These three points are well illnstrated in the Republic of Plato. In
opening the discussion on the admissibility of certain modes, Socrates is
made to say that a musical composition is made up of three things, the
'words,' the 'harmony,' and the 'rhythm,' and that the musical 'words' are in
themselves in no way different from the words of common speech. 2 In
another place much scorn is cast by Glaucon on the musicians that sought for
the least perceptible inten-al to make that the unit of sound-measurement,
some of the experimenters declaring that they could distinguish an intermed-
iate note, where others insisted that the two sounds had passed into unison. 3
Socrates miswers 'You mean those gentlemen who tease and torture the
strings, screwing them up on the pegs.'
Socrates and Glaucon both speak as amateurs in mn~ic, and their
feelings must have been shared by many Athenians at the time. Just as
,,ith us there are some ,vho long for the return of Handel's' noble harmonies,'
as a relief from the chromatic aberrations of the \Yagnerian scl1ool, so these
two worthy Greeks looked back to the sturdy Dorian airs of Terpander as
the true strains of the Hellenic muse, before she had learnt to voice the
subtler moods of the heart of man. To such amateurs the refinements
of the musical scale must have seemed base loans from the decadent

l I ,Yish to thank the following gentlemen
for their 1'ind aml valuell help to me in
collecting the materials for this article: )1.
A. Merlin, Head of the Department of
Antiquities !or Tunisia, for having specially
had photographed for me the unpublished
statuette from the lllusee Alaoui, Tuni, (Fig.
5) as well as for much other assistance ;
l\I. GouYet, D1reetur of the l\Iuseum at Sn,a
{Sonsse; for the prints u,ed iu Figures 2 and
,I ; and Dr. "\\'. H. D. Rouse for i,upplying me
with a rno,lern example of a pan-pipe from
Smyrna.
"\\-ith very fe,v exceptions, the monuments
referred to are known to me iu the originals,
from my vi,its to the museums where they are
to be found.
" iii. 39S D. Cf. N ettleship. Lectuns on
PlotJ·s fl,.p. 10S.
.; \°ii. 5:31A.
 IXSTRC\IE::\'TAL ::ui:src IS THE RO)IA~ AGE. 161

art of the East; and if, as is now thought, the music of the fourth ce11tury
med intervals of ;1. quarter, three-eighths, a thirLl, two-thirds, aml three-
quarters of a tone, this was no wonder. 1
The contrast is drawn by Socrates between the school to which Aristo-
xenus belonged, the cultivators of the enharmonic style, and the Pythagoreans,
who based the scale on the harmonic relations of the octave, fourth, anLl tifth.
Into the details of tl1is controversy there is no need to enter, but it i., clear
that such a simple and easily-tunell instrument as the lyre was best fitted to
this screwing-up process by which the minimum intervals were reached. A
many-stringed instrument would haYe taken too long to adjust to any
highly complicated system. By the time of Aristoxenus himself the
enharmonic scale was nearly dead, as Aristoxenus himself regrets; 5 and
although the later musical writers repeat mechanically their account of it,
there is not much reason for thinking that it was ever revincl in practice.
Aristoxenus complains that, if the enharmonic system was dropped, there woukl
soon be nothing left but the diatonic and the 'highstrnng' chromatic (xpwµa
uvvTovov or Tovia'iov 6 ), and these actually survived.
The objection felt by many Greeks to variety of musical effect is voiceLl
by Socrates soon after his remark first quoted. He banishes such many-
stringed and various instruments as the 'Triangle,' the 'Pectis,' and all kinds
of flutes/ leaving only the lyre, cithara, and, for shepherds, the pan-pipe
(syrinx:). It is possible that in retaining the cithara, Socrates may have
meant only the kind with few sttings, for it would have been strange to
admit a fourteen-stringed cit.hara, while condemning the flute for its too
great variety of sound. Here Plato's views must have seemed Yery narrow
even to his own age. In making music a means of moral upbuilding he not
only struck at virtuosity and over-refinement, but would ha\·e checked the
progress of the art along its most promising lines. His beliefs do not seem to
have had much effect, for the very instruments that he excluded were culti-
vated with growing zeal. In Greece itself however the double-flute, lyre, aml
cit hara remained the favourites. At Athens every boy was taught the lyre, and
4 Cf. 'iYestphal, Hw·11i. u. Mel. d. G,·. 45--17. chromatic coulcl be played un a piano ; aml
'\\' e,tphal's view holds the fiehl, but it needs althongh Ptolemy has three kin,ls of ,liatnnic
<ume faith to belien that these ear-splitting scale, it woulcl ,till SCt'lll that the mmic of hi,
,lissonance-; were commonly pbyed a~d sung. lLty wonl,l not han sounded utt,·rly barb,1rous
The so-called enharmonic mode of the modern to our ears. A form of ch1omatic mo,le is in
Eastern Church (Hxos TplTos ; cf. I. Th. use in the Eastern Church, an,l is often heard
S3kellarides 'I•pa. 'Tµvceliiu. 95) is sung like in Romaic folk-songs : it has an amtere and
the major scale of F; and it has been suppose,l striking effect. A 'soft• cliatonk is sung in
lJy Dom Gaisser (L,1, Jf11.;iqiic Ecd. G;•. cl' (lpti:s some Greek churches as the second Byzantine
1a T,·aditfon) that the ancient enharmonic was mode ; but few western listeners find much
i,1 pmctfre the same a, this, the two quarter- sweetness in it. '\Ve ourselves allow both the
tones being always sung together, and the ·just' and the 'tempered' intonation ; the
,louble tone being dfrider!. It is impossible bagpipes, I believe, are tuned to neither of
now to go into this interesting theory. these, and their effect is not al ways ,lisliked.
5
Quoted in Pint. de Jfus. 38. Cf. Aristox. ~ iii. 399 c and D. Arist. Pol. viii. 6 will not
Hcu111. i. 23. allow these instruments in the trainin~ of the
• This is stated by Ptolemy. Cf. )lonro, young.
Jlodes vf Ancient Ch-. Jfus. lll. The highstrung
H.S.-VOL. xxvp.
 H. J. "\Y. TILLYARD

the use of the flute was by no means confined to professionals: Alcibiades, for
example, is said to have studied on it." Again Epaminondas not only played
the flute like other Thebans, but learnt the lyre also. The cithara, which
had been perfected by Timotheus,9 was chiefly played by professionals. These
three instruments are common subjects on Attic vases, and late monuments
and autho1ities show that their use went on through the Roman age : their
natnre ho,rn,er is so well known that there is no need to say more about
them.
The kinds of harp called 'Triangle' and 'Pectis' by Plato seem to have
been of Lydian origin. Athenaeus, who has a long discussion on the subject,
says that tl1e l\Iagadis was a stringe1l instrument, later callecl Sambuca, ,vhile
the Pectis ,ms the sarne.10 It is possible that the 'Triangle ' was also similar,
and that the names of Trigonon and Pectis were meant as Greek renderings
for the foreign words l\Iagadis and Sambuca. This harp, as it may safely be
called, is oft.en seen in Egyptian art, and must have been widespread over the
East. It appears on a fine red-figured vase in conjunctior, with the lyre ancl
cithara. 11 Athenaeus sa.-s that Sappho
brought in its use from Lyllia, and Anacreon,
as his own words record, played a harp with
twenty strings. 1 ~ The instrument embraced
the whole compass of the singing voice, and
had high notes beyond the range of the
cithara.1.; It could be used without a
striker. One of its pecnliarities ,vas that
Fr&. 1.-TRIGOXl.:1! on S.U!Bl:CA. the sound-box was on the upper side.
Smaller sizes with nine or even five strings
were sometimes made. Examples of snch miniature harps are seen in some
of the wall-paintings now iu the :Naples JUu:-;eum: one of these, played by a
Cupid, is here illustrated. (Fig. 1 )1-l
.Another stringed iustrn1nent of the same class, more like a zither, became
popular in the Roman .Age. But, while the use of the harp called for great
skill, and g,n-e foli scope for rich and splendid effects, the zither can only
have yielded a thin and twanging toue, especiall_y as the ancient instrumer;t
often hail 110 sound-box. This instrnmeut is nearly al ways played by women,
,dw often wear a carelessly sumptuous clres~, suited rather to paid performers
than to freewomen. Examples are again seen in Tioman wall-paintings. In

' Dm i, a1;, A then. i,·. 84, 184 D, "·lwre it i', ,peaks of the PL·cti,.
,.1i1l tl1c,t tl1•, famon, flnte-1,hyer l'ronvllllb ,rn, 1
: Tdeste-, 4 ~5 1 (Bergk) Tol o· t;u<:pti:J.tots
..::\li il1i,ult·::.· lllLl~tl r. 1r"1JK'TLOw11 1fai\p.oL < s> np€1wv AVOwv VµvoJ.',
'' Cf. Pau,. iri. 12. S. -~ Fu1 oth1.:1 lXaru1>L~,., cf. Le Plrtu1·c .AJtt. d 1

1' _\.tlu·n,1,,11, xi,·. 3'1-3S. An,totll' /.,:.
c b",, together the Pee ti,, Bubitou. He1,tag11u
(1.,rh,_'l'\\i-,1: nukuo,,·11\ Triangle, a11Ll Sarut,uLLl:
lie c,db them a.pxa,a ~p 1 a;c,
11
B.1u111e1~ter 1 Duil. :11111i'u·, 15-±-!.
L A1uu. 1-!'5). ,;,a.Al"'' Ii' e,,wu'.lxopoov)
<b ;.tEpo-~z > ,Uia-:,a.Ow tx"-•1-·. In .t\.131,lti) hL
E1· 1·olu,w. ,-. 1G7. I11gliira111i, Pztt. dt, r11)i
F,tt;[l iL cecxliii., a11!l YOH Jttn A 1·u'1. Zu'I.
x1·i. lSi ,l'l. ex\". HJ. Fur the,e in,trurneHt-
in g, neral d. an a1hde 1,v ,-◄:..n '--Ta11 in
.Daun1ei".'.lte1 ),,·, .'':J'ulit,lt11:-.t1·u,;l'-/lt,_,t ; auJ. a
Lli~Sel tat1011 u! tl1e ::-clltie w1iter, D,,_ !-'''·
>~·at!>:.1l111,if'U11u ,1{,_',1,
 INSTRUl\IENTAL ~IUSIC IN THE ROMAN AGE. 163

Roman Africa a complicated form of this instrument was common, and it is

often represented in statuettes. The example (Fig. 2) is from Susa (Had-
rumetum) and shows a lady performer, richly dressed, and possibly wearing
a wig: on either side of her is a small figure,
perhaps of a muse. The type is often seen in
Africa. 1" The name of this zither was perhaps
the Psaltery.
A more curious contrivance was the
so-called Tripod, invented by Pythagoras of
Zacynthus, and described by Athenaeus. 10
'l'his stood on a revolving base with a ,;ound- /
box called AE/3i7,; above ; the strings were /

.
stretched between the three branches that ~\I:, •
gave the instrument its name. On one side ~ ' .l#J,-J
. '

the strings were tuned in the Dorian mode, on

another in the Phrygian, and on the third in ~
the Lydian. If the player wished to change
the mode, he had only to turn the instrument ' '

with his foot, so as to bring another row of •i

strings within his reach. The left hand ,ms
used to stop clown tl1e strings or to check
:~~-
their vibration,H and the right hand held the
striker. This ingenious instrument did not
survive the death of its inventor.
Th · · 1 f h t · t · t FIG. 2.-TERl:AcoTTA F1t.n:E AT
e pnnc1p e o s or en1ng a s rmg o SusA. '.Yo}us WITH ZnHER
make higher notes ,ms known to the Greeks (P:;ALTEI<Il::II).
at an early age. Nicomachns says that the
Pythagoreans called a one-stringed lute a Cauon, 1s which means tliat it
,ms used by them as a standanl for generating their scale, It is quite
possible that the range of the cithara was sometimes extended by stopping
down the strings, but this was no part of the regular technique of that
instrument. In the Roman age instruments appear in which the strings were
systematically stopped down on a finger-board as in a modern maucloline.
Although it is possible to embrace a large compass of notes in this way, the
tone produced must always haYe been feeble and lacking in resonance ; and
a-i now the guitar, rnandoline, and banjo are hardly reckoneLl as irnstrnments
of music, so the use of such instruments in olLl time was a sign of declining
taste. The ancient name seems to have been the Pandnra. Pollux remarks
that the Pandura hall three strings, and ,Yas im-ented by the Assyrians.1''
Nicornachus, in the place already quoted, classes the Pandnra with the one-

15 Cf. hrn similar figures in the }Imec IS Hrn·,n. l'· 8.

Alaoui, Tunis (Jfus{, d,, E" ,·,Iv 74, 75; in the rn Pollux i I'. 60. -rpixopliov lie 5rrep 'Arrrrvpw,
series Jlzw'e~ d C'olfrdion, u,-,:h. ,l'_/1:1,',•ie cl de 1rai•00Vpav Wv6µafov, JKELvwv O' ~v Tb eUp17p.a.
1a Tunisze, e,l. La. Hlauch~re.) 1rhere however Dimlorf note, th.rt no form or
10 Athen. xiv. 41. th,, name Pamlnm is found eitha- in _\s,yrian
17 .6.t?t T¾v E1nf3oi\:,jv. or Cluldaean.
1 G± H. J. W. TILLYARD

stringed lute. But this can lw.nlly rnean more than that the nutes were
produced on tLe same principle, namely by stopping down the strings. Other
writers confuse the Pandura ·with the pan-pipe; 20 but as the name is still
applied to a stringed instrument in Italy, it can hardly have been otherwise
in antiquity. 1lartianus Capella "1 calls it an Egyptian invention, aml it is
probable at any rate that it came from the East. The Emperor Helioga-
balus, ,vho was brought up in Syria, used, among his other undignified
pursuits, to play on the Pandura; "2 and one is represented on a silver cup
of Graeco-Persian workmanship found in South Russia."8
About a dozen examples of this type of instrument are known, and none
of them is earlier than the Roman age. 24 Two principal shapes may
be distinguished. One is shaped very much like a rnandoline, ·with an
oval shell and a short neck. Of this the Graeco-Persian Pandura is a
specimen: and there is another played by a
siren on a sarcophagus in the Lateran
1Iuseum/5 and another, almost guitar-shaped,
in the museum at Turin (Fig. 3)."5a The
other form resembles a banjo: it has a very
long neck, but instead of a clrum head
FJG. 3.-P.L'(DURA.
stretched over a hoop, a round shell is used
to re-inforce the sound. The back and front of such instruments, with
the manner of playing, are shown in the illustrations (Figs. 4 and .3). These
are taken from African statuettes; but the type is not at all common. The
other extant examples are chiefly on sarcophagi. A fine specimen is seen
in the representation of the wedding of Cupid and Psyche on a late
sarcophagus in the British Musenm. 2G At Naples 27 there is a sarcophagus
which is remarkable because not only one of the figures in the scene repre-
,-;ented, but also the lady who appears on the medallion, and was therefore
buried in the coffin, are playing the Pandura. The instruments here are shaped
like the African specimens, having a crescent-shaped top, and four strings
instead of the three mentioned by Pollux. It cannot be seen whether
the finger-board was divided by ridges, as in modern instruments of that class.
On the African statuette it would almost seem that the strings are stretched
over a bridge, but this also is uncertain.
Among the instruments condemned by Plato are all kinds of flutes. 23

::" E.g. hi,l. Ot"ig. 3. :W.

21 8. !124. Athenaern, fr. 82 ascribes its dis-
the Lou.re (Clarac, Jlus. Srnlp. 119, X o.
cf. Robert, Ant. Sark. ii. 41, 111. 1!6 A\ is aho
4, ;
con1y to the Troglo,lytes by the Rerl Sea. hardly a P,111Jura.
"'1 'Pond11ri~r11it,' Larnprid. Jlel. 32. :;;; Benndorf, 126.
5
"·' Stephani, Cumplc Rrndu, 1881, 55. :2 a On a late relief of Orpheus and the
2 • There is a list given by Steph,mi ,b. Sume Nym1,hs. Unpublished, but possihly forged.
6
of his cx.1mples are doubtful. The su1•po,ed " Ancient Jlarbles i,i B.JI. Pl. IX. Fig. 3,
l'andnra on the well-known Hippolytns relief aml ]'· 25.
on a. fine early ,.1rcophagus in the cathedral :2~ Xaples ~Inse11m, Xo. 6598.
at Girgenti '.-fr,:/z. Zt'it. 1847, Pl. YI.) seems to es ..-iri&t. I.e. also 1ejeets the flute in educa-
me afkr l·lose inspPctiou l to be only an ti.,n.
elongate,l lyre. The instrnment on a relief in
 IXSTRG}IE~TAL }IUSIC IS THE ROl\US AGE. 165

He ,ms no doubt thinking chiefly of the double-flute, which had reached

a high pitch of complication in his own day,"0 anLl which is often represented
on Attic vases. The instrument belonged rather to the flageolet class
and had a mouthpiece. The true flute-type ( r,)..a ;/au)..o,) was also kno,n1
0

but little cultirnted. It is sometimes seen as a short fife played by Fauns and
Satyrs; or by Cupids, as on the urn of L. :Minucius Felix in the Capitol
Museum at Rome:lll A more interesting type of wind-instrument, appearing
in the Roman age, had a wing-joint, and resembled a bassoon. This is

./,

FIG. 4.-TERP,ACOTTA FIGUI:E

AT SUSA. 'WO)L\X WITH FIG. 5.-TER[tACO!'TA FIGrr.E IX THE Mu~tE AL-\un.
PAXDl:;R ..\ .AND "\\'REATH. :HAN PL.\YI::SG OX THE PAXDURA.

seen on a sarcophagus in the Taormina .Museum, here illustrated (Figs. Ci, 7).
It will be seen that the sculpture is late work. The heads of the figures are
too big, the iris of the eye is hollowed out, and the hair and drapery are
freely worked with the drill. The sarcophagus, which was meant for a child,
may therefore date from the third century A.D. Besides the bass ,vind-
instrument there are also a lyre, cymbals, a conch-shell, and a small pan-pipe
in use. The name of the instrument is uncertain : it may haye been
the Bombalium. 31 There is, I believe, only one other example, which is seen
on a small sarcophagus in the Vatican.'3~
" 9 It ha,l been perfected by Pronourns the whether the Pan in the British l\Iusetnn \A,1c.
master of Akil,iades. Faus. ix. 12. 5. Jlw·. in E.JI. iii. 1:35) is playing ,nch an
au Helbig, Fii!tra, 440. imtrnment. l Cf. the artide i11 B,mmei,tcr SJ.
·:i Thi, word occurs Epith. Laurc,d. 61. F/utcn.)
2
' .lfus. Piu-ClCill. v. 13. It i, ,lonbtful
166 H. J. W. TILLYARD
The pan-pipe (Syri,w,;, Fig. 8) was one of the oldest Greek instruments, and
was always put in the hands of shepherds and country deities. In pastoral

FIG. 6.-SARCOPKlGcS rn THE TAOR¼rNA MUSEUM •

.FIG. i.-P.UtT OF THE SAl\l'OPHAGUS Snows rn Fm 6.

poetry it is often mentioned, and it appears in art as an attribute of Pan and

of Fauns and Satyrs. It consisted of a row of pipes made of cane-stalk
each pipe _\being stopped by the natural joint of the cane, below which th;
 IXSTRG}IE.NTAL }IUSIC I.N THE RO}IA.N AGE. 167

pipe was cut off. The pipes were put in a row, and, as Pollux says,33
fastened together with thread and wax. Below and above the row of pipes
two flat strips of cane were laid, and to these the thread was tied, going
round the reeds and holding them firmly together. It is easy to see from
ancient sculpture that this was the plan then followed, and a modern
pan-pipe from Smyrna, now in my hands, has been put together in the same
way.
In the Greek pan-pipe, the reeds all appear of the same length : there
were as a rule about eight of these. 34 Such an instrument is played by

(I,. b

FIG. 8.-PAX-PIPE~: (et) GREEK, (b) GRAECO-RO:IL.\X.

(The natural joints of the cane ,ue shown in black.)

Calliope on the Frarn~ois Vase, and it appears as an attribute of Pan on

Arcadian, olessenian, and Sicilian coins.35 In later art it is rare, though
there is a good example on a relief of the Hellenistic age in the Barracco
)lusenm at Rome, representing Pan and the Nymphs.
As the reeds were all of the same length, how were the different notes
made ? Some have thought that there was a row of holes in the pipes at
certain heights above the joints; but I have found that a hole in the side of
the pipe takes away the musical tone altogether. It is not likely in itself,
nor does it appear from the monuments that difference of thickness "·as the
sole basis of the scale. Probably therefore the reeds instead of being cut
off just below the joint of the cane, as in the modern pipe, were cut some
inches longer than they were meant to be, and when the upper part of each
had been trimmed to the length required, the lower ends were simply cut off
so as to leave the pipes even, although the part of each pipe above the joint
( which alone made the note) would be different in every case. The advantage
of this plan would be that reeds of the same length would be easier to
fasten together, and the pan-pipe thus made would be more handy to hold.

;3 Pollux iY. 69 (<rupq,O ••• 7/ I''" ol,v Ka>..cf.- '" Cf. A.,rn. cl. Inst. 1877, 21-1.
_u.wv <<T"Tl <rvv8~K1J >..fv'I' Kal K1/P'P <ruvoe8e,<ra. The 13 P. Gardner, Types of G,·. Coins, Pl. If. -1:2.
pan-pipe is also an attribute of Attis. Cf. the ·w. }L Le,1ke, liumism. Hell. 17. Head, Hist.
terracottas in B.C.H. xxi. 518-5:20. The reeds ]l;n,;1. 373.
are all_of_the same length,
 H. J. ,Y. TILLYARD

The Roman form of the pan-pipe was also the Etruscan :JG and tl1e moLlern
shape : in this the reeds were cut off just below the joints of the cane, and
so bound together as to leave the ends of the instrument sloping.'17 This
became the recognised form in Graeco-Roman art, and it is very widespread
on the monuments. It seems to have taken the fancy of the mediaeval
restorers, so that countless statues have been embellished with pan-pipes
in plaster.
Pan-pipes were made in all sizes; some had only four or fin small
reeds: one of these is seen on the sarcophagus from Taormina, already
illustrated; some had as many as twelve reeds bound with three bands.'1s
A piece of ribbon was sometimes fastened to the instrument by which it
could be carried when not in use. The scale of the pan-pipe no doubt
rnrieLl "irh the maker's taste, but it ,ms probably diatonic as a rule:
firstl_\- because it ,rnuld be the easiest to make in tune, and secondly
because the murmuring or buzzing etfect produced by gliding from note
to note would have been harsh and dissonant on any other system. By
strengthening the blowiug each reed could be made to yield a note
an octave higher than its normal pitch; so that perhaps the instrument
witl1 seven or eight renb was strictly diatonic, while the more complex
and rarer kinds had chromatic notes in between. The shape with a double
row of pipes seems to have been innnted by the restorers of statues in
the middle agesY 9
Literary references to the pan-pipe are nry common: it \\·ill be enough
to lluote a pretty description from Claudian, which shows Low the instrument
was played. (Epith. Pull. ct Ccl. 3J)

(Hymenaeus) ... platano namque ille sub alta

fusus inaequales cera texebat avenas,
Maenaliosque moclos et pastoralia labris
murmura tentabat relegens, orisr1ue recursu
dissimuli tenuem variabat arundine ventum.
Besides the common pan-pipe which was blown from the top of the
reed8, the Romans in muted a more complicated kind known as the Etrus-
can Pipe. Pollux explains that this was made of bronze reeds and was
playe,l upside down, the smaller sort being blown by the breath. 40 Of
this instrument the pan-pipes now extant in the Kaples l\Iuseum are ex-
amples. The larger sort, says Pollux, was blown by water; so that it is
clear that he is referring in both cases to primifo-e kinds of organ with

,,, It ap1,car, on an Etruscan urn, Brunn, i, nearly all pla,tel'.

Rd,,.,; ,1. Ur,,c Et,·u,. l, PL 9:2. 3 : cf. Eu/I.
In,t. lSSo, 1, Hil.
::- Cf. Ovi 1L J/d. i. 710, dispa.riDu:; cal~c11z1~.
'' The 1•,m-1,i1•c on the gl lS5 kr,,ter in tl1c·
X,t!'!t, .:irll,elllll Cat. l'· 81) li,li, twehc llhl-.
'• Thu, the ex,tm1,le in the Yatican · Anw-
ln11;.:-.",-...., 1dJ'. ,1. 7-;,t_ J/ui., J/. Ch/ru·,t11LU,lft 5SS
411
Pullnx iY. 70 ToU-ro OE n.aTCl. ¥µ1rc.Aiv txwv 0
Tvpp17vUs aUA.0s O.vreurpaµ.µ.Evr; rrbpt"j . ./L 1rapEotnchs,
xa:AK0s µEv iuTu1 U Kd.A.aµos. K0.-r'4,0Ev OE V1ro1rve6•
µevos. cpU(J'c.ts µEv J €7'.&.T-rwv, VOaTL OE O ,Lffi~·c,,·v
0.1.:afJJu/3op.Ev'f' Ka, a[/pav -rrveUµaTos Cl.¢tfi Tt. For
the in,truments at Xn1,le-, cf. C. Abdy Williams,
!_'[.,-,. r.... ·. 18(,2, 409.
 IX8TRC"JHEXTAL MCSIC IX THE RO}IXX AGE. 169

some sort of mechanical fingering; and it is curious to note that from the
pan-pipe which was deemed only good enough for shepherds should haw
grown the most majestic of all instruments. It is well known that the
organ was highly de\·eloped in the later Roman age, 41 as may be inferred
from a fine passage of Claudian (De .Mall. Thgod. Cons. 31G).
Et qui magna levi detruclens murmura tactu
innumeras voces segetis mocleratus aenae,
intonat erranti cligito, penitusque trabali
vecte laborantes in carmina concitet undas.

It is remarkable that this noble instrument described by Claudian

served no better end than to amuse the crowd gathered in the amphitheatre,
where its strains alternated with the feats of tumblers and the sallies of
buffoons. But this after all may be characteristic of the music of the Roman
age: it was no longer dedicated chiefly to the worship of the gods, or to
the serious education of youth; the advance in skill and in the variety
of instruments did not imply a real progress in the art, but rather led to
virtuosity and false effect.
H. J. °W. TILLYARD .

.u On the Roman organ i-. Baumei,ter s. r. upon here.

Flaten. The sul ,je<:t is too "'ide to be entereJ
 ~.\ HISTORY OF 'i'HE PELASGIXN THEORY.

FEW peoples of the aucieut world have given 1ise to so much controversy
as the Pelasgians; and of few, after some centuries of discussion, is so little
clearly established. Like the Phoenicians, the Celts, anJ of recent years the
Teutons, they have been a peg upon which to hang ail sorts of speculation ;
and whenever an inconvenient circumstance has deranged the symmetry of a
theory, it has been safe to · call it Pelasgian and pass on.'
One main reason for this ill-repute, into which the Pelasgian name has
fallen, has been the very uncritical fashion in which the ancient statements
about the Pelasgians lrnxe commonly been mishandled. It has been the
custom to treat passages from Homer, from Herodotus, from Ephorus, and
from Pausanias, as if they were so many interchangeable bricks to build up
the speculative edifice; as if it ueecled no proof that genealogies found sum-
marized in Pausanias or Apollodorus 'were taken by them from poems of the
same class with tha Theogony, or from ancient treatises, or from prevalent
opinions ; ' as i( further, ' if we find them mentioning the Pelasgian nation,
they do at all events belong to an age when that name and people had
nothing of the mystery ,d1ich they bore to the eyes of the later Greeks, for
instance of Strabo;' and as though (in the same passage) a statement of
Stephanus of Byzantium about Pelasgians in Italy 'were evidence to the same
effect, perfectly unexceptionable and as strictly historical as the case will
admit of.' 1
No one doubts, of course, either that popular tradition may transmit, or
that late writers 11W!J transcribe, statements which come from very early, and
even from contemporary sources. But this is quite a different matter from
assuming, as a working hypothesis, that tl1e unauthenticated statements of
late writers do come from early sources. Even where such a statement tallies
with a statement of Homer, or with the results of excavation, we are not
justified in inferring, on that account only, that the late writer had Homer
before him, any more than that he had himself conducted such an excavation.
In the absence of evidence to the contrary, he may equally well be assumed
to have got his information from a quite late handbook, or from an imaginative
author who for once by chance was right.
)lost recent writers meanwhile admit, tacitly, that authorities do vary
1
::'iiebnhr, Hislru·y of Ro,nc (tr. H,ue ,1w1Thirlw,1111S37J i. 1'· :lo.
 A HISTORY OF THE PELA.SGIA.~ THEORY. 171
in value, aml that ceten·s pcudJU.-3 the earlier sources are more trustworthy
than the later. But the reservation 'celui.., paril.Jus' covers a great deal; for
it is argued, not uncommonly, that Hecataeus, for example, stands much
nearer in the scale to Pausanias than lie does to Hesiod, ancl Hesiod nearer
to Hecataeus fr,an to Homer: in the sense, of course, that between Homer
allll Hesiod lies a great political convulsion, involving a fatal breach with the
past; and that between Hesiod and Hecataeus lies at least a century of
strenuous endeavour to bridge tliat gap, and ' restore' the missing data by
strenuous use of the imagination.
At the time when the chronological lacuna between :Mycenaean and
Hellenic Greece was still unsurveyed, a considerable service was rendered by
)Ir. Cecil Torr, in an experimental reconstrnction,lc' in which every interval of
time which he was able to demonstrate was 'written down' (so to speak) tu
the ' least possible' dimensions; somewhat as if a prudent capitalist to-day
were to ' write down' to 80 the value of his consols. The result was a
chronological scheme which, although it has not been widely adopte<l, had at
least the merit of being 'within the mark.' It called attention, besides, to
certain other matters of historical method, which I need not speciiy here.
:N"ow what I have attempted to do, in this essay, is to make a similar
experiment with the ancient statements about the Pelasgians: to arrange
them, in fact, strictly in accordance with the relative antiquity of the sources
from which they severally become first known to us; and to use, at each
stage, as commentary upon any passage, only such other statements as we
know from extant authors to have been current at the date when that passage
was penned. To interpret Homeric passages, that is, I shall use only Homeric
evidence and the physique of the Aegean, accessible to 'Homer' as to us;
to interpret Hesiod and the later Epic, only Epic source'l; to interpret
Thucydides, only sources of at least fifth century date. Not uutil I reach
the authorities of the age of Alexander, shall I make use of any statement
which rests merely on the authority of Ephorus or his kind. In this way
alone, I think, can ,ve be certain to avoid anachronism. )Iuch else about the
Pelasgians may very likely be ancient tradition, but it cannot be proved from
e.\tant sources to be so; and it may, on the other hand, find a more probable
context-if not an assured origin-lower down, when once we have constructed,
on the hypothesis of ' lowest possible' dates for each phase, the outlines of
the growth of the Pelasgian Tl1eory.
It is difficult to be certain, in an enquiry of this kiml, that one has
really left preconceptions behind ; but I may at all events confess this, that
I had not the faintest idea, when I began to apply this method to my
materials, what the results of the experiment were going to be. Least of all
was I prepared for the form which the Homeric evidence assumed, when once
it was released from its Hellenic commentary; or for the part which I have
found myself compelled to assign to Ephorus in the concoction of the Great
Pelasgian Myth.

i,, C. Torr ,llonphi~ ailrl Jfy,:e,we, Cambridge, 1S9o.

 .1. L. ::\IYRES

To fake, first and separately,~tl1e Homeric p:1ssages. 11 ' They diYide at

once iuto two cbsses: those which contain tlie substantfral forms ITc:\.aa-~16,,
IlE;\wi- 10£ and those which contain merely the acljectiYe ITc\.aa-,yuc(k In the
0

substanti ml passages it is a fair preliminary hypothesis that the poet had in

his mind some more or less definite conception of an actual people, either
still existent in his own time and that of his original audiences; or, if
extinct, familiar both to him and to his audiences, through a lively and
accepted tradition, as recent occupants of the areas in which he places them.
In the adjectival passages, on the other hand, such a hypothesis is not
legitimate. Tliese do not imlicate more than that the place or personality to
,d1ich the poet applies the ai-ljecti\·e 'Pelasgifln' seemed to l1im, and presumably
to his andieuc-e, to partake, m some way, of the Pelasgian character as he or
they umlerst:md it. ·These passages therefore cannot be used by thernseh·es as
eYiclence that either the audience or the poet had any experience or
immelliate reminiscence of actual Pelasgian inhabitants in the area or about
the personage to which the adjectiYe is applied. And when we come to
consider thi:;; class of passages in detail (B. below) \Ve shall see, I think, that
tl1is consitlerntion is valid, aml of some importance.

It ,rill :;;implify discussion to take the sub.stantintl pa;;,sages first. They

are as follows : -
( 1)
II. 2. /-,J0-2: 'lr.r.6000, 8' a-yE <f,v:\.a IIEAa{T~/WV l,yxca-tµwpwv,
TWV ot' Aap1a-a11 dp1/3wAaKa vatETliaa-KOV-
TWV '7Px' 'Ir.r.o0oo<, TE IIv\.ato, T, oto<, "ApYJo,,
Vt€ Duw A,;Bow Ilc:\.aa--yoii TEVrnµf8ao.

The pas,-,age stands at a criticnl point in the structure of the 'Trojan

Catalogue.' Starting from Troy-Town, in 1. 816, the poet has reviewed (l)
the Tn0ans themseh-es i'.11- 816 ff): (2) their Dardanian neighbours to the
XE. (SID ff.,:; r'.:3; other Trojans from Zeleia (82:3 ff) on the lower Aisepos,
wlicre the lowest spurs of Ida sink into the Propontic seaboard; ( -!) Adrasteia

ll, It might fairly be argued that account
should J... taken here of the I""sibility that
the 0,l} s,ey for example may re11re,ent a later
1,liase ot Homeric belief or of Aegean hi,tory
t!t,rn the Ili:i,l; or that a distinction should be
ol,se1 H<l betln·,·n data supplied by the ·earlier·
01 tl11· 'hter · 1,a.rts of th,· llia,l. But, quite
apart from tl,e tlll<:e1t.,inty which surrounds
the whole •1ne,tion of ,m·h di,section ,_,1 th,,
lfoilll ric ,_·u,pac<, I htl\"e tlwught it better to act
on the vie"· that relatively-though of course
not ab;ulutr·ly-these minor di,tinc:tions are
unimport.mt; awl that even if some part, ol
'Homer· rn.iy 110s.,ibly be approxirnately a,
late a, some part; <>f 'He;iod,' clearness will lie
gained, without sacrifice of truth, by tre,,tin!!
the Homeric Epir- as a single group of data·;
an,l Hesiod and the r,ther frngments of E1,ic a,
a di,tinc·t, ancl nn the ,1·hole well contrasted
grnup.
 .\. HISTORY OF THE PELASGL\.S THEORY. 173
(simply 'AJrastos' town,' like nlidaeiun, Kotyaion, and the like) with Paisos
( Apais:.is ), aml 1It. Tereia, between Parion and Lampsakos (835 ff) : i.e. the
poet has reached the E. margin of the Troad, and is returning by the sea-
coast to ( 5) Perkote, Praktios (ri \·er), Aris be ( 011 the Selle1s river;, Abyllos, and
Sestos. \Vith the mention of Sestos we have passell from Asia into Europe.
Tlien come the Pelasgians (1. 840): then ( G) the Thracians, 'all those whose
frontier is the Hellespont' 8-1-5: then ( 7) the Kikones (11. 846 ff.), ,vho are
fixed by Od. 9. 39-40 in their historic habitat 'under Ismaros,' west of the
lower He bros: then (8) the Paeonians ( ll. 848 f[), who come from as far off as
the Axios river. Here the confeLleracy of Priam has its limit westward:
antl the poet starts again from the Troad, and strikes out, first north-eastward
tlH"ough Paphlagonia and beyond; and then finally southward, through
:\lysia, Phrygia, }laeonia, and Caria, to Lycia, where the confederacy ends
south-eastwrml. Priam'::, confoJeracy, in fact, once plotted out upon the map,
reveals itself as a coalition of the whole northern and eastern shores of the
Aegean against a' blow at the heart' delivered by Agamemnon, as overlord
of the south and cast from Kos and RhoLles to Olympus, Ithaca, and Dodona.
Now the whole of the rest of this tripartite list is in correct geographical
oraer so far as it goes ; and the single omission of importance (that of
Bithynia, between the Tro~_d frontier at Zeleia on the Aisepos, aid the
Paphlagonians) is sufficiently accounted for (a) by the later consensus that
the historic Bithynians (like the :\Iygdones of the 0L1ryses river, inland of
Dask_yleion and .Myrlea) were Thracians-in-Asia, whereas for the Catalogue-
poet the limit of Priam's Thracians is the Hellespont;~ (b) by the indication
supplied by I!. 3. 184 ff. that the Phrygians themselves were but recently
arrived in what later became Bithynia, and were still cutting their way up
the Sangarios valley in the early manhood of King Priam.
The Catalo6 ue, then, sets a block of Pelasgians between the home-
country of the Troad and the Thracians; and the mention of Sestos in the
previous section, along with Abydos and Aris be, shows that the poet ·s suney
lias already reached and crossed the Hellespont. The probability therefore is
that the Pelasgians of the Catalogue occupied an area between the Helles-
pont at Sestos, and the proper country of the Thracians.
At this point a geographical consideration comes to onr aid. Between
the Isthmus of the Chersonese, and the headquarters of the Thracians in the
basin of the Hebrus, lies the rougher and more hilly tract from C, Sarpedon
to the Hieron Oros, which in historic times was occupied by the Caeni and
Apsinthians, but which, though overrun thus later by Thracian tribes, never
became wholly incorporated in the geographical area of 'Thrace.' It is
therefore not unreasonable to suppo3e that this same area corresponds with
the non-Thracian, and at the same time non-Hellespontine area, which the
poet of the Catalogue assigns to the 'Pelasgians.'
" In post-Homeric time we :;hall find copious Homeric evidence as commentary on Horner ;
evidence of this Thrako-Phrygian thru,t south- 1,ut only because the event under discus,ion is
e,1stwanl aeros5 the Hellespontine area. I itself o: hypothcsi post-Homeric.
h,tn b1oken here my rnle of not using post-
1 i -i J. L. ::\IYRES

It ,nts inevitable that the occurrence of the place-name Larisa in this

passage should give rise to copious speculation : particularly as one of the
principal towns of Thessaly bore this name, and lay at no very great distance
either from 'Pelasgian ' Argos or from 'Pelasgian' Zeus at Dodona; and
another Larisa (L. Kremaste, not mentioned in Homer)_ lay later c1osely
adjacent to the former, in the territory assigned to Protesilaus. Prof.
Ridgeway, for example/' pronounces without hesitation for the Thessalian
Larisa, and avoids the obvious difficulty, how people from the Thessalian
Larisa should be fighting on Priam's side, by laying stress on the form
vatETaaa-Kov as meaning 'used to liYe there, but haYe ceased to li\·e there
now. But exactly the same grammatical form is used of the men of
Karystos and Styra (_I. 530) ; and there is no more reason in the one case
than in the other, for supposing that they did not intend to go back to their
respective homes, as soon as the war was O\'er. Further, the form vateTaaa-Kov
does not differ appreciably in meaning from the ordinary imperfect, evatov,
which is used for example (1. 681) of the Achaean Hellenes who inhabited
Pelasgic Argos ; nor in the significance of the tense from the KaAevvrn of
l. 684. Had these people then migrated long since from South Thessaly,
and ceased to be called Myrmidons ?
Moreover, ewn suppo;,ing that vateTcfaa-Kov had the meaning which is
suggested, it proves nothing more as to the Thessalian Larisa than it would
prove about any other of tl1e numerous towns of this name. The place-name
Larisa. in fact, i:=; rn common in the Aegean, that it is of no practical use as a
landmark. :\I oreover, so common a name probably had at first a merely
descriptiYe meaning. ·what if Aapta-av z,at€TUll<TKOV should be found to have
meant that they' dwelt in a Burgh' ? If however it were legitimate to
'count heads' in such a matter, or to neglect the latene;,s of our authorities
for all these place-names, the distribution of the name Larisa on the map
wonlcl distinctly farnur a Hellespontine home for the Homeric Pelasgi as
against a Thessalian; for a dear majority of the known sites are stre\l'n
,lown the Anatolian coast, from the Troad southwanls, in exactly the same
manner as are, for example, the towns with the 11ame Pedasa, which looks a;;
if it liad the ,-ame termination, aml oeeupies the analogous place in the ethno-
logical cycle of the Leleges; and, for that matter, also, as those "·ith the place-
name 1lagnesia, -which has likewise its eouuterpart on the Thessalian side.
As long as it wa;, thought admissible to regard the Pelasgians as an
, j .. siatic people,' 3 any one of these Asiatic towns would have sened the
purpose of thi,- passage. And if it were not for the specific mention of Sestos,
it ,\·ould be tempting tn regard these Pelasgians as covering tl1e basin of the
Satnioeis "·hich i;, not separately mentioned in the Catalogue, though t\vo
heroes are rle~cribe,l as coming from thence to the ,rnr. 4 But against this

~~ E11,·7,1 _t'.-,,, ,~r' fi-1·c,_-c1° {Ca1nbridge 1901) i. -: 11. C. :3-L U. H.,. Tl,i, Larisa rni«ht tlic11
1'· 1,2. he i,lentinerl ,vit1 ,, little town of th,tt -~,tme on
:, On tlu, Hi,lan•"" of JI. 10. 429; on ,vhi•·h tl1P r·ud~t ,tlJout th·i=a 1n1lP-; StlUth of Alt·XdIHlri.L
"l't Lek,\,~, T1u,l'-.
 A HISTORY OF THE PELASGIAX THEORY. 175

identification the following considerations are decisive: (1) it would utterly

dislocate the geographical sequence of the tribe-groups; (2) this area is
definitely assigned in other Homeric passages to the Leleges," who (with their
neighbours, the Kilikes) are not mentioned in the Catalogue; (3) the epithet
EptfJw)...aKa is hardly applicable to the mere coast-strip some four miles long
by two wide, which is all that the Troacl Larisa can offer; ( 4) when the
Pelasgian Hippothoon is killed iu Il. 17. 301, it is T~;\,' a7ro Aap{(j'YJ<; JptfJw-
;\,aKo<;, and the Homeric usage of T~A-€ is entirely against its application to
a town only fifteen miles (on a straight road) from Troy, and fully in
sight of it. 6
It is probable then that the 'deep-soiled' Larisa of the Pelasgians in the
Catalogue is yet another unidentified site which bore this wide-spread name;
and that it is to be sought, with the Pelasgians of the Catalogne themselves,
on the European side of the Hellespont; not improbably in the low fertile
ground round the head of the Black Gulf, near the site of the later
Lysimachia.

(2)
rz
1,. 10 . 4 :.9 8- 31 : 7rpc,;' µev
' a"'o<;
,.., ' K ape,;
~ Kai' II awve,;
' ' ' ' t: 01
a"/KVAOTOs
,ca), AEA,€"/€<; Kal KavKWV€<; SZol T€ Ile;\aa-ryo{,
r.poc; 0vµflp17c; S' e;\axov AvKtot l\Iv(j'o{ T' a"/f.PWXOl
,ca), <I>pvrye,; l7r7rODaµoi KaL ~If,ovec; l7r7rOKOpV(j'Ta{.

The passage is Dolon's statement of the order in which certain allies of

Priam had been assigned their camping-grounds on either fiank-r.p6,; cL\o,;,
7rpo<; 0vµfJpTJ<;-of Troy-To\vn. The names are not in geographical order:
the Karians are separated from the majority of the Asiatic allies, and are
brigaded, so to speak, with P8eonians and Leleges; and the Pelasgians are
separated both from the Paeonians, and from the Thracians. The latter are
expressly stated in the sequel (l. 433) to have arrived late, and occupied
a separate camp by themselves. The passage ,vould, indeed, have barely
deserved mention, were it not that some modern writers 7 ha.-e quoted it to
prove that the Pelasgians are an Asiatic people, ignoriug uot only the whole
tenour of the context, but the further circumstance that whatever conclusions
are drawn from the passage as to the geographical situation of the Pelasgians
must equally apply to that of the Paeonians in the preceding line. Yet no

5 II. 10. 429 (Leleges, witliunt locality, in site.

the c,nni,-1mssage); II. 20. 9:2-6 (Lekges ,rnrl
Trojaus inhabit Lyrnes~os and Pe,Lt,o, 1 : 11.
21. 86-7 (Leleges liw on the Satnioei, R.,
anrl Ped,u,os is their c,11,iral).
6 abo Holm, G,·. !Jescl1. i. p. 69. 'Sic werden
E.g. in the whole Troj,m Catalogue 011ly
the Alizone, and the Lyciau, come T7]A60,v; in
1/. 16. 233 Zeus of Do,lom i, T7]A.60, vcdwv,
i.e. remote from Olympus. or trom Phthia.
Strabo's phrase about the '!'road Laris,1. iv 6'f«
TEAews, is "·holly justified when testecl on the
7 E.g. Busolt, Gr. Gesc',. i. ~ 16.5. ',tho
unkr J,istori,chen Starnmen Kleina1,iens.' To
justify thi,, he omits the Paconian, from his list :
com p,tre p. 166 'kleina,i.nische P.' Compare
er1rnlmt als asiatisdre Hulfstruppen der Tru-
j,ml'r'; l'· 70. 'Xar·h clie,rn Ste-lien (the
Homnic 1,as,ages) 7U urtheilen sincl sic ein
St,1mm der in E1,irm, The,salien uml Kleiua-
sien sas-;.'
176 .J. L. )IYRES

one, so far as I am aware, has ventured to contend that the Paeonians are an
..c\.siatic people. 3

Od. HJ. 175-7 (describing the peoples of Crete): Ev µ,Ev 'Axawt,

EV D' 'ETEOKPIJTE~ µ,eyaA~TOPE~, EV DE KuDWVE~,
D..wptEE~ TE TPlXlltKE~, D'io{ TE IIEAao-ryo{.

~ ote here, first, that, as the context shows, the object of the poet is to
'add verisimilitude ' to one of Odysseus' many inventions. Any information
which it gives, therefore, may be assumed to have been correct information
for the poet's original audience, as well as for the presumed audience of
Odysseus. The passage therefore describes the populations of Crete as they
appeared at the date of the composition of the poem; and it is consequently
of the first value as evidence in the present enquiry.
At first sight it is not obvious how a tribe, whom elsewhere Homeric
poets only know as a European people bordering on the Hellespont, should
also have had an abode in Crete. But the context in which the Pelasgians
are introduced seems to supply a clue. Of the other peoples enumerated,
two, the Eteokretes and th8 Kydones, may probably be assumed to be indi-
genous (in a general sense); the former in the east of the island, where
tradition and archaeology alike attest the survival in historic times of a
distinct type of language and culture; the latter in the west, v7ral 7rODa
vE£a-rov-so to speak-of the mountains of Sphakia. The Achaeans, on the
other hand, may fairly be regarded as a southerly section of the Achaeans of
tlie Greek mainland; and these we may accept, on Homeric authority, as
com para ti vely recent immigrants. 9
There remain the Dorians and the Pelasgians : both - like the
Peloponnesian Achaeans of Herodotus viii. 73-in an intermediate position,
neither exclusively Cretan, like the Kydones and Eteokretes, nor quite
recent EmJAVDE<; like the Achaeans of Idomeneus. Anything therefore which
we may infer from this passage as to the Cretan Pelasgians must either be
applicable, provisionally at all events, 9" t.o the Cretan Dorians, or there must
be countervailing e;-idence, of Homeric date, to enable us to differentiate the
two cases. But the latter alternative is out of the question, for Dorians are
not elsewhere mentioned at all in Homeric literature. We are therefore

s Relying on ll. 2. 848-9, 16. 287-8, I make -Zeus.

a present to the adw1·s<1ry of Hrlt. :i. 23. 98,
where the fotce m"jeurc of Darim makes them
· s\.sia tic' for a se,1son, a, strategical neeJs do
herP !
~ For the peJigree of Idomenens see the line,
,d,ich immedi,ltely follow Od. 19. 178-81, ,mrl
fl. 13. -!19-453 : it 'goes up to ,l god,' as
Hec,ltaeus wou!J s,1y, iu the thinl generation :
I,!,1meneus-Dencalion (the .\.rgunaut)-:\Iino~
~a If it were possible to demonstrate that any
real ethnie or 1,olitical <:onvulsion occune,l in
the Aegean after the composition of fliacl ii
but before the composition of Ody~sey xix, this
argument would of course be invalidated. This
however is one of those prospective refinements
in the treatment of these data which, as I have
explainer! already, I have felt at libertv to
11cglect, in the intere,t uf the main argum;nt.
 A HISTORY OF THE PEL~\SGU.X THEORY.

co1dined by our present purpose to such inferences only as would hold good
equally of Dorians. 10
Now the obvious inference, as to the Pelasgians, is that the Cretan
Pelasgians were so called by the poet because they were kno\\'n by him to be
a branch of the Hellespontine Pelasgians : they are distinguished from tl1e
old population of the island, and linked with a people whom we hM-e strong
reason for believing to be of more northerly origin ; aucl geographical
considerations once more confirm the impres,,ion that the Peb.sgians also
liail from the north. The north wind prevails in the Aegean area fur Ly far
the greater part of the year : Homeric sailors at all events were well
acquainted with its behaviour; and Crete, lying as it does like a breakwater
across the mouth of the Aegean, was probably already then the same dreaded
'lee-shore ' that it lias been ever since, for every boat which goes adrift
south of the Dardanelles. 11 Even on the modern map of Crete, place-names
like Tor.DA.ta, Bovt.:yapovs-, °!K)l.,a/31Eoxwpt, !KA.U,007TOVA.a-perhaps also
'Pw<5<5oxwpt and 'Pw<5<5a-a-r.{'Tla,-are sufficient evidence of what happens;
and the post-Homeric stories of Phrygian settlements, no less thau the
occurrence of Phrygian cults, and of North-Aegean place-names like .:.\..cipt<5a,
''I'Ba, and the Macedonian ITv'Bva( 'I€pcfr.vTva) E and .:lZov (~{a) go far to
confirm the inference already drawn from the geography.
The mention of :Macedonian place-uames recalls us to the question
\\'hether the argument is equally applicable.. as it should be, to the Cretan
Dorians of the Odyssey. The non-mention of Dorians on the Homeric
mainland makes it impossible to complete the parallel directly ; but there is
another case of silence in the poems, so significant that it can hardl_y be due
to chance; while, if it is not due to chance, it comes .-ery near supplying tl1e
missing link in our reasoning. Of all the coast-line of the Aegean, from
l\Ialea to the coast of Lycia, only one section is unaccounted for in the
Catalogues of Iliad 2. Priam's confederacy ranges, as we have seen, frc,m
Lycia to the Hellespont, and from the Hellespont to the riYer Axios :
Agamemnon's allies extend from Rhodes aud Kos to Peloponnese aud the
Western Islands, and thence to Oloosson (Elassona) on the northern frontier
of Thessaly. But of the coast of .Macedon itself, from the foot of Olympus to
the mouth of the Axios, there is not a word from the beginning to the end of

w This point of view was in rngue already in
late antiquity. Andron for example (fr. 3.
quoted !Jy Strabo -!75) would seem to derive all
three alike from Thessaly : impelled, no doubt,
l,_y the lc,ter belief that there were Pelasgians as
well as A.dtaeans awl Dorians in The"sal_y.
Tolls µ.Ev oliv "E-re&Kp1]ra.s ,ca£ ToUs KVOwPas aVT6-
x8ova.s lnr&.p!ai el,cJr, 'TolJs 0€ i\.oi1r0Vs J1r1,l\.u0a~,
ofis et< E>etrtral\.[as qnwlv e71.9e,v 'Avlipwv Tiis
Awp{Oos µ.Ev 1rpO-rEpov 11Vv 0€ 'EuTta.Lwr{Oos Aeyo-
µev7Js. But An.iron's guess is neither Homer
re1·e1&e vie11· (Eudy Age qf G,·eei:c, l'· 86\.
'_-bit is an is'.and far remond from the re,t uf
Greeee. it ,ras much less likely to haw its
1•opttlation mixed by constant adnmees of other
t1 ibes. ,ueh c1, touk place in the history of
northern Greeee aml northern It.1'y.' 1Yliat I
,a_y iu the text rests only on my 011·n cxperie1iee
of Ciete, on that of the people I have met
the1e, .1nd on the history of _-\.c~e,m uavigatiun
sinc-e Hon1eric times.
1" Aap,rra,ov 11:•litov at Hierapytna. Str. -!-l.1 I;

1wr Homeri~. Ad.p,a-a=Gortyna. St. Byz. s. t. r6p,-uv.

11 Professor Ridge,ray ha& t.1ken exaetly the

H.S.-YOL. XXYII.
178 .J. L. )lYRES

the epic. Xow if the unaninuns Hellenic tnHlition 16 is correct, that the
Dorian:; of historic times made their immediate entry into Greece in post-
Homeric times, and from the north ; and if, as Herodotus states, in the stage
which immediately preceded that entry they were 'described as a Macedonian
folk,' it would be exactly this strip of coast which would fall first into the
hands of the new-comers, and giYe them access to the sea. It would be this
strip also, conse(_l1lently, ,vhich wonld fit·st fall out of the ken of Aegean
political life in the event of invasion from the north. 1Iacedon in fact
was already in the Homeric Age the thin end of the black wedge of
barbarism, which two generations later was to be ch:iven into the heart of the
Aegean.
In the light of this consideration, the occurrence of a Dorian vanguard
in Homeric Crete becomes not only natural but almost inevitable: as inevitable
in fact, under the geographical conditions, then and now, as the occurrence there
of a vangnarLl of Pelusgians; supposing only that the Pelasgians, as the
previous passages have sufficiently suggested, ,rere a people of the north-east
angle of the Aegean, exposed to closely analogous pressure seawards from the
Thraco-Phrygian moYement across their Hint,.i'land.u

It illustrates well the peculiar methods of criticism which hrwe been

toleratell hitherto, that the two Homeric passages on which the greatest
stress has been laid by commentators on this topic are those in which the
Pelasgians themsekes are not expressly named, or stated to exist in the areas
iu question; but where the mere adjective IIEAaO"~/tx:o,;- is nsed to express
~ome attribute which in the poet's minll recalled analogous attributes in tlie
Pelasgians who were known to hims1Jf; an,] where, moreover, it is possible
without going ontsi,le the text of the Iliad itself to set up a fair probability
that there 1cn'e not any Pelasgian inhabitants at the period describe(_l in tl1e
poems. The two passages are as follows:-

Il. ~- GSl-4: Xvv av TOV<;' 0/J'O'Ol TO IIEAaa-~;ix:ov"Apryo,;- €l'atov,

1 1
Ol 7' ' .-\.;\ov Ol T 'AA07PJV Ol TE TpJJxZv' EVEµovTO,
rl ' .... me,
01 T HXOV 'l-' 117v 110
,(',.'
tE'-,~1\-aoa
"'\ I.... \,
x:al\-At7vva1x:a, /

~IvpµtDOV€<;' DE KaAEVVTO x:al ''EAAi]V€<;' Kat 'Axaw[.

ft will be mlmitte,1, I think, that it is a little unfortunate for the supporters

13 Here, a~ aho\·,_i, p. 1 i 3: I ~un n:,i11g 11ust·
Homeric c·,·i,lcnce ,olely to e,t~l;li,h a post-
Homeric eYellt.
1
-1 If fnttht'l' ar.,llogies l,c desirecl. they ,,re
snpplie,-1 hy tl,e coJ•i<",us Helleni,· tradition of
the Tl, tflt'(o ,t ;;;ettl\-"1nt::·11ts in En1oe2, in
_\.tticcl, a1J,l !n Xaxos, which belo1Jg. ap1,are11rly,
to the s,lllle lllHneJutdy po,t-Homeiic period as
th~,e Thmci,m i1J1_ur;10ns into Hcllesp.-,ntine
_\.,r.:, "ln,_h re,ulte,l in the e,ta bli,hment of a
Hitl1y1,u. Bnt t!ie extant €\·irlenc(• for ,111 this
i;;; co1111i1.ratin--•ly Lite.
 _\. HISTORY OF THE PELASGIAX THEORY. 179
of current' Pelasgic Theories,' that on tlie one uccasion in the Ho111eric poems
where the epithet 'Pelasgic' is applied to any locality at all, the poet should
have so rapidly corrected any false impressiun.s which this might convey, by
adding that the people who actually lived there were not called 'Pelasgians'
or anything of the kind, but were in fact specifically' Achaeans,' and indeed
uniquely 'Hellenes.' Note, moreover, that tlie IIEAaa-~;tKov "Ap"fO'> of Homer
is a quite ditlerent region of Thessaly from tl1at which contains -\.apta-a.
The difficulty is usually evaded 15 by explaining that though ITE?..aa-~;tKov
~Ap~;or;; was helLl by Hellene:;; in the time of the poet, or in the time of the
Trojan \Var, it had once upon a time been inhabited by Pelasgians, and that
possibly descendants of tl1ese Pelasgians may have sun·ivecl as subjects of
.Achaean and Hellenic conquerors. All this however is commentator's
inference, not the statement of the Homeric poet; and it will hardly be
contended that a passage like this stands in the same plane of authority
with that in the ' Trojan Catalogue' (Il. 2. 8-1!31, What it was about the
Thessalian Argos which struck the poet or hio audience as ' Pelasgic,' it is
probably too late to determine; but it may be conjectured that the phrase
may have been suggested by some such remains of early or at all events pre-
Achaean fortifications as are so prominent later in Attic legends. X o such
connotation however would be possible at all until the Pelasgic name had
ceased to be merely denotative, and had come to be used in just such a general
sense of' prehistoric' as would naturally prompt the obserrntion, which follows,
that tl10ugh the tuicn 1 '5 was of immemorial age, its inlwl,itants now were
Achaeans, Hellenes, and :\IyrmiLlons, and of <1uite recent institution there.
And this is all that, for the moment, we are concerned to show. 'Pelasgian ·
in fact had already t\\·o senses in Homeric Greek: it meant, as a subst,mtive,
certain actual allies of Priam, and their congeners in Crete: as an adjectirn
it meant 'prehistoric'-' that wliich once was, but most emphatically is uot
no\Y.' Of course the occurrence of a connotative adjecti\·e of this kirlll is as far
from disproving, as it is from proving, that the facts were as the poet seems to
have believed : 'prehi~toric' is not by any means the same as ' unhistoric.'
All that I contend for is that if a Pelasgian population of this Argos is ever
assumed to have existed, it shall be on some more convincing data than can
be derived from r his passage.
The other adjectirnl passage is the phrase in the prayer of Acl1illes : -

n E.'.f. Bu,,.lt, rJr. lh·sdt. i. 2 165 · Das
Epitheton Pela,gikon setzt jedenfalls voraus,
th,s in Thes,a lien Pelasger ,rnhn ten oder
"flvohnt hatten:' c:f. l oi · so mussten "·oh! die
PeL1sger die vor-aeh,ti,d1en uncl ,·or-helleni,chen
,rntochthonen Bewuhner des Landes geWL'Sen
,ein. · See also S. Bi uck, Qua, afcrcs d, Pdas:.1is
t,·r1d1,-le;·int (Bre,lau 1SS4), 1'· 5.
1o 'IYhether ,.;, ne,\a<T 1 ,~ov 'Ap 1 os means the
/9,c,z (ranging with H,110,, Alo11e. anrl the rest)
or the dist,·id, is a. matter of inditfeience tv the
argumrnt. Analogy suggests that in the Cata-
logue, as it stands, a specitic tu,~,i is intended.
In any case we must note that To Ile,\a<T 1 LKov
'Ap,os in Homer :neans a 11nite dilforent part of
The,saly from the ne,\aa·1 ,w7';s ot HelLrnicus
antl later wntel5: and that the ,trea .,f this
ne:\a<T 1 tw7'ts is quite ,lilferentl,r ,1cecnmtecl for
in the Homeric Catdlogtw; as aho is the
i:ountry rounl tlw Thes,alian Llfi,a.
x~
 180 J. L. }lYRES

ll. lG. 233-5 : Zeu, ava . ..lwowva'ie, IlE:\aa-rytKE, TIJA00t vair.Jv,

D.wiwn7, µE◊EWV 8va-xE1µEpov. llµ<pt DE !EAA-01
a-oi va!ova-' VT.O<pl]Tal, lll'l'T.TOT.00€,, xaµatEVl'al.
Here ,rn should note, first, that it is not quite clear why Achilles-mo-:t
He'.lenic of all the Achaeans, according to 11. 2. G81 ff. abo.-e-should pray in
his deepest nee,l to a Zeus 'of the Pelasgians,' 11 if by this he meant actual
C01".temporary non-Hellenic inhabitants of Dodona. To assume that Zeus of
Dodona is a local 'Pelasgian' deity annexed by Achaean conquerors is to beg
the question. 1foreonr, the more local a deity is, in all ages, the more
restricted is !tis sphere of influence : for an Achaean at Troy the unqualified
Zeus of the rest <>f the lliad. anthropomorphic and 7,o:\vr.:\av17To,;; KapTa as
the Achae::ms themselves, was surer defence than a G//U-!Joft in Epirus.
~ext, the poet of the Catalogue at all events was aware that the actual
inhabitants of Dodona were no more Pelasgians than were those of 'Pelasgic
Argos:' for ll. 2. 749 expressly describes them as 'Evti}vE<:; (Aenianes) and
Perrhaebians, hnth of them well-establisl1ed and wide-spread Thessalian
peoples who persisted into Hellenic times in this regionY·' and are in no
sense identifiable ·with PelasgiansY Here therefore, as in South Thessaly,
,ve have only the name, not the people themselves, in Homeric times; but
here, fortunately, we have sr)mething of a clue, which was wanting wholly in
Thessaly, 8S to wh.1/ the Pelasgian name was appropriate to the cult of Zeus
of Dodona.
If th,·re "-ere two points of behilxionr on which an Achaean, whether
chieftain, or poet, or awlience, was sci npulonsly careful in daily life, it was in
the use of the bath, and in the choice and arrangement of his beLkling. If
there were any two points therefore in which the dancing-dervishes of Dodona
woulLl seem remarkable and repulsive in the eye~ of au Achaean, it would be
that they were £tvtr.Tor.o8E,, xaµatEvvat; aml the ouly pos,ible excuse for
such beh:n-innr in the miniRters of a go,] to "hom an Achaean chief could
pray thus as to his own god, would be that this was actually part of the
immemorial obserrnnce, and came down from 'prehistoric,' that is to say (as
in Thessaly) from 'Pdasgian' times.
I a<lmit that at one time I was puzzled by the intrusion, at such a
moment. of details so grotesque and so pedantic; especially as there was no
evidence either of interpolation in the prayer itself, or of' late' tastelessness
in the context; and comeqneIJtly no Lloubt that we have here as genuine
arnl fe1Tent a prayer as the poet could frame for liis hero. But we have only

17 Busolt. i." lti:i, <:vnjectm" that Zeus of i-,1,-.·'.'· Hu:,1Jlt. i . .: lti:,.

Dod<ma '.tuch ,l,·r einb~imische Gott ,!er
Pdasgisch,·n Thes,aliens war.' T!ti, pre;,nppo,e,
the e,i,tence nf a Thes-alian Dod.,na sw:h 11,,
was inwnt,·d hy Unger (Pf,,lu/. S,,ppl. 13d. ii.
18tl3, pp.;:;;; ff.) 011 the hasi, ot a llOte .,fSuid>l".
,- Excq1t of ,·,rnr,e w ,o far as Pela,gi::rn ca11
Le fH·ce,l t" mean tl:,, · :,\[e:diterr,rnean Race' ol
mo,leru It,1lian L thnolo!<i,b : alld enn here [
han my cloul.ts whether the popuL,tion, (,!
PinLlns wr uhl be ai•1•i--11tPd by ethn1,logi;,t;; ris in
1

Cr. Xi, ,e, H,.;,,,_ S,·h,jf,J.-,,t,,f,:,:1, p 48. u11y true '=t:11::.t' · )f PLliten tnr-an. ·
 A HI:-:iTURY OF THE PEL-\.:-:iGL\S THEORY. 181

to giance at our own Book of Commuu Prayer to see tliat the practice
of piling up descriptive phrases in iuvocation is not cunfo1ed to Homei·ic
liturgy; anJ it cloes 11ot neeJ great experience of popular extempore prayer,
to cc•nfinn the observation that the descriptive invocati,)ns which mea11 most
to the snppliaut are uften <tnite 1ULlicrvus to the bystander. What the
fimction of such descriptive invoc,ttions may be is ll•>t yd clear. l[ost
probably they are of the natnre of a pas:;-wonl, intimati11g to the deity, by
allnsiou to some iutimate quality or mystic rite, that tl1e suppliant is
hirn;:elf initiate aml fit to be hear,l But doubtless they ,:.,erve also to express
and to euhauce the suppliant's mental presentment of tl1e recipient of his
prayer; anll also, no doubt, like pictures,1ue abuse, to attract the attention of
a god who, for the moment, peradventure sleepeth.
In this sense then, that he was a god with an ancieut and unusnal ritual,
Zeus of Dodona may conceivably ha\ e been 'Pelasgic;' aud certaiuly not
demonstrably in any other. It is exactly as if a man uowadays should
describe Stonehenge as ' Druidical.' :X o word is ,said in the text as to
wurship paid by Pelw,gians either recent or extinct; and no Pebsgiaus can
be shown, on Homeric evidence at all events, to have existed in Homeric
times nearer tlmn Crete and the Hellespont.
On the other hand, each of these two acljectirnl passages, taken literally
and in connexion with Homeric passages solely, does seem to suggest that
adjectirnlly 'Pelasgian' meant already n,,t merely 'prehistoric,' but either
positively 'pre-Achaean,' or negatiwly merely •non-Achaean': that in fact
the conelative-as well as conuotative-usage, whid1 preclorninated in
Hellenic times, was already familiar in the Homeric Age.

§ J.-Thc Q;·igin of the Co;uuJtati1:1; [tsage of· Pelw,gi ui'

1 zn Hui,u.,·.

How did this antitliesis between 'Pelasgian' arnl 'Achaean' ari;:e?

Again a probable answer seems to suggest itself, when 0nce we refrai11 from
cv11taminating Homeric texts with the later Hellenic commentary. Among
all their references to earlier times the Homeric poets kuow no such
universal 'gathering of the clans' as that which rallied to the aiLl of
)lenelaos. The Trojan Expedition then, as Thucydides was aware, was
probably the first exJJloit-not excepting even the original Achaean Im-asion,
which may well have been gradual-which was in the strict seuse Pa11hdlc;ii.c,
aml so the first occasion on whicl1 a common designation was required
for the members of the great coufederacy, Hence two phenomena: firstly,
a struggle for sun-i ml among se\-eral gene1 ic names, 'Ap 1 €'iot, ~a vaol, 'Axawi,
with a marked predominance of the last named; secondly, the beginni11gs
-under the literary stress of the compilation of the catalogue-of a
new use of au originally merely tribal name ''EAA17vE<,, not merely as
S) nonymous uoth with the specific ).IupµtoovE, wul with the generic '_\xawt
but also as a chaiacterization-word to express co,uwtuticely that 1h1Yning
'Hellenism' which was coming to be the common boml between chief and
people, as well as between cl1ief and chie[ Thie; latter connutative seuse,
 J. L. ::\IYRES
moreoyer, comes out more clearly still in the ob\·iouc-ly ' coined ' word
IIavE7\.A17ve, in the description of Aias a few lines further on. 1s" For Aias was
not in the strict sense a 'Hellene' (i.e. a niynnidon-Achaean) at all.
The Homeric Achaeans, then, were brought to the Yery brink of
'Hellenism' by the crisis of the Trojan ·war; and in the compilation of the
Uatalogue the momentous name came to light. \Vhat determined, then, the
choice of a correlative? In all probability, the same great crisis, and its
sequel.
Thucydides explains the absence of the word /3ap/3apov<, in Homeric
Greek, Ota TO µ170' '1 E7\.7\.i]Vll', r.w. But the com·erse also is valid : as soon as
the Hellenic peoples began to feel the need of a common Llenomination for
themselws, the need arose also for a common word for 'non-Hellenic.' The
Home1ic poets had howeYer no single generic word for the confederates of
Priam, and the circumstance, that the war was mainly a siege of Troy, made
the name TpwE,, and its quasi-synonyms Di.cfpoavot, TEvKpot more nearly ade-
quate than might otherwise have been the case.
Pass on howe\·er to the period which immediately followed the war.
Troy-town had fallen; the hegemony of Priam was at an encl; extensive
settlements of Achae;m 'Hellenes,' as the place-names i:J and tl1e archaeological
evidence show, occurred on the Troad coast; and the need for a generic name
for the neighbouring tribes recurred with renewed force. Landwards in Asia
1Iinor, indeed, the olLl names' nlysian' or' Phrygian' seem to have remained
in use for the nearest large groups of folk, who were moreoYer closely akin
to the old Trojans. The Trowl itself, ·witl1 it, population al ways mongrel,
and its varying degrees of Hellenization, easily acquired the llescriptive title
of AZoll.{,-' patchwork-land.' It was only seawards, therefore, beyond the
Hellespont, that any real difficulty would arise. Now exactly in this
direction the contrast between Greek settler aml barbarous natirn was being
enhanced, during this very period, by that Thracian thrust which we luwe
already seer, to correspond dynamically with the Dorian thrust in the North-
"'est Aegean; and with so marked a geographical feature as the Hellespont
between Hellenic Asia and non-Hellenic Europe, it would be only natural to
expect that the correlafo·e to 'Hellene' -for this corner of the Hellenic world
at all events-would be the name of the dominant or characteristic native
tribe. X ow we ha.-e already seen that in the Catalogue the dominant folk
in this area between Hebrus and Hellespont are not the Thracians strictly
so-called but the Pelasgi: and it "·as probably in some ;;,uch circumstances
as these that the antithesis of "£;\;\17v and IIEAacr,yo, first took ri:3e. 2 r:, Frorn

1
" Iliad 2. 5;30. turc tlwt the antithe,i, arn,e in Thessaly, and
1' The t\'.be of Ach1l;eiull an1l
1
f-ii~l'iu11 are ,ms tran,terrecl durin::; the Aeolic migration to
ry1 ita.l. The .\ theni~1Hs, 111 the tline of l't·ri-
1 Aeolis may reasonal,ly 1,e nskerl first to catch
<ln1ler. coul,l cb,i1n ol,G€v ,u&AA.ov Alo,\EVrr, uETEC,z., their Tlie,,alian Pelasgi,ms, ,1n,.l then to point
Tfjs ·1,\ufOos X~PTJS TJ oU KaL ~cpi.rn na~ -roL(n t11 the ci1cnm,tanc,·, (it any I oth,.7 than the
l'i,\Ao,u,. U er o L 'EA,\ 7] z,, w v vurer.p~~a.1-·,o exbt, nee ut our trans.Helle,pontine Pela;..~i,1n,,
l\I<VE,\f'I' Ta;s 'E,\<>'7)5 a.p1ro:yls. H,lr. ,·. ~cl. ,'"11ich 1u,1tle th,· tran,f, rrnce it,elt a1,1,ro1;riate
:..i, J.li \YL,, like Bt1---il-- ,:.o. i . .! 1fij c,,nh•--
 A HISTORY OF THE PELASG-L\~ THE(JRY. 183

lleaning 'pre-Achaean' in tl1e mother country the name of the Pelasgi

comes now to mean 'pre-Helleuic' in this colonial region; but acquires al,o
now the fnrther connotation of 'barbarnu,,:' which we can trace indeed to
tl1e case of Zeus of DoJona, but which does not otherwise meet us till we
come to Hellenic writers.
\Ye haYe thus, within Homeric time, a situation in iYhic·h almo,c.t
ine,·itably the names "E::\.:\ryv aull IlEAa<T,yo, came, in merely descriptiYe
fa:;,hion, to stand for 'ci\·ilized' and 'uncivilized' respectively: so that it \Yas
possible for a Homeric poet to de;;cribe eitl1er rude nun-Achaean fortifications,
or uncouth ritual survirnls, as 'Pelasgian,' without intending to conny miy
suggestion as to the ethnological status of their originators.
That this interpretatiou of the evidence is correct i:S suggestell also by
comparison with what happenecl elsewhere. In the South-Eac,t Aegean we
hear little of IIEA.a<T"/Ot; and in proportion as they recede from -..iew, nm
other names KcipE, and AEAE,YE<; become prominent as generic names for non-
Hellenes. Here, fortunately. in the case of the Carians, the Homeric
evidence is sufficient to show that in Homeric times these folks were already
dominant in Caria, and in possession of coast towns; that their speech was
unintelligible to Achaeans; and that they were philo-Trojan. To this, the
subsec!uent eYiclence adds only this: first that the domination uf actual
Carirms o,·er Caria pen,isted until the fourth century and later; but,
secondly, that in the interrnl between Rumer and Herodotus, there sprang up
in the Suuth ~.\..egean a great 'Carian Tl1eory '-in all respects analogous to
the · Peh,gian Theory' of the Xorth Aegean-in i\·hich many 'Carian ' -
looking smTivals and antiquities, in Crete, in the islands, and even so far
flfielcl as ~-Htica and the 1IegariJ, were construed in the light of the piratical
performances of the real Carians of the vii-vi centuries as e-..idence of a
wide-spreall 'Carian' barbarism in pre-Hellenic times: until, by a strange
imersion of history, it is to a direct ancestor of the Achaean Idorneneus
that the first 'pan-Hellenic' crusade was attributed by the writer,- of the
fifth ceutury. 21
An examination of the ancient references to the Leleges leads to a
similar result. An actual people, in Homer, on the Asiatic coast land, they
fade, in Hellenic times, first into the fabled builders of archaic Tltcpo, a11d
r.o;\/a-µaTa, then into an ethnologists' label for pre-historic traits in }Iessenia
and other parts of European Greece. 21 a

§ 5.-Lemnos, Imu,·us, wul tlu Hcllcspontiuc A,·u, i,1 Ho,nu.

0

Before leaving the Homeric data, mention should be made of two gronps
of passages, \Yhich, though in a sense negatii·e evidence, are of some import-
ance when compared with the statements of fifth century writers.
One group concerns the population of Lemnos and Imbros in the
Homeric Age. Both islands are mentioned as geographical stepping-stones

"1 H,1t. i. lil. Thuc. i. 4. "·

1
Strabo 611. Cf. P,1ton and ~Iyres, J.H.8. xvi, :2,_;i-,O.
 .J. L. }IYRES

between Europe and Asia," 2 an,l are quite well known to the poet; but so
for from bein~ occupied by Pelasgians from the adjacent mainland, or by any
allies of Priam at all, they are apparently on the Achaean siclE,. Lemnos in
particular is still the 'c;ty of Thoas,' 2:3 aml ruled by EunJus, son of Jason
anrl Hyp3ipyle/4 who had apparently allowed the Achaeans to put in to
Lenmos on their way to Troy/5 and traded on provisiom at their camp. 20
He also seems to ha,:e been of me to them by providing a market for their
prisoners of war, for he bonght Lycaon son of Priam frum Patroclus with a
Sidonian cnp which had belonged to Thoas. 2~ Eetion of Imbro, carried on
a similar slave trade witl1 Euneus, and in due course bought Lycaon; 2B bnt,
being a tEZvo- of the Honse of Priam, let his purchase escape and go home:
or perhaps this indired ransom of a princely prisoner was a 'put-up affair'
throughout. In any case there is no trace of a Pelasgian in either island;
and not only is the Minyan occupation still effective, bnt a native population
is described, which is twice expressly described as ';i_fvrLE-,. 20 In both passages
they are mentioned in conn2xion with Hephaestus; but they ate not stated
to stand in any special relation to him,'10 and they cannot be merely mythical,
for tl1ey are c'i ;pto¢wvoi,'31 and this implies personal experience of them on
0

the part not merely of the Achaeans but of the poet or his audience. The
1[vrw, do not appear at all in historic times in Lenrnos; but we shall
see that a tribe of similnr name existeLl on the neighbouring mainland to the
w1rt h in the latter part of tl1e fifth cent my (p. 205 ).
The other group of passages concerns the Hellespont, and implies at
tlie sanw time a frontier and a tendency to migrate beyond it; and we shall
be dealing so much with theories of migration in the sequel, that a Homeric
hint of rnigratil)n in tlie Hellespontine area must not be overlooked. The
definition of tlie Tliracians in tl1e catalogne as

clearly snggests that, though the Tht"clciam of Europe were umler the over-
lordship of Priam, there existed other Thrncians ,vhom the Hellespont had
hat! not succeeded in confini11g, and who lell a more or less nomadic life on
it,- fnrther or A--iatic bank, like the Galatae of eventual Galatia. That a
Tliracinn im·a~ion of Xurtli-western _.\.~ia had already begun in Homeric
tirnes is probable, if only fur this reas@, tl1at it is almost impossible to say
w!.ern (in the generic sense) Thracian crnled and Phrygian began; and it
wa;; only in Priam's youth, we must remember, that the Phrygians themselves
ha,! pushed up the valley of tl.e Sangarius aml fought their great battle

20 Lem11,,s, II. U. 230. 2,,J : !1nl,10,, 1-J. '" II. 1. fJ54, Od. 8. :!g4.
2S 1. '" Iu th<' JI w,l they men'ly pick hirn ul'
" ll. U, 230. wh,·n he ,rn, thrown ont of He,iwn . iu the
c.i fl. 7 . .167: :;1. 40 4-, ,·,,1["'' 11 too !in tlw m<>nth of hi, flighty ]arly',
_·, fl S. 230 they ,ue 'th<>,e huni,l r,eo1, 1 e' whom he will
''' ii 7. 4ti~ tin,l ,llwn he goe, to Lem11ns.
'..!;- fl. :2:J. I -f.~,- - ·:i IJil. S. :2!l-L
2 • Ii. 21. 42- l ' 2 11. :;. "15.
 A HISTORY OF THE PELASGL\.~ THEORY. 185

with the A111az,rn-fulk.:i:J ~ow if, and when, any such pressure 011 tlie European
shores uf the Hellespont was in progre:;s, the immediate and ine\·itable result
woul,l be to srpieeze out the Pelas;;·ians of the Catalogue from Europe into
Asi,t M: an.J exactly this result ,ve shall meet before long.

§ G.-Hesi,Jd ,md the LatCI' Epic.

For the long period which intervenes between Horner awl Herodotus
our sources are unfortunately very few and very fragmeutar_v. They are
sutficieut, l10wever, to show that the double usage of the Pelasgiau name,
which ,ve have observed already in Homer, was prornking commentary and
speculation; and they give some idea of the directions in which theorists
were working. The period di,·ides rather sharply into two phases; au earlier,
in which our authorities are few and mainly epic, and where the allusions
are incidental and explanatory; and a later, in wl1ich we are confronted
with a critical and constructive movement, of rapidly increasing originality,
and of a growing complexity and multiplicity both of local traditions and
of schools of enquiry. It will be com·enient still, as in the case of Humer, to
keep separate su far as possible the denotatirn substantival, and the connotative
adjectival passages.

A.-Actnal Pelasgiwis.-Hesiocl (Strabo 32, = fr. 225 Kiukd) is (-1uoted

a;;, saying of somebody,
LlwowvY}v cpYJ~1ov TE, IlEAaCT~/WV EOpavo,,, DEV
which suggests that he interpreted the Homeric phrase ZEv, civa, ~wowvaZE,
IlEAaCT~/tKE as if it referred to an actual settlement of Pelasgiaus at Dodona. 34 a
:Now as Homer populates Dodona not with Pelasgians but with Perrhaebi
aml Enienes, Hesiod's phrase must imply either dependence on Homeric
tradition for a description of Dodona as it might haYe been in pre-Achaean
tit11e-in which case the passage becomes evidence not of ethnology but of
current theory-; o,·, if it is really descriptive of Dodona as it was in Hesiod's
time (uot much before 700 B.c.), it giYes us this important mldition to our
k11owledge, that, as we shall see in the case of Lemnos, tlie arriYal of Hesiod's
Pelasgians at Dodona must be a~signed to post-Home1ic time. In eitlier case
Hesiod's phr,tse is no proof that the Pelasgi,tns wet e autocl1tlionous at
Dodona or even existed there in Homer's tillie.'3·5
:: II. 3. lt>J-1S9 33 In later times it cert,iinly w,ts not ah.·ays

H Fcir ,l \'clY remarkable echo in ,1 lc1te
,niter of thi, Homeric eonception of a · Thr,,ko-
Phrygian thrn,t' see the pass,1ge of Apolloniu,
of Rlw,Je, rn the .lz,p,,ulu p. 2:?:? 1,elow.
"·' Here he is mure than fullt,wnl l.1y Holm,
Gr. 1}rnd,. i. tifl 'Hesiod h,1t ,lann au,drnck·
lieh ge,agt, ,lass D,>dona ,lei Sitz ,lei Pela,ger
war.· Sm ely the ll!O~t that may 1,e argue,l is
thct Do,lona ,,,is" settlement of Pe:asgi.uh.
rnteq,1ete,l so. Ephonh for exam1,le, who as
we shall ,ee w,1, u1,1inly re']" ,n,iL!e for the re-
haLiliration of Hesioclic \·ielYS ,,L,,ut the Pel.is-
giaus, certainly re garde, l Do,lon,1 ,ts one uf the
...ettle1neu ts uf hi~ Pel.1:-.gi.111 l H1igr,u1ts fro111
.\rc,1,Iia. (Epl1oros rrp. StraLu :337 fon o·, &s
./)7111,v 'Eipopos, Il•;\cur,wv Yopuµa. (~ L:.wli{,v71)· o[
OE IlEAao--yol TWV 1r€pl Tijll <Ei\i\&Ga aV Va-
lJ" 7 Eu J V'T w v 0:pxaiOTaTOt AE1uvTaL,)
18G J. L. ::\IYRE:-;

B. T!uo,·ctiml Pdasgians.-Asius, who fiuurisheJ about 700 B.C., is LitlOted

by Pausauia,, (S. 1. 4) as follows:-
1ivTt0wv OE IIeAaa- ;ov EV 11'/rlKOµOlO"lV opEO"O"l
0

I'aZa µEA.aw' aviOWKEV, 't'va 01'YJTWV 7ivo, ei'17.

Here for the first time a man 'Pelasgus' appears as an indi\·idual
eponymos; a11Ll also not merely as 'prehistoric,' bnt as 'primitive,' -the first of
mankiml. Pausanias has just stated that ' the Arcadians say that Pelasgus
was the first man who liYed in this land;' but an A;rndian origin is
not claimed for Pela.sgus in the passage of Asius, aud there is no more reason
for holding that A,,ins believeLl Pelasgus to ha,·e been an Arcadian than
for holLling that he made liim a Dodonaean or a Thessalian.
Hesioil, similarly, knew of an individnal Pelasgus, who was 'auto-
chthonous' ('fla-{ooo, OE TOV Ile;\.aa- ;ov avTox0ovu <pYJO"lV elvai) 3,; In tl1is he
0

agreeLl with A.sins; bnt he went forther ,Yhen he wrote vt'e'is dgeyEi•ovTo
_\VKllOVO', llVTl0Eoto, av 'TiOTE Ti KT€ IleAaa- ;oi;- s;: for Lycaon is the great
0

culture hero ,)f \Y estern Arcadia, and the progenitor of a family which
came erentually to include some fifty ep•mymi of various places and
peoples in Greece.
Tlie contrast presented by these passages from the later epic with the
Homeric eYiLlence is apparent at once. In pltce either of real people
familiarly known, or vague allusions to a mysterious pa,t we have a clear-
cut tl1eory which representeLl Pelasgus as the Primernl )fan, and consequently
his descemlants, the Pelasgians, as representatives of an aboriginal race and
a primiti\·e phase of culture; aml we ha,·e also a further stage of theory
in the localization of Pelasgus (and conse11uently of Pelas_;;ians) in Arcadia,
which is 11nite foreign to Horner, anLl marks tbe first step in a new path
of speculation which we have next to follow out among the writers of the
late sixth century and of the fiftl1.

T\H> distinct movements may be recognized among the Logographers.

On tl1e one liaml the metl10d of personification employed by HesioJ an,!
Asius is applied to other p:1rts of Greece, in ,Yhi~h traces of Pelasgians
were aLlmiHed. Hecataeus for example :is makes Peln~gus a king in
Thessaly: for Thessaly, he says, was called Pelasgia ltr.o IIeAaa-7011 Tov
/3arnAEo,. On the other haml, more than one writer, accepting the Hesiodic
theory that Pelnsgns was the First )Ian, were at pains to harmonize this
theory ,vith the claims of other peoples in Greece to be regarded as aboriginal.
Acusilans, for insUrnce, writing at about the same time as Hecataeus,
seems to han: interpolatPd a personal Pelasgns into the primeval genealogy
of Argos. In this genealogy, Xiobe. daughter of Phoronem, becomes the
3" _\t,,,11. 1i. l. 1, ~=lfr,io,l f1. 6S Killkel. :,, Scl,nl. A.rull. R!,o,l. -±. :26d.
3~ St1. :!21 = tr. Ki1,kel.
 A HISTORY OF THE PELASGL.\.X THEORY. lSi
earliest n1ortal consort of Zens and gives birtl1 to Argos. Acusilaus, himself
an Argi\'e, annotates this pedigree like that of the proverbial \\' elshman
- ' about this time Adam \ms born '-ancl inserts Pelasgus as a cadet
brother of Argos. The rest of the genealogy is the e:s:pamlecl version
already mentioned of tl1e Hesiodic theory: Pela\~Us beco1nes tlte father
of Lycaou, o, /3aa-lA€Ua-a, 'ApKaOwv EK T.01\.AWV ~;vva lKWV T.'EVTrJKOVTa
T.a'ioa, J-yevv71a-E, including the (JJOilYii1 i of many Arcadian towns, and e.-en
of remoter Greek and non-Greek peoples: Thespror.us, Peucetius, Cancon,
:Maceclonus, Phthius, Lycins, and the like. The list ends with X vKTwo,
or XvKTtµo,, a 'twilight' personage as~ociateLl witli a Dum111c,·1u1g iu the
shape of Deucalion·s Flood. 1Ieanwhile Lycaon has also a daughter Callisto,
who becomes by Zeus the mother of Areas. Arc-as, in due course. sur.-ives
the Deluge, and becomes the founder of historic Arcadia. Ho,Y much
of all this was the real setiuel to Hesiod's phrase v[E'i, EgE~;if.vovTo _\.vkcLovo,
avn0Eoto, or how much is later superstructure, is an open yuestion. 30
All that is of importance here is the fact, recordetl by Apolloclorus,w that it
,ms Acusilaus who engrafted Pelasgus into the Argi.-e pedigree,-' Phoroneus,
-Niobe-Argos,' -and that this iuterpolation took place in Llefiance of tl1e
authority of HesioLl, who liar_l made Pelasgus an avTo;y_0wv.
That the expanded genealogy of Lycaon was a systematic attempt to
ascribe 'Pelascrian'
0
ancestrr
.,
to certain sets of Cheeks especia]h, in the ! •

N orth-\Vest, is clear from the version ascribed to Pherecn1es bY Dionrsius

of Halicarnassus.41 IIE/\.aa- ;ov Kai !}.rywvdp'Y}, "/lVETat i.VJClLWV • .... ;iJTo,
0

ryaµEt Kvn..17vl)v v71toa vvµq:>TjV, c'icp 17, TO opo, 17 KvAAIJV1) Kall.EtTGl-this

domiciles Lycaon, as before, in Arcadia-ET.ELTa Tau, EK TouTwv "/EZ'v170if.vTa,
Ol€gtwv, /COL Ti'va, TOT.OU', EKa<TTOl TOVTWV fJIC'Yj<TGV, OZvwTpov Kal IlEVK€TLOV
µiµv1ja-JCETat ll.Eyr,,v 6JOE :-KT/\.. H~re we ha\'e a clear formulation of the
theory of a diaspom of Pelasgian peoples from Arcadia north-,vestward,
to which system and currency were given later on by Ephorus. And we can
banlly doubt that the gorrl of this north-,re,twanl moYernent \\·as the
IIE/1.aa-~;wv i!opavov at Doclona, which we have seen reason to belieYe that
Hesiod had inventecl out of the Homeric epithet of Dodonaean Zeus.
Hellanicus, a generation later, writing EV 'Apyoll.tJCaZ, like the Argirn
Acusilaus, makes another and quite different attempt tu associate the
lineage of Pelasgus with a genealogy which i::; essentially Argin•. This

"" This genealogy comes t" rn, as the work of
Ani,ilaus iu Apollo,lorus i,. 1. 1, cf iii. 8. i.,
confirmed lJy Diouy,in, of HalimIH,t,sns i. 1 i.
3 and Tzetzt:s, Luc. -181.
-!ll iii, 8, 1.
-ii Fragt. 85=Divuy,. Hal. i. i:3. It i& a
misfo1 tmic that it is not 1,os,ii.Jh· to disentangle
with ceitainry the coutributiom ,_,f tlte three
write,, IM!llt·cl Phe1,·cyde,. Ewryt!tiu:; that i,
attributed to them on this t"[•ie is so Slturate,1
with the irleas of Ephorus (,ee §§ H-16 helu\l·)
th,1t my own iu, lina.tiou is t" ,ls:ii~n all b the
latest ot tlicm. Bnt Ephonb certaiuly u,e,.l a
great Jli,bs of ge1walo~ical material of earlier
than fomth ceunn-,r dare: gencalogieal stud, of
this claho1at1• kiml is <:l,,nacteri,tic of the l.ner
sixth allfl ,·arh· fifth centnry; anrl in the
p,n ticular c,tse o·f Lycaon we h~n- evidencl· tliat
a metrie,ll g,·nea],,gy ,·xi,te,l whi,·h \BS ,1ttri-
butt,l to ffr,i,,,l. Sn, mther than pres, my
011·n view of the matttl' tn an extren1e, I haw,
chosen to chscu,s the staternenb of Phereeydes
a, if they 1,c-longe,l t" the 71.o-yo,p:i.cpJs ,.[ tlt,n
nan1e Sec a~..;o I'• 220 i1cilow.
188 .J. L. ::.\lYHES

t 1,eory comes to us in the following forrn.4 2 Triopas, ,d10 stauds in the same
eponymous relation to the Dorian h,,.,_:ap )li,, on the Ca1ian coast, as the
1

hero Argos does to its ArgiYe metropolis, hall three sow,, Iasus, Pelasgus, aml
Ageuor. On the death of Triopc1s, these 'di\"ided his kingdom.' Pelasgns
took the eastern half, Ta 'TT"po, 'EpaCTLVOV 7TOTaµov, aml founded Larisa (the
acropolis of Argos City), calling it after the name of his own daughter
(fr. :29). Iasus took the ,vestern half, Ta 'TT"po, "HAtv. On the death of
Pelasgus aud fasus, Agenor brought cavalry aml conquered the whole
cvuntry. This is all to explain tliree Homeric epithets of Argos: ~laCTov,
i''1T"1ro/3ornv, ITE"\ao- ;1Ko11; and the theory is ascr ibecl to Hellanicus by name.
0

It presupposes thrtt the name 'Ap"/0'> was applicable to the wl10le of the
kingllom of Triopas, which i•nclmled all Pelvponnese; aml so gives us
fifth-cer1tury <rnthority for the belief underlying the statement of Apollodorus 43
tliat the hero Ar;os on suc~eecliug Phoroneus as king called all Peloponnese
after l1is own name. Whether Apollodurus' forther contribution, when he
puts the hero Argos iu place of Triopas, is of earlitir date, or is <t subsequent
attempt to st1nare the ge11ealogy given by Hellanicus with that given by
Acusilaus, is another l[Uestion; and the same observation applies to anotl1er
variant gi,·en by Eustathiu,,,4-± which puts Phoroneus in place of Triopas:
a11 ewn nearer approximation to the theory of Acusilaus.
An obvious motiw for these various attempts to interpolate Pelasgus in
genealogies relating to the Peloponnesian Argos has doubtless suggested
itself to the reader by this time. There can in fact be little doubt that
Hellanicus, or Acusilaus, or both, were the ,-ictims, if not the perpetrators, of
a -,irnple literary blullller. Hellanicus, it is true, is the first known author
who uamed IlEAa(ryiw-ri, as one of the Thessalian tetrarchies/ 5 aud he was as
fully com·inced as anyone of the existence of a Pelasgian settlement in
The,,saly dow11 to the time of the ' Coming of the Hellenes;' so he cannot be
acquitted of ha,·ing known that the Homeric ITcAaa- 11Kov "Apryo, properly 0

rderre1l to some part of Thessaly. Yet he aml his immeLliate predecessors

are under grave suspicion uf having taken that phra~e als.J as referring not to
the Tliessalian but to tlie Peloponnesian Argos; of having confu~ed both
·with that Tl1essalian Lari,-a which is ne:it!ier pnrt of Homer's IIEAaa-rytKov
".'\.p";o, nor the lrome of Homer's actual IIt::\.ao-e;oi; aml furtl1er of having
cumbined this non-existent 'Pelasgian Argos' in Peloponnese with the
'Pela--gian Arcadia,' which we have seen to be Hesiodic doctrine, and of which
Ac::silaus-i,; aml Hellanicus -1, were both aware.
The actual reduplication of the place-name Larisa, iu Tliessaly, in
Ar0 olis, and in tl1c cuLwtry of Homer's actual Pldasgians -i, inevitably in-
c1ensed the confusiou, aull led to a variety of fr e~li cotu biuations. Hellanicus -io
" :--,_h,_.]. JI . .J. ;5 =fr. :Ji. In ;,1,1tc of 111, ·B Ii. 1. ~- :2.
44
lak1 ,Lne. I dass Hdlani,,n, ,nth the other :S,.ho:. ii. 3. 75 .
gtutal1Jgi:,t-... ,u1,l :,€[1a1a.t•· l1i111 f1um H1_ru _iotu-,
1 .Jj Hell po< I. ,. Y. -rerpap;,Ja,.
aL i Tl1u,;yd1Lle-,, 1Jll the gruuwl tli.:1.t a.11 th,it 0
" .A1Jol1, d«1 us ii. 1. 1.
we k1111w of hi-, wurk n1c.1.rks h11u ~ts a belate,l -i, :--re1•l1. Byz. ,. Y. 'Ap1«i.,.
co11d11:1~tt01 of the l,J,~n5ra.1)}111: .-,2l11Jol •Jf J1i".ltory- -s: ll. ~- S-±:3.
w11:i11,.:. "" Plu:,,·,.,,u, fr. 1.
 A HISTORY OF THE PELASGIAK THEORY. 18!}
makes Pelasgus many iienippe, a daughter of the Peneins,"0 and so localizes him
in Thessaly, and makes him ancestor of a line of Thes5alian kings; Phrastor,
Amyntor, Teutamidas. Of these the last named is of course suggested by the
ancestor of the leaders of that contingent of Pelasgians in Homer;-; 1 who, as we
have seen, are really Hellespontine, and have nothing to do either with
Thessaly or Argolis. Hellanicus again, 5 ~ and also Pherecydes/'3 brought
Acrisius the Argive on a visit to the Pelasgians of Thessaly, and 1:,0 explained
the existence in Thessaly of the ArgiYe place-name Larisa; and, later,
Staphylus of Naucratis brought Pelasgus himself from Argos to Thessaly to
found this Thessalian Larirn_;,.1, There was however apparently yet another
tradition in the field-perhaps th8 legend utilized by Staphylns-which put
the foundation of the Thessalian Larisa earlier than the generation of
Acrisius; so yet another step was taken by the defenders of the Acrisins
theory, by duplfcating their p;·ofege." 3

Side by side with all this speculation, one passage from Hecataeus;;;;
reveals to us an actual population of the Pelasgian name, resident now in
Lemnos, but believed to have once lived in Attica. The passage however is
only preserved to us in abstract; and we shall be at all events on the safe
side if we postpone consideration of it till we come to discuss the \·iews of
Herodotus, to whom we owe its presern1tion.
One set of fragments of Hellanicus "7 deals likewise with Lemnos, or
rather, ·with the !.lvTte<;, its Homeric population. From merely tending the
outcast Hephaestus-and the merest 'Pelasgian' could hal'llly do less under
the circumstances-they have become his Lemnian craftsmen, 'the first arti-
ficers of metals,' inventors of armour and implements of destruction; and that
is why they are !lvTlE<;, from a-tvw·0at. ;,s They are also, by this time,
immigrants from Thrace; for when certain Trojans, who play a part in the
foundation-legend of Chios, landed in Lemnos, 17rrav ... avTo0t KaTOlKOVVT€<;
0p~K€<; Tll/€<;, OU 7i"OAAO£ av0pwr.01· €~/€"fOV€trrav CE µi~tAAJJVE<;· TOVTOV<;
Their ' Hellenic admixture' we must suppose
EKaXovv oZ 7rcptotKot !.tvTta<;.
to have been dne to contact ,Yith the Minyans, and perliaps also with
Agamemnon's Achaeans during the war. For the further history of the
"i.tVTte<; see p. 20.5 below.

°
5 Compare the allianee arranged by S2 Fr. 2\l.
03
Pherecydes between Pelasgns arnl Kyllene v11ioa Fr. 26., cf. Schol. .\.p. Rh. i. -10, Tzetz.
vvµ.,p71v (abo,·e p. 187); with the result that Lyr. 83S, Steph. Byz. s. "- 11.&p1tra.
Pelasgus i, localized in Arca,lia, " Sch,;l. Ap. Rh. 1. ~,SO.
51 ll. 2. 843; Phoronis fr. 26= Sehol. A1, 55
A 1,011. ii. 4, 4.
Rh. 4. 1090. It is a further questiun whether ,,; Hdt. ,i. 137.
57 Fr. 112-:J.
in the Homeric phrase ufe o6w ll:/i8ow IT<ll.atr')'oii
Teu-raµ.(liao the ,,ord ITell.atr')'OV means ' son of 58 Philod1orns (fr. 6 = Schol. 11. l. 59-1) after

Pelasgus· or simply ·the Pelasgian;· an,l again his manner has J'Onnced upon thi, bit of phil,1-
whether Tw-raµ.[liao mean, '50n of Teutami, la,,· logy ancl a, lopred it, hut explain, it 11mte-
as Hellanicns thought. or rath, r · ,,1n nf d1tferemly.
Teutanrns.·
190 J. L. }IYRES

§ 8-Tltc Tnrgalia,u,.
Ho,v popular in the fifth century was this blunder about the IIE:\.ao- 1tKozt 0

"Ap,oc; is well seen from the tra_;edians. Aeschylus for ~example in the
811nJlin'S (ll. 1 fl::) makes the king of the Peloponnesian Argos call himself
the son of Palaichthon the earthborn: he i;:; the eponymos of the Pelasgi.
and the lord of a realm which includes everytl1ing west of the Strymon,
Paeonia, which he seems to put also west of the Strymon, 50 Perrhaebia,
Pimlus aml beyond, and the hills of Dodona. It extends, in fact, as far as
the sea, presumably the Adriatic. It also includes all south of this Strymon-
A<lriatic line as far as, and including, Peloponnese. Here the genealogical
<liagram I'17-IIa>-.a[x0wv-IIE:\.ao-'Yo-, is clearly an expansion of the Hesiodic
theory of a IlEAaa- 10, who is himself avTox0wv. The extent of the Pelasgian
0

kingdom is no less clearly lletermined, partly by the desire to include a

'Pelasgian' Do<lona (which had by this time become matter of common
knowledge), nncl the 'Pelasgic Argos' of Thessaly; partly by an attempt
to claim for the Pelasgian Argos of Peloponnese the hegemony over all
those parts of Greece (including Macedonia) which had come in historic times
under the rnle of .soi-di,unt 'Heracleids from _-\.rgo_s.' It is possible also
that the allusion to the Strymon may cover the poet's acquaintance with
the fact, k11own to Herodotns ,,o that 'actual' Pelasgians remained extant in
the fifth century within the basin of that river.
In Pt'a111t!hel!s, similarly, IIE:\ao-"l[a is used in a context which shows
tliat the Peloponnesian Argos of Aegisthus anll Danaus is meant:-
87!) f. Il£Aaa- 1ia 0'"€ oetErnt, 017AVKTOZ'Cf'
0

"ApEl oaµEztTWzt VVKTt<ppovp,jnp 0pcta-Et'

aml here too _-\.eschylus is further supported, as we shall see, by the
Herodotean accounts of Argolis as having been Pelasgic at the time of
the corning of the Danaids.'5°" .
Sophocles in the same ,my transfers to the Peloponnesian Argos not
merdy the associations wlnch belong to the IIE:\ao-,ytKov "Ap 1oc; of Thessaly, 0

!mt also all that other body of fifth-century doctrine which equated the' actual
Pela~gi,rns · of Thessaly, the Thraceward parts, and Lemnos, with the no less
111nterious Tvrseni.
. F{·. ~-3G. "I vaxE '/EVJIC/,TOP, 7ra'i Kp17vwzt
r.a-rpo-, 'fJ.KEaztOV, µE 0/a 7ipEo-/3EVWV
"Ap'YOV<; TE ~1vat<;, ''Hpa<; TE 7T"a"fOl',
Kat Tvpo-1]ztOto-t IlEAaa-s101,;. 60 h
,., l{emember he1e 1 1) tl.1c1t Hvme1_.s Paeonin i, defimtely included in 'TlLr.ice,' trom which
nu:, a, Lir we,t as the river _-b:ius; (2J that · P,1eonia ' pr,:,per is distinct both in Homer, in
tl,c,ugh in the :,ixth ceutnry Paeonia h.1d Herodutus, an<l e,en later.
exte11,!ed ,l goo,1 \\·ay east ol tht Strymc,n, yet h« Hdt. 2. 171 ; 7. Id. see § 10 below .

.dl thh ea-::,tern lt_.gion lu.d lieen ma,.le C1.vcfo-TaTos ,, ' HJt. ,. 04 : 2. 171.
,11 ,lte time 0f Darius. H,Jt. 5. 15. :!S' or does it 6 1
' ' llion H. 1. 25. For the Tyrseni see§ 17
-,t·c1n eVt:r to La \·e recon:~re11 it-, I\1t:onia11 below.
,J1.11-.1i_ter ; Ill tl1e filth and tom th crnturits it
 A HISTORY OF THE PELASGIAX THEORY. 191

Enripicles contributes little. His regular use of the epithet 'Pelasgian'

is to Llenote the Peloponnesian Argos an<l its population, botl1 Achaean, as in
the Oreste..;, and Iphigenia in A-,dis,';l'c anJ pre-Achaean, as in the Plwrni..;sae,
and the Supplie.::sY0d In Orafrs 12±7, IIE;\au"/tK01 ~Av;o, clearly meaus 1

Acl1aean :Mycenae. Only in one passage does he distinguish between the

previous IIEX.au"/LWTai and the culture hero Danaus, whose name they are
caused to assu meY1

§ 'J.-Ho·odot·us: (a) his rndcpewlrnce nf the He.siodfr /:Mu_-cl.

\Yith Herodotus ,rn are once more in broad daylight. His allusions to
the Pelasgians are numerous, and his us,ige of the name, though it rnries,
is on the whole intelligible. His work also shows sufficiently clear points of
contact both ,vith recent observation and with contemporary theory to
permit it to be used as a commentary on the more fragmentary utterances of
other fifth-century writers. It has on the other hand the disadvantage
that, thanks to the eclipse which befel the History almost as soon as
it was published, it had surprisingly little influence on the course of
later speculation. But herein there was gain, as well as loss, as ,ve shall see.
Herodotus has, in the first place, no mention of an individual eponymons
IIEX.au";o,; and no direct contact ,vith the Hesiodic theory at all, except the
bare allusion to the Arcadians as being in the theoretical sense Pelasgians,n~
and as being autochthonons in PelopJnnese like the Cynurians.'3; But the
Arcaclians are in no way specially marked out as aboriginal or Pelasgic;
and their Cynurian colleagues are ne,·er called by him Pelasgian.
This leads us to the positiYe side of Herodotus' work; and here once
more ,rn must distinguish between a writer's accomits of Pela,-;gians actually
smTiving in his o,vn day, or extinguished within Ii ving memor_\·, and bis
statements of a ' Pelasgian Theory' of early Greece.

§ 10.-Huolotus: ~b) octual Pcla,1gians as su,Yirnls, cli?'cfl!J in th,. ~Y,_1rfll Acgca,1.

Actual Pelasgians, either smTiving or recently extinct, are known
to Herorlotus in three rlistinct areas, all on or near the north coast of the
Aegean.
(1) At Placie and Scylace, on the south shore of Propontis, a little east
of Cyzicns, and presumably on the secluded Karndagh plateau. These
Pelasgians still retain their name, and speak a peculiar language ,Yhich
is not intelligible to their neighbours.154 X ote that the,:e Pelasgians are

""" Ile,\acr-yia 0;·. 960, I. A. 1498 ; Il•,\acr-yrnov ti~i. 146, ii. 1 il.
"Ap-yos O,·. 1601 : IlE,\acr-yov ''.-\.. Or. 692, 1296; 63 Yiii. 73 oiKEeL OE -r1'}v Ilei\01riJ1.,1171crov tez.,E=a
IlE,\acr-yov EOOS 'Ap·1do:v Or. 124,. E1rTd. · -roVT(J.,'V -rCl. µEv Ol<o. ab-r6x8via iOirra, Ka.Ta
'>'d Ile,\acr-y[a Suppl. 36S : I1e,\acr-y11,ov 'Ao·1os xWp7JJI !OpvTaL i. Vv TE ,ad
1
-rO 1rd,\o:t [ otl\EJJV ],
Ph1..1en. 256; IleA.acr/'t'i:tiv <TTpd.-rEv,u.a Pluxd. :ApKdOe5 TE Kai. Kvvolipw,.
105-6. 64 i. 5';".
01 Fr. 227. Seep. 221 belo,,·.
 J. L. :\IYRES

situated immediately across the water from the aboLle of the Pelasgiaus
of the Trojan Catalogue; and exactly in the Llirection to which the south-
eastward thrust of Thracians, Treres, and Kimmerians in post-Homeric
times had tended to dri\~e the Homeric population of south-eastern Thrace.
~ ote also that the silence of Homer, not merely as to Pelasgians in Asia,
but as to Thracians in what afterwards became Bithynia, and also the
positive Homeric evidence as to the non-Pelasgian character of the population
of I.emnos 1mcl In1bros, makes a very strong case for assuming that this
Pelasgian occupation of Placie find Scylace results from tl1e sftme post-
Homeric movement.
A simibr raid, by some of these same Pelasgians, reached as far as Attica,
and effected a regular lodgment there for a time, oi crvvotKot e"/Ev o v To
'A.0riva[otcrt. The approximate elate for this raid is given in the parallel
passage in ii. 51 : 'A0rivaio£<Tl "lap fj S YJ T TJ v t " a IJT a e,; ,, E ;\, :x, TJ v a ,;
T €A,€ 0 V CT l IT€Aa<T"f0l <TVVOlKOl E"/€VO VT O EV TV xwpy, o0€v Kat, "EAATJV€<;
77p;avTo voµtcr0ryvat : so that if it is possible to discover at what point
in their history Herodotus thought that the Athenians ' were just beginning.
to count as Hellenes,' it will be possible to assign at all events a relative date
for the time at which these Pelasgians ' came to be fellow-lodgers with them
in their country.' This point however will be best reserved until we come to
the question of the Pelasgians in Attica. 03
(2) I,1 Lcmnos and Imlm,s. These Pelasgians also are post-Homeric
intruders: for they expelled from Lemnos the lllinyans,60 who are still
in possession there in Homer. 67 .Moreover Herodotus fixes the date of t11e
:Minyan migration from Lernnos to Laconia in the same generation as the
Dorian inrnsion of Peloponnese: for Theras was the brother of the wife
of king Ari,-toclemus.';s These Pelasgiam; were still in the islands when
tbe,r were anm xed by Persia about 50.5,m and were also still in possession
when ~Iiltiades conquered them, not long before 493.• 0 It has been argued
from the phrase ETl TOT€ inro I1EAaa-ywv olKEoµeva<; in \". 26 and from
the omission of Lemnos in the list of extant Pelasgians in i. 57 that
these Pelm::gians were extinct when Herodotus was writing; but he nowhere
states that the Pelasgians were wholly expelled by ~Iiltiacles, and in i..'57
he clearly hints at the existence of ocra a;\;\a IT €Aa<T~/lKa EOVTa 7rOA.l<TµaTa
To ovvoµa µETif]aAE, as though there were people who still talked ' Pelasgic'
aml were known to be of Pelnsgie origin, but no longer satisfied his
other condition that they should have retained their proper tribal name ;
and this would clearly cover such a case as tliat of Lemnos under Athenian
rule. 71

71
:'lute tlic,t ,1 'Lemnian' \\ho was in tl1e
Persian ,et ,·ice in 4S0 B.c. (Hdt. viii. 11) con1Jt-;
6T JI. i. 1,;s. 23. 7li, the lattct a Llte n,-, ont TWv uUJJ f3autA.fL 'EA A 7J v w v EOvTwv. He
p~1.., .. a~f-. al,o 1,ear, a Greek name, Antiilorn,. If the
H" IY, lJj, L, rnnian Pda,giaus liad 11ot 'cha, ged theii:
fl~i \". 2t_i. name· lit' wunl,l t•resumably have been de,cnbecl
7"'1 ,-i. 1:;t~. as a· l\_•1.1..,~ia!l.'
 ~\ lH:-iTORY OF THE PEL\:-iGLlX THEORY.

Xl)w these Pelasgiall-; of Lemuos auLl Irnbros lie. like those of Placie and
Sc}·lace, right iu sight of the territorv of the Homeric Pelasuiaus
I,._) ....., .,, ,=,
·' and kept up
~

to the close of the :fifth cc:ntury a piratical connexion with the mainland : for
their Persian aLlministrator l1a,l to deal severely with them, Tov-; µEv Alr.o-
' €7Tl
0-TpanYJ-; ' '~
-KV'0 a-; aLTtwµevo-;,
' ' ' OE
TOV>; ~· <TLVE<T
' 0ai TOV
' ...:.apEwV
' ' <rTpaTOV
' <L7TO
' '
~1w8Ewv om'a-w UT.OK0µ1soµH'OV,7" allll from a base in Lemnos thev would
only have .Jone this either in soutl1-eastern Thrace, or in coune of it; transit
over the straits.
Tlie Pelasgians of Lemnos ailll Imbr,Js wern also concernecl in eJrlv rai,ls
on Attica: for the 'Pelasgians unLler Hymettus' in _-Htica, made L~mn,;,,_
among other places, their retre:tt: ciAAa ,E a-xdv xwp[a Kat S,7 Kat ~\.P;µvov. 73
This connects them directly with the men of Pbcie and Scylace, whom
,ve lia ve alrea1ly seen to be among those oi' a-vvotKoi JyEvovTo 'A817vaio1a-1.
The rai,l on Brauron moreover is expressly stateLl to have been the work of
these same Attic Pelasgians after they liaLl left .Attica and settled in Lemnos. 74
(:3) I,i 8c1 11wth;·(1 cc, HeroLlotus accounts for similar sun·ivals by the
same s: 11y. He is illustrating, by the Ka,3,dpwv op"fta in Samothrace,
1

an Attic cult ,Yhich he believes to be of Pelasgic origin. This wuulLl not by

itself prove that there were then, or e,·er hatl been, Pelasgians in Samothrace.
But HernLlot11s goes on to explain, T17v ·1ap ~aµo0p1nJV ot'KEov 1rpoTEpov
IIEAaa-yot, OVTOl, 017.Ep , }.,. 817vaLOl(J'l u V VO l KO l €~,El' 0 l' To, Kat wapa
TOVTWV "'5:.aµo0pryiKE', Ta opyia r.apaAaµf]clVOV!Tl. 7 ±a The phrase about the
a-vvo1Ko1 is illentical, and the present tense of 1rapaAaµf3ci.vova-L suggests that
in HernLlotu,;' own time the fountain-heaiJ of Cabiric orthodoxy was an
extant Pelasgi.111 c,)mmunitY. 7'

;"l Y. 27. S,rn1,1thr.1e'an rin:11 still 1:-.eJ 1ra1'c1.1a.v i/iiav

~J vi. 13,. The 'l>Or,ls are part of:he ciuti•)ll.
or su1n~nary. llf lle1::ataetB, nlrt:-L1dy 1nention~J
'": the eml uf § ,.
;, A. closely a,ialog,)n,; c.1se is tli,n of tl1e
Dolopes in Scyro,. Oris;inally :i mainland ancl
iuL111d peo]Jle, .1s i•1deed the rest of them were
;,till in the time 1Jf the Persian \Yars (H,lt. fr.
13:1, 185), they e!Jtered Scyros in p,y,t-Home1i,•
time, aucl ret,1iue,l their hold on the island
uHtil they wc1e ,upprcsse,l by Cirnun, as the
Lemnians kid been l,y :\Iiltia•les. That the
Dolopiau 01_•:.npLltinn of Scyro-:, ,v.1:-3 JHJ..,t-
11 orneric seems tu fullow from Jl. 9. titiS.
where the ishud is iaiJed aml ,_·,1ptn1ed by
Achilles, anJ fmm fl. l!l. 326-:32, Od. 11. 509,
wh,·r,, it st·ll f.,nns p.:trt of his dominions.
Th,· ra-;e i~ hen: to J e:.\at.:t1y analu6ous ,vith
1 ,iruilar to tltJ.t reached l,y Herocl,1tus about
t!,at of Lmmos, Jl. 14. 230 ancl Iml,ros ll.
14. 2S1. Fur the further fate of the<e S,,yrim
Do lopes at the l1smcls of the h1,t• ·ri.rns, ,c·e
l'· 221 l,elmY.
7
"·' ii. ;:;1.
75 Frnm the f.,ct th.it iu llo:n,m times the
H.S.-YOL. XXYII.
i5,a1'€KTO>' D1,yl. 5. -18. :1; cf. Lobe,·k, A:]l.
110\l, 1343), :rn,l tha: the cult itself ,ms ll•H
then contiHctl to Sa1nothrace, but was obser~~e<l
d-ewl,ere, ll•J: me,ely in Lemnos and lmbros,
but in tl,e Troa,1 and on the Hellespont (Strabo
J,2-31, we may re,1s011ably infer that here
ah,}. •1uite . 11,,ut from theorie,, HeroJotu:; is
,lealing with cmTent wrifial,le obsen-ations of
Xu1th Ae~ean cults, of the s,1me kin,l as those
\Yhich he ljllOtes ,peeitically fur the cult of
Herades in Th,1so,. Demetrius of Scepsis. later
on, ha1.l ,l theory ol his own about Samothrace,
,rhich is •Jnire iw.lepen,knt of He1 c,,lotus. and
at Ji1,t ,ight ,111irc ditlerent, but \Yhid1 on
c].Jser inspedion seews to show that he ha,l
been led by similar dat.1 to a conclusion Yery
the,'" X orth .\egun Peh,gia11s. i-amothrace, he
says (11nuto,l hy Str.10,J 47:2), ,ms at tir,t
calle,l Me1'iT71: the name -:f.aµo0pci<1/ is its
s,,c,.wl name, .incl dates from the coming of the
Cahiri, whom r.e ,eern, to i,lentify wit], the
Cnretes. Their cult lw reg,ull-; a, I'h,·11']ia11.
0
 J. L. :\IYBES

(J,l At Anto;ul,,us, on the south-west ::mglP of the Troad, Herodotus lets

fall, unexplained, the epithet TI/V IIeXaa-~;{8a.70 He doE·s not assert that tliere
were any Pelasgians resident there in Hellenic times; but the geographical
position of Antandrus is such as to facilitate settlement there (as at Placie
and Scylace) in the event of TLr::tcinn pressnre on the country of the Homeric
Pelasgians. That snch pressure was felt, and tlrnt such settlements were
made, is clear from a fourth-century arconnt of a colony of European ELlones,
like those of the Bithynian coast, at Antandrus itselF 7 ; and that tl1ere was
some non-Hellenic element at Antandrus much earlier than this, is clear from
the phrase ~\eXEywv 7,oAi~ applied to it by Alcaeus. 75 We ha\·e seen already
(p. 183) how closely the 'Lelegian theory,' of which this is one of the most
northerly manifestations, replaces further south the' Pelasgian theory' \Yhich
prernils in the Hellespont and its neighbomhood?'
The probability that in the fiftl1 century Antamlrus was belieYed to be
not merely non-Hellenic, but positively Pelasgian, in the sense that it held a
population of South-east European origin and post-Homeric arrirnl, is
increased by the fragment of Hellanieus whieh is qnotecl to explain the
proverb IIiTaVI) Etµi. <I>,w) ~;ap (Hellanicus) a VTTJV VT,O IlEAatTrywu
a1•8pa7,061a-0i7va1, Kal r.a/\.lV VT,O 'Epv0paiwv €Aev0epw0ryvat. 5" ~ote that
thi,;, proverb itself can be trnceLl back as far as Alcaeus, and presumably
the legend likewise, wl1ich in that case falls within the class of data
accessible to HeroLlotu:,. No Llates are given, but the inci,leut mnst fall
(If not later than the time of Alcaeus; (b) hardly, if at all, earlier than
the foundation of Erythrae in the time of the 'Ionic migration:' for the-
point of tl1e pro\·erh is that tl1e disasters of Pitane are incessant; so there
can have been no long interrnl between enslavement and liberation. "\Ve-
may therefore place the incident in post-Homeric, aml probably in very
early Hellenic, times; and we may class this hint of the presence of raiding
Pelas;:;-ian~ in Aeolis alongside of the other e-,,-idence of the kind."'
( ,) ) :Yea;' Creston, finally, on the mainland between Thrace and ~Iacedon
in the district which lies south-weshnml of the middle course of the
Strymo11, Herodotus alludes to To'i, vvv ETl Eouai ITeXaa~;wv Twv v1rEp
The n,1rnc· ~o..un8pcin1 in :111y case J,,.,k, as 1f it ;, Strct bo, 60G.
r-:·C•)ttlhl ::ln int1n5i(,u ftotn tht· neighbou1iug ;,-, The positi,·e statc11:c·11to of K,mon J,.-an·.
Europ, an rnainlaml. aml it i, in,trnctil"e tu tiwl 41 a!11l )Ieh i. 18 that tl1ere 11ere P..Jasgians at
it :,11gg1::,ted that jt was a Phr1111(1r;i cult ,, hich A11taa,lnh a1e only worth noting hPre as
wa, iatiwled. a!l(l that it-; c,ubjcct was a g1ou1• <·Yidemc· of a later reYi1·,,l ot tl1e a1{rho1ity of
ot 1•er-onage,, who )ih the Helles1,011till(• He10,lotu,. Jfda·, n·ision contrrins an ,rna-
PeL1,gi,llh of Homer) !tn,c ,,. c·xac' a counter- chroni,1n ,rn,l two 1,ie,·t"S of rhurr,u"hly Graeco-
1, . .1rt in C,, !(. Ro1nan 1t11i!c1logy.
;,, Yii. 4:!. The plirasc clciriy ,lwotes ,om,·- '" Fr.11[,h=Zenol,. ,-. 61.
thing pl·ctiliar to Antand:us, awl not rommoH &1 Pliny X. H. 5. JO. 32 and :'iteph. Byz. s.v.
t,:> the Gn·eksnf .\eoli,. These iatt.::r a1e TO 1ra,\a, add Ci,,1 uiUd to the already lo11g list of ethno-
/\a,\.E6p.EVOL IlEAaa--yol, Ws 'EJ\i\.~1:c.:1. i\O')'os (\-il.
1
logical '")'ithet~ of AnumlrU5.
fl;,,. but t:1i, i, Greek th,·ory, not Herodr,tean Till!•:, ,Ji,lt•s on the other ],and ,fems tacitly
1 !i....t•r,-,nir1n, ruul is 1H-.ctrssul in it~ prc\per pl ice
tu 1,ut all this on 01.e si, le rh nvt-proven,
i11 § 11. wl:ell 11e: ':-te( di.t•.., Antantlrn... 1w_·reh~ a~ an
j_t ,_.ln11 '..'•/n11 :' 1n \"ill. 1 (i~. ~
 A. HISTORY OF THE PELA.~GIA.X THEORY. 195

Tvp<T17vwv Kp1J<TTwva r,o'Atv otKEovTwv.'" They spoke a language which,

though different from that of their neighbours, agr~ecl with that of the
Hellespontine Pelasgi,rns at Placie aml Scylnce.

~Inch confusion has been wrought in recent commentary on this passage

by the circumstance that Diony::;ius of Halicarnassus apparently read here
KpoTwva for KmJ<TTwva, 8 J meaning thereby however not Croton in South Italy,
but Cortona in Umbria, a reading which led him to use the passage as evi-
dence for his own peculiar theory about the origin of the Etruscans. This
reading however has been accepteLl and defendeLl more than once recently,
and 110tably by Prof. Eduanl Meyer.''
Those who read Kporwva however may fairly be askeLl to meet the
following objections : -
(a) Though Herodotus mentions Umbria twice," 3 he uses it merely as a
general geographical expression for northern Italy, and displays no familiarity
either with the country or with its people. It is difficult therefore to belieYe
that he \·entured npon exact philological comparison between the speech of
the people of Cortona arnl that of the Pelasgians on the Hellespout; and still
more tliat there should be truth in it if he did. It is onl_v on the popular a
p,·iori assumption that in a passage of Herodotus an absur,lity is more likely
to be the true reading, that the variant commends itself at all; anJ it is, in
fact, for the purpose of discrediting Herodotus that the reading KpoTwva is
commonly defended.
(b) On the other hand Herodotus shows himself particularly well
informed about the districts inland of Cbalcidice; and his descriptions of
lake Prasias and of the road from Paeonia into :Macedon ha\·e all the look
of evewi tness. 50
(c) His association of Pelasgians with Tvp1J"17voi and Kp17<TTwvaZot is con-
firmed by the statement of Thucydides,8 ; who haJ also special reasons for
acquaintance with this neighbourhood. There arc two discrepancies in det-iil,
(1) that Thucydides is speaking of a mixed population <TvµµLKTa E0v17, nearer
the ,;ea-coast, and (:2) that he speaks of it as consisting of /3ap/3apwv
8i~/Aw<T<Tr,JV. But they do not at all affect the conclusion that Thucydides
either was independently acqnainteLl \\ ith the same state of tl1ings, of which
Herodotus describes the earlier and more inland counterpart, or was reading
Kpry<Trwva in the passage of Herodotus which is in 'lnestimi.' That snch 0

<TuµµtKra Wv17 shoulll have come into existence nearer the seaboard, is exactly
what we should expect as the result of successirn thrusts from olle northern
intruder after another. That in the ueighbonrhood of the Clialcidic colonies

57 i,·. 108.
~2 i. 5 i.
SJ i. 2!l. " That he really knew th~ L'Olllltry, and tl,at
'" E. Meyer. For chang~,1 z. alt. r;,_,,;h (Halle
0 there was such a disni,.t---r,,r n·en thi, h.is
1891) i. pp. 1-124. heen denied latteily-is cle,11' fr,-,m !,is reference
,·, i. !l-!, iv. 48. to rp770-n.,,fa in ii. 99.
,,, V. 15-11.
 .J. L. ::\lYHE~

the natin?s should have become bilingual, is again exactly what happens
\\ hereyer two cultures meet: the mongrel popuhtion just beyond the
Chalci<lic 'pale' learnt Greek for use 'in town,' ,vithout forgetting their
mvn la11gnage for communication ,vith their friends in the interior.
(Cl) There is collateral evidence of community of population between this
neighbourhood behind Chalcidice and those other districts in which an
actual Pelasgian population i;; best demonstrable. (a) In the case of
Lenrnos, the Homeric Sinties,S0 though they do not appear to have survived
there into historic times, have their counterparts in a Thracian tribe, known
to Hellanicus,:1<l which has its habitat fixed by Thucydides 01 as lying on
the left flank of Sitalces' march from Thrace into )facedon, while Paeonia lay
011 his right. It has left its name, moreover, in that Heraclea Sintica,
of wliich the site is fixeLl on the right or western bank of the middle
Strymon, a little ~- E. of the district of Creston. 02 (/3) In the case of
the Hellespontine area, Herodotus accepts without question a European
origin for the Asiatic Phrygians {who ha,l indeed but recently entered
Asia in Homeric times) and compares them with the )lacedonian Bpt7ei;,.V'3
He also locates Bpv70L 9,1 between the XaAKtOtKov 7evoi;, and the Pieres
(who lay east of the Strymon)''" in a list which nrns in an order which
is quite intelligible geographically: that is to say, they lay somewhere
between the Strymon and the promontory of ~It. Athos. This all agrees with
tl1e locality indicated with these Bpv~;ot, whom he call..; 'Thracians,' and who
attacked the army of :'.\Iarclonius. at a time ,vhen its escorting fleet was
,lestroyed off )lt. Athos."; The bisection of the European Bpv7ot-Bpt7ei;,
is in tnrn parnlleleJ by the duplication of the Pieres, some of whom are
east of the Strymon.~ 7 while other,-, far west of it, are next neighbours of
the Perrhaebians of Thessaly. 0~
Like the Bpv ;01, the E<loni of the lower Strymon, who are also one of
0

the cnrnponents of the ,:,vµµtKTa lf0v17 of Thucy<licles/V have their Asiatic

counterparts, as we have seen at Antan,lrus in the fourth century epithet
'Howv[i;,, where Her,xlotns had written TrJV IIE;\.a,:, ;(oa. The Mygclones, 0

also, who for He1wlotu'J 10') and Thucydicles 1" 1 inhabit a district of :'.\Iaceclon
next we$t of Creston, north-west of Chalci<lice, an,l east of the Axius, and
survived in Strabo's time as a subdivision of the Edones near lake Prasia;;,10~
liad however by tliat time almost vanishe,l out of Europe, and were best
stun.ied, like tha Pela:-gians of Heroclotus, on the south shore of Propontis
next east of the Doliones. For Strabo, they are thus immigrant._ from
Europe, and of tl1e same character as the Plirygiam. the ~Iysians, and the
Doliones them,-eln:>s. 1 'j.l Here. ngain. no theory is in •1uestion: it i,:; simply
"'
1
JI. 1. ;,~-1-. (_1,I :"'.'-. :!~J"i.
'' Fr. 11:!. , C \'11 112.
''" Vll. 111. Ct'. 17;.
~j~ ThL' fp'Y]t1'Ta:?:{a "t Thu,_•. ii. r,0. 111 Rornfln "" i\'. 10:1.
t11n,•-; thrn· Wt'l'1:' tr:1.,·1•-, nf ~H'Tvi qIJ. 1,o(h 1,ank-, '\ \·1i. 123--L 1:21.
rd' th,, :-,;try1110n : StLll10 ;J:}l.
113 . . . . ')
Yll. ,.,.

''4 Yit. 15;").

,, vii. 11 :!- :3.
 A HISTORY OF THE PELASGIAX THEORY. 197

a question, how much collateral evidence exists to support an observation of

fact on the part of Herodotus, that a split tribe coulLl inhabit Pbcie, Scylace,
and the Strymon valley without appreciable damage to its common speecb.
( c_·; The circumstance tlrn.t Herodotus n:.entions a Kp1J<TTwva r. 6 ;\ t v
lias been criticized in Yiew of Thucydides' statement that his <TvµµtKTa €0v17
li\·ed KaTa µtKpa r.OAL<Tµarn.1''! But first, ThucydiLles' statement refers not
to the people of the district of Creston but to the <TuµµtKTa ii0v17 of the coast-
land further south; seconrlly, it would be difficult to prow, e\·en if it did
refer to Krestonia, tliat some one or other of these r.oA{<TµaTa was not called
Kp1j<TTwv; tl1irdly, that there was sucl1 a r.o\.t, in later times is stated poi:>i-
tively by Stephanus {s. \'.J aml an appropriate site for it exists at the
modern settlement of Kilidj.
So far as we h,we gone, all tl1e Herndotean e\·idence goes straigl1t
back to the denotati\·e usage in Horner, whicl1 makes the Pelasgians a
specific N' orth Aegean people. Only, fur Herodotns, instead of being located
on the mainlaml ( 1, ith a single oflslwot in Crete), they are projected
into the X orth Aegean isbuds, and onto the Hellespontine shore of Asia:
exactly as the known stresses of the post-Homeric age would have led
us to guess would be the c:i.se.1''·-, These 'actual' Pelasgians of Herodotus,
moreo\'er, retained still in his time a linguistic character which marks
them as haviug issued, at an earliu· stage still, from a centre of dispersal
sufficiently far back in the Thracian mainland to permit similar projection of one
band of tliem into the basin of tlie Strymon; and so puts their case on all fours
w·ith that of the Herodotean Phrygians. Whether all this observation was
accurately rnmle, is beside tl1e question l1ere, and is not conclusively proYed
even by its consistency witliin itself. All that we are concerned with, here, is
that such observations were not only possible in the time of Herodotus, but
are recorded by him as haring been made. It is equally besiLle the question,
whether they are consistent or not "·ith his general 'Pelasgic Theory,'
which must engage attention ne.s:t.

§ ll.-Haodot1 s: 1 (c) l1is gc;1Cl'1d Pclasgic Tlu·o;·y.

If we look now to hi::; counotatiw use of the name 'Pelasgian,' we shalt

find that Herodotus holds a ,\·ell-defined 'Pelasgic Theory' of the ethnology
of Greece. Once upon a time all that is now called Hellas was calleLl
'Pelasgia' mlll was inhabited by PelasgiansY'·;" These, in the majority of
cases, ha rn become Hellenized gradually: and the crucial test of Hellenization is
the change of language from 'Pelasgian' to Hellenic. 1";:;h Herodotus admits
however that it is only by tlie ,-tndy of the speech of the 'actual' Pelasgians
discussed in the last sectiou, that auy idea can be formed of what 'Pelasgian
speech ' was like.
1e,,Hdt. i. 57. Thuc. iL 10\l. 1°,.l i. ;,ti-7, Ii. [12-f,b.
'"' For m,Iications of such ,l mc11·e111ent e1·en lP~,}, i, ;,-;.
,Yithin thf Homeric age ,eel'· lScl al,o,·c.
198 J. L. )IYRES

Of this metamorpho3is of theoretical pre-Hellenic Pelasgian into actual

liistoric Hellene, Herodotus quotes particular instances in several districts of
Greece. Let us take these Llistricts in geographical order from ucwth to
south.
(1) At Doduw1, tLouglt HeroL1otus does not definitely assert that
there were ever any Pelasgian residents, he states that the oracle ,rns consulted
by 'the Pelasgians' in primitive times.1'' 30 He had learne,l also, apparently on
Dodonaean authority, the theory that in early times ' the Pelasgians' knew no
names for their gods, a11Ll only acquired names later, and from abroad. X ow
there is nothing in all this which is not obvious 'by inspection' to any one who
has before him ( 1) the Homeric phrase about Do, lonaean Zeus, ( :2) the Hesiodic
description of Dodona as IIE:\.ao-rywv i!opai ov, an,l (:3; the Herodotean obser-
1

Yation that 'actual' Pelasgians talked a language different from Greek. The
reasoning may be formulated as follows. Even without HesioJic commentary
it might well seem likely to any fifth century Hellene with a 'Pelasgiau
Theory,' that the Homeric epithet IIE:\ao-'}'LJCE meant 'god of Pelasgians,'
Le. of the Pelasgian inhabitants of D.),lona. If so, Pelasgians at Dodona,
or their descendants, were calling the goll of Dodona 'Zeus.' But
'Zeus' is the G,wli name for the god of Dodona; and as the Pelasgian
language is c.,; lt!Jpothrsi different from Greek, the word for 'Zeus' in Pelasgic
must l1ave been ditferent, if there was one. But was there a word for Zens
in Pelasgic? Enquiry at DoJona, possibly elsewhere, reveals none ; all the
/3ltp/3apol S(~1:\.wo-o-ot, who are within hail, call Zeus 'Zeus' and nothing else.
Yet Achilles mldresses Zeus as IlE:\ao- /tJCE, 'god of Pelasgians : ' he wa.s
0

worshippml therefore by them in their unconverte,1 'Pelasgian' days. In

those days therefore Zeus of Dodona wacs worshipped as a nameless god,
aml is now callell Zeus, only because 'Zeus' is the Greek name for
liim. 1J_E.D.
(2) I,1 Tlu.'Ssal_lJ, though HeroLlotus does not state that there were
Pelasgians there, it is pussible that he is assuming their presence when he
describes tlie Aeolian Hellenes of north-west Asia Minor as To r.a:\.al
JCaAEOf-1,EVOl IIEAao-ryo(,w, 'E:\.:\.17vwv AO'}'o,. 10:;,J The qualifying phrase charac-
terizes tliis attribntiou of Pdasgian origin as a matter of current Greek
belief, and as ;;ornething L[Uite distinct from the ' Pelasgian' peculiarities of
Antamlrns-whate\·er they were-as has been noteLl already in § 10 above.
This current Greek belief must mean that these Aeolia!ls represent
€ither Pelasgian:i domieilecl in Aeolis and HellenizeLl ill sit,1, or Pelasgia.ns
formerly llomiciled in Thessaly, an,l Hellenized there before their migration
to Asia )li1wr. Iu the former alternative, the phrase goes far to explain his
phrase "AvTavSpov TI/V IlE:\.aa-~1iSa, but at the same time makes it difficult to
see in what peculiar :;ense Antamlrus was ,rnrth calling 'Pelasgian.' In the
latter, Herodotus would ,-eem once rnore to be pntting his own interpretation
Gn the Homeric p!trase To Ile:\aa-'}'tJCov "Ap'}'o, which (as we lrnYe seen) was, by
 A HISTORY OF THE PEL\SGL\S THEORY. l 99

the time uf Hellanicus, (1) extemled so as to include Thessaly iu generctl, awl

(::2) confused with Pclasgiotis and with the country rouml Larisa, with which in
the Homeric Catalogue it is clearly coutrasted. 1'' 50 In any case, the phr,ise .:,f
Herodotus about the Asiatic Aeolians is either Lir cornmeutary on the
trans-Hellesp,mtine thrust of Priam'-; Pelasgians, or else a not-mrnatural
interpretation of the phrase To ITc:>..aa- 11Kov 'J,.p 10,. Here also therefore
0 0

we may reganl Herodotus as going back to Homeric authority, and as

aLlmitting current Greek belief ouly so far as it seemed t,) conform to
Homeric dah1.

(:3) I,,
..Atticu, Herodotus Llescribes the aborigiual population as a
Pelasgian tribe, the Kpavao/. 1•i,, Here we have a fresh featme: a Pelasgian
gc,rns subclivideLl into species with tribal names. There is no Homeric
authority either for Pelasgians or for Cranaans in j,Jtica, nor for any of the
regions ·which follow, further south; so that here we are free to regarLl
Herodotus as summarizing contemporary theory, aml perliaps even improving
011 it.
These Cranaan Pelasgians of Attica went through, not one, but several
metamorphoses,107 before they won their way to Helle11ism as ' Ionians,' in the
time of Ion, son of Xutlrns; but they had maLle their first step as early as
the Llays of Cecrops. Further proof that the Pelasgians of Attic,1 ·were
Hellenic alreacly at the time of the Ionic migration is given when (in recounting
the origin of the Ionians of Asia 1linor,10 " ,Yliom Herodotus believed to have
come immediately, though not ultimately, from Attica) the only Pelasgian
admixture which he mentions, in that very mongrel crew, takes the
form, not of Attic but of '_-\.pK,ioE, IIc:>..aa- ;oi. The 'lnonda.:,i Pelasgians of
0

Attica were therefore 110 longer Pelasgic \Vhen the Iunic colonies were to be
founded.
The passages about Pelasgians in Attica, howe,-er, prese11t difficulties of
their own which entitle them to separate discussion l,,ter on,~ 1:2). For the
moment it is sufficient to haxe discovered : 1; that 'Pel.:tsgiau' for Herodotus
is a gcn11 .., including tribal ,pccies; 2) that the prucess of Hellenization was
in some cases capable of analysis, and approximately Lb table; ;:3 J that the
crucial event in thi,, process was for HeroJotus, as for Hellanicu,-; ancl for
Thucydides, the arrival in the country of some genuine · son of Hellen.'

: ±) In _Yodh Pd,JJW,rncsc, from Sicyon westward, there once li,-eLl a people

who were Pdasgi,rns generically, with the specific tribal name of Ai~,ia:\EZ,. 10 ~
These, like tl1e Pelasgian Kpavaol of Attica, became HellenizeLl by means of
Ion, son of Xu thus; and then, as fully Hellenize,1 ' Ionians,' migrated iuto
Attica, and thence again to the Asiatic Ionia .

.·,')) I,i tl1c C,')cladt's the islamlers are, for Heru.Jotus, Kat TOVTo ITcA.aa-1tKov

1 '~•.: :--:ee p. 17f• and l:3S. ,,,, i. 14d.

:
16
vii. ~-q· :.,J Tii. 94.
~ 17 viii. 4 L
 J. L. ::.\IYHE:-;

Uh,o,; : bt1t tLe cnntext w,., does not sl10\Y wl1etl1E:r lie 111eai1s Pelasgiau
aboric.:ines, HellenizE:ll i;i 51f11, or a branch (like their rep,it.>,1 ki11smen, tlit•
Iouirrns of Ai:-ia 1Iinur) of the IonizeL1 Pelasgi::ws of X ortl1 Pelupulll:ese.11"
(G) I11 f/1, I'thp,,;uusi, 1n Argus, Hcro,Jutns describes a populatiou, autu-
chthonous and Pebsgian, as recei\·i11g from immigrant Danaids tlie rite
whic-11 the Greeb call th,si,wplir,;•i,,. The natin·s in this case liwl neither
tl1c name nor the thing. Elsewhere lie quotes Damms ( tl10ugl1 he was
not' a ;;on of Hellen') side by side "·ith Xutlius, as one of those whose corning
marked the crisis before whiclt the people of all ~ orth Peloponnese haA€Oz!To
IlEAaa-~;01 Al'Yia?\e'i,,;. A11otl1er poi11t of theory emerges here. Hellenism in
the sense of tho operation of a 'son of Hellen' is not the only form of e11-
lightenme11t. Danam from Egypt can ' Hellenize' in a generic sense : at all
e,·ent, l1is arrival troubles tl1e Pcbsgian w'-'ters Y,ith the mon'mc11t of
a new spmt. HaYe we perhap,-. liere a reminiscence of tl1e phase, "·hicl1
"·c c<•lljectured earliE-r,ll 1 ll'hen Danaus competed with Hellen for eponymous
rank in Greece ;
::\Ieaimhile it i,; clear tltat tl1ongh HeroLlotns may perhap:;, ha ,·e shared
with l1i:3 contemporaries tlie current misconception as to the Pelasgian
claims of the Peloponnesian Argos, there is no evideuce that for him
tlii:3 Llistrict stood in any such special relation to Pelasgian a11tit1uity as had
been assumed recently by the genealogists.
(7 1 I,i _A,,w,7111 tl1ere "ere '_\p1Cct0E, IlEAaa-"/0£,-again apparently a
specific sub-division of a Pelasgir:n !F iws,-wlw took part in the colonization
of Iouia. 11 ~ The Arc,ulians also \\'ere regarcleLl by Herodotus as the sole
sunirnrs n.; of tl1e aboriginal population of Peloponnese; nml this aboriginal
populatiou wa:;, apparently continuous with tliat of 'Pelasgian' Argos. On
the other hand, in hi~ formal smTey of Pelopom1e5ian etlrnology, 1 H tl10ugh
lie cla~:3cs the C_nrnrians "·ith the Arcadians as autoc:l1tl1onons, lie omits
to call either of them Pelasgiam,. \Ye eannot say therefore that tliere is in
Herodotus any preferential treatment of Arcadia as a source, or habitation, of
Pelasgiam.

(ti. I11 Cy;nl/· 1r1 tl1e sam,:• remark applie,;. Tl10ugli autochthonous,
the Cyuurians are nut called Pda::-ginns : tl1eir pedigree is taken only
so far back as to de:oeribe them as 'apparently Ionians,' who hare however
,-ince 'beeome thoroughly Dorizcd.' u-, Here \Ye get a fresh point of
Herodotean tl1eory. Helleni,-rn, like Pela:;.gism, is a guws wliicl1 includes
lli\·er:--c spccio,. 'Io11iau' Hellenism is oue t.ype, 'Dorian' Hellenism is

i,,,:,, A-., in the case of .\.-,iati,· A\1,!)lis (2) J.l,,-,,.,. 1:xi1lt·1.1_L•, thi~ tun11ti11~
,E If then· we1e any C(I;-,',, e.-i,.lence f,,r th, n1,nrithl,l,.
I, c:.::mhofT!tracian, iuXa,o, a11tlntltcrCyda,hc 111 l'· 1~1. al)o,·t.
island,, ir wc,nl,l l,e temr,tin.c: to 1, :,:ar,l tl,i, 11.: i. -1t-}.
a,<:1i1 1tion of • Ptla.,-,giau' origin a-.. a l1iut 11t' I: ii 1 ;- i.
raicl, c,t Heile-1,outin, l'eL1.-!-!i,1u, hkt. tl,o,· ll.;. \·iii. ;-:1.
\d1icl1 11·, have- 1.1,.-t,, t.::,1 alrca,ly as far ,die!,! a, : l· \ ii~. ';°:J.

C11 ti-:· 8.t ll -\ttica. Unt in 1lt.:Ln:r c,f :::-~H.h ,;a1:y

1
 A HISTOHY OF THE PELASGIAX THEOHY.

auotl1er: and it is pus,-ible for avTox0ove, to u11<lergo conYer,-.i,)tJ, 1wt lllerely

frurn outer darkuess to any one of tliese types of enlightenment, but from
auy one sect to another. Tbe latter proc-es,;, like the former, i:s a luu~-
oue : EKOEbwplwVTat U, he can say of the 'Iouiau' Cynuriam. i.rr.o 'Ap 1 e/w11
(lpxoµevot Kai TOU xpovov.

Between tlie statements of what I luixe called 'Pelasgian t\1eon·'

iu Herodotus, and hi5 accouuts of Pelasgi::m tribes eitlier actual, or only
recently extinct, lies one group of pas:;ages which has caused some perplexity,
but seems to me su,:;ceptible of simple an<l instructive explanation. Tlie
people of Attica, as we have seen in § 11, are for Herodotn5 autocl1thonous
Pelasgians, who ' became Ionian ' and so entered tl1e Helle11ic family,
in the days of Ion son of Xuthos. 110 On the other hand, just at this wry
phase 'A017valoun Jjoq TYJVlKllUTa E, qE;\;\17va, TtAEOVCYl, ITeAacr,yo1 CYVVOlKOl
€~/EVOVTO EV Tfj xwpn: 11 ~ and by the side of these Pelasgian 'country
cousins,' the autochthonous Attic Pelasgians really seemed quite ci\·ilizcd,
o0ev Kat '1 E;\;\17ve, ijp~avTo voµu,0ryvat. Of these intrusi \·e and relatin·l_y
recent Pelasgians, Herodotus gives further particulars, partly on the autl10rity
of Hecataeus, partly from local Attic tradition.
(1) He quotes Hecataeus to the effect tlrn.t it was tl1ese Pelas~ia11s "·110
built for the Athenians the wall round the Acropolis. Thi,, ren:als, as one
element in the story, au aetiological myth about the so-called Pelasgic "'all,
which was still defensible in the days of the Pei:-istrntidae and may be ideu-
tified with some certainty as that l\lycenaean fortress-wall of which remnants
are still to be seen. Of the open space below this wall, which Thucydides
knows as To Ilf;\aa-~11Kov, neither Herodotus nor Hecataeus lias anything
to say.
(2) He quotes Hecataeus further to the etfect that these Pelasgian
wall-builders were allowed to settle in the country i.rrro TOV 'Tµqcra-ov, that is,
as the story shows, between Hymettus, the Ilissus, and the Saronic gulf.
This repeats ( what we already know) that these Pelasgians are not anto-
chtl10nous in Attica, but recent immigranb ; and it takes tl1is belief as far
back as Hecataeus.
( 3) Eventually tl1ese Pelasgians misbeliaYeJ, al1ll were expelled; a!lll
,yent and occupiell a;\;\a TE ... xwp(a Ka£ 017 Kat ...\11µi·ov.ns This abo
comes frum Hecataem, arnl consequently goes back to a conternpornry of
the conquest of actual Pelasgians in Lemnos by Otanes, bet\Yeen .ilO anll
500 B.C.; and also of their corn1nest by l\liltiades. which belong;, to the
same generation.m•

u; viii. -H. 11 ' Yi. 13~.

J[~ii. f, 1. 11 ' Y. 26. (OLmLs): \ i. }:113-H0 ),lilti,1clc,,:.
 .J. L. )IYRES

( 4) Local Attic tradition added this, 120 that after settling in Lem nos.
some of these Pelasgians returneLl aml raideLl Brnuron 011 the east, coast
of Attica; and that they did this EV Jter.t<TTUfl,EVOl TGS 'A0ryva!wv opTl;S,
presumably therefore ,\·ithin the lifetime of those who had been themselves
expelled from Attica.

( 3) The Pelasgian occupation of LeH1nos is assigned by Hero<lotus to an

ascertainable date. In Homer, as we have seen, 1 " 1 the )Iinyans !Hwe not yet
been expelled from the island. They were however expellecl, according to
Herodotus,1~" in the thirLl generation of the Argonautic occupation; that is, in the
generation after the Troj"rn war, for Enneus, who is king of Lemnos in Homer,
is the son of ,Jason, whu occupieLl the island. But here there is a slight hitch
in the story. Tl1e local Attic tradition, as we h::n-e seen, attributed the raid
on Brauron to Pelasgians ,vho were ovTol APjµvov TOTE vEµoµwol; in which
case the rnirl was snbsec1nent to the occupation of Lemnos. But in telling
the story of the )Iinyans, Herodotus says that they were expelled by Pelas-
gian;; TWV EiC Bpavpwv0<, A/T)l<raµEt'Wl' Ta<; , A.017va{wv ~;vv,ttKa<;. It is possible
that he merely add;; thi:o Lletail for tl1e sake of identificatiou, and without
intemling to say that they had already raided Brauron; but at first sight
it certainly looks '.tS if he meant to put the raid bcjoi'e not riftc,· the occupation.
And there is thi, fnrther evidence in the same direction. The rest of the
story of the )Iinyans (late;; their e,;entual arrival in Laconia witliin the
generation (Tov bE llVTCV TOVTOV xpovov) E: of Theras, great-great-grand-
son of Polyneice;; of Thebes, aud brother-in-law of Aristodemus, about
the time of whose Jeath the Dorians conquereLl Laconia ; and this entry
was fully two generations after the Trojan War. Either therefore ,ve must
allow the hest part of a generation for the ' exodus' or 'voa-To<;' of the
)linyans, or else there must be a misfit of one generation in the chronology;
ml'! iu tbe latter event it may well be the reason why there is ambiguity as
to sequence of the occupation of Lemnos and the raiLl on Braurou. But there
i-, nu 5erious inconsistency; and though the whole story comes to us from two,
or more probably three, independent authorities,-Hecataeus, local Attic,
aml perl1ap,; local Laconian tradition,-we are in a position now to fit it all
together as a single series of events, of brief duration and approximately
a~ccrtaiuable Llate; for it falls in any event within a generation of the Dorian
iHrnsiun of Peloponnese.
According to Heruclotus tl1erefore-aml I Llo not claim at present any
earlier authority for this version,-once upon a time there were Pelasgians
in Attica, in the same sense as there were Pelasgians ewrywlie;-e in Greece in
pre-Hellenic days. Just as these Attic Pelasgians were beginning to 'count
as Hellenes,' in the days of Ion son of Xuthus, 1"-1 Attica m,s invaded by quite
a different sort of Pelasgians, of the Hellespontiue variety ,\"ho survived at
Placie, Scylace, Lemnos, Imbros, and Samothrace. His repeated phrase

· 2'' vi. 1-3~. "' i,·. 14,.

l'.:l Jl, LL ~.JI) ,1lltl s~ ,ltJtJVe • l.!~ \'111 -.1---1.
. ,, fr. u:,.
 _.\. HI;-;TORY OF THE PELA:-:iGL.\.X THEORY.

oi' uuvotKot E"f€VovTo 'A017va(otul can hardly mean anything else than that
this Hellespontine type of Pelasgians is the source of the inrnllers of Attica ;
though no doubt, as i11 the case of Lenrnos, Pelasgians ejectecl from Attica
retreated in a direction where there were settlements of their own countrymen .
.As we have fifth century authority for the contemporary existence of Ion son
of Xutlrns and of Theseus, and as Theseus was himself an Argunaut, we can
a~;;ign the invasion of_.\ ttica by Hellespontine Pelasgians to the generation of
the Argonauts approximately; and as their expulsion from _.\.ttica occurred
not earlier than the first generation after the Trojan \Yar (i e. the tl1ird of the
Argonautic occupation of Lemnos) and not later than the second, ,ve can give
to it a duration of about three generations, and an approximate date within the
fifty years which preceded the Dorian invasiou. \Yithin these fifty years fall-;
the raid on Drauron, a secollll attempt of Hellcspontine Pelasgians to get a
footing in Attica; but wl1ether of fresh Pelasgi:rns from Hellespont, or of
ex-Attic Pelasgiam from Lemnos, remains in doubt. \Vitbin these two post-
Trojan generations fall also the Pelasgian occupation of PJacie and Scylace
(in a neighbourhood which, for the Crda1og11,', is not Pelasgian) and probably
also the settlements in Imbros, Samothrace, ancl the like : for Imbros also has
no Pelasgians in Homer, tlwugh it had alrea,ly, as we have seen, a Sintian
population, which to fifth century eyes 125 must bwe seemed to be of mainland
ongm.
~ ow we have seen already that the ,lepartment in which Herodotus
seems to have ,;;truck out a new line of Pelasgian enquiry is in the collection
of evidence of the survival of actual Pelasgians in ti:e ~orth Aegean, rouncl
the fringe, so to speak, of the Homeric Pelasgians of king Priam; and I ,lo
n'Jt think that we are unduly straining the sense of the passages which deal
with the Pelasgian invaclers of Attica, if we reganl these also as a contribution
to the same enquiry.
That Herodotus regarded some part of the population of the promontory
of Attica as still of non-Attic origin, is suggested f11rther by the terms of his
comparison between Attica and Scythia. In this comparison, when once
allowance has been made for the geographical conceptions of the fifth century, 1"';
all the other features quoted are markedly apposite; arnl when he goes on to say
Ka£ 1rapan'>'-1J<rta TaUT[l 1Ca1 oi Tavpot vEµovTal Tl)'> 'iKv0tKI)<,, w-,
El Tl)'> '_\TTllCI)'>
a71..71..o Wvo, !Cat' µi-J 'A0i]vaiol vEµo(aTO TOIJ "/OVl'OV TOV ~OVVtaKOV, ICTA., it is
difficult not to believe that, although he cloes 1wt mention them, lie has the
vision of uon-.Attic Pelasgians in his mind. It may indeed ham been common
knowledge in his time that these predatory Pela,gians had had a footing about
Suniurn, as well as 'under Hy:mettus.'
The Herodotean phase of the 'Pelasgian Theory' may therefore be
summarized as follows. The logographers haw done their work: they ha\'e
multiplied Pelasgian origins to such an extent that it is possible already to
generalize. All Greece, in fact, was' Pelasgian' once, atlll the large rn::ijo1 ity

J2.'.:i Tlnv-. 2. 9~. Hero lotns · in tht• Geov,·aplo, 1-t! J1_11{r,u1l, Yiii.
1

126
See my paper · On the }fa[" u;e,l hy I -\!ti. pp. '3•)5 fl.
of actual Helleucs are by descent Pelasgians, Helle11izecl. But 'Pelasgian' has
nuw Ct·ased to be a race-name. aml means the pre-Hellenic pha~e of divers tribes
"hose proper 11ames are kno,vn. There is e--reu the beginning of a tentative
and unformulated theory of how Hellenization is effected. In the light of
this Pelasgian generalization, and of the new 'Hellenic Theo1y' which is its
curolbry, the special claims of Dodona, Thessaly, Arcadia, and the Pelo-
ponnesian Argos, are seen to fade away. Attica, on the other hand, begins
tu ri,,e t,) new prominence in the story; 1 ~, due partly to the recent actirn
to11tact between Peisistratid Attica aml the 'actual' Pelasgians of Lemnos;
partly to tl1e contemporary desire to find some historical expbnation of the
rapid rise and peculiar characteristics of the Attic State since Cleisthencs; us
but partly also to the increasetl importance which the fiftl1 century is coming
to attribute to the evidence of cultural survi mis, in comparison with that of
place-names or of literary or oral tradition. Philology and Genealogy, in
fact, are rapidly gi,,ing pbce to Anthropology as the instrument of historical
research. And anthropology ,vhile it has nothing to say of Tliessaly, m;.d can
pro,·e only foreign influences in Arcadia, has already detected numerous cases
of sun·irnl in the neighbourhood of the Homeric Pelasgians on the Hellespont,
together with a true cause for their actual distribution. And wl1en we come
next to consider the attitude of ThncycliLles to the question, we shall find t11e
same tendency predominant.

Frum Tirncyclides, ,ritli l1is extraordinary concentration upon those

aspects of history wliicl1 lie regards as his proper concern, we shoul1! not
naturally expect much lig11t on questions of etlrnography. It is therefore the
rnure in,-tructive to timl that on the rare occasions on which he does digress
i11tu such matters, his k11owlh1ge and his beliefs not only agree in general
,rit!t nonnal fifth century views as we find them in Herollotns, but also,
where they diverge from these at all, do so in direction,; which foreshadow
exactly tl1e principal new dl'parturcs which are to characterize the speculations
of the fom tli century. Iu this, in fact, as in muc:h else, Thucydides stands
just at tl1P parting of tlie wny;;:.
A. First, as to 11du,,/ Pda~gi, 1 ,1s. Thucydides gi,·es an account of the
rwti,·es of )lonnt Atb,,s, 1 ~·• the substance of which we have alr.-,aLly noted in
discu,,si11~ tl1e evidence of Hc:ro,lotus. Its main points are as follows:-

1'~ In _.\tti,·,, also, a! .. 11e, ,L, 11e fiml tlte
't!Je,.reti,:,1! · an,l the· · actiul · or 1ather the
'lti~torica1 · Pel.L,.._~ian ~i1l1· by ~idl in the
,,,111e,-ontcxt, 1·011tra,te,l as Hcllc1iinUe Attic
a11originf•s 3,;,d11:it ~aYagt· }-It,:It., . . pnnti11t·
I li,n·e collccte,l ,ol!le c,·iJeucc fur the Yie\\·
that a ,i111ilar tleuw1tJ of the Periclean Age to
k110,1 3( ~v a.h[1Jv there wa, a Delian League,
wa, 1110,]11ci11,'( n1y ,iruilar effect5 iu a n·,,,01,ccl
11·tro,1•cd ,.f )fe,litenanc.111 ,ea-po,1 er.
1
L'l: iv. 109, !,t.f 11. 19ti aLuVL'.
 .\. HISTORY OF THE PEL.\.SGL-\.X THEORY.

;l) The promontory, as its physical position \\"Ollld suggest, wa-. a Sc'ilt,,1,1
y,·,itiui,l. Its population included ,vaifs from all tl1e principal natin~ stocks
uf the alljacent mainlaml: E,lones from beyot11.l the Strymon, Bisaltac and
rnen of Creston from between Strymon and Axius, and Pelasgians Twv Kai
.\i7µ,vov 7TOT€ Kal ' ..\01va<; Tvp1n7vwv OLK'Y)ITUVTWl a phrase ,vhich sums up
1 :

all the main feat1u-es of the Herodotean Jiagnosi~ of 'actnal Pelasgians' in

the North Aegean, except that he makes no rneution of their kimrnen on
the Hellespont.
(2) The mention of Creston, as we haYe seen already, is important
confirmation of the manuscript realling of Herodotus i. -5i.
(:3) These people are uvµµtKm l0l'IJ /3ap/31ipwv ot•y'A.wuuwz,. If /3ap-
/3apwv, one of their languages was non-Hellenic. "'hat their ' secon,l
language' was, is not stated; but we may fairly infer that it was Greek: for
though 'barbarian,' these people are in tl1e heart of Chalcidice; and, as
Thucydides says, KaL Tl Kal XaAKlOlKOV EVl /3paxv. For the rest, they
presumably retained each his own native dialect; that is to say, the
Pelasgians among them still talked Pelasgic, exactly as Herodotu;, says of
their namesake, up-country.
( -1<) Though Herodotus does not actually ,say tliat Pela~gians of the
district of Creston were among the colonizers of _.\.ttica, he does say so
of the Hellespontine Pelasgians; and these he connects with tho;,e of Creston
by the significant tie of a common dialect. ln TlrncyJi<les, either we
have additional evidence for this identification, coming frurn a fresh quarter,
and from a writer who had peculiar opportunities for enquiring locally:
or we haxe a fresh inference from the data supplied by Heroelotns, in
which case we must infer that these data were accepted by Thucydides
as trustworthy so far as they went. The importance of this latter point
is obvious, in view of the captious attitnde wl1ich Thucydides usually
adopts in dealing with his predecessors; an,l, no less, in view of moelern
attempts to show that Herodotus in this pztssage is describing Cortoua
in Italy!
( 5) Thucydides has also one small piece of confirmatory evidence in regan1
to the general view of :~forth Aegean ethnology, the l1istory of which we are
tracing. It is he who is our earliest authority ±; ,r the existence of those
"5.[vTot in Thrace, wliom we have already h~,l occasion to compare nJ with the
Homeric 'i.tvTtE, of Lemnos. Here also the strength of the evidence lie;,
in Thucydides' special facilities for exact knowledge of Ta Jr.), 0pcf,K17,;
and, with this admitted, the significance of the reference, in Hervdotus ,·ii.
223, to a town "5.[voo, near Therm::i, becomes obvious at once.
B. The Pdasgian Theory of early Greece, which is found in Thncydide;:,
presupposes that of Herodotus, but differs from it in cletails, \Yhich all
mark advances in historicnl methocl. 131

"" ii. 98, ef. p. 181 al.io,·e.

 J. L. :\IYRES

:1 J Thucydides recoguizes that the 'theoretical' Pelasgians ha\·e tlic-ir

11ame from some single tribe, which really was called Pelasgian, bnt did
11ot constitute the whole or e\·en the majority of the pre-Hellenic population
ol. Greece ; E"0 VTJ OE
"' a,\,\a
" TE /Cat' TO' II El\.a(r/l/COV
" ' E7r£
' ' 'lrl\.El(J"TOV
" - ',1..' EaVTWV
a't' ' -
TrJV hrwvvµ[av r.apexEa-0at. We may fairly infer from this that since
the time of Herodotus a still wider imluction has been attempted, based
11pon data clerived from those parts of the Greek worlll where the pre-
Hellenic population had been previously labelled Carian, Lelegian, Cancun,
and the like, as well as from those where it had been labelled Pelasgic.
(~) The Pelasgic 1rnrne l1as conserp1ently acquired for Thucydides a
definite generic and connotative value, \Ybich is llistinct from its specific
and denotative use as in i\·. 100. For the first time, that is, a Greek
historical writer is using a Pelasgian hypothesis consciously, with tlie
knowlellge that it is a hypothesis, and not a summary of obser,ed or
reported fact;,.
(3) ,Yhereas Heroclotus rests content with a view of the process of
Hellenization wl1ich is expressed intransitiwly 132 and assumes a kind of
spontaneons generation u.;_. :-pec's I growed' as Topsy said-Thucydides
is conscionc, that TO 'E\.11.17v1,coi has arisen by actual contact of 'Pelasgian' non-
1

Hellenes with a body, howe\·er small, of gPnuine and actual "EAA'IJV€i, who
liad the higher cnltnre, aml s,) were 'of use' to their neighbours. Of course
the cliscowry tbat Hellenism sprealls by contagion only puts the problem one
otage fm tl1er back : for the obvious question is now, how to account
for the real Hellems. But it is a clear advance to ha\'e formulated the
Yiew that culture does thus come by contagion, Ka0' EKaa-Tovi, µEv ,;,oi7
T!J oµtAlCf µa.AA.OV /CaAEt(J0at "EAA'l]!'ai,; that it is quality which tells, not
ll uantity; that 'a little le,weu' may work 'until the whole is leavened';
and tb,1t, like the Pelasgians, the Hellenes have come to have their name
used in a cunnotative as well as in a denotative sense; of which indeed
we hare ;,ceu the vagne beginnings already, in HeroLlotus' use of Danaus
side by side with Xuthus. Bnt we find no express formulation of it till
Thncydiiles puts' Danaans.' 'Argiws,' and 'Achaeans 'as equivalent Homeric
names for t!to:::e 'men of Pbt!tia' oL1rEp Ka~ r.pwTot "E\.AJ]I'E'> i'ja-al'.
(-le; Thucydides makes no doubt that the real Hellenes first became
appreciable in Phtbiofo. "'hat tl1en becomes, for him, of the view which we
have SCl'll growing up in post-Homeric times that To IlEA.aa--;tKov ~Ap~;oi,
was a lwtbeJ of Pelasgi? Surely l1ere if anywhere the Hell011ic 'leawn'
must b,l\ e ',rnrke,l' early and effectuall"v. The proce:,s of Hellenization
was gradual and lengthy, as lie admits; OU µEVTOl 7TOAAOV ~;e xpovov
~ovvaTo Kat a1raa-tv EK1't1C1Jaai : but missionary enterprise, like cliarity, surely
begins at lu,1ne.
1 ,.! T~ o?Jvo,ua µ.ETfPaAe . . . T7]11 "'t/\Wuuav ,uer~ 1
·•' Though even Herodotus as,ocute; in
f,u.aOe i. f1 -; • TU E.\A. 0:1roa-xi0"8fv µEwro, (l,r(J roV some Ccl,es the cn,is of Helleniz..ttion ,dth a
ne,\acr;u(O(/ i. [J,3 : Cl.1reKp£0r, En. 1ra1\airEpov -rov · cluhl of Hellen· welt as Xutlrn,;.
f3apf3o.pou te,,,os -ro 'EA,\. i. tW.
 A HISTORY OF THE PELASGL\S THEORY. 207

§ H.-Tltc Oompm·atirc llfdhod, in T!wc!Jdides and rn the Eudy Foudh

Century.

In a neighbouring passage 134 Thucydides formulates-also, I belie,-e

for the first time in literature-the 'comparative method' of ethnological
enquiry. Ceteris pu,·il,as, he argues, it is permissible to infer from the
present state of a backward people to a preYious state of an adrnnce(l people.
It is possible therefore to plot out, in a series, all known varieties of' Hellene,'
from the most cultured to the least; and as Hellenism, for ThuC\·dides
stands for the highest form of CLilture, tlie most cultured will be th~ most
truly Hellenic, and the least cultured will show the most purely Pelasgi:m
survival.
\Ye, who have passed more recently through a similar plrnse of method,
know only too well the corollary which a looser logic may allow to be drawn
from such a series. Granting, as everyone did grant, including Thucydides, that
early Greece hall been the scene of intense 'distress of nations' and long
continued µeTavacrTc1cre1r;, it was only too easy to confuse culturnl with
geographical advance; and to argue (as the stmlents of 'Aryan languages' argued
repeatedly in the last century) as if those Greeks who had 'progressed least'
in culture had therefore 'advanced least' from a geographical focus of
dispersion. K ow if the zero of adrnncement is the 'Pelasgian · stage of
culture, the starting point of Greek µeravc1crTacrtr; ought to be the
'Pelasgian Home,· to adapt a familiar expression. Tlrns all that was
necessary, in order to discoYer inductively the Pelasgian Home, was to arrange
all Greeks in their eulturcd order, and see whereabouts on tltc map the most
backward of them were to be found. 134"-
Now in the early fourth century, the answer to tliis question was easy;
and it was threefold. (1) Only one people in nearer Greece (apart from
districts like Messenia and Thessaly which haLl neither shaken off nor
absorbed their 'conquerors' since the late µeTavacrT<.Lcret,) had failed to adopt
in full that 7ro:\.tr;-system which alone-so Thucydides, and Euripides, and
Plato thought-could produce or sustain Hellenic ~Ian : only one people in
all Peloponnese answered to Thucydides' description of his' actual' Pelasgians,
1caTti OE µiKpd- 7ro:\.{crµaTa olKovcrw: u, only one area had so far ignored the
tiend of Hellenism as to permit its sons, in that clash of principles
which was a~toA.o~;wTaTOV TWV 7rptv, to fight for either siLle indifferently : i·;,;
and that "·as Arcadia and the Arcadians.
(2) On a broad review of the culture of Greece, the full Hellenism of
Athens and the Ionian 'colonies,' of Corinth, of Argos, and of Delphi, might be
134 i. 6. /3ouA.0µEvoL rO. 1ri\eLcrra -rWv 1rcpL ai?roUs. To
1a4., A very 5imilar fallacy confounds advance this frame of 111in.-l. belongs also the Ephoran
in culture with progre,s in ti,,,,_,. Eph,>1 us i, a theory of tlw longevity <)f · 1,rimiti ve' men
conspicuous instance (Fr. 6 = Dio,l Sic. 1. 9) (Fr. 2-!=l'lin. X.H. i. -!81 'Eplw,·u.s (uit)
?repl 1rpdrrw11 0€ -rWv fJ a p J3 cf p e&.• v Oii!tµ.ev, oV,c
x
Ct p a Lo-rt po us al/rolls 7}-yoiiµei-•ut -r&Jv rE A A -h· m iv. 109.
II WV K0.8a.1rEp 'Etpopos E1p7]KEI', c,,\,\a 7rp0DLE,\8e,v Yii. [,!.
136
 .J. L. ::\IYRES

rignrecl as fading away gradually north-westward, int,) a region ,vhere, tirst, as

Thucydicles well knew, 7TOAE£, gave place to a life Ka Ta Kwµa, llTElXL<TTOV, in
Aetolia, and ,d1ere ewn hoplite armour was unknown, as in Locris; i·;, where.
11ext, Hellenic speech became blundered and confused, so that Demosthenes'
army had need of interpreters, 138 aml he coulLl trust to his ~Iessenians being
1aken for Peloponnesians by their accent; where, further afield, Peloponnesian
troops i,earE:ll massacre v-rro
' ' Twv ' 0 tcrTwv
' fJa a p fJa a. p w v Kat' EX ' ' , \. µ'1'1"-oxwv;
,1.. ' ' 1 '<)
···
and ,d1ere, behind a1l, and on the extreme etlge of the Hellenic worlcl, by
the rude ritual. aml the immemorial age, of the oracle of Zeus at DoJona.

(:3) On a still broader view of the civilized world, the march of culture
was still more clearly seen to be westward. Danau;;, 1-io Pelops, 1-ll and
Cadmusl-l 2 ha,l brought 'light from the East' to Hellenic lands; 'Hellen
and his sons· H.} kul spread their own light not only to Dodona, bnt also to
)lagna Graecia and to Sicily. But round these Wf'Stern outposts also lay a
penumbra of barbari;,rn. and beyond, a great expanse of peoples who, like the
'theoretical' Pelasgians of Greece,l-l-l ETra';oµevwv auTOU', E7r wcpEAL<f,
Ka0' EKllCTTOV, µ~ •. fo17 TB oµi>..(q, µa.AA.OV "·ere becoming severally confronted
with Hel!euic culture, whose receptivity of things Hellenic was remarkable,
,vhose cults arnl legends bore strong resemblance to the ruder phases of
Hellenic religion: who continued to practise a 'Le;;bian rule' in their
architecture, wl1ich recalled the primaeval citaJels and terrace-walls-the
IIE"X.aa- 11K<L ,E1x11-of ol1l Greece; ancl whose coast;, were still infested by
0

the lawle-;s pirates whose name in the Aegean was alreacly thrice associated
with the Pelasgiau,H; awl who had macle the Lower Sea' Tyrrhenian · for
good aml all. Italy an1l the ,-rest were rapidly being involved in an enlargeLl
Pefosgian Tl1enry. 145 ~
,Yhat precedes is, I believe, legitimate inference as to the probable
course of sper:nlation, from the position taken up by Herodotus, along the lines
which are suggeste,l by the indications of ad\'ancing metliod in Tbucyclides ;
arnl it accords with the actual extensions which Pelasgian theory receivell
dnring tlw 11ext generation. A crucial instance will make the situation clearer.

i; iii. 0-1, !";, ,:t. 11:2 i.-\.mphil,)ehi.1\. el<Ttv,

~:1 5 Tht' 011hion1-s aw.I Enrytc1ne.:; wt•re cz ...;z'w· 1
'" HJt. ii. 9S, l il, 182, vii. 94.
u,J-raTut ...,,\Wrruai·. Hal ~•uo<pd.'}'at eZuLJ!, &,,s AE;e- rn Hut. ,ii. s, 11.
-ra,. Thuc. 1ii. 9-L The )I,·sseninn~ Le ile- 1-Ll Hdt. ii. 44--!9, iv. 14,. V. 5i-S .
.__1::1 ibes a,q ~wpi5a TE •..,.,wrurav 1Ei·Tas KO:! To4s 14
' Hrlt. i. 56, 60. Thue. i. :3.
-rr,.11cpUAa!L 1rt<Tni, 1ra.oex_o uEvous. iii. 112.
1
lH Thuc. i. 3.
• 3" iii. 112. Of the,e same Am1,J,ilochians ,.., H,!t i. 5i. ;C;oph. Fr. ~56. Tlrn.:. iv. H:,1.
· lklleniuti,:,n · i, !'' e.Jicate,l for th,- fir,t time ,_.,,. The fii ,t trcl•:e, of this lie ,·erv far b .. ,·k.
I think in Greek Jite1atnr,· rn the ,lcfinitely As earlJ as I'hercr·y,1, s (if it L,• the. tifth r_en-
:i11guistic Sf•n--e · nal E\,\r,v{u8nuav -r~v vLv tnry crnth,w of that llcl!ne) Peu,·etin, aud Orno-
'},\C..•u<ra,,, 'TOTE r.pWTov V1rO -r~·v 'Au1Tpa.KL~TWv trus a]rea,]y ec,nnt ,h <:hildten of _\La•li:i11
{uvo,n:7)<T:i>TCL'I'. a, OE a,\Aot 'A,u<f>{,\oxo, f3a.p$apo{ Lyc:ion.
 _\ Hl~TORY OF THE PELA~GL-\.X THEORY.

If there is one writer who represents for ns the characteristics, good ,-.r
had, which clistingnish fourth century historians from fifth, it is Ephorus of
Cunrn.e. The pupil of Isocrates, he was brought up in the laxest sect of the
pryrnpE,; arnl the fragments which we ha,·e of his work show how in-
tlustri,msly he improved on the l1istorical method of his master. ::'{ot only
was his work on the early age of Greece the first and the most copious of
the fourth century redactions, bnt it has been shmn1 by more than one
modern writer practically to haYe held the field until far on into the
Alexanrlrine Age ; to have been a standard book of reference for Polybius,
and to have supplie•l Dioclorus with almost the whole framework of his
history for this period. Strabo, too, qnotes him repeatedly on points of early
etlrnology.
It is from Strabo that we learn, among other points, that Ephorus had a
Pelasgian theory of his own. In the well-known passage 1413 in which Strabo
summarizes the Yiews which had been helll by Greek writers on this matter:
a large proportion of the more important data are assigned to Ephorus by
name; and the whole of the Homeric evidence is marshalled in a form which
makes it highly probable that we have here an abridgement of Ephorau
commentary: for phrases characteristic ,of i.he Ephoran theory recur, as ,ve
shall see, tlironghout it. This theory of Ephorus may be summed up in a
sentence. The Pd(lsgians originatc,l in Arcwli,1 11,ul ,zo,ihe,y else; an,l s1,,·,,u,l
;>o;n thcna, all oca G1·ccc,; and ucyoncl, us militai':J c,),VJl'O'Oi'S un,1 colon,,sts, rd
a puiod 1d1frh can b,· dated app;·o,r,inwtdy.
Strabo says that Ephorus got this idea from Hesiod; anll quotes t,he
actual passage_H, ~ow we have seen already that this is the only evidenee
preserved to us, down to the end of the sixth century, ,vhich expressly con-
uects Pelasgian-, with Arcadia; that it gives an eponymous Pelasgus; that
it not merely introduces a factor which i-, out of acconl with the Homeric
tlata, but had already set people thinking how to explain and justify a
Pelasgian Arcadia; and that it had thus been the source of the temptation
to transfer the phrase IIE::\aCT~/tKov "Ap-yo, from the Thessaliau to the
Peloponnesian Argos, with the t~isastrous re;;ults which we have seen.
The 'Arcadian theory' of Ephorus is introduced, in fact, in contrast to what
Strabo regards as the popular theory (oµ,oA.o,ovCTl a1raVT€, CTX€00V n) which
made the Pelasgians apxaZov Tl cpv.\ov KaTa Tl)V 'E.\.\izOa 7r a (j a V
€1rt7rOAUCTllV Kat f.l, a At CT Ta 7T a ,0 a TO l ', ALO A.€ U(j t TO l, Ka Ta
<~ E a- CT a.\ [ a v. This theory, as we have seen, was current from the end
of the sixth century to the days of Herodotus, and was based partly on an
imaginative interpretation of the language of the Catalogue, partly on the
discovery of the place-name IIE::\aa-~;twTL<;. But it sank into very mmor

"" Strauo, :221. Lyr:,10n: ~ee I•· 1St3 above.

i.;Fr. 68, in whi,·h Pelasgus is the father of
H.S.-YOL. XXYII. P
 ,T. L. }IYTIES

importance in HE:rodotus and Thucydides, who both ten<l to regard Thessaly

as the starting point rather of Hellenes than of Pelasgians. \Ye must infer
howeyer from Strabo's words, that after the eclipse of Herodotean history this
'Thessalian theory' revived; ancl this is indeed abundantly clear from the
writers of the period between Ephorus and Strabo himself. We may fairly
infer, meanwhile, that Ephorus did ,wt hold this theory, or regard the Pelasgians
as the generic aborigines of Greece; and that in particular he oppo,ed the
'current view' that either the Ile\.aCTryu,ov "Apyo,;, or the IleAaCTrytwn,;, or the
~\.r1ptCTa of Thessaly were among their primary abodes.
Next, Strabo's argument treats the Homeric passages similarly, but more
e.xplicitly: Klll ryap Tl)<; Kp17TYJ<; € 7T O t KO l "/EryovaCTtv, dk <pllCTlV ''0µ17po<:,
quoting Odyssey 19. 177 ff. But Homer does not say that the Pelasgians of
Crete il1ro1Kot ryeyovaCTtv, and though, as we have s2en, it is very probable that
tl1ey did' come to reside in addition to' its other inhabitants,-fas rst et au hoste
1locu,·-the Odyssey gives no direct support to this view. The phrase e7rotKot
"/EyovaCTtv in fact, shows that what Strabo is giving us is somebody's
e.xplanation of 1,ow Pelasgians came to be in Crete at all: namely that they
were intruders here, just as they were everywhere else but in Arcadia. ·who
was this somebody?
Further evidence follows, about the ITeAaCTrytKov '' Apryo,; of Iliad 2. 681 :
Kat To ITe\.aCTrytKov '' Apryo,; 17 E>eTrnAta AEryerni. This also is not true, at all
events in the text of Homer which has come down to us. First, Homer
nHer mentions Thessaly by name at all. Next, as we have seen already,
the Homeric phrase To ITe\.aCTryidv '' Apryo,;, refers only to that part of
'Thessaly' which includes Halus, Alope, Trachis, Phthia, and 'Hell as' in the
narrowest sense: it is the country of the :Myrmidons, and the kingdom of
Achilles; and it does not include even places like Phylace '.lncl Pyrasns,1 k, much
less the head of the Pagasaean gulf, or tl1e country round Tricca or Larisa.
This Thessaly, in fact, which, as Strabo goes on, includes To µern~v Twv
lµ{JoXwv TOV IT17vewv Ka£ TWV 0epµo7TVAWV ew, Tij<; opetv~<; Tij<; KaTa ITt'voov
is the Thessaly, not of Renner, but rather of Aeschylus; an<l the reason
"·by it is either 'Pelasgian' or 'Argos' is the same also as in Aeschylus ;-oul
TO Jr. ll pg at TWV T07TWV TOVTWV TOU<; IIe\.aCT"fOV<;. It is an Er.apx[a, an
'anne.xatiou' of the Pelasgians, not their original home.
Here, again, as in the previous instance, what Strabo is reporting is
Si>rnebo<ly's views about Homer, and about Aeschylus also; and this somebody
lws catd1-worcls of his own, e1ro1Kot, hrcipga1, arising from his theorv and be-
traying it whenever they recur. ·
A few liues below, Strabo rder:;; again to Ephorus by name, ascribing to
liim the m,e of IleXaCTryt'a as a name for Peloponnese. From tl1is, we may be
pretty sure that Ephurus also, like that early fifth century school of logo-
graphers wh:ch Herodotus aml Thucydides ignore, took the phrase lle;\aCTryLKov-
,, Aa~,o,; a5 referring p;·imo rily to the Pcloponnesia:i Argos, adjacent to
• Pelasgian · Arcadia; and as referring only sccondcuily to the Thessalian
 A HISTllRY ()F THE P.ELASGIAX THEORY. 211

district. If so, Thessaly was for Ephorus, as for our anonymous 'some-
body,' merely an 'eparchy' of the Pelasgians of Arcadia.
This impression is confirmed by the ,rnrds which Strabo adds next, Kat
Evpi1r£8,,, EV 'ApxEAO.(f' </nJt7tV OTl Aavao<; o7rEVTT)KOVTa 0vryaTipwv r.aTTJP
came to Argos and gave the Danaan name to the IlEAa<T"/tWTa, &woµaa-µlvou,
Tu 1rp!v_HSa This is good fifth century belief, for we have it almost verbatim
in Herodotus.149 It refers of course to the Peloponnesian Argos, but it is
noteworthy that both Herodotus and Euripides make use of the peculiar ethnic
IlEA.aa-ry1wn7,, -wn,, which only occurs otherwise, in fifth century literature,
as the name of a Thessalian TETpapx!a; and this passage is in an excerpt
from Hellanicns. But why bring in Euripides and Aeschylus in the middle of
this discussion of Homer? Clearly because, not Strabo, but the anonymous
';;;omebody,' whose views are being trnced in contrast with Homer, as with
the ar.avTE, a11d r.oAAot above, was concerned to claim their support.
And if Sfl. this somebody must h:we been at ,vork not earlic:r than the date of
the Arcl1clcws of Euripides. This limits the range of our enquiry a good deal.
Similarly, Strabo goes on, in regard to Dodona: Tov SJ ilia Tov ilw8wvafov
avTO<; 0 7r0l7JT1J<; ovoµii'(Et IIEAaa-ryt 'COV ( quot mg Iliad 16. 233) ... 7rOAAOt Si:
Kat Ta 'H 7rElpWTtKa ll0v17 IlEAaa-ry1Klt EtpT)Ka<TtV. Here again the phrase
avTo<; o 1TOL7JTTJ<; ovoµa'(Et has all the look of an attempt on the part of
'somebody' to claim the reluctant Homer and the others who calle,l the ,n1d
,vest 'Pelasgic' as supporters of his theory that the Pelasgian hegemony, more
or le-s forcible in its extension, had reached as far as Dodona, if not even into
Epirus-w<; Kat µEXPl ()Evpo € 7r a pf ll VT (I) v-and out comes the catchword
again. Now this exactly ac,·ords with the known views of Ephorus about
D11dona: for Strabo says of Dodona in another context 150 ecnt 8', w,;- <f,170-w
"E</,opo,, IlEAaa-rywv Z8 p u µ a. Zeus of Do,lona, that is, is IIEAaa-rytKo<; per sc
and Aw8wva'io, JJl'1' accidr:,is : as fine a rhetorical inversion of the Homeric
phrase as conk! well be devised.
By this time, I think it will be clear that the anonymou» fourth cent11ry
'somebody,' whose views we have been tracing in this passa6 e, is none other
than Ephorus himself; and that what Strabo is giving us is a detailed analy,,is
of the Pelasgian tlrnory of that writer, quoting him by name only when his
views diverge from those which were orthodox in Strabo's time-which is very
seldom-and quoting authors earlier than Ephorus only when their testirnouy
is either of crucial value, or had required special ingeuuity to make it
'fit in' with the theory.
\Ve begin also. I think, Lo see the connexion between the curious and
detailed commentary on the Homeric evidence, 011 the one hand, and the
statement which follows immecliately, that the ancient author who really best
supported the Eplwrnn theory, and indeed suggested it to Ephorus, was
Hesiod. It was mdeecl a choice between irreconcilables. The learned world
from Acusilaus to Thucydides hatl expended itself in constructing theories

1"'' Stmbc>, 3:27. Thr ,Iepcndencr, of thi, on

l-ll'a Fr. 227: .ilreacly notPd. abo.e, 1'· 191.
149 ii. 1 il. the Hesiodi,· Ile;\ao- 1 i<v ,lipavov is ol,vions.
p 2
 .J. L. }l YltES

about the Pela:3gians which woulLl fit the Homeric evidence as they unrln-
stuoLl it; but one group of earli pass,1ges had stooLl out, and coulJ not be
uude to fit. These were the statement of Hesi0tl that a personal and there-
f0re primeval Pelasgus was the father of Lycaon of Arcadia, and the
{'.onformable witness of Asius that Pe'.a-;gus was Ku-thborn and the First ~Ian.
Pherecydes, on the other hand, had collecteJ round the passage of Hesiod a
rnass of local genealogies which went back to Lycaon; and he had probably
been led to connect with these .ArcaLlian genealogies the barbarous Xorth-
west rouud Dodona, and places as far beyon:1 as Pencetia and Oenotria. ~Iean-
w hile Acusilaus aml Hellanicus had tried to reconcile the Homeric and the
Hesiodic schools, by applying to the Peloponnesian Argos, with its citadel
Larisa, the Homeric phrase about Tu IIeAaa-~;tKov ".,_\.pyo, in Thessaly, and also
the Homeric statement that so;,1e Pelasgians ( who however liad nothing to
Llo with To IIeAaa-"ftKov ''Ap-yo,) dwelt round a place calleLl Lansa. The
tragedians belong wholly to this popular syncretistic school. Herodotus and
Thucydides, on the other hand, use mainly Homeric data, but supplement
these by fresh search for objective fact, and by new methods of interpretation.
But now the reaction from anthropology, which 1'hucydides had foreseen,
has come; and it is entirely in accord ,vitl1 the methods of fourth century
rhetoric, and with the known bent of hi,s own genius, tlut Ephorns shot11Ll
appear in clue season with the mission to construct 1rpo, To 1rapaxpryµa
(tKovetv a completely iuYerted pyramid, resting its slender apex on the one
outstanding passage about a personal Pelasgus in Arcadia, and incorporating
the Homeric passages, somewhat unsuccessfully, very near the broad ern_l
of the structure.
With this clue in millll, the rest of the passcige of Strabo is instructive
reading. The remaining passage of Homer, about the 'actual' Pelasgians
mnong the allies of Priam,1:; 1 is dismissed in a fashion as brief as it is charac-
teristic: Kal TOl', EV Tfj T pwclOl Kh,.LglV ., 0 µ17po, Etp7]KE TOV, oµopov, IIeAaCT'YOV,.
Xow this, once more, is simply not true, unless the Homeric text has suffereJ
grievously since Strabo's time. ~Ioreo,·er, if it were, it would make Homer
group with the Pelasgians just those allies of Priam who are least 'at home'
in their Homeric position on the map, when compared with the historical
Cilicians; and so woulLl affonl the plainest suggestion of To 1roAv1rAav,1Tov. 151"-
That the Aeschylean theory, too (huwernr well it suited Epborus in
Thessaly), needed amendment in Peloponnese, is clear from the adversative
clause which follows. Ala-xuAo, 0 E EK TOY 7rEpL 1IvK17va, "Apryovr:, <p7]<Tlll EV
'1 KETlO"l
' Ka£' '"'1aVala-t
\ ~
TO ~/€VO', avTWI/'
l ' I
/Cal TTJII II El\.07rOVV1]CTOV
, ..
' '
0€
II EAaa-rytav
I , '-''

<f>1w1v 'E<f,opo, K"'A.r70,7vat; and then follows the •lnotation, already noted, from
EuripiLles. ~\e,-cli_ylus, that is, was in err<Jl in :,,upposiug that it was because
the Peloponnesian Argos was IlEAaa-y1Ko11 that Peloponnese was called
IIeAaa-~;ta; and Ephnrus has set him right. For it is not merely the IIEXaa-ryt-
KOV "J. pyo, of ~lrgolis, but Peloponnese as a iYhnle, which on his theory
"' II. ~- 843. :!,c,t ot Herv,lolns. In the fifth century it js
n1ay note in 11a':'.-"'in~ the 1ndtkt'. 1l anti-
ni.l \\·\· :he llorrnn ll,·llenes wl:n are the migratory
tlie,is between the etlmulogy ol Eph"111, all l {1roLfiO! ,.1 ()1 ee l', 1ro;\v1rA&.J17JTOt Kcf.pTa, (i. 56).
1
 A HISTORY OF THE PELASGIAX THEORY. 213

acL1uireJ the name IlE;\.ao-y[a: a11d it acquired it, as we have seen, not in
pre-Danaan days from tl1e Argi,·e IlEAao-~;o, of Aescl1ylus-wide reaching as
his e1rapxfat were-but from the Pelasgian <npaTtWTtKo[ of Arcadia.

Two classes of data, it will be obse1Ted. have evaded, hitherto, the wiLle-
spread net of the new' Arcadian Theory' : they "·ill have to form the ,·ery
cornice of tl1e irn·erteLl pyramid ; ::mcl they are just the data which had most
contributed in the fifth centnry to throw fresh light on the realism of tlie
Homeric evidence. "\Ye have not, in fact, had a wonl, as yet, either about
Lemnos and Imbros, or abont Attica.
Strabo goes on l1owever (with an aLh-ersative consturction once more;
'AvTtKAElbi]<; DE 1rpwrnv, </:HJO"l)) aUTOl8 Ta 7iEpt AiJµvov Kat "Iµf]pov KTlo-a1,
Ka£ b7J TOVTWV TLVa, Kat fl,ETa Tvpp;1i·ov TOV "A TVO, El, T1JV 'ha;\,{av o-vvapa1.
Now it is not very likely tliat any of Anticleides' writings were extant early
enough to be of use to Epliorus; and Philocliorus, the Atthidographer who is
particularly responsible fur the speculation about the IIEt..aa,yo),-IIE:\.ap,yo/
which Strabo quotes next, is even Lcter still. It follows that what Strabo
is doing now, is to supplement m:id de\·elope the theory of Ephorus from the
works of his immediate successors. In both cases the Pelasgians are repre-
:;ented not as aborigines but as immigrants; but the verbs are no longer
€7iOlKELJ/ and Er.apl;at, but ICTL<Tat and €r.t<pOtTav. How exactly the fact of
these Pelasgian settlements ,ms "·orked into the general structure of the
theory, there is ncthing in tliis passage to sho,r ; but the silence of Strabo as
to Ephorus, and his use of later writers to supplement his theory on these
two points, certainly suggest that a difficulty had been felt. In the case of
Athens the problem was simplified in adrnnce for Ephorns by the circumstance
that, as Herodotus observed, the Athenians, wlrntever their origin, were so
thoroughly Hellenized as to be reckoned To'io-t r.pwTOtd-t ?..eyoµEvoio-t Etvat
'EA.:\.;jvwv u-o<f,£17v, 1·' 2 and therefore furthest remo\·ecl from the simplicity and
folly of barbarians. If, that is. tl1e theory of Ephorus arose as a false corollary
from a cultnral classification of extant lireeks, such as was contemplated in
the time of Thucydides, the Athenians must at once have fallen out of the
list of possible candidates for genuiEe Pelasgian ancestry ; and if so, the stories
in Hecataeus and Herodotus about their dealings with Pelasgian 1r:\.av17rnt
would come in as proof of the early date of Attica's conversion to Hellenism.
Tlie philological speculations of Philochorus about Ile:\.au-701-IIE:\.ap,yoi rest on
inadequate knowledge of the history of the Attic dialect. But, whatever their
validity, they are incompatrble with any theory which did not reject (or more
probably ignore) the "·hole of the Herodotean treatment of the' aboriginal'
Pelasgians of Attica, and lay i'tress solely on tl1e Herodotean admission tl1at
certain Pelasgians 'came and went' between Attica and Lernnos.

lic Hdt. i. GO.

 .J. L. ::\IYHES

In the case of Lemnos ,ve have further eYidence of the fourth century
treatment of Homer. Homeric proof of the late arrival of the Pelasgians in
Lenmos existed indeed, though only of a negative kind, and so far Anticleides
was justified in asserting that the Pelasgians were not aborigines but colonists.
But in laying stress on the negati\'e evidence, he ignored the positive
testimony of the Iliad to a pre-Pelasgian KTL<Tl<; in Lemnos; an,1 it was only
by so ignoring it that he was able to state 7i p wTo v, .•. avTov, Tit 7icp't
~\FJµvov ,ca} ''Iµ/3pov KTL<Tat.

Strabo's citation from Anticleilles introduces another new feature, when

it attributes to Pelasgians of Lemnos and Imbros a share in the foundation of
Etruria. Attempts at an explanation of the western Tyrrhenians by means
of a Pelasgian theory of the Aegean go back, as we shall see, at least as far as
Hellanicus; aud both Herodotus and Thncydide;; mention 'actual' examples
of the two peoples in an as;;ociation ;;o clo.se as to border on identity. Bnt
the statement of Anticleides i;;, I believe, the earliest which connects the
' actual' Tyrrhenians of Etruria with any part of the Aegean where 'actual'
Pelasgians existed in historic times. It is on this ground that I have
reserved till now an examination of the literary evidence about the
Tyrrhenians by the same method of criticism to which I have contined myself
in the preceding sections. If it leads to an intelligible result in this case
also, I think I may claim this as some confirmation both of my previons
results and of tbe method itself.
Considering how much has been written about the Tyrrheuians and how
hrge a place they filled on the Greek horizon, it is almost surprising to find
how little early evidence about them has survived in Greek literature.
Homer has no mention of Tyrrheniaus at all; and the isolated passage in
Hesiod's Tltcogoniu (l. 1016) is suspect. In fact the only direct reference in
literature earlier than the fifth century, is that in the Homeric Hymn to
Dionysus ( 1. S). Here the sea-pirates who kidnap Dionysus, and are
miraculously punished by him, are introduced without comment as Tvpu7Jvot'.
But the Hymn gives no internal indication of the date or place of the
episode, except that in 1. 28 Egypt and Cyprus on the one haud, aud the
Hyperboreans on the other, seem to lie on the poet's horizon; and this does
little but confirm the conclusion suggested by style aud hrnguage that the
Hymn may belong to the sixth or se\·enth century, and not much earlier.
At two points in the Hymn there may be traces of 'T_yrrhenian' proper
rnuues; but if there are, they are hopelessly corrupted. It is possible, but is
not pro,·ed by auything in our text, that the Hymn may belong to the same
Cycladic cult of Dionysus as the fragmentary Hymn I, with its allusions to
X axos and Icaria; 10 i but it is al;;o possible, as the unexplaine,l allusion
 .A HI:-;TORY OF THE PEL_-\.:--UL-\.X THEORY.

to the bear 1., 4 suggests, that it m:1y belong to the Brauronian cult: in
which case this Hymn (or the legeml which it embo:Jies) may be the source
from which the Tyrrhenian name came later into the story of the Pela-;gian
raids round .Attica.
1n the fifth century four distinct stories were tolLl about Tyrrhenians m
the Aegean basin. 1"'
1 7
(1) Herodotus i.-,,; and Thuc,FliLles
are agreed that Tjrrhenian-; existeLl
·'

still, in the fifth century, in the district enclosed between Chalcidice, tlie
Strymon, the Axius, and the inland Paeonia; aml that .they were aL1jaceut
to (Hdt.), if not actually part of (Thuc.), the Pelasgiaus who ,,urYive,l in that
district. Thucydides adds, as we haYe =,een, that they retained a language of
their own, and connects them with certain inhabitants of Lemnos and .Attica
who seem to be those whom Herodotus calls Pelasgians. But neither writer
connects these actual fifth century Tyrrhenians with the Tyrrheuians of tl1e
\Vest. 15~

(2) Sophocles is quoted i:;o as having useLl the double phrase Kat
Tvpu71vo'iui IkX.au,yot.<, of a part ( or the whole) of the people of the pre-
historic realm of Inachus, namely the Peloponnesian Argos. Ent we haYe
seen in the case of the word IlE;\.aa-~101, first, that its application to tl1e
Peloponnesian Argos results from misinterpretation of the IlE;\.au 1lKov 0

"Ap,yo<; of Homer; secondly, that already in the time of Aeschylus this

prehistoric realm was regarded a5 including a large part of central and
northern Greece, and particularly the Thessaliau Pelasgiotis. There is
nothing in the Sophoclean use of · Tyrrhenian ' to preclude this interpretation
of the passage, and there is no suggestion anywhere that there either were or
had been 'Tyrrhenians' in the realm of Inachus in any other sense than that
in which there were or had been 'Pelasgians.' The passage in fact is only of
interest as confirming the evidence of Herodotus anLl Thucydides as to a
growing belief in the fifth century that the 'Pelasgian' and the · Tynhenian '
names 'went together' in some way; and, as we shall see shortly, by the
close of the fourth century the;;c names hacl become p1"c1ctically inter-
changeable.

(:3) Hellanicus,rn° though he does not expressly mention Tyrrhenians

in the Aegean, has a theory about the origin of the Tyrrhenians in the \Vest
which derives them from his Pelasgians of Thessaly. These Thessalian
Pelasgians, on being expelled from Thessaly by the Hellenes (who, for

1"• See 1. -16 aml l'rusius' note. Hero,lotus, an,l there11"ith that of ThncyJirl(•S,
1" 5 I ne.:,;foct the tragerlians' use of Tupa-1)v<KT/ that E. )Ieyer is enableJ to condnJe that
a• a &tock epithet of a-ttll.71"<')'~ or ,cwllw,·. ~-\.e-,,:J,. He,o,lotus · kenut Tyrsener im I3erei,J1., ,le,
En11i. 567, ::ioph . .Aj. 17. ai--g,tischen )Ieeres nid1t.' l fJr,grhu,11•:,t i. p. '.::L
1

ljlj i. 57. 1 ·•~ Fr. 256 = Diouy, Hal. i. 25.

m iv. 10'.l. l,v Fr. 1 = Dionys. Hal. i. 23.

i;, 5 It i, <July by re,niting the passa;;e of
::!lG

Hellanicu::<, ,ee111 tu liare been in11nigrnnts from somewl1ere) llil touk ::-l1ip aua
hllllell in Italy t1r1 °5.1,/V1/Tl T.oTaµf,, that is, on the Fmbrinu u,ast uc-ar
Spiua ; 1' 2 they tl1eu weu t ll lJ country EL, Kpo-rwva r,o:\w.
That Hellanicus hom?\·e1 had liimself no evideuce of the existence of
the Tyrrhenian name in Thessaly, is E-uggested by his use here of tl1e Pelasgirm
name solely, so long as lie is describing eYents in The;:;saly or indeed anywhere
nutside Italy; aml by his statement that it was only on atrirnl in Italy tbat
the Pe1a,,gian refugees took tl,e name 'Tyrrhenian.' i,,.; At the same time we
must note that elsewhere M he ascribes a settlement at Metaon in Lesbos to
one :\lETa, Tvpprivo,: and as most of the Lesbian towns were of Tliessalian
origin tliere is a prime, fac/L case for regarding this Tvpprivo, as coming from
thence.1'··· He might howeYer han~ been a Pelasgian from Lemnos or tl1e
Hellespont.
Hellanicus gin--, else,d1ere, as a lower limit of (late for thi:s migration,
the tl1inl generntion before the Trojan war, and the tweuty-sixth year of
Akyo11e, priestess of the Argive Heraeum; and Philistus, a little later,m;
,siws the same date, in the formula 'eighty years before the Trojan war.' In
both caoes the actual date in question is that of the expulsion of the Sicels
horn Italy into Sicily; bnt as the Ligurians, who according to Philistns
expelled tl1em, were tliemseh·es under compulsion from 'Umbrinns aml
Pelasgi:rns,' the presence of Pelasgians in or near Umbria is presumed at a
date 11ot later than the Sicel migration. ,Ye cannot however be certain that
tlie Pelasgiaus wl10 lamlell at Spina were the only people of the name whom
}'hilistns (or even Hella11icus) beliewd to be at that time in Italy.

(-!_ About the "~esteru Tyrrl1enians howenr Iferodotu.s has a t1uite

iliffcrcut story, wliich he gi\·es on Lyllian authority ir,~: uamel:· tl1at they are
of tlte same origin as the Lyllians. His story is that in a time of famine
tl1ese Lydian Tyuheuians took ship and 'after passing many peoples' came
to the '0µ(:3p1Ko1, where they funneled cities; and tl1ere they ltve still. They

HH The st11ry ,ul,l,·rl l,y DiPny,in,, tltat thi,
l1,1P1•E-Ill·1l in the clays of Denealiun. c,mnot he
trace,l to any ea1ly ,our,:,·. The ne,,rcst analogy
is HeioJoru,· ,t,1ti-rne11t (i. 501 that in the ,by,
of Deuc,dion the lft-lleue, otKeov ,ij,· Ti;v 4>0«,-nv
:rnJ iu the tiua, ol hi, ;;iarnl,on Doi ns 1ni;;r.ite,l
re, the H1,tiaeoti, Lelow 0--,, au,_! Olympu, :
l.1ut thi, d"e" uot pn,n, that iu tl1c intern11ing
g,·mr,itir,n they or·cnpi,·,l tl,e intern-11ing t,-rri-
tory, tlinngl, Diony,ins ,·ery likely thonglit ir
di,!. H,,io,l (('(If. tr. 11 an,l Piwlar ;r,/. £!.
64 .,eew to ha,·e ieganled Denc,tli0n ,1, king ot
Opuntian Locr:,. or at le.\st ot Opn,: but we ,lo
u": l;now how early it was <li,cr,,·ere,.l th,1t thi,
king of 01,u, wa, tl,e ill\-ailer ol l'hthia.
'°' T!t .. t ::i1•in,t ,ho11]J h.1'·e 1uai11taim,!
t1tl.11tary 1ela:i .. 11s with D, 11,hi dowu to t!tc
ti 1111: of it~ d,·:-.t1lll'ti 1 ,11. a.. i-, :-tatt•l liy D10n., .siu--
l'- 1,, 1..-1brs ,,ho "'' the ,rnthotity 0f He!-
lanicns, 1,ut uut e:q,hcitly ,o), •lot·, not ,eem to
pro,·e 'fyrrhen:,m, or Pdasgian, or eYen The,-
snli,rn origin. 'f!tat the L1tter Yie,Y at all ew-nts
w·as popularly l•eliev,-tl l.lter is confirmed hy
the analogy of RaYenna. But ,-,·en a Thes-
,,ilian 01i;;in Joe, not prove tlut the colonists
\\ ere eithe1 Tynl1t·uia1" or Pelaagian,. arn1
Stial.11, ,21-11, who i, 11u1 autl1ority for this, h,ts
ch11sen to tle,cribe S1,i11., as ,rcf,\a,o, v,
'E ,\ ,\ 7/ s
1r6i\ts lv~o(os 1 \rhich i . . ba,J f1)1' Its Pclasgiu1t
1"3 There i, ,,-,rne bte evi,1ern·e f11r a helief
tl,at the1c "·e11. l'<·l.1,.~i.1!1 ,ettle1s in Lesl,oo:
,e,:c ""!'"' ially Stral,o, 2:21, G:21, Dio,l. f.. 81,
Pliu. X.H. 5. ~1. ;ig_
1
"" Fr. 1::1 = Steph. Ryz. s. L i\le,-cfo:,·.
,,._-. Diony,. lfal. i. :!:2.
11
''' fliuny,. lb!. 7.r. = fr. :c.
[,,- i. 8-1.
 A Hf:--T<>ltY (IF THE PEL\.S<3L-\..\°' THEOltY.

g"t tl1eir uame from tlieir lcrlllcr Tyrse1nts, wl10 ,n:; sun uf Atys [1l1Ll couse-
![ uently (i. ,) brotlier of Lyllus tlic 111u,1f/uws uf tlte L_nli,rns. Here the change
uf name suggests the ::,arne cow.:lusion as iu tl1e case uf Hellat.icus, namel.1·
t liat Herodotus lrnd no e\·iJence befure ltim uf a Tyn hcnian people in Lydia.
Un the other hanJ a dichotomy of the L_nlians, sucl1 as his story presumes,
is in accordance "·ith a natiw Lydian trarlition of fifth century date : fur
Xanthus the Lydian i,;;, gives, as the sous of Atys. L.nlus tnlll To rebus ( or
Torr helms) and add:; tliat tl1e languages of tl1cir 1e;,pecti 1·e LlLscenLbnt;; stooLl
to one another as Ionic to Doric, that is. they were closely-kindred dialect:,.
Xantlios however gives 110 inclicati.:,11 of a Turrhebiau e1uigrati,_111: but he
knows of a town Torrliaebus iu LJ·dia. :'\ot mn1 · Tynl1e1rn-;' l1,)11eYer is
known either to Herudotus or to anyone el5t:'. 1'''.
Another point is perliaps worth noting, to cutllplete tl1e parc1llel Letwee11
the accounts of Herodotus a11Ll Xautlrns, and to suggest a liue of urgumeut
,1·hich may ,~ery likely ha rn been present to the rniud of tlte former. Hero-
dotus introduces hi,- account of the Tyrrhenian emigration as a footnote to
the Lydian im·ention of r.auyvt'at, which lie ascribes to tlie LyLliaus, on Lydian
authority, in a passage tl1e rest of whid1 is 1e111aikab!e for its tletailcLl
kuowletlge of things Lytlian. 170 X ow ,1 e do not know erwugh either about
Lydian or Tynheniau, or e1·en about Helienic 1Ta1-yviat, to be able to coufinn
or to dispute Herodotu:;' account ; but \1·e may fairly assmue that in l1is time
tilere was actually sntficient similarity bet1Yeen these pasiimes. to uphold such
a story; aml further that sucl1 similarity between Lyci.iau and Tynhenian
game::, was one of tlie ft'sti111uniu to the story of the Tyrrheuian emi 6 ration-
n, one might argue from the g:1mes of Ne1Y Engbnd or Yi1ginia nowaLlay5.
So that it becomes important to note that in Xantlrns abo 171 the place
Torrhebns has a local culture-hero named Carius, who is inre,1toi' f/1•/iuiil, and
that is why LyLlian mu5ie. in particular, is callell Torrltebian : for l1ere ,1·e
seem to haw anotlier phase of the same genernl st(•!'_\· of a Lydian or Tor-
rhebiau culture-hero.
It is by this time fairly clear lww Herodotus crn1e by l1is story, at
its Lydian end. At its Italian end the story is clearly a Yariant of that of
Hellanicns: for 'rmbria' in Herodotn;; 17 ~ extends northwards as far as the
foot of the Alps, a1Hl so inelndes the site uf Rpina. l\Icanwhile his phrase,
li0v€a 7TOA/\.a r.apaµEt,Jraµevov-;, looks Ye1y like an attelllpt to summarize a
long series of data as tu · Tyrrheninn · settlements, or attempted settlements,
on the route bet ween Lydia and tl1e ltead of the Adriatic.
Snmmiug up tl1e evidence of tlie fiftl1 centnr_\. 1\riters 11·e reach tl1e
ful101Ying presentatio11 of tlie fifth ceutury 1~iew of tlie Tyrrhenians: and 11·e
io, Fr. l = Di,,n~·,. H,d. i. ~S. 1 :-11 i. ~4 cpa.uL 0€ alToL AvOuL Ka~ 70.s 1rat•yi ia~
169 Tl1e uarnl' Tuppn,·os wod,l be a natur.11 TCl.s i•Vv cnpicn TE Ka: ''.EA,\7](1! KctTE<FTEC:..'ffa.s
'etlrni<:' if the1 e wa~ ever a place e.,!led Tyn !1:1, e!L'VTWJ,' O..µa OE: ral·TcU TE
E~eUp11u.a [EJ/i(T0a,·
awl it ,rn;, ueliend in quitt late time;, that E~EvpE0'ijiaL 1rau2t: u<p[cn AE:uun Ka, Tvp£1711,·{77v
there w,i;, ,nch a to\\ ll in lite Stonth Lnli,rn C1.1rotKluai· ~Oe ,n~pL aV-r~L' AE-;,,1,'JES.
tli,triL t ot Ttol'I hl,in ( Et. J]11,1. ,. ,·. Tupavrns) 1 :i Ft. ., ,nn1m.11ized l,y Xi, lwl.b of
am! th:1t L<yg,·, came f, r,w ti,en, c. Bnt thi,
11l'OYf-:, nutl1ing for tltl· tilth i·entnry 1._i1 ernlil!.
218 .J. L. )lYHES

note at once the remarkabl1:: likeness bdween its main features aml those uf
the Pelasgian tl1eory at the ;;,arne phase.
First, there are ·actual' Tyrrhenians (1) north of ChalciJice, (2) in
Etruria; but 110 fifth century writer has reconlecl any attempt to iJentify
them.
Secomlly, the ' actual' Tyn-henians of Chalci.Jice are closely associatecl
with 'actual' Pelasgians in our two best authorities.
T!tinlly, speculation has been at work, connecting, on the 0110 lrn.nLl the
'actual' Ty1rhenian5 of ChalciLlice with the intrusi.-e Pelasgians of Lemno:-;
aml Attica, on the other hand the ' actual' Tyrrhenians of the West (1) with
·theoretical' Tyrrhenian;; in Lydia, now extinct, '. 2) with ·theoretical'
Pelasgiam in Thessaly, also extinct now·.
Fomthly, in popular belief, represented by Sophoclean Tragedy, tl1e
llame • Tyrrheniau ', again in the closest association with· Pelasgians' has got
a general connotatiw sense of 'pre-Hellenic in the Aegean,' which exactly
corresponds with the behaviour of the Tyrrhenian indi\·iduals whose exploits
have come clown to ns in our one epic source, the Homeric H!fmn to
Dion!Jsus_l7J

But no sooner ,.l,) we pass from the fifth century into the fourth than
all is exaggeration arnl confusion.
Fi,·st, as we should expect, the co:motative use of 'Tynhenian · to mean
'violent and piratical' c1-,y:otallizes into a definite theory, assigned to Ephoru-;
by name, in which the Tyrrhenians play almost exactly the same part at .5c 11 ,
as has been assignell to the Pelasgians on laml. The crucial passages are:

,'_l J Strabo ,no, where Ephorns accounts thus for the latene-;s of Hellenic
expansion in the West, 1 • 4 TOV', -yap 7rpoTEpov OEOtEvat Ta A'[JtJTl)pta TWV
Tvpp17vwv Kat Tl]V wµoTl]Ta TWl' TaVT'[J /3ap;3apwv. Here the Tyrrhenian is
the type of Outlan,l barbarism, as the Pelasgian is of pre-Hellenic barbarism
in the Aegean.
( :2, Strnbu -1, i"i, \\ here tl1e writer, speaking of th1:: Cretans, ;;ays f.LETa
TOV', Tvpp17vov, oi' µa?..tuTa ED!JWO"av Tr)V Ka0' 17µa<; 0ctAaTTav, OiJTOL ELtJlV Ol
OtaOE~ciµwoi Ta A'[JtJTl]pW. At first sight it is tempting to take this as
referring to tl1e Cretan piracy uf historic times, which is much in the mind
of Strabo himself. But if the ascription to Ephorus is correct, this is
out of the rinestion, for the Cretan piracy did not appear to be serious
till after the age of Alexawler. Anotl1er possible interpretation woul,l
he to regard Ta ?..t7a-T17pia-a regular Ephorall catchwurcl, like e1rotKot nnLl
<i1r1ipgal-<,,; the victi111:3' exrressiou for a · sea-power.' But there is no
evidence that Ephorus wa-; ac,111ainted with the Tha]a-;;;;ocracy List which

1 : 1 Thi, i, .,11 •rnite i11<lepe11,le11t "t' th,, lat., lT-l Ht• J.~•d~ns the t'"nwl.ninn of the ,Ye--:tern
anJ fir t,111 -..,Yee1, H6 ;..:,·ue1,d1:~~ltt•1H c,t U10uy:,1tb X,1xu~ anil )Ieg~1t.1 to ~hf' tifttr·nth gent ration
(i. 25, •)11 th~ 11,1"-:-..;1ge ot S iph(,~:.-_•~ 1 • Tvpp1Ji la.s
1
~ft,·r the Tr-,,i u1 ,\- u 11 S-1 1: , . --[1;) :Jo= ]45•)
µfv 70.p 011 f~i 0.4a TO:t xpr~vo:,• in€Zt Qj,' O.vCl. T1]v =i:34 11.1. I.
"E;v,aaa ,jc.
 _\. Hl:-:iTURY tJF THE PELASGL-\X THEOHY.

cc:•1ues to us tltrnugl1 Diocloru;;; awl even if he was, it cannot be argueLl that

lte describeJ as Tyrrhenian the sea-power 17 ·• which the List call,; Pelasgian :
for the sea-power which sncceeJs it is not· Cretan' in the List, but· Tl1racian.'
The only alternative is to regard the 'Cretau · )l.:oa-njpw as the famous
' ,ea-p,)wer of 1Iinos,' anJ to regard the Tyrrhenian A.lJa-Trypia as the Ephorau
e•tuivalcnt for wltat Herodotus and Thucyllides know as the 'Carian'
sea-power \\ hich )linos overthrew.17ti So, whereas in the Aeg·ean this
' Tyrrhenian' sea-power was broken by )Iino;;, and permitted Hellenic
expansion early, in the \Vest )Iinos failed ,~as Herodutus knew;, and Hellenic
expansion tarried till the fifteenth generation after the Trojan \Var.
Se,·o,ully, whereas Hellanicns had made his Thessalian Pelasgians chaage
their name on their arrival in Italy, and so leave the \Yest a free field
for Tyrrhenians, the fourth century, from Philistus onwards, admits unmodified
Pelasgians in Italy. In Philistus' account, already cited,177 of the dis-
pvssession of Ligurians aud Sicels southward, their invaders are Hot
1-'mbrians and Tyrrhenians, as we shoulll expect from the fifth century
evidence, but Umbrians and Pelasgians. The later writers carry this con-
fusion further, sometimes identi(ying Pelasgian and Tyrrhenian, sometime'3
distinguishing them. The 'Thessci.lian' Ravenna, for example, strengthen-;
itself against 'Tyn-henian' attack, by admitting its 'Umbrian' neiglibours. 178
In Southern Campania, beyoml the Sarnm R. lie flTa Tvpp17vo£ Ka£
ITeA.aa70/, µeTa TaUTa OE ~avvZTat· Kal oiJTOl o' EgE'lT'EO'OV EiC TWV Tor.wv. 17!)
Diodorus, in fact, "·as probably under no rnisappreheusion when he saitl
tliat 'the Greeks' apply the name 'Tynhenian' to Latins, rmbrians,
anll Ausones indifferently. 150
1'hi,·dly, the weakness of the evidence which in Hellanicus' story connects
the Pelasgian immigrants from Thessaly with the Tyrrhenians of Etruria,-
aml perhaps also a discrepancy bet1veen the elate of king Xanas of Thessaly
in Hellanicus, and that of king Atys of Lydia in Herodotus and in the few
writers such as Timaeus 1 ' 1 who followed l1im in tliis matter,-:;;eem to
have led later to the conclusion that in the '\Vest there were tn·,) lll<)\·emeuts
of colonization, one earlier and 'Pelasaian'0 '
the other later and 'Tnrhenian.'
•
.A good example of the duplication which ensues is that legend of Caere,15 ~
in which a Thessalian-Pelasgian in the town speaks Greek-xaZpe-to
a · Tyrrhenian ' assailant, and is umlersto,)Ll hy liim.1 ',; The Pelasgian emi-
gr,Hion to the \Yest from Thessaly, moreover. was certain souner or later
1 5
: Placed by .Eusebius (Jemnw) 1,etween 177 Fr. 2 = Dio11. H,11. i. 17.
105ti and 961 n.c. ; aud by myself about a 1,:, Strabo. 21-±.
c<:utnry later (J.II.S. x:wii, Pl'· 88, 126-7). 17 ~ Sh-alto, 2-H.
1 0
: This agrees well with the fourth century i;o Fur insunces see the literature in Bertra
elate for the spread of the Hellenes over the a111l Rl'inach, L1,; Cdtes clan:-; fr-3 n,)lt,., du Pu ;_:t
PeLt5gian 'eparchies' of the maiulan<l : fur Ion du Da,wb,_, lS\14, pp. 74-6.
son of .X.uthus is Yety nearly contemporary 151 Fr·. 19.
1
with Theseus, awl Theseus is one g~n<>ration '" Strabo, 220.
below Mino~ an,] ono gen•!rntion abo,·e th, 1
' ' That C'a,·re, ,w rather the nurefonned
Troj,m 11 «r. Helleu t!tereforc \\',ls furn· ge,1er,t- ;\.~ylb, Juel like Spina, regnlc;r relations 11 tth
frms before the Troj,m war, and :Xntlim nn•l Delphi, awl eYen a trea•ml'y ti.ere, p101·es
Dorn, were conternpo1a1ic, of ~Iin,}s of (_'rcte. nothing a-; to it;;; 11rigin.
 J. L. lUYREb

t,, be c:u11fusell with tl1e far eadier movcmeuts im!Jlied iu tl1e geuealogy
11 liich Pl1erecydes constructed for the children of Lycaon of Arcadia. 011e
Yersion of the latter brought Oenotrians from Arcadia to Italy as its fii,;t
i11liabitants, and a kindred version (wliicl1 bo1n:1-er only comes to us
tlirough Dionysius, m1tl is not assigned to Pl1erecydes or his fol 1owers by
1tarne sets this Arcadian movement as far back as tl1e seH!11tcenth gent·r-
atiou before the Trojan \Yar. The evidence however for tliis double-coloniz-
ation is all later than the fourth century: N., it naturally pro1·es nothiug
f«r any period earlier than the circnmstanccs which called the t heor_,-
itself into existence; and these circumsbnces are indicated very clearly
i11 Di,:111ysius' 01m ver,;ion of the story of tlie Pelasgians in Italy, 1s-t ft1r
part of which he claims the support of Hellauicus. For he represents
tlie Tliessalian Pelasgians of Hellariicus as being tlietnselves a detachment
of the n1ilitant~Pelasgians of Arcadia, who ,wre not in1·ented till a century
after Hellauicus' time; and he puts their arrival back ~ix generntiom
l1efore the days of Deucalion, whereas Hellanicus had kept tl1e111 in Thessaly
until the invasio11 of the Hellenes, at least one generation after Dencalio11,
aml ouly tliree generations before the Trojan \\~ar. Tlw whole story, iu fact,
as YieweJ b.v Dionysius, is see11 through the spectacles of Ephorus; or rat lier
perliap3 of rnme fullo1rnr of Ephorus 1d1ose aim was to work into the Ephoran
tlieory some part of the c.1!culations of Pherecydes.1"",
F,_111;·tlil:1, the Tyn henian name became more and more ,videly applied to
t lt1° Pelnsgian inYaders of Le1unos, Attica, arnl other parts of the Aegean.
The staterneut of Thucydides, that his Tynltenian-Pelasgian folk in ~It.
Atl10s ,rere akin to tl1e irn·aders of Lemnos, lay open to misconception in
proportion as tlie word 'T_yrrl1enian 'gained more generic .-ogue; and we l1a,·e
rd ready seen t liat Hellanicns bad placed a 'Tyrrhenian' colony in Lesboc<. owr
a'._!·ainst "AvTavopov rr)v IlE;\.a1ry!oa. There was some exc-nse. tl1erefore, for
the• attempt of AnticleillC'3 to reconcile tl1e accounts given by He1wlotus, and
hy Helh.uic11s, r,f tlie 11·estc·rn Tyrrlieuians, by causing Pdu.s111w1s from Lernw,s
and Irnhros (wlio on Thucyditlea11 autl101 ity were akin to tlie Tyrrhenian-
Pelasgiaus of ~It. ~.\.t hos,: to jom T!Ji', Ju u us, son of Atys, and l1is men. eth·rn -rro'A.;\.a
-r.apaµE1faµE1 ov,. as Herodotns says, on their way to Tyrrhenia-in-the-\Yest.
1

Hut it is qnite another affair. when Ephorns ,lescribes the Lemnians as

'l'ynl1e11iaus "·ithout qualification: 1 '" or wheu Philochorus 1-,, retells tlie story
1s:.~ It i-. -..1 t ont i11 g11·,1t •1t-tail 1,y J:idgf·way,
E'orl.:1 -jr,,· r,r U1·1tu 1. 11p. '.2-Jl n.
"' 1Jw11ys Ha!. i. :!:!.
i~- l lt~JTI'.' ._tln-ad,,- evn1tHt11tt1l 11. l ...,~_ lJ. -!l
1rn the d11ulit ,,Lith 111tht e,i,t d..., to tl1e lltc vt 1
.i,11y ::-tatf•Itlt_'llt att1iLutt,tl tu Pltelet ~nle::-, :l.Hll
rny i1q,1e,,1.,11 tl";t. though the cu li,·,t of the
to Hesio,l. it fr.,grnrr,t S5 ,.f Phere, ytlc, "··"
extant aml k1Jo111, to hint.
1
''' Diu,l. 10. 19.
''~ F1. 5. \re L.1n already liacl t"·o expe1i-
ences ,_,t l'l1i].,chorcs as a philoJ,.gi,t awl It 1~
rn tl,e ,·ery Hext fr,1g1uent, fr. ti, tlt,,t he derin·s
the 11.1n1e ot t!tl' l--f ,ml'iic ~{i.'TLES tr01n a-lveafiat
1

tl1L:.C w1itt·l':, 11t tln, Il,l'Jlt· ,,a..., ,l ,\O/u7pd.cpus
aJ!(l 1q•oliaLly :.:0!1111ilt•1l ge11ealogie.--. tb, 1in1,ta-
ti"Ih tlicn1,•h·,., httay tl.e 11,flnen,,e ol the
I· 1,h.. r.,r, th,·or~·. au,! ni.ty J.,.. •jllit.:- late. It i,
Lttt.iinl_,· re,,,arkahl,· tli.,t EpJ,,.,11, ,!i,l n,,t
w kHo\, ltd...:>:: L;-.. tlr>l,t t,) Phut-t ydt . . a.., \n_ ll ,1-..
,\ ith n:fu1 w I to thi-., S,lllk 1aitl Hut iu tlii":i
t,.,g,n, lit b· ul!, the· ,aid, r, Pela,gian,. Th,-
HomL1i_ ~{J.'TtES lw\\e,·c-r a-.. \\C L;1.,l' -:,ee11, li,l\-l
1,,, rn .. ,, to ,J., ,lith tit, Pd.1,~i.,,,, than tliey
li.1, c "itl, t l,e Tynlt, 1,i.,1. ,,
 _\ HISTOHY OF THE PEL.-\8lHAX THEOHY. :.? :..'. l

nf the Pela--giau rnicl on _\ttic,1 with details derin).J from Hecataeus au,1
Herodotus. but with · Tyrrhe11ian.s' substitute,1 for Pelasgians throughout,
nml with the philological moral T vpa v v o , dp17Ta1 a7ro Twv Tvpp,,v!;iv Twz,
;31afwv /{a[ A!J<:rTWI' E;
Z1px1r, ... TvppYJI'O! "/G.P OA/"/ 0 V Tl Va X p ci VO 1'
o:'ic1kavT€, EV T,ll<; ':\.0,ji·al, ... '.'l"OAAOL f.LEV ;,VTWV tl'TrWA.OZ'TO ... aXt-..Ol ci
CK<pv-yovT€', _\i'jµvov Kat ''1µ;3pov 'f)IO](Tal' ... and th, n retnrned when -rrap0.fi•o1
0

<tpKT€uoµwa1 T,17 0€,j'J were at their mercy at Brauron. After this it is n,)t
snrprisin3· that Apollonius of Rhodes,1' 3 fulloweLl by Plutard1 ;,J a11ll
Polyaenus, 1'"J shouhl h:we described as 'Tyrrhenians' the persecutors of tl1e
~Iinyans; that Aristoxenns 1U1 shoulcl describe Pythagoras as a 'Tyrrlienian'
from Leurnos; that Diogenes Laertins We shoukl describe one }foes:uchm a.;;
Tupp1JVOV OVTa Kat ~/El'O<; TWV _\i'jµvov Kat "lµf]pov Kal !Kvpov:_olKl)<IllVTWV
Tupp17vwv; or finally that the Lemnians who were conqueretl by .l\Iiltiades
shonld rank, for Cornelius X epos, as Ca!'ian.s. 1•1·, Only much later \ with the
,-,ingle exception of one passage of Charax) does the revival of Herodoteaa
authority permit Steplrnnns (s.r. 'Hqiata-Tta,;, Suidas, aml Zenobiw;
(s.t. 'Epµwvfto, x_upt,) to recur to the fifth century name of' Pelasgian.'
The mention of Scyros is particularly instructi\·c, because its inh:1.bitants
had been noted by Thucydides 191 as Dolopes, of a well-known mainland stock
of ordinary ~ orth-Greek type.1''' Ephorus hO\\.e\er called them 'Pelas-
gians,' rn,, as we might alm,ist h:we gues,;ed, seeing they are l!r.otKot from
:~forth Greece; Scynrnus couples them \Yith the men of Sciatho3 as IlEAaa--yo/,
bnt gives them a <1uite different origin, EK 8prj,K1J, oia/3,tvTE,, w, A-0~10,; 1 '' 7
~icolas of Damascm calls them 'Pelasgians and Carians ' 1''' ancl Diogene,;:,
as we ha,·e seen, couples them with the men of Lem nos and Im bros, but call-;
nll three peoples 'Tyrrhenian.'

Anyone wbo has followed this analysis of the Greek authorities as fo.r as
the close of the fourth century will agree, I think, that there i;; not much t') be
gained by classifying the nnau thenticated statements of the writers fm ther
down. Anyone, moreover, who is familiar with those statements, "·ill
recognize at once how large a proportion of them comists in direct elaboratiun
of the Homeric and HeroJotean connotative view, that ' Pelasgian' meant
'pre-Hellenic' in much the same sense as 'British' is popularly used in
England for 'pre-Roman,' or ' Druidical' for 'pre-Christian ' ; and how large a
proportion of the remainder are TEµa ·x,11 Tov f.L€"/l1.Aov O€L7T'l'ov 'E <po p o v.
T<tke the case of the famous Pelasgian settlement in Rome. There is

1 ,s .d rgo,wu!ic,.t iv-. 1760. Pammon, all lie· has to sny of hi!Jl is that he
1'9Q. Gr. 21, Virt. Jlul. 8. 19 'J vii. 49. betrayed a Greek anchorage to the P•:r,ian,.
,n Fr. l. 192 viii. I. 2. 196 Diodoru,, xi. 60.
193 Jliltzad,·, 2. 194 i. 98. I!Ji Scynu1ns, til:i.
19 >Hdt. Yii. 1:32, 185. Though he has rn_. Skph. Il)-z. , . .-. ::;; ,;;,ios
occa,ion in vii. 183 to mention a Scyrian 11.. med
 J. L. }IYRES

an oLYious but anonymous culture-hero; so he 1s ErnnJer ( Ev-avop-o, = ci,·

7onus) aml of Arcadian origin. There is the place-name Palatium; so it is
a de-nasalized form of Pallantion in Arcadia. There is archaic masonry
upon the hill; so it is a IIEAa1T7tJCov TEZxo,: and behold'. an 'important
confirmatory proof' of the Ephoran theory of an Italian 'cpa;·ch!J' of the
Pelasgians; incidentally also a good excuse for Roman inten·ention in the
affairs of 'Pelasgian' Epirus and 'Pelasgian' Greece.
Xor is the case of tlie Pelasgians exceptional. I have dealt already
incidentally with the Carian Theory which grew up on parallel lines in the
South Aegean, and more fully with the story of the Tyrrhenian name in the
Aegean and in the ,Yest. The story of the Leleges is shorter and more
fragmentary; but in its main outlines it hardly differs. In all, there is an
e:uly period, beginning with a time when there seems to ham been a real
but eYanescent tribe, of limiteLl geographical range, and some peculiarities of
culture ; and ending, between the sixth and the fifth centuries, with a vague
cycle of memories, and a connotative usage of the name. To this, in each case,
succeeds a fifth-century phase in which, while ingenious theory flourishes,
real search for 'survivals' of backward folk is perceptible. Then comes
tlie fourth century, regardless of research, reckles~ of accnracy or scholarship,
info.tuated with headstrong tl1eory, to which the evidence (such as it is)
urnst conform or be ignored; and then Alexandria, stupidly farraginous, but
rehabilitated lately, as we sa" to begin with, as 'evidence to the same effect,
perfectly unexceptionable a11Ll as strictly historical as the case will admit of.'
J. L. MYRES.

APPEXDIX OX APOLLOXffS, ARGO.YA. ['TICA I. 1021-4.

I l1an reseTl'et1 fur di,cu,,ion in an apprndix the one passage in which an ancient
anthor pnrpnrts to ,le;,criLe an attempt on the part of 'actual' Pelasgians tn gain a footing
on the A,iatic , 11ore of the Helle~pont. The passage itself is of late date· and my only
rea,ons for not treating i.t among contempor,iry passage;, are that the persom,;es to which it
1efers can be tr,,ced bac:, beyonll the fifth century; that the ethnic situation which it
pre&npposes ha, alreafly been sho,n1 to be presupposed in the Homeric Age ; ancl that the
incident ibelf occurs in a context "·hich links it at lntest with the Ionian colonization of
Proponti", and at earliest,, ith the _-\.rgonaut-saga, which we know from Homer to have been
current in wme furm ur other Lefure the composition of the Odyssey.
The anecdo'.e in •1ne,tion is as follows. The Argonauts, after pa"sing the Troacl,
landed on the Asiatic cuu,t of Propontis, macle friemls with the Doliones and their
kin~ Cyzicns, aud fongl,t .,ume Y'IY•v•H from the interior, who tried to blockade the Argo
in the so-•·'llle,1 Xt"To, X,µryv at C~-zicus. Soon after, they we1e forced by stress of weather to
put l,ack to tlie ,ame friendly c:,a,t. Then follow the crucial li11e;, : -

j_ !!)_ l---!-. ol.CE TL~ alr,,v v,~cruv Eri1.cjJpubew!!., E.JJ<;t}O Ev

ol'O' i•r.O VVKTL .lnAiovEs c~f clvtOvras

fµµ£1,1at·
ifpwas V1Jfl-'JJT<s hrryttrnv· dXX,i r.ov dv<ipwv
MaKpiiwv ,i'.a-avrn IlfAaa--y<Kov ,~prn 1<.<Arra,.
 A HI:--TORY OF THE PELASGIAX THEORY. 223
So there wa., a tight ,tt ,.-ross purpose,, awl great i,lau~hter of the Duliom,s, and in that
fight ,rn.'- Cyzkus -lain, their king: whose towb remaillt:•l at the city r,f C'rzirns iu
Hellenic time.0 , honoured ,till with Argonautic ,t£0Aa. • •
Xow gr-anted that all tl1at Apollouius knew was tlte fouacbtion-legencl of Cyziei:s, ancl
&ome prffions ver&ion, nc,t necessarily early, of the Yc,yage of the Argo: granted also that
the founclation-legernl iti,elf was nrninly aetiological, and tLat e,·ery -elf-respecting town in
Propontis, and beyond, liacl its uwu 'remini:,cence · uf the Argonaut-, to pro,·e its antil1nity ;
yet nothing of all this e:-q,lain- either the :,pecitic riame of tht: )luKp,iwv, <>r ,rhy tlie plu,tse
II f A a <Ty, K<', v ,iprn i- apl'liec1 to their raiL1.
This name, aml pl1ra,e, completely pnzzle,1 the very le:1rnerl ;,ch-·,lia-,t of Apolloniu•.
He seems to have begun Ly applyin;:; it to the Dolionb them,eln,s; an,l he explain~
(l; that the Dolione- are colonist., from Enboea; (2) tliat Euboea "a~ once callc,cl MaKpi,
'Long Island' ; ,3_ that a- EnLoea lies 'near Peloponne;;e, which fa Pela:,gian,· Cyzicene
(i.e. panllo-post-Eubc,ic) ,rnrfare w.1s 'Pelasgian' likewi,e_H1t• " .e h,l\"e clear!~- to look
fnrthrr than this for an explanution.
_.\.pollonius him,elf ,hare;., as we ha,e seen,:•o,:, the misapprehensic,ns of l1is time a,
to the relations of Pefa-gian;. and Tyrrhenians; and he is therefore not the most likelv
person to lrnYe held comciou;.ly a Pelasgian theory, or recounte,l willingly a Pelasgian
anecdote, which vresmne,l a •1nite different Yiew from anything which had been held
~ince the fifth century, if e,en cvnscionsly so late as this. It is therefore the mo;.t
notable, if he ha:; presen-ecl ,uch an anecdote ; and if he ha5, there is a fair pre,umption
that he did nr,t iin-ent it, lrnt found it in existence and used it.
The Yersion of thE, ;.ame incident which is gi,en Ly Apollmlorns-' 01 suggests that
there "l>as more in the authority which Apollonins was following, than he chose to in-
corporate in hi;. A,·gomwt1ca. The passage is worth quoting in full: dr.o f\~µ.vov <lE
r.po<ri<TXOt'<TL .lo"li.io<Tt, &v ,3a<TtAf1Jf K{·(,Ko,· olro, ai•-ro-i·, t•r.ec!itaro <ptJ\orppovw,. vv1<ro,
d.vaxBlvT£S lvTEl'B£v~ Kal ttEptr.£<rVvres dVTLr,voLat>, dyvool vrfS' ,rCTAw roLs ..:iol\.Lo~t 1,poa"Luxova-iv.
ol a€ voµ[(ovTES' n c i\ a a- y t 1< 0 v cl i• a i u r pa TO v (Er t x n v y c'z p i, r, 0 II f Aa a- y Wv
1

a- v v EX W s- r. o i\. E µ o i: µEv o i; µUX'JV 1'7}s- v1•KTDs- rrvvdr.ronrtv, dyvooVvrES" rrpOs- dyvooi•vras-.

Who were the"" Pelasgians Ly whom the Doliones were 'ince,santly raiclecl' ? They
can hardly be the Herodoteau Pelasgians of Placie and Scylace ; partly because the
Pelasgians are apparently still an European people in Homer, ancl had certainly not yet
reachell Lemnos in the Homeric ~.\.ge; but still more because it wa- a sea-borne raid which
convinced the Doliones that the inrnders were Pelasgian. and thl: Pebsgian;. of Pbcie and
Sc.lace were on the rnme siLle of Propontis as Cyzicus it:,elf.
· But were they Pela~gian, from Lemnos ·? Certainly nut, in a poem Ly Apollonius, or
we should surely haYe heard :,omething of this exploit in hi,, versiun of the Leumian epi5odt>.
~Ioreover, even if Apollonius hcid thought that there were Pelas6 iaus in Lenmos in
Jason's time, there is Homeric authority, a, we have been, to the contrary.
The whole question is somewhat complicated by the fact that there was also great doubt
in antiquity as to who were the Doliones. Stephanus ~ays ~oc that Homer ,1pplie,l this name
to the inhabitant, of CyLicus w, ro-i·, rov ~I<rµ.apov KiKova,: lrnt thi'l clues not ,Jccnr in our
text of Homer. It sngge;,ts however that there existed some · H•m1eric' sour,:e of traditi--m
about Cyzicus; a!lll thi~ we shall soon see to be probable otlierwise.
In the ordinary way Cyzicus counted as a colony of Miletus ; but we know from
Hecataeus of 2.\Iiletus,~0.; at the close of the sixth century, that it had a previous existence
as a town of the Doliones (or Dolieis as Hecataeu~ himself wrote the name). The
geographi~al situation is dbcu:,sed fully and clearly by Strabo. 204 But who the Dolinne,;
were is onh· known from one phrase uf Ephorus, an,l frum Alexandrine or later writers :
and opinion; t.liffere,l then in an instructiYe way. Ephorns eo; t.le,criLes them a~ Il£J\a<ryoi•~

iw Schol. Ap. Rh. i. %:2, 10:24. 201 8teph. Byz. 8. ,._ Ku(,Kos.
200 Above p. :221, n. lSS. ~ 3 Fr. :?OJ= Steph. Byz. -;, 1·. ao;1.[ov£S.
201 i. 9. 18. 1. Apollo,lorn, \,:·ute circa ~J-1 ~tr. ;,-; 5.
140 n.c.
:2:2-! .J. L. :HYRE:--

i~YTa!,' KaL Ex~,Jw3W~ Jlak.EL,'..LiVul'!) '71' 'J!> -rolJ~ TTjv 0fTTa:\.lav Kal ~I 1y?17,rluv }(UTOLKOl'VTU~ 0Hl 70
1

. ,.,J\acrlfijvai {..,., <11,wv. i e. he re~arJs the Dolioues as exileJ Thes·mli.m-Pe]aRgians; auJ rn

this he i, followe,1 lJy C\mon,"c" who atJ.ls th.it Cyzicus w,1s their kin:; in The,saly, and
:h,1t th•J-e who expelle,l them were Aeuliaus. It is therefore nut me1ely a cunfusiou of
11:,mes when ,mother Lite writer~,), calls the Duliunes 'Du lopes'; fur we 11.tve ~eeu
:,heady "08 that the population of s~yros whid1 for Thucydi•k, ·was 'Dolopian' hml hecome
'Pe1a,gian' ,tlre,1,ly for Ephorn°, and r2maine,l so for Scymnus an,l Xicolas.
But there ,Y,lS a quite ,1ifferent acc011nt ,,f the Iloliones/' 9 which descriLe,l them not
,is exiles from Th,,,,al!-, Lut a~ i,;-;-01Koi ee,Tai\wv, and consequ<.:ntlv kinsmen nf Ja,on, and
follow-enemies lJuth oi the expelle,l Pelasgi,ms, anJ of the yryyn,iH of the Cyzicene interior.
This was the\ iew uf Deilodrn,, whum the Sd1nli,1st s,1ys that Apollonins was fullowing. 2rn
These "/'IYEl'<E> ,ue an ,1,1ditional element ,)f complexity in t!te sto1y. _-\.p·,llonim s.:iys that
it was the!- whu tried to l,lo.:kc1tle tl1e Argo in the xuru, J\iµryv during the vi,it tu Cyzicus 011
,m,1 were ,lain l ,\- Her,1des ,m,l !tis cumm,1e,; l,nt Deiluchn, ::I:J ascribes the blocka,1e to the
PelMg1ans rnn, ''-0.,, ,,; r.pu, ,o,, 0errn:\o,, {ct,' &Jv ,te,3e3hiv,o/ 13 and says ZH that the
1 ryyeviu were e,cra-ai\o,, 'iJ. :-.oi\i"m) l,xELpoy,icr,opa,, ancl that it was they who mistook the
.\rgonauts for pi1,ite, ,ul<l pbnne,l the attack on them: an obvious attempt t:} relieve the
The,sali,m L'yzicenes frolll the reproach of that blnnder. Stephanus also ($.I". B,cr,3uw,)
li,tin~ui,hes the uldrncti,·e ,,1,evie, from tlte Pelas:-,:ians, lrnt curiously reckons the
Pel.1.-~ians as ,illid •Jf Heracles in hi, ,1e,trnction of the yryyevi-,.
Con on al,o ,1,1,ls th,H va-upov (i.e. after the fi,c;ht with Jasun) the surviving Doliones i.r.u
T, ppryvwv Kv(iKov µaavforrycrav Ka, Tvpp'7vo, .~v X•piJoll1JTDv <crxov : awl that it was these
· Tyrrheni.ms' whom the 1Iile,ian colonists f.,nncl there. Co11011 therefore ha,l alrn before
him, besides the 'Pelasgic' \'iew ,,f Ephorus, this other· i,,torv which distinguished the
Doli,me, of Cyzicus from 'TyIThenian' Hl'lran,Jen in Hellespont ; and we may well
11eliew, that, ,niting as late as he <lid, he meant by 'Tyrrhenian' to signify much the same
;1, the II,}.acr,ik,;v f/prn of Apolloniu-.

,Ye reach therefore this conclusion. _.\ttractin ancl acceptetl as it was, the Ephoran
Yiew, that the D·,li,mh were Pelasgians from Thessaly, tliJ not wholly eclip-e an alternati,e
le:.;en,l that tl1ey 1,elongcd to the same great Pagasaean r.,h·entnr·<'-cycle as the ~.\rgonauts
themsehi:,; an,l that in their Hellespontine home they and their friemls were exposed to
the atta~k, not merely of half-conquere,l Y'IY•vie, (alm5x0oves) on their own side of the
,rnter, hut also of enemies from the European shore. These enemies Apollonins still calls
· P,,]asgian ·: only a later compiler like Conon uses the Illarine e,1uirnlent 'Tyrrhenian.'
_.\ml this ~li111ps<.: of another tradition dors not stand t1nit,· alone. One of the theories,
\Ye nMy rememLer, to acconnt for the Dolopes of Scyros mitl tlrn 11ten of Sdathos, was that
they ,vere II,J\acryo, /,c 0,;\ikry, ~i.; l3w,!3a.vn,, ws :\oyo,: and "e kno\\ that in the Homeric
_.\ge there were ,1lreatly ',1ttual' Pelasgians as far afield a, Crde. \Ye must remember also
that Pla-"ie an,l Scylace, where Her,·Jotus knew of Pelasgitws surviving and speaking-
, Pelasgic · iu the lifth c<:nttlt'}', are in the immediate ueigl1L11nrh•><ill of Cyzicns itself.
1Iel.t 21 '; moreover h,1, a very ,imilar sng,:eo,tion about the D<1liones themselves, for he
b1ings Loth them and their kin;; Cyzicns not from The,s,tl v or Euboea, but from Thrace,
111,tking them, in fad, almu~t an ttllrn11t:ell guard of our immigrant Pelasgians from the
bame region; so that it i, n11t i111pos,ible tlut here we n11v h ,v,, ,i due tu the origin of
that 'Pela,gian' ance~try or <[ll.llity of the Duliones of C zicns, which attracted the
.tttention of Epliorus, aml leJ to their incorporati,•n in tlte ~re ,t Pela,:,;ian mythology.
It ~eems prol,a1le, thei:, that we may infer that wh:tt .~ present tu the mind of

,.,, _,·a,·,·. n. 213

~dtol. Ap. Kh. i. 987.
'"' Oq,h. Ar!/- 4flj 1~:31Jl. el! ~d,ol. \'R\l.
:.'l" P· ~:ll ,tlJO\"t'. :.!,J ~t·ym11 1 ,s 1 ft~-i, -..ee p. 221 above.

:.,i<J Sehf)L Ap. Rh. i. f1:21, PS7. "16 :\!,·'rt i. l !1, ~- omp,ne :-;trabo's rliscus-
c1· S,·lwl. _\p. Rh. i. 103i.
1
1,ion of the eth· ogrnJJl" ol all this region, sum-
Cl] ,\p. Hh. i. fl-~: 1nari.zeJ on p. 1 ~r; a ho\ e.
1
' " Si:hol. Ap. Rh. i. 11):3;.
 A HrnTOHY f1F THE PEL\i--GL\X THEOHY .
.Apolloniu~ awl ,u111E: "tl1e1 Lite 11riter.c 1, a pidnrc .,f a Tl11 ace, w!J1d1 the- Hellespont,
as in Holller's tirne, ,vros .ipyE< with ,lifficnlty ; and ot an Asiatic cr,,1st watched, like a
'Saxcn $hore,' day and night f<1r the 'iYinged Hat,' from the European side.
Bnt all thi, l,reat!1es a ,1uite different atmr,-pltere f10m tlwt of foe, Alexanclri::m
Library. It presumes the exi,tence of tl,e Thracewanl Pela,µian, of the Catalngne, of whom
no single Greek writer, I think, take,; ::my positil'e account till Stral,o; ,mrl enn Herodotus
only implicitly and rngnely. It comes to ns in a context,-the foundation-legend of
Cyzicus, anJ the ritual '1l'a8os of it, slain foumler-king,-which we can trace in nomenclature
back to Hecataeu:o of :\liletus, aucl comeq uently l ,eyond the perio,l where tl1e Ephoran theory
of a Pelasgian row1ncst begim to predominate on:r all: back, in fact, into days when
Lemnian Pelasgians were known to Le post-Argrmautic. and the Pela,gians of Placie and
Sey lace wen, stil I talking their own language and recounting their own traditions.
It gives us, in fact, a n,ry strong ca,e for belie,·ing that here, at any rate, .Apollonius
is incorporating. almost verbally, a section of a very much olcler A i'gu!lcwtico ; that thi;,.
,!rgo1wutica goes up certainly into the e,1rly days of l\Iilesi,m colonization, prol_1ably intrJ
the Homeric Age ; ancl nry pos$ibly e,·en to a generation which stootl to the Argonauts
and the Doliones as Demodocu, stood to the Trojan i"\'ar.
J. L. l\f.

H.S.-YOL. XXVII. Q
 THREE I~SCRIPTIO~S liRO}I ASIA )II~OR.

1. FRAGME~T of white marble, entire at the upper and right edge only,
measuring -5¼ in. x 4 in. Found among the ruins of Troy on Apr. 20, 1907,
by Mr. F. G. Harman from the 'Argonaut ' : now the property of J. Alison
Glover, Esq., nI.D.

- - - w(v) - - - - -
- - - - typatw - - -
- - ~£¢11-.0<; ':!=.av0!r.-
-rrou EiC T ]/7 -rravrr;vpEt Tw[v
ITava01,va!wv - - a-TEcpav]w0EVTa v<f/ EaT&i[v 5
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ea A - - -

The Llate is late, not earlier than the first century B.C., as is inLlicated by
the absence of the iota adscriptmn (1. 4), and the coarse style of the lettering.
The form EaTWI' in 1. 5 is characteristic of the first century B.c. 1 fl!¢i7\.oc,
2av0t7T7rOV i~ not otherwise known to me. The 7ravrhvpic, or festival
assembly of the Panathenaea at Troy celebrated by the nine cities of the Ilian
union is mentioned in numerous inscriptions. 2 It is impossible to define
further the outline of the original document, as so much is lost.

2-3. ·Two tablets of marble, now in the house of )I. Jeau Gaetano, a silk-
manufacturer, at )Ioudania, on the ,:ea of )Iarmora. Found by him whilst
digging foundations for a wall near the centre of the town. 2. measuring
1 ~leisterhan,-Schwyzer. G,·,111unutik du utt.
-161 ; Ditteul.,~rger, Syll. 2 .50:3 ; Or. G,·. I,1s,:,·.
J,,;du. 3 1'· 15.Jc ; Dittenbcrger, Syll." 3:28, note Se/. -H.J. notes 1 ,m,l 6. Tw[v ?v,•er,, 1rOAEc.:v is
Ll. .d,o ,l po~~n1}1.: re~tOl'cltion.
0
H.g. Durptelcl, T,·,;j,, ,,. 1110,1, ii. p. -l5-l,
 227

about 3 ft. by 1 ft., was bnried some six feet beneath the ,-urface, and was
found in an upright position. Of 3 (which is smaller. about D in. wide and
6 in. high, and found near ::?) nothing further is noted. Both tablets are
ornamented with serpents, 3 having a coiled serpent above in relief, 2 an
extended serpent incised. 2 is brvken into several fragments; but the surface
is wonderfully fresh (the line5 ruled by the stone-cutter being still quite
ob,ious). I nnder:Stand from )I. Gaetano that trace5 of an ancient channel or
waterway were fouwl beside these stunes.' ( X ote by J. A. Glover, Esq., )1.D.)

2.
AfA0HTYXH
ETTHKOn0En
ACKAHTTlil
ETTl.~AYPln
TTEPr AMHNn 5
AlilPYr AK A TOIK oYNTI
rNAIBIO[IOY[To[
YTTEP[ilTHPIA[
THN[TOANANE
[THCENKAITON 10
El[THNOIKOAO
MIANTOTTON
EXAPICATO
T n0En
'A!ya08 TVXTJ' 'E-m7Ko~ 0Erp 'AulCA1]7rUp '£7r1oavp[:o fIEp 0/aµ17vrp Otwpv1a
ICaTOllCOVVTl r.
Kalj3w;, 'lov<TTO', V7rEp (]'CrJTl]pla <; Tl]V <TTOClV Kat TOV EL', Tl]V
olKoooµ{av T07T'OV Jxap[uaro Tff) 0Erp.

rP AKXl~~EKOYN AO~
OP<pANO~YTTEPIAI
A~~nTHPIA~A~
0H<AA~KAHTTlil
AIOPYrEITH 5
'
r paKXt'> ~ ..
-EKovvoo;,
c;:- op..,,avo<;
' "" ' V7iEp
" ' 'c:- '
wta;, '
uwn7pia;, ., '0 17Ka
avE 'A G'IC/\.1]7T't<p
" ~

At[W ]pV"fELT'[J.

On April 1\1, 1!107 a number of ns who were traYelling on board the

'Argonaut' landed at )Ioudania, and thence proceeded by rail to Brusa in
Bithynia. While in )Iomlania our doctor, )Ir. J. Alisou Glornr, )1.D., heanl
of these inscriptions, and went to see them. He took copies and memoranda
Q :2
of bc,tl1: of 3 lie 111adt: abo a 11.,ugli rubbing. These lte has l1awleJ to me
for publication. They are 11ot iu Boeckli's Gc,, 111 1 s, and I do uot remember to
liave seen them before. Tlie inscriptions are entire and legible. The last
line of 3 is slightly obscured by the carwd margin of the stone; but no
(loubt the third latter is .n, and not o. Dr. Glover writes [ carefully in 2:
liis rubbing an1.l copy of 3 give ~- Iota adscript is absent.
Myrlea, renamed by Prusias Apameia after his wife, and now known as
}Ioudania, was iu ancient days. as now, a natural landing place for those who
wanted to reach Prm-a. The distanc-e between the two town~ as the crow flies
is about ten miles : by iail or road. nearer twenty. Prusa itself is noted for its
water-supply, and its batl1s "·ere as famou,, in antiquity (Pliny, Ep. to T,·.
xxiii) as to-day. Of tl1e social l1istory of }I_yrlea we know practically nothing.
Tlie inscriptions before us belong to the seeond century A.D. They indicate
that there ,rn;;, an altar or temple at }Iyrlea to Ai>klepios, and that near his
sanctuary. or through it, there flowed a stream of pure water artificially
brought by a conduit (01wpvg), possibly from the medicinal stream running
down from the springs at Brnsa.
In 2 Asklepios is spoken of as the god of Epidauros and of Pergamon.
Rea1.lers of Aristeides the Orator will fully appreciate the epithet TlEpryaµ'Yjvrji. 3
A Roman named Cains Kaevius Justus makes a free gift to tlie god of a
'stoa," or colonnade, and the site on which he built it. This dedication he
makes vT.i:p cr<,:n17pta,, i.e. probably lie had escaped harm in an epidemic,
and liad attributed his immunity to the favour of the god. 'E7T1JKotp
H1ggests that it was in answer to prayer." It may be noteLl that oiwpvrya
(line 6) is regarded as a le:-s correct form than oiwpvxa, while olKoooµtav is
certainly better Attic thau olK000µ17v (cp . ...-an Herwerden, Lex. s.i-.).
:3, iYhich cannot be much later, and is perhaps earlier, than 2, is a
dedication to the same deity, here called ~1wpV"fEfT17,, by one Gracchis
Secumlns, vT.i:p lo(w; crwn7pta,. Probably he had lost oue or both of his
pare11ts in an epidernic <opcpavo, ), aml attributes his own safety to the favour
of the god. The name Gracchis is unique, so far as I know. Happily the
e\·idence of the marble is beyond question.
The Roman 11ames remind us that Ap:uneia (Myrlea) was a colonia: see
Hanly's note on Ap::nnei.'.l in his edition of Pli",1p's Go;Tcsponrlcncc 1cith TraJan,
p. 1-!8, Ep. xlvii.
E. L. HICKS.

·' Cp. l\1us. 1i. ~6. :~ oa tl:e 11-•latio1t LL·tw1"·211 d,ni..l the l\ir~1e11-, inscr. ~EAT. l~E-8 1 p. 134,
tl,e, nlt, ,tt ,\,rg,nnun dllcl Epid,imu-. Xe,. ~ii.
" I ·1•- ,,1-o F,_,1ul!n d'£11i,[. l'· f.S. Xn. 1-!H
 [Pu.n:s XY., XYI.]

THERE are few places in Greece ,rliich possess the c0rnbi11ed clw.nns of
uatural beauty and of historic association to the same extent as }lonern.-asia,
The great rock which rises out of the sea near the ancient Epidauros Limera
is not only one of the most picturesque sites of the Peloponnese, but has a
splernlid reconl of heroic indepemlence, which entitles it to a high place in the
list of the world's fortresses ( Figs. 1, ~). }IonetuntSia's importance is, huwe..-er,
wholly mediaeval; and its history has hitherto neYer been written; for the
painstaking brochure of the patriotic }Ionemvasiote deputy and ex-.:\linister
K. Papamichalopoulos, ,ms c•m1posed before modern research rendered it
possible to draw upon the original authoriLies at Venice ancl elsewhere. In
the present paper I have emlea..-oured to state briefly what, iu the presellt
state of Greek mediaeYal studies, is k110in1 about tliis interesting city during
the Frankish period.

:'::1;:a-~.'••-··' :
. '
'""" ,•,,,.,,

N
Frn. 1. --~I<JXE}li".hl.l. l'l:CJJ! I IIE L.\:\"D.
(Phu/0)1',1pl, 1,y JI,·,. J[,/lu )

.At the time of the Frankish Conr1uest of the rest ,)f Greece, }Ionemn1sia
was already rt place of considerable importance. E,·en if we reject the state-
ment of the fifteenth century historian, Phrantzes, 1 himself a 1w.tiYe of the
place, that the Emperor ~Iamice 11ml raised it to the rnuk of the ;3-Hh }Ietro-
politan see-a statement contn,LlicteLl by an ecclesiastical document of 1:397
-we know at least that it was eYen then the seat of n Greek bishopric,
whose holder remained a suffragan of Corinth~ till the Latins capturell the
1
P. 39S. (;,•,_,._,,_•,t J/e,,'f/ _.f, ~-·, 1i. :!.S7; Dori1theo5 of
:.! )Iikl0sich nwl :\Inller, _1,:/,t ,_/ J!,r'.j ,, ,(a ~Io11, 1an,ia. B,/31.'.uv
0
I1TTop11,uv (d, lSl.J.), 39,.
:.?30 "\YILLL-Ur :mLf.Elt

latter city in 1210, The Cornneni li::td continnecl tl1e liberties of a connnunity
so favourably situated, and the local aristocracy of :Uonemrnsia enjoyed the
privilege of self-goYernment. Thanks to the public spirit of its inhabitants,
the ·wisdom of the local magnates, and the strength of its natural defences,
·which made it in the ~Iiddle Ages the Gibraltar of Greece, it had repelled
the attack of the Normans from Sicily in the middle of the twelfth century.
Fifty years later it was a busy sea-port town, whose ships ·were seen at the

....

.
....
-

.,.
;t_~

"

-~
i.

r··
...'.
.,

Piraeus by Michael AkomirnUo;,, the last 1Ietropulitm1 of Ati1ens before the

Conquest, and whose great artistic treasure, tl1e. famous picture of Our Lord
being 'dragged,' which ha5: ginn its name to the 'E;\KoµEvo, church, attracted
the coYetuusness of the Emperor Isaac II?
As might ha;-e been expecthi from its position and history, Uonemvasia
was the last spot in tlie Peloponnese to acknowledge the Frankish supremacy.
Geoffrey I. Yillelinrdonin ha1.l contenthl himself perfvrce with sending a body
 ~IO~E)[Y ASIA. 231
of troops to raitl tl1e country as far as the causeway, or µ01117 fµf]a<ru;,
which leads to the great rock-fortress and from which its name is
derived; 4 and his son Geoffrey II. seems to have meditated the con-
quest of the place; 5 but it was reserved for the third of the Yillehardouins,
soldierly Prince William, to hoist the croLr ancree of his family over the
'sacred rock' of Hellenism, ·which was in uninterrupted communication by
sea with the successor of Byzantium, the Greek Emperor of Nicaea,6 and was
therefore a constant source of annoyance to the Franks of the Peloponnese.
The Prince, after elaborate preparations, began the siege in 1245. He sum-
moned to his aid the great vassals of the Principality-Guy I. of Athens, who
owed him allegiance for Nauplia and Argos; the three barons of Euhoea;
Angelo Sanndo, Duke of X axos, with the other lords of the Cyclades, and the
veteran Count Palatine of Cephalonia, :Matteo Orsini, ruler of the island-
realm of Odysseus! But the Prince of Achaia saw that without the narnl
assistance of Yenice, which had taken care that his principality should not
become a sea-po,Yer, he could never capture the place. He accordingly
obtained the aid of four Venetian galleys, and then proceeded to invest the
great rock-fortress by land and water. For three long years the garrisou held
out, 'like a nightingale in its cage,' as the Chronicler quaintly says-and tl1e
simile is most appropriate, for the place abounds with those songsters-till
all supplies were exhausted, and they had eaten the very cats and mice.
Even then, however, they only surrendered on condition that they should be
excused from all feudal services, except at sea, and should even in that case be
paid. True to the conciliatory policy of his family, William wisely granted
their terms, and then the three arclwns of !Ionemvasia, Mamonas, Daimon-
oyannes, and Sophian6s, advanced along the narrow causeway to his camp and
offered him the keys of their town. The conqueror recefred them with the
respect of one brave man for another, loaded them with costly gifts, and gave
them fiefs at Vatika near Cape .Malea. A Frankish garrison was installed in
the coveted fortress; and a Latin bishop, Oddo of Verdun, at last occupied
the episcopal palace there, which had been his (on paper) ever since
Innocent III. s had organised the Latin see of :Monemvasia as one of the
suffragans of Corinth.
The Frankish occupation lasted, hO\Yever, only fourteen years, and has left
no marks on the picturesque town. Buchon, indeed, who spiell the Ville-
hardouin arms on the Gorgoepekoos church at Athens, thought that he had
discovered the famous croi:c c111cdc on one of the churches. 9 He apparently
meant the 'E;\.KoµEvo~ Church, which the late Sir T. ,Yyse called and
.:\furrny's Handuool..· still calls St. Peter's-a name not now known in Monem-
vasia, but derived perhaps from an inscription to a certain Dominits Pdrus,

4
To XpoVLKOV 'TOV Mop<6JS, 1. 205;;,
" Ibid. II. 2630. 2644.
6 Ibid. 11. 2i65-P.
7 Ibid. 11. 2S91-6 ; Romanos, rpanavbs
Z~p~·11s. 136. The .French nr;ion of tlie
·Chronicle· omit~ the Naxian anrl l't·phalonian
contiugents.
8 Epistolat, vol. ii. p. 622; Les Registr"·s
d'Jmwcent Ir. YOl. iii. 306, 3\li.
" La Grice Continentale, p. -112 ; Sir T.
·wyse, E,xursiun i,1to the Peloponnesus, i. 6.
Cf. ~Ir. Tozer in J.H.S. iv. 233-6.
 "\YILLLDI }!ILLER

whose remains 'lie in peace' hard by. One church in the town, 'Our Lady
of the }Iyrtle,' bears, it is true, a cross with anchored work below, anJ four
stars above the d00r. But this church, as I was informed and as the name
implies, was founded by people from Cerigo, whose patron saint is the ITava7{a
)lvpTtDtWTta-a-a (Pl. XV. A). The capture of the town by the Franks is,
however, still remembered at ::\Ionemvasia, and local tradition points out the
place on the mainland where Yillehardouin left his cavalry. One pathetic
event occuned ut the rock during the brief Frankish period-the visit of the
last Latin Emperor of Constantinople, Baldwin II., in 1261, on his way from
his lost capital to I taly. 10 In the following year 1Ionemvasia was one of the
castles ceded to his successor, the Emperor }lichael VIII. Palaioh\gos, as the
1 ansom of Prince William of ~.\..chaia, captured by tbe Greeks three years
earlier after the fatal battle of Pelagonia.
The mediaeval importance of }lonemvasia really dates from this retro-
cession to the Byzantine Emperor in 1262, when a Byzantine province was
-established in the south-east of the 3Iorea. It not only became the seat of an
Imperial governor, or KE<pa?c1j, but it was the landing-place where the Imperial
troops were disembarked for operations against the Franks, the port where
the Tzakones and the C:a31;w1iloi, or half-castes, of the Peloponnese enlisted
for service iu the Greek navy. During the war which began in 1263 between
:\Iichael VIII. and his late captive, we ac..:onlingly frequently find it men-
i:ioned; it was thither that the Genoese transports in the Imperial service
conveyed the Greek ti oops; it was thither, too, that the news of the first
breach of, the peace was carried post-haste, anLl thence communicated to
L'onstantinople; it was there that the Imperial generals took up their head-
•1uarters at the outset of the campaign; and it was upon the :Monemvasiotes
that the combatants, ,Y11en they were reconcile,1, agreed to lay the blame for
the war.11 C nder the shadow of the Greek flag, ~Ion em vasia became, too,
nne of the most llangerous lairs of corsairs in the Levant. The great local
famili2s did not disdain to enter the profession, and ,ve read of both the Daimon-
oy,innai and the )Iamornides in the report of the Venetian jmlges, who drew
np a long statement in 127::, of the L1epredations caused by pirates to Venetian
..:ommerce in the Levant. On one occasion the citizens looked calmly 011
while a flagrant act of piracy was being committed in their harbour, which, as
the port of shipment for ::\Ialmsey wine, attracted corsairs who were also
connoisseursY Moreover, the Greek occupation of so important a position
,rns fatal to the Venetian lords of the neighbouring islands, no less than to
Venetian trade in the Aegean. The chief sufferers 1Yere the two Marquesses
of Cerigo and Cerigotto, mem hers of the great families of Y enier and Yiaro,
who had occupied those islands after the Fourth Crusade. It would appear
from fl confused passage of the Italian ~Iemoir on Cerigo, that the islanders,

,, TO XpJt'Liiliv TOU )Iopfws~ 1. 1 ·JiJt.3; L,' L, er, 1'}J.J, 50:2ti, 55tJD. ~,5TtJ.
,/,_, la Cuil'J''C'3fe. p. ~I. :
2
1-~",I,.-: }/.1.1•1111l ~lll~t,·u 1L'1{1E ,1! _\.l,t. ii.
11 Les lf 11J1\t,·,sd'l~,i11ui111-. ii. 11)1) 13-11: TD e. xi L 161, 102-:], 204, 215, 220. 22,;, 2!:3.
Xpov,,c(}y Tu~ ~lopE~s, il l,j.)-1, 1.)17, -15""0, 1.-•'L
 )IO~E)IY ASL\..

impatient at the treatment which they received from their Latin lorLl, the
descendant, as he boasted, of the island-goddess Venus herself, sent a Llepu-
tation to invoke the aid of the Greek governor of the new Byzantine proviuce
in the }loreaP At any rate, the famous cruise of Licario. the upstart Italian
of Negroponte who went owr t,) the U-reeks, temporarily ended the rule of
the Venetian ~Iarq uesses. ~\ governor was sent to Cerigo from :\Ion em vasia :
but ere long }Iichael VIII. conferred that island npon the eminent :\lonem-
vasiote archo,i, Paul }lonoyannes, ,vho is clescribe,1 in a \r enetiau cl0cument as
being in 1275 ' the vassal of the Emperor an<l captain of Cerigo.' :\Iono •
:yannes fortified the island, where his tomb was discowred during the Briti511
protectorate, and it remained in the possession of his family till l :30!J, when
intermarriage between the children of its Greek arnl Latin lorils restored
Cerigo to the YeniEri.1-l
The Byzantine Emperors naturally rewardeiJ a comrnunitv so useful to
them as that of Monemvasia. :\Iichael VIII. grnnteLl its citizeus rnluable
fiscal exemptions; his pious son and succe::sor, An,lronikos II. not only con-
firmed their privileges and posse~sion;,, bnt foumle1l the church of tlie Di\'in,·
"~is,lom which still stands in the castle. The adjoinillg cloister has fallen iu
ruins; the Turks after 1540 convertell the church, like the more famous Santa
Sophia of Constantinople, iuto a mosque, the ,;1 ilu11l, of which may still be
traced, and smashed all the heads of the saints which once mlornell the church
-an edifice reckoned as ancient e\·en in the .Jays of the Yelletian occupation,
,vhen a Monemvasiote family had the.J11s pafru1i,it,,, over it (Pl. XT. B). Bnt
a fine Byzantine plaque over the dour-two peacocks aml two lambs-still
preserves the memory of the Byzantine connexiuu. Of ..A.rnlrunikos II. we
have, too, another )Ionemvasiote menlt)rial-the GolLlen Bull of 120:3, by
which he gave to the :\Ietropolitan the title of· Exarch of all the Pelopon-
nesos,' with jurisdiction over eight bishoprics, some, it is true, still i,1 pcut ib,1..;
111.fldelinm, as well as the titular )Ietropolitan throne of Si1le, anLl contirme,l
all the rights and property of his diocese, which \HlS rniseLl tu be the tentl1 of
the Empire and extended, at any rate on paper, right acrnss the peninsula to
'Pylos, which is called A nuinos '-a convincing prouf of the error m;1Lle Ly
Hopf in supposing that the name of ~anuino aro,-;e from the Xavarre:-e
company a century later. The Emperor lauds in this interesting docmnent,
which bears his portrait and is still preserved in the Xational Library and (in
a copy) in the Christian ~-\.rchaeological )lusemn at Athens, the conYenience
and safe situation of the town, the number of it, inliabita.nb, their atHuence
anJ. their technical skill, their seafaring qualities, and their 1levution to his
throne and person. His grandson aml namesake, Andrunikc,s III. in 13::i~.
granted them freedom from market-dues at the Peloponnesian fairsY· But a
city so prosperous was sure to attract the C(Wetou-; i.slances ot enemie-;.

13 Ailll11w: Jic11w1·1'"' 1l1. C'(,·l~/•), apad S<ltlia-.,, C,·01wl,_jyi.11 i,~. l Jl J1ldo, i°iJl. 1,;,: H11Jit ,,_,,'fl,
1

;-.1V1)!,L<<a 'E.\-\1)>tK~s 'Irrrnpias. Yi, 301. Ers,~ll un1l Gru1A'r, lxxxv. :}10.
H Sa11uLl1l, Isto1 /o dd ltey,10, apud llupf, " )ltklo,i,·h u11,l )lull~r. v1,. ed. \". }:,~,-•jl ;
Chruniqu1;s ( ,' ,·1_c·o-n_1m11 ,u.'s, 127 ; l~Jnfrs lt,;ru 111, 3~ftl_ 400; l)or/,thcr}')id )l1J!1,_•·:1~·..1-.1J.,
Phr,UJt!'.~--,
.Au::,t,·ia1'tr1'tfi1J, Al,t. ii. n. xn-. 1 ' l ; ~.lll~(JYino, B1p,\[ov 'Irr-.or'!'<6v, !fJO.
 W ILLLDI )IILLETI

Acconlingly, in 1:Wi, Roger de Lluria, the famous a1lrniral of King James of

Aragon, on the excuse that the Emperor had failed to pay the subsidy
promised by his father to the late King Peter, <lescended upon Monemvasia,
and sacked the lower town without a blow. The cli'clwn;; and the people took
refuge in tl1e impregnable citmlel, leaYing their property and their l\Ietrn-
politan in the power of tl1e enemy. 10 Ten years later, another Roger, Roger
de Flor, the leader of the Catalan Grand Company, put into l\Ionemvasia on
his way to the East on tliat memorable expedition which was destined to ruin
'the pleas:rnnce of the Latins' in the Levant. On this occasion the Catalans
were naturally Ou their good bel1aviour. l\Ionemrnsia belonged to their
new employer, the Emperor Andronikos; it had been stipulated that they
should recein: the first instalment of their pay there; and l\Inntaner 1• tells
us that the Imperial authorities gaw them a courteous reception and pro-
vided them with refreshments, inclnding prob,1bly a few barrels of the famous
l\lahm,eY.
l\Ionemvasia fortunately escaped the results of the Catalan expedition,
"hich proved so fatal to the Duchy of Athens and profoundly affected the
"~
X orth and est of tlie l\Iorea. Indeed, in the early part of the fourteenth
century the corsairs of the great rock seemed to h,we actually seized the
classic island of Salamis under the eyes of the Catalan rulers of Athens,
whose narnl forces in the Saronic Gulf had been purposely crippled by the
jealuus \~ cnetian Go,·ernme11t. At any rate we find Salamis, which had
prHiously belonged to Bonifacio da Y erona, the baron of Karystos in Enboea,
awl liaLl pa~scLl ,Yith the liaml of his daughter and heiress to Alfonso
Faclrique. tlie head of tl1e terrible Catalan Company in Attica, now paying
tribute to the Byzantine gm·ernor of }Ionenwasia.1' \Yhen, however,
U,1, ards t lie end of tlie fourteentli century, the Greeks began to recc,ver most
ot tl1e Pelopo1n1ese, the city whicl1 lwd been so rnluable to tliem in the earlier
days of the recum1uest of the Morea LaLl to compete ·with formidable rirnls.
Iu 130T, when Theodore I. Palaioh',gos obtained, after a desperate struggle,
the great fortress of Corintli, ,diic-11 had been his wife"s dowry from her
father, X erio Acciajnuli, his fir,-t aet was to restore the Jletropolitan see of
tliat ancient city, a11cl the first clernand of the restored l\Ietropolitan was for
tl1e restitution to l1im b,· his brother of Monemvasia of the two suifraoau
bishoprics of Zemenos a·Hcl .\Iaina, ,d1ich had been giYen to the latt~r's
preLlecessor after the Latin conquest of Corinth.1'1 This demand was granted,
allll we are not surprised to hear that the Monemrnsiotes were disaffected
to the Despot, under whom such a slight liad been cast upon their Church.
The }loreat 1 1 ;-clzuilf< at tl1is period ,Yere iutensely independent of tl1e
Despot of :\Iistr:1, ereu tliouglt the latter was the brother of the Emperor.
Tlu:- most 11nruly of them all was Paul Jlamo11(13 of ~lonenwasia, wh0

lti L1..· Li ,·1 c (1, la Co,11Jtl• ,f,_\ :_;,_;:J : L,!,rc, d,_, /,_.:? 11 Ch:-::. 1~1£1, ~01.
J,:,.7,,_,,. 10;; )[uutauer, C',·o,u,p· 1. L11. 117. 1
~ Thoma.s, D,ploul'.:f_f/11'l t~ltl T..e,ittv-L-:t(l,/l-
n11tltol111Il3.t_'lb di_' xl'Ol'a::-tlL) Ullll Xi1 ,_.lau-.. t:,u,,i1. i. 12~.
~l t ciali-., 111~d :\fn1.1tori r.,,,,. ]', l. :')·,·,·111' . .\.ll~-
1 11 1' 1 JI1klu-:-id1 nu,l JI dkr. '·'-'·
1
1
] 1-..:-; ; X. £1[,fi.
 )IOSE)IYASIA. 235

beloHgell to the great lucal family which had been to the fore in the days of
Yillelianlouin. This man held the office of 'Grand-Duke ' or Lord High
Admiral in the Byzantine hierarchy of officials and claimed the hereditaiy
right to rule as au imlepemlent princelet owr his native city, of which his
father had been Imperial governor. \Yheu Theodore asserted his authority, and
ex:pellecl the haughty m·clwn, the latter did not hesitate to arraign him before
the supreme authority of those degenerate days-the Snltan Bajazet I. who
on1ered his immediate restoration by Turkish troops-a humiliation alike
for the Greek Despot and for the sacred city of Hellenism."" Theodore had,
indeed, at one time thouglit of bestowing so mn·uly a community upon a
Yenetian of tried merit; and, in HHJ, after the death of Paul"s son, the
Republic appears actually to have come into possession of the coveted rock
and its surroundings-then a valuable commercial asset because of the
.:Ualmsey which was still produced there."1
It ,ms at this period that .Monemvasia produced two men of letters,
George Plmmtzes and the .Monk Isidore. To the latter we O\\"e a series of
letters, one of which, addressed to the Emperor Manuel II. on the occasion of
his famous ;-isit to the :'.\Iorecl in 141\ describes l1is pacification of Maina and
his abolition of the barbarous custom of cutting off the fingers and toes of the
slain, which the }foinates had inheritecl from the Greeks of Aeschylus and
Sophocles. He also alludes to the Greek inscriptions which he saw at
Yitylo."" Of Plirantzes, the historian of the Turkish conquest, the secretary
and confiLlant of the Palaiolt',goi, the clewr if somewhat unscrupulous
diplomatist, who, after a busy life, lies buried in the quiet church of S8.
Jason and Sosipater at Corfo, it is needless to speak. In the opinion of the
writer, Phrantz(·s should hold a high place in Byzantine history. His style
is clear and simple, compared with that of his contemporary Chalkokonclf·les,
the ornate Herodotus of the new Persian Conquest ; he knew men and
things; he was no mere theologian or rhetorician, but a man of afE1irs; arnl
he wrote with a na'irde, "·hich is as amusing as it is surprising in one of his
profession. .l\Ionenwasia may be proud of having produced such a man, who
has placed in his history a glowing account of his birthplace. \Ye hear too
iu I-HO of a certain George, caHed 'Count of Corinth' but a native of
l\Ionemvasia, who haLl a fine library, and among the many Peloponnesian
calligraphists, the so-called '~Iurmures,' found later on in Italy there were
some l\Ionem ,·asiotes. c:;
The Venetians did not, on this occa:;ion, lung retain l\Ionemvasia. A
few yenrs later we fiml it in the possession of the Despot Theodore II.
Palaiologos/4 who ratified its ancient privileges. All the Despofs subjects,
whether freemen or serfs, were permittell to enter or learn tbis important

"" Phr,mtzi\s, 57: )Lmm-1 Palrriolvgos, Tltco-
tlun· Despot: Laudrdlo F1u2el_,1·is, opud ~ligne,
Pati-olo1ia Grace,-,, ch·i. 2:!S-[ 1 : Chalkokondyle,,
80.
"
1
Misti, liii. fol. H, :!56; h·i. fol. 76 v.,
cited l,y Ho1•f. op. cit. lxxxvi, ,!.l.
22 N<us 'Eil.il.11vo.uvf,µ.i.:v, i. 269; ii. 181.
~-' Montfancon, Pul!Jaoy;·aphia G,-o,w1, 81, 09;
'Eil.il.11vo,uvf,,u.i.:v, 336-46.
e-1 :\Iiklo;,ich und Mi1ller, v. 171--1; ITapvao--
a-6s, vii. 47:2-6.
 "\YILLLDI :.\!ILLER

city \\·ithout let or l1imlrance. except only the llangerous denizens of

Tzakonia and Yatika. whose character had uot altered in the two hundred years
wliieh had elapsed since the time of Villehardouin. The citizens, their
beasts, and their sl1ips were exempt from forced labour; and, at their special
re,111est, the Despot confinnell the local custom, by which all the property of
a :\fonemvasiote who died without relatives was devoted to the repair of the
ca-;tle; while, if he liacl only distant relati.-es. one-thinl of his estate was rese1Tell
for that pnrpose (PL XVI. _.\.,. This system of death duties ( To af3u,,T!Kwv, as it
was called) was continued by Theodore's brother and successor, Demetrios,
by whom 11onem.-asia was de:,cribed as 'one of the most useful cities nnder
my rule.' 2:, Such, indeed, he found it to be, ,Y11en. in 1..J.58, Mohammed II.
made l1is first punifo·e expedition iuto the }Iorea. On the approach of the
great Sultan, the Despot flell to the rock of }Ionemrnsia. It was the
ardeut desire of the Conqueror to capture that famous fortress. 'the
strongest of all cities that we know,' as the contemporary Atheniau
historian, Chalkokoncl_des,"'; called it. Bnt his advisers represented to him
the difficult nature of the country which he would hase to tmrnrse, so he
pru,Jently desisted from the enterprise. Two years later, when J\Iohammed
II. \·isite<l the ::\Iorea a second time and finally destroyed Greek rule in that
peninsula, ::\Ionenwasia again held ont successfully. After sheltering Deme-
trios against an attack from his treacherous brother Thomas, the town gave
refuge to the ,\·ife anll daugbter of the former. Demetrios had, however,
promisetl to give his daughter in marriage to the great Sultan; anll Isa, son
of the Pasha of Uskub, aml }latthew Asan, the Despot's brother-in-law, were
accordingly seut to demand the surreucler of the eity and of the two
prince;-;ses, whom it contained. The }Ionemn1siotes <lid, inlleell, hand over
the t\rn Imperial ladies to the en.-oys of the Sultan aml the Despot; but,
relying on their immense natural defences. animated by the sturdy spirit
(Jf independence which ha,1 so long <listinguishell them, and inspirell by the
ex.unple uf their go\·ernor, )Ianuel P.1laiolr'.go:-, they bade them tell
}l,>liammed not to lay sacrilegious hands on a city which Goel ha,1 meant
to he invincible. The Snltan is reported to have admired their courage, and
\\ isely refrained from attacking the impregnable fortress of rnelliaeval
Helteuisrn. As Demetrios was the prisoner of the Snltan, the Governor
proclaimed Thomas as his liege:lonl: but the latter, a fugitive from Greece,
was incapable of mai11tai11ing his sovereignty and triell to exchange it with
the Sulta11 ±~Jr another sea-sille place."' A passing Catalan corsair. one
Lope de Baldaja. was then inYitecl to occupy the rock; but the liberty-loving
iul1abitauts soon drove out the petty tyiant wlwm they had summoned to
their aid, and, with the consent of Thomas. placed their city under the
protection of his patron. the Pope. Piu'i II. gladly appointc,1 both spiritual
an,l te1npural g•J\·crnor.~ uf the t;Jrtrcss \Yhich had s0 l,mg been tlie -;tronglwlLl

~) J/1111. iii. :!5~. "

7
1 'halkokonu_{·J,.,. 4i6, 4S5; l'hr,llltz,,,. 3%-
"' I'. 4 l~. ~~,: ~1-aniln~ino (e,1. 15;i1 \ 14 ,;.
 237

of Orthodoxy, awl (Jf tlmt nationalis111 ,1 ith wl1icl1 OrtlwcluxY was

identical."5
But the papal flag did not wave long OYer .Mouemrnsia. The Orthodox
Greeks soon grew tired of forming part of the Pope's temporal dominion, and
preferred the rule of Venice, the stro11gest maritime power interested in the
Levant, whose goYernors were well known to be 'first Venetians and then
Catholics.' The outbreak of the Turco-Venetian "\Yar of 1463, and the
appearance of a Venetian fleet in the Aegean, gave the citizens their oppor-
tnnity. The Pope, as Phrantzes informs u::;, had no wish to giYe up the
place; but he was far away, his representatfre was feeble, the flag of Venice
"·as for the moment triumphant in Greek waters, and accordingly in l-!63 or
146.J., the inhabitants admitted a Venetian •garrison. On September 21,
l-Hi4, the Senate made proYision for the gornrnment of this new dependency.
A Pudestd, was to be elected for two years at an annual salary of 500 gold
ducats, this salnry to be paid every three months out of the reYenues of the
newly-conquered island of Lemnos.H, Six months later, it was decreed that
in case there was no money available for the pmpose at Lemnos, the Podesta
;..hould receive his salary from the Cretan treasury."•' From that time to
1-HO Monemni.sia remained a Venetian colony. Once, indeed, a plot was
organised in the ancient city of the Palai6logoi for the purpose of wresting
the place from the claws of the Lion of St. Mark. Andrew Palaiol6gos, the
still more degenerate son of the degenerate Thomas, had, in 1494, transferred
all his Imperial rights 9-nd claims to King Charles VIII. of France, then
engaged in his expedition to Naples, in the Church of San Pietro in Uontorio
at Rome. In accordance with this futile arrangement, his partisans at
.Monemrnsia, where the Imperial name of Palaiologus was still popular,
schemed to deliver the city to his French allyY0 But the plans of Charles
VIII , and with them the plot at Monemvasia, came to nought. Venice
remained mi:stress of the Virgin fortress.
Down to the peace of 1502-3, )Ionemrnsia seems to ham been fairly
prosperous under Venetian rule. By the Turco-Venetian treaty of l .J.7!J she
ha<l been allowed to retain the dependency of Vatika 31 in the neighbourhood
of Cape ~Ialea, which had been captured from the Turks in l 4G3, and where
her citizens had long possessed property. But the territories of 1Ionemrnsia
were terribly restricted after the uext Turco-Venetian war: she had then
lost her outlying castles of Ramp:mo and Vatika, from -which the ecclesi-
astical authorities derived much of their dues; and we find the inhabitants
petitioning the Repul,lic for the redress of their grievances, and pointing out

cs Magno, Annali 1-encli, apud Hopf, Clu·o,1-
iquc:1 Gd,co-roma11cs. 203--! ; Pii II. Cu1,1-
111cntari, 103-10-!.
" 9 Phrantzes, 415 j lllngno, 20-! j Satha,. Yi.
p;:; ; Chalkokondyles, 556. Regina, fol. 52, ;"i6
(tor a copy of which I am indebted to Mr.
Horatio F. Brown: see Appendix). The actna:
,late is uncertain; Phrantzes aIHl Mag110 gi1·e
1-16-!, and the Venetian document al,01·e-,1uoted
points to that year; but Malatesta's see1etary
in his account of the w,,r (S:ithas, l.c.) 1•uts it
in 1463, uefore the siege of Corinth.
so Sanudo, Dial"ii, i. ,03.
:a P1etlelli, Co;macmuriali, \'. 22S-30, 2:38-!l,
241 ; )lik!o,ich u. Mimer, op. cit. iii. 2!'3-30~.
238 WILLL\11 }IILLER

that this last delimitation of their frontiers liad deprived them of the lands
which they lrn.ll been wont to sow. The rock itself prt)L1uced nothing, and
accordingly all their supplies of corn had now to be imported throngh the
Turkish possessions.32 .As for the famous vintage, whicl1 had been the delight
of Western connoisseurs, it was no longer produced at }lalvasia, for the Turks
did not cultivate the Yineyards which were now in their hands, and most of
the so-called ':Malmsey,' nihil de Jiolfasia habcns scd ;w,ncn, as worthy Father
Faber S'.1,YS, had for some time come from Crete or 1Io<lon,:3'3 till the latter
place, too, became Turkish. But, in spite of these losse;:, .oionemrnsia still
remained what she had been for centuries-an impregnable fortress, the

FIG. :J.-K.1srnn.
(Plwtoyraph &y JI,·. ,J. J. E. Trac·.)

Gibraltar of Greece. The Y enetians renewed the system, ,vhich had prevailed
under the Despots of the 1Iorea, of devoting one of the local imposts to the
repair of the_ walls; the \~ eneti:m Podesflt,, who lived, like the military
governor, up m the castle, seems to have been a popular official; and the
Republic had wisely confirmed the :-pecial pri\·ileges granted by the Byzantine
Emperors to the Church aml Community of this fonure,,.1. city (Fig. 3). Both
a Greek Metropolitan an,J a Latin Archbishop continued to take their titles
from )lonemvasia, and the most famous of these prelates was the eminent
Greek scholar, Marcus ~Iousol1.ros. It is interesting to note that in 1.5~1
32 S:1tha~, Mv77µ,,ct 'EJ.l\77v<1<17s 'I,nopias. iv.
fol. 182 ; f,,bcr, Ecr,J,dorinm, iii. 314. Tl,e
230: Sanutlo, IJll,l'll, xxix. -:iS2. name was ,o ],:,ng 1•reserYe1l that a wine-,hor in
..,3 Feyc1abew1. E .-hb,ldt d,_'s ll'-t'lt;J..;,,~ Lr'tu_l~,
1_ 1 1
YenetiJn Jialec: w,1; ,_dlle,.l • )Ialrn,ia.· -
 Pope Leo X. had a scheme for foun,ling an academy for the sttllly uf the
Greek language out •if the rcwnues of whichever of these sees first fell
rncant, as Arsenios Apostolei', at tliat time )Ietropolitan, was a le11rneil
Greek and a F oiate, and in both capacities a prime fa,·ourite of the classi-
cally cultured Poutift: In 1.5~4, howHer, despite the thunders uf the
Oecumenical P,ltriarcli, the Greek an<l the Italian prelates agreed Grnong
themselws that the former should retain the see of )Ionemrnsia and that
the latter should take a Cretan diocese.'14 The connexion between 't,he great
Greek island' awl this rocky peninsula was now close. The Greek priests of
Crete, who had formerly gone to the Y enetian colonies of 1Iodon and Coron
for consecration, after the loss of those colonies in 1500 came to )Ionemvasia;
the Cretan exchequer continued to contribute to the expenses of the latter;
and judicial appeals from the Podesllt of Malmsey lay to the colonial author-
ities at C,mdia, instead of being remitted to Yenice; for, as a :\Ionemrnsiote
deputation once plainti.-ely said, the expenses of the long journey had been
defrayed by pawning the chalices of the churches. E.-en now Monem.-asia
is remote from the ·world; in those Venetian days she was seldom .-isited,
not only because of her situation, but because of the fear which --hips
captains had of her inhabitants. 35
The humiliating peace of 15±0, which closed the Turco-Venetian war of
1537, closed also the history of Venice in the }Iorea till the brief revival
at the close of the seventeenth ceDtury. This shameful treaty cost the
Republic her 1'rn last possessions on the mainland of Greece-~auplia
and Monemvasia, both still uncaptnre<l and the latter scarcely assailed
by the Turkish forces. 30 Admiral l\Iocenigo was sent to break as best he
could to her loyal subjects the sad news that the Republic had abandoned
their homes to the Turks. The Yenetian envoy, if we may belieYe the speech
which Paruta puts into his month, repe,lted to the weeping people the ancient
adage, ubi benc, ibi pattia, arnl pointed out to them that they would be better
off in a new abode less exposed than their native cities had been to the Tmkish
peril. In Nowmber a Venetian fleet arrived in the beautiful bay of Xa·,1plia
and off the sacred rock of 1\Ionernvasia to remove the iiullliers, the anillery,
and all the inhabitants who wished to live under Venetian rule. Then
the banner of the Evangelist was lowered, the keys of the two last Venetian
fortresses in the Morea were handed to Kassim Pasha, ancl the receipts for
their transfer were sent to Veuicc. 37
The inhabitants of the two cities had been loy,11 to Venice, and Venice
was loyal to them. The first idea of transporting t11e )Ionem vasiotes to the
rocky island of Cerigo-then partly a Venetian colony and partly under the
rule of the great Venetian family of Yenier, which boasted its descent
from Venus, the fabled goddess of Kythera-was abandoned, in deference

3• Sanudo, Dia,-ii, vii. 714 ; xxiii. 536; nfr. S,ithns, i\~. :?:24, 227 ~29, :2:34 ; Lan1L1n~ky, Li:s
1

6ti9 ; xxv. 64 ; xxix. 40:! ; xxxi. 227 ; xxx,·. Scads de l'Ewt de rcnue. p. 059; Feyerabernl,
:363; xliv. 475 ; lv. 29'3; Neos 'EJ\J\1]vo,u11~."""'• op. ,:it. fol. 112.
iii. 56. 3ti Predelli, CG,u11lC111on·,_dt, vi. :2.31:). :2:3S .
35 Sanudo, Diarii, xi. 349 ; xxxiii. 366 ; ..:;- ParutL1; H,;)! )rll1. 1~, ,1ctia,u.t, i. -151<3.
1
 l\IOXK\l ,- .\SIA.

to the eloquent protests of the :Metropolitan, and lands were assigned

to the exiles in the more fertile colonies of the Republic. A commission
of fiye nobles was appointed to consider the claims, and provide for the
r,ettlement, of the sfi'udioti, or light horsemen frorn Kauplia and :Monem-
Yasia, who had fought like heroes against the Turks; and this commission
sat for several years, for the claimants were numerous and not all genuine. 38
Some, like the ancient loc-al family of Daimonoyannes, formerly lords of
Cerigo, received lands in Crete;Jv ·where various members of the Athenian
branch of the great Florentine family of tlie ~Iedici, which had been settled
for two hundred years at Nauplia, also found a home. Others were removed
to Corfu, where they soon formed an integral part of the Corfiote population
and where the name of these Stradioti is still preserved in a locality
of the island ; while others again were transplanted to Cephalonia, Cyprus, or
Dalmatia. Not a few of them were soon, however, smitten with home-
sickness; they sokl their new lands and returned to be Turkish subjects at
N auplia ancl oionemvasia. 40
The Venetian fortifications; the old Yenetian pictures on the eikonostasis
c,f the 'E?..Koµwo, church: the quaint Italian chimneys, and the well-head up

FIG. 4 -,\R~l~ OX .WELL-HEAD rn THE CASI LE.

( Shct,:h by 1llr8. Milla.)

in the c::i.stle, ,vhiclt bears the ,vinged lion of St. ~lark, two private coats of
arms, the date :UDXI\~ and the initials SR llpon it, the latter those of Sebas-
tiano Renier, Pudlsftt frum 1:no t,> 1512, still speak to us of this first Venetian
occupation, when the ancient Byzantine city, after the brief vicissitudes
of French aml Papal government, found s11elter for nearly eighty years
beneath the flag of tl1e Ernngeli,,t (Pl. XVI. B arnl Fig . .J.).
WILLIAM MILLER

~.._ Lami, Del/dac E'n1,lito,·w11t, XY 20j; ·" I&,,{. 34:l, 413, 450, 45.Jc.
~,Ltha:--. t,p. cit. Y1ii. 810 0. ~~::u l, :J3.--;, 3-14, •" Ibid. 386.
377- s, 441-3.
 :l41

Two YE;>,ETL\.X DocDIEXT'i UEL\.TlX(, TO THE Acr;>CISITIOX (JF

:\fo.:rn1rLl'-L\. rx 1-h;±.

}1<:cc,-LXIII.J indictione xij.

I1ic· SXl ~c'l1t~li11J1i~.
Cum per c.Ictti,trn onmi11utenti-; IJ,..i ,.c,1ni,tci ,it in panil_,us c:re,:ie inrnh ~t,dimini-
,-lin,s er opnlenta in •1lla -mu tIE:" tene <:llllI C.t-telli, ,·i1. C:,chinum, :\Inch-um et Paleo-
;:,;,c;nnm qne temp ore racis recl,1ere s,,l<"nt Jnc,ito-- , i1 ,_.,t x 1'1. Item diam Civita-- }fol ,·,u,ie
,iu in Amorea. _-\.d ,·1nornm locorurn J_.onam s;ubernatiouem c:t cnnservation<cm sul,
ol,e11ientia nostri Dominii proYicleudnm est ,le rectoril:>us et c,unerariis e venetiis rnittenclis
tam pro populis regemlis et jnre redclendo rtliam pro introitibns earum l.1ene gul,emam1is et
11011 perclendio ,icut hncnsque dicitur esse iactnm . . . .
Elig,1tm per quattuor manus electionum in maiori con,ilio nnm pote,tas :\L]v;,--ie cum
,alariu ducaturnn1 V. auri in ,umo, sit per duo.- annos tanturn : et habeat ,mlarimn liberum
mm prerogati, i-; et e:semptionibu" 1·ect01is Stalimiuis et ,-irniliter in contumacia sua.
Debeat habe1e dnos fan,ulrs et tre, e,1nos et recipiat ,,1huinm ,m1m ab in,ula Stalirninis r1e
tril:,u-; men--il,u, 111 tre, rnen--e, ,mte tern1,ns.

tDe parte .J 7 .._l

De non. 1-J
X on syncere . !)

Die wij Septembris mcccclxiiij in conselio di x]ra.

De parte 26
De non. 0
X,m --ync. 1

II.-Reui,w fol. 56.

Die i1j :\farcii l.J65.
Caprnm est in ltlaiori Comilio : Qno,l Rector monon.1sie elegendus de tr1bu, in tre,
men,es hal.1ere .Jebeat salarium suum a loco no-;tro stalimni, et quum rncile accidere J-'OS-et
per nrn~nas i1upens,1s ,1uas iuem stalinmis locns habet •1uo,_l imle ,alarium ipoum ,num
habere non po,,et ... Yaclit pars qnocl in 11u,mtnm idem rector 11oster rnonoua,ie ,1
Stalimnis inrnla salarium ipsem snum habere non po;:,set juxta formam presentis electioni,
,ue a camera no•tra crete illucl percipere ,lebeat sicuti conuenien, et hone,tn1n e.,r de
rribu, in tres men~es jnxta formam presenti, ip-in,.
tDe parte
ne non.
~on -y11cere.

H.S.-VOL XX\"11.
 THE CEXTR.AL GROUPS OF THE PARTHEXOX PEDE\IENTS.

THERE is probably no subject in Greek archaeology which has afforded

material for so much discussion as the identification and arrangement of the
sculptures of the Parthenon, anll at first sigl1t it may seem presnmptuous at
this time of cla,-"
to brincr0
forward new vie11·s. But, on the other hand. it
must be remembered that discussion cannot be wholly fruitless, even if it does
no more than bring us closer into touch with the work of Pheidias; and e;-en
this well-"·orn path is not a mere wandering np and clown, bnt ,c,ometimes
leads us farther. If it is Yonchsafell to us by taking thought only to add
one small fragment to the Frieze, the labom is not in min. And so I lrnw
the le,,s hesitativn in retnrni:cg once more to the question of the central
groups of the two Pediments of the Parthenon.
Discussion on.these t,rn subjects has entered (as I shall hope to shew) on
a new phase since the discovery ,ms recently made that ,Ye must remorn one
of the figures commonly assignell to the East Pediment and place it in the
\Vest. It is now, I believe, generally admitted that the supposell -Xike of the
East Pediment does not belong to that Pediment at all, but is the figure shewn
in C'arrey';, drawing as in the \\~ est Pelliment, next behind the Poseidon.
Mr. )uthur Smith has recently found among Lord Elgin's papers at Broome
Hall two further letters from Lusieri and Dr. Hunt, which make it finally
clear that the torso in 11uestion was found beneath the ,,~ est Pediment. .t\.
summary of tl1e eYilleuce, which ~eems to carry couviction, is giren in the new
edition of the Parthenvn (-/-uidc, p. 32.
That being so, it is fairly ob\·io~u, that this torso caunot be identified
any lon.~er as Nike; for what should Victory be doing in the train of the
oppi:,nent of the .-ic-toriouc; Athena ? Studniczka (,_,ft,h,·h. 190-:1-, p. 10) suggests
that the figme is Iris, communicating tv the clisuutants the will of Zeus. But
the same objection applies equally here: in a composition where, as we know,
every detail had its value both as composition aml also in rebtion to the subject
repre5ented, what significance could tl11::re be in giving Iris such a place ?
The hurried 111owment of the figure suggests that she i,, advancing against
.\.thena ; in any case both her position and her action wouhl be appropriate
to Eris, the personification of strife; and if so, the expression med by Pau-
0

-sanias in describing this Pediment acquires a new force when he spe aks of
the · Eris of Poseillun against Athena.'
 THE PEDDIEXTS OF THE PARTHEXON.

This, l10wever, is beside the present purpose: the fact remains that this
wry reasonable innorntion leaves us without a figure of Yictory in either
Pediment.
And yet, wheu we consider the requirements of the case, and the
Athenian habit of mind in relation to these subjects, as we can judge of it
from contempor[,ry mo11nme11ts, we must see th,,t at this period, in the
representation of any of the strenuous moments of her being, the presence
of Xike is essential. On the Frieze, in the peaceful sociability of Athena's
surroundings, her helmet and spear are cast aside; but wherever her panopl.\-
is donned, Xike cannot be far away. Even in the other, the pacific render-
ing of the dispute between Athene and Poseidon, as shewn, for instance, in the
Smyrna relief (..lth. Jiitt/1. 1882, Pl. I., Fig. 2), it is Nike who couuts the
votes: and in an Athenian monnment of the importance of the Parthenon it
is hardly probable that so essent,ial a feature shoulLl be omitted.
A curious illustration of this tendency is shewn in a red-figure vase in
the British Museum (E -no:. It dates probably from the latter part of the
first half of the fifth century. and is therefore before the date of the Parthenon.
Here the birth is represented in the old traditional way, with the miniature
Athena leaping from Zeus·s head: the artist has felt so strongly the necessity
of introducing Nike somehow that he draws her on the extreme margin of
the scene, and in defiance of the unities represents her as nearly twice the
size of Athena herself.
The necessity of ~ike's presence in the West Pediment ,rns felt long
ago by the early commentators; thns Visconti identifieLl the figure who
drives the chariot of Athena as a 'wingless Yictory,' but that is a type
which is unfamiliar to the artists of the Pheidian period.
There is yet auother reason why Nike must be predicated for the
Pediments. In the pedimental compositions of the fifth century, so far as
we have them, tradition demanded (as, for instance, at Olympia :-ttlll Aegina)
that the culminating point of interest should concentrate in a single figure
in the centre, occupying almost the entire height from floor to apex. Sauer's
examination of the marks of attachment in the floors of the Pediment shews
conclusively that Pheidias adopted a different principle: in each Pediment we
ham two important figures balancing each other on each side of the apex.
In the Ktst Pediment Zeus and Athena balance as they do in the Frieze; in
the "\\'est, Athena and Poseidon. But this arrangement leaves a gap in the
apex which mnst be filled.
"\Yhat is more important still, we are left in doubt as to which is the
predominant figure of the composition. In the temple of Athena it would
surely be mmle clear that it is the goddess herself, and not Poseidon or eYen
Zens, who holds the pride of place.
Both these difficulties are m-ercome by the introduction of a small
figure of Xike-not so large as to make her strncturally difficult to insert.
or to give her undue importance, but such as woulLl shew clearly, by her
inclination towards Athena, that here is the important moment of time aml
place. In both Pediments the rhythm aml flow of the composition take,-
R 2
the eye inevitably from the angles to the apex: aull here in the crown aml
summit of things, though the balance till now, as it were. ,ms e,-en. the little
satellite of Athena, ,vho herself is .Athena ~ike, comes with uu uncertain
Yoice r.o decide tl1e i,s11e

F1,:. 1.-S<'IIF\U; OF llE,!O!LH'!():-< OF l'E.'i I !CAL c:rrocl' UF uu: r:. l'EDDIE.'i !' (_\FTER
Fn:TWAX•_;u·R-REICHll"Lll, PL. 20), '\Yl[H SArEr:, FLAX ()F 1 !IE
f'LOul: BELOW.

In the East Pe,liment there is a certain appropriateuess in the introLluc-

tion of a miniature figure at this point: a-; we see from the Yase pictures
tr,1,lition before Pheidia'-'s time dem::tmle,l a ;,eatecl Zeu-- with n mimatur~
_\them, springing from his hend. \Vhether Plieiilias wa-: or '\\-as not the
i1tYentor of the new ,cheme arlopte,l in the East Pediment. it ,ms. we know,
 THE PEDL\IE~TS OF THE P~\J{THEXOX. 245
an iunorntion; aml it is possible that Pheidias may ha,·e felt that the small
Nike here would be, as it were, a concession to artistic tradition.
In the "?
est Pediment, again, a Kike introduced to mark the issue
obYiates a difficnlty which has always been felt. Petersen, for instance

~
'=.
'1
'\
;\ \

L
Frc. 2.-SurL\IE UF TIE,ru1:xn,,-. UF C'E.'il'l:.\L l;J:<>l'l' VF 1111: ,,·. PJ.:DDIE.'iT:
AFTER THE Kn: fl'H YABE (EXT ..\.:XT FRAG~IE:X rs I:x~EI: I ED) ;
S.-1.l'EI:'s PL\.'i OF THE FLOOR BELO"lt.

(Hermes, 1882, p. 131), expressed the belief that Pheidias had succeeded in
rendering victory and defeat in the action of the two deities without recourse
to the presence of judges, which he regards as unfitted for sculpture, although
the later literature assigned as judges the tweh·e gods or the Athenian people ;
but the attitude of the groups on either side (as A. S. Murray pointed. out) is
 CECIL S)IITH

certainly not judicial. One kt, only to look at Sch werzek ·s restoration of the
Pediment to see how meaningles.s the whole composition becomes when
explained in this way and with no central Xike.
Let, ns now turn to the monuments, and see how far the introduction
of Nike is borne out b\' them. But first I should like to remark in passing
that there is one class ~f remains which has, I think, been somewhat neglected
in this connection. I mean vase paintings. The Kertc!t vase · which I shall
come to presently\ ., I
is mo:itlv., reo·arded
,"-J
as tellino·
;::,
us little of the Pheidian
\Yest Pediment, although it remains the only amhority we han~ for it. There
is one class of Attic rnses in particular, which date from just after Pheidias,
and which, oddly enough, are uearly all found in the Crimea, ,d1ich are fall
of suggestions of motive~ tlirectly or indirectly borrowed from the Part11enon.
I see no reason why tl1e humbler handicraftsmen who painted the vases should
not have been prowl to reprOlluce the sculptnral types which were their
national glory. I believe we shall fiml that this track is worth following and
I have here one or two examples ,d1ich at least seem to throw light ou the
central group of the East PeLliment.
First, however, in orcler to recall the composition that ,re may
expect, let me call attention to tl1e marble well-head from }Iaclrid, which
is now geuerally accepteLl as gi\·ing the most satisfactory rendering of
the main foatmes of PheiLlias's composition. The positions of Zeus and
Athena arc shewn by the marks still existing in the t:loor of the Pediment
to be approximately identical, but the •1uestion of comparatirn scale raises
a difficulty. The heacl of Zens, though he is seate,1, is on the same le,-el as
that of Athena, so that if he stood up he \,-onl,1 be on a much larger scale.
But the artist of the puteal is only following out the principle of isocephalism
commonly observed in all frieze composition, aml especially :;o m the Frieze
vf the Parthenon. It does not at all follow-indeed, it is extremely unlikely,
that the same principle would be observed in a pcdimental compositiun in
the rouml, for the carefully mljusted balance of right and left, a balance
minutely calculated i11 every other group of tl1e Pediment, mn1M thereby be
upset.
The trne arrnugement ( Fig. 1. is shewn on a rnse 11ictnre (Fmnrnngler-
Reichhold Taf. 20) in which, though the subject is not the Birth of Athena,
the central group i-; clearly a reprot!uction of the Pheitlian. The types of
Zeus and of Atl1ena are both precisely what we shoul,l expect of Pheidia:;:
note especially the helmet of Atheua ,rnd the gorgeons w,wen peplos that
she wears. And une sees at once how admirably the '" bole is adapted to the
reL1uirernents of the centre of a pediment. As, li,),Yever, tbe vase arti~t is
not confined, as the sculptor was, to an angle on the upper honler, be has
probably slightly moditied hi~ Xike, who woulLl naturally '.a;; on the puteal)
haYe flown more directly towards Athena. The figure of Athena, on the
other lia11Ll, which in the puteal moves rapidly to the right, i"-> here iu a rnnr<J
probable 11osition.
A curious detail of perspecti.-e, by the way, is worth noting: the vase
a1tist for no apparent reason has drawn the underside of Zeus's throne in
 THE PEDDIE:XTS OF THE P_.\.RTHE:XO:X. 247

such a way as it would be seen from below. Is it possible that this is llue to the
fact that the artist was actually so copying tho pedimental group from below ?

A slight modification of the same group appears on another comempor-

ary vase (Fig. 3 1), where Nike is shewn 'in what is more likely to have been
1 From (Jomptes Rendus de la Go11un. 111,p. A,·ckiol. 1860, Pl. II.
 THE PEDDIEXTS OF THE PARTHEXO:.\".

her true: direction. An interesting feature of this rnse is tl1e iutroLluctio11

of other Pheidian motives, which though modified are unmistakeable. On
the right ,re ham a woman ridiug on a horse, wliich naturally suggest;; tht:
Xyx or Selene of the right-hand angle of the Pediment; aml 011 the left a
group of three women, who in their relative position,- strongly sugg;e;::t the
group of the three Fates.
Turning now to the \Yest Pediment (Fig. 2,, the most complete document
we ha-:e is the drawing made in 1683 for tlie )Ian1nis de Nointel. The
drawing is badly executed and the figures m·ercrowdecl. Lut it gi,·es a good
general idea of the central group. Comparing this with the rnse from Kertcli,
we see ho"· closely the artist has followecl his original: the rniniatnre temple
in the corner (a most unusual feature in a vase painting) can, I think, be
11otl1ing else thall the arti;;t's shorthand method of acknvwledging tl1e wurce
of his desig 11. It ,rill be noted that Athena turns partly a way frorn her
adversary, and both are wry definitely ,,triking dowmrnnls: probably
Pheiclias would have wished to make it clear that the high gocls are not,
engaged in turning their -weapons against each other. The existence of the
nliYe tree is attested by fragments that remain; and like a bird out of its
branches comes the little Xike with the Yictor's wreath or ribaml for Athena.
Whatenr the relative positions of the two Kikai in Ea,:t and \Yest may have
l,eeu. it is clear that there was scope for the avoidance of sameue,,s in a com-
pari-.011, just as in the general composition there is general respom,ion with
contrast of detail: so the fJl1e Nike flies free from the apex with partial
inclinatiou to the right; the other J:iies with inclination to the left out of the
branches of au olive tree. The group of Athena and Xike reappear on
another vase of the same series.
The LJnestion that now remains is a practical one: Have we any frag-
ments which can be identified with these two Xikai, arnl liow were the figures
attached ?
As reg£mls the secoml puiJJt, tlie (jllestion has been con-;iderecl Ly Durp-
feld, a practical authority, who sees no iulierent difficulty as regards the East
Pediment in supporting a Xike on metal standard°' which would be cramped
to the tympanum or floor: in the \Vest Pediment the olive tree would give
plenty of scope for the concealment of such cramps. If the figures of Nike
were of marble, it is possible that among the fragments of large and small
wings in the Acropolis )luseum which are said to belong to the Pediment
sculptures portions of their wing,: may yet be fonwl. I am inclined to think
that the Xikai mav• haYe been of some other material ' such as bronze-amorw 0
the many bronze enrichment-; of the sculptures throughout the Parthenon
such a material for a small figure \\·ould not be out uf place ; and in the
vase pictures of the time the practice com1110nly occurs of detaching tl1is
class of fignre I Eros or Xike). when in a central position, by a wash of white
or of gold.
( 'EC! L S:mTH.
 THRO\YIXG THE J_\. YELIN.

[PU.TES XYII-XX.]
A.--Tlic Jr1rclin u11d the Anu,ltum.
THE ja;-elin used in Gi·eek sports is called nu-iously ciKwv. aKol'TlOl',
µEull"fKV/\.Ol'. u[~;vvvo<;, cir.oTOµck The latter term, llefineJ by He.sychins
as uxtt;av Kat aKovrwv r.EvTc1J:J?.,ov, appears to denote merely a lath ur stick,
and apparently describes the javelin as reprcsenteLl on the ntses. It is
merely a straight pole, in length neatly e11ual to the height of a man, though
occasionally longer, and about the thickness of a finger. It is one of the
commonest objects in palaestra scenes, whether in use, or carried in the hand.
or planted in the grollncl singly or in pairs apparently to mark the line from
which the athlete is to jump or throw the clisko.,. 1 These rods ,\·ere
formerly describe(l as jumping poles; but of the pole jump there is no
evidence, and the fact that they are precisely similar to javelins which are
actually being thrown. aml that they often have the throwing-strap or anY:ntum
attached, pro,·es that they are nothing more than javelins. At the same
time there is no reason why they shoulLl not have serveLl as measuring-rods
or KavovE<; for measuring the jump, a use which is perhaps represented on
the British Museum kelebe B. 3Gl, published in rnl. xxiv. of tliis journal.
p. 180.
The athletic j<tvelin is in the vast F-~ajority of cases pointless. On early
black-figured vases, such as the kelebe just meutioned, or the B. )I. lekythos
B. ,5";-6 published in this Yolume, Pl. II, the javelin is represented by a black
liue which does seem to taper at the ends, but this is a mere accident of
technique, the natural result of a line drawn rapidly with a single stroke of
brush or pen. On the red-figured vases and Panatheuaic vases, the rod is of
uniform length and usually ends square. Sometimes indeed it appears to
have a blunt cap or ferule, indicated by a thickening of the end, or by a black
patch, or by lines which represent the binding by which it is attached.~ Such
are the javelins and spears which Xenophon recommends cavalry soldiers to
use in practice, pro--;-ided with a round end (lucpatp(J)µEva) 3 which corresponds
to the button on the modern foil or bayonet. Such a cap served not only for
protection but to give the necessary weight to the head of the javelin,

1
i·. p. 11 of this ,olnme : ,ilso ml. xxiY. Fig. 32.
p. 186. 3 De re cqzwst. ,·iii. 10.

" Jiitlmer, .4.nlikc Tur,1g,.!"i1th,·, p. 38,

250 E. XOR3L-\.X GARDIXER

without which it would not tly properly. It was probably universal, the
omission of the lines 01 shading that indicate it being due to the vase-
painter's carelessness. ,,. e cannot however ascribe to the same cause the
omission of the point, seeing that in hunting and fighting scenes the javelin
has almost invariably a long leaf-shaped metal head; aml we may tlierefore
safely conclude that the blunt jawlin was generally used for practice, espe-
cially for distance throws. For target practice sharp javelius were naturally
used, as is prov8ll by the speech of Antiphon in defence of a youth who. missin~
the mark, accidentally hit and killed a companion. 4 }foreo,·er, on t\Y•) of the
three vases which represent ja,·elin throwing on lwrseback at a target, tlie jan"-
lins liarn all lon.~· leaf-like point.;;, such as we see in hunting scenes:' A si1nibr
heacl is roughly represe1ited on an early b.-f hydria in the British }Iusem,1
B. 3:26, where we see t-Y,) athletes c:1rrying· javelins; bnt of the fi rn wea1Jons ,:iuly

a
F1.-,. 1.-YA1:1,-,1-, :l[1:u1,,n, ,:,F
,7

_,Tr_,.-111~c, THJ: .\ ,ri,~ rt'-'!.

Ij

rr \·,,;e of H1eron (Polbk. Zic, i T-(1;,:;1 Hiuo,zs:. 1,. B.:IL E:ylix. E 5.S. '°· B. :II. L,,kytlio,, E <:J,13.
,7. JL~l. Kylis, E 9tl. ,,_ _\.lex,mi.ler ::IIo,aic: Jtithuer, Fig. :JS. /. E. :II. J.1111,h<}rcl. E Jltl.

one is pointed. 8,:>mewhat ;;imilar i,; the javelin 011 a well ku,)Wll Cl1iusi wall-
painting, while on t1ie Lateran mosaic occurs a barbed ja1·elin head.'· On the
Berlin bronze diskos tbe javelin has a long thin point attached to it by
a socket. and similar points occur on a few r.-f. vases.' These howe,·er are
but isolated examples, an, [ the enormous prepomlerance of tlie blunt j,welius
justifies the conclusion that though for target practice the sharp j,welin \\'as
used, the blunt one was preferred for clistance tlirowin,'.;·, awJ that Jown t•:> the
close of the 5th century distance thr,)win£:· ,rn,; more o-eneral tlian tlll'owiw:.·
~ ~ ~ ~

at a target.
"\\·hether poiutell or blunt the ja.-elin was evidently a light object, cn1,J
Anacharsis conte1nptuonsly contnist.:; it with the more sen·iceable weapum

! Tctralugi,r, ii. 2. .\11,lcr,on, Atla,, x:-,.ii. 8.

5
i·. ir,f,·. Fig. 16 an,! Pl. XX. 7 Ji1tlrner, Figg. 20, JO.
6
Jiithner, ol', ,:it. ]'· :J9. Fi:,,. J3: Sd1rcilJel•
 :231

which are not carried about by the wiml.8 It \ras thrown by means of a
thong called ll"fKVA7J, or amentum, fastened near the centre of gravity of the
javelin, which was therefore called µunt~/KVAov. The amen tum was a leathern
thong a foot or eighteen inclies in length, if we may judge from the numerous
representations of an akontistes holding an amentnm lc11se in one l1aml and a
jaYelin in the other.!' It was bound tirrnly r,mml the shaft of tl1e ja\·elin in
such a ,rny as to leaYe free a loop 3 or + inches long. iu wl1id1 tl1e thrower
imerted his first. or tirst anLl middle ringers. The point of attaclnneut was
the centre of gravity, in the light-lieadeLl janlin uf the athlete alm,)st in tlie
centre of the shaft, in the more fonniLlable weapon of \\"al' or the c:h,1::-e
generally nearer the head. Its place varied also according as the j:n elin
was to be thrown for distance or at a mark. By putting the ameutum
behind the centre of gravity it is po,:,sible to iw::rease the distance thruwu,
but at a sacrifice of accnrncy. Hence the amenturn was detachable,
and the athlete fastened it to suit his taste shortly before use. On
the r.-f. hydria in the British 1Inseum, B 16+, published on p. :3:2 of
this volume, we see a youth sitting on the ground in the act of attachiug
the amentmn. On a ,Yii.rzlmrg r.-f. kylix published by ,Ji.i.tlmer, 1u a
youth is ben<linu0 down windin~ the amentnm round the shaft, while he
• ~

holds the other end tight with his foot. It was as we shall see essential
that the thong should be securely fastened. The rnse-paintings are
tuo minute to show precisely liow the amen tum ,\ as fastened, but they
suggest a consiLlerable variety of ways, as will be seen from the examples
girnn in Fig. 1. The clearest example is that shown on the _.\.lexarnler
mosaic in ~ aples. In every case it is only the actual lL)Op \Yhich is left
free.
The amenturn served various purposes. In the first place it enabled the
thrower to give a rotatory motion to the jarnlin, which not only helped it to
keep its direction, acting on it in the same way as the ritling of a gun on a
bullet, but also increased its carry and its penetrating power. For this reason
the modern savage habitually puts a spin on his weapon by a movement uf
the fingers, which however are not so el:fective as the thong. The manner in
which the amentum acts is shown in the illustrations reproduced from
J1i.thner in Fig. 4 a, b. The carry was further increased by the additional
leverage given to the thrower's arm. Tl1e amentum also seneLl to mark
the point at which the javelin was to be grasped, a matter of con,,iderable
importance in war or in the chase, when there is no time to adjust the
weapoff carefully. In javelins and spears nsed by savages at the present
day this point is often marked by some sort of binding. Such binding is
clearly shown on the long spear held by Athena on the British :Museum r.-f.
amphora E :HG, a portion of which is ;;;hown in Fig. 1 t: Lastly. the amentnm

5
Lucian, ...4 ,1achio·sis, 32.
i• Jiithllt'l'. !J. 40, Figs. 3-1, 3:i, 36. Jiitlmer
pruves condusiYely that the ohject-; re1iresentecl
P]sewhere and conunonly de,eriliecl ,b ~,_1111p,1--~e,
,tre merely ament,1, some,YhH mi,d1\1\Yll.
1
q Op. cit. Fig. 37.

011 the Pan,1etius kylix (,:. infr. Fig. 12) ,twl

 , E. XOR~L-\.S GATIDIXER

afforded a co1n-enient handle, also a m,1tter of some practical importance.

Hence it ,ms sometimes attached to long spears not intemlerl primarily for
tliro,;·ing. Spears are sometimes provided with a short loop or sling for
tltis purpose only.11
From these considerations it is obYiom, that the amentum was not as is
sometimes stated the im·ention of the gymnasium, but was adopteJ by
the gymnasium from war and the chase. This is abundantly prorncl by the
wonuments. \Yhetlier it ,ms used i11 Homeric times, is uncertain. The prin-
ciple of tl1e sling was certainly known to the Homeric shepherJ,1~ and besides
the 60)1.1xoaKlOV E"fXO" of the chieftain, there was apparently a lighter and
shorter weapon, tbe al ;avb1, ,d1idt is closely associated with the bow, aud
0

like the bo,Y ,ms usetl f.,r ln111tiug, and by the common soldiery in war and in

Fru. 2.-I.-.nr.11>1: or B.-:F. KYLIX. B.::IL B 3S0.

~pc,rt. 1 ' But tl1ere is no e,·idence in Homer that the priuciple of the sling
"';b applied to tlie ai'Yaz,i11. Tl1e warrior vase from 3Iycenae 14 however
cleai 1.,· s}iows t,rn types of spear, a long spear carried with clenched fist, and a
~hort speQr rai,eLl almost at ann's lengt.!1 behind the head, with the point
,urnewlta,t downwards, in a pusition commonly represented in hunting scenes.
The liancl is sharply pointell a;; if the fingers were extended, and a com-
parisc,n of the way in which the spear is held wit-h the hold shown in
Fig,,. 6 anLl 7 confirms ,Jiithner's Yiew that the artist intended to represent
a weapon throwu with the arnentmu.
From the sixtli century onwards the amentum was used in war, in the
l, P,,s;ilily the H,ht.t .\n,,,t,, i, sncl,. 1-'ttt l1dg1uent of ,t silver rnesel from Mycenae.
1
, • t·1~f,._ 1'· 255.
Such s;pe,1 r-.. are kuown .tmong ' 11. x,·i. 5S9, ii. ii -1. '\Ye rn.ty note that
tb.· Iwlians. r. Egelton Anns of tl,e Jn,li,rn<. both O,lys,eus am~ X est or s1,tak of their skill
Fig-. 2, Xo. o; i2. Xo. 25. oovpi, not o.Kov-r[q,. Ocl. viii. 229 : 11. xxiii. 63i.
1" c. p. 5 of thi, rnlnme (the Kall.aiipoi/, 1 : q,. 14
Schliem,rnn-Sdrnehwlt (Eng. Trans.),
JI. xiii. 600. Slingers are repre5ented on " Fig•. ~84. 5.
 THROWIXG THE .J _-\. YELIX.

cliase, and in athletics. A few examples will suffice. On a Corintl1ian b.-f.

lekythos in Berlin showing the rnrious pieces of a hoplite's armuur there stamb
side by side ,vith the long spear a shorter weapon provide,] witl1 a sort
uf loopY The use of the amentum is clearly shown on a Chalcidiau
b.-f. kylix in the British .:\Iuseum :Fig. :2,. As is often the case the artist
lias made a mistake in drawing the fingers: the first mid rnidLlle :fingers
slionld l1ave been passed througl1 the loop, not the uther two. The wanior
is perlw.ps about to thrnw tlte spear "·ith a short underhand thr,:,,,·, a
throw in ,vhich certain savage.s are extraordinarily skilful and f,:,r ,d1icl1
tl,e amentum wonlLl be most useful. Another Corinthian ,·a~e, in tl1e
British )Iuseum, B :37, shows a delightful hunting scene. Se,·eral
,1avelins fitted ,\ith amenta are -,,een sticking in the bo,1r's back, cleurly
proYing that the amentum ,va-: rixed to the javelin ancl did nc,t remain
in the thrower\ hand. On yet another archaic Yase, t,> wliich }Ir. Cecil
Smith hus c:,lle,l my atte:nion, a ja;-elin fitted with the arnentnm i;-, rlying

through the air, and the artist to produce a sense of Yelocity has ginn
the shaft a wavy appearance.rn Lastly on the Fran~ois vase we see a
pair of warriors with their fingers in the amentum about to throw their
spears (Fig. 3), who in the position of the hands and fingers, and the "·hole
attitude, closely resemble the akontistes in Fig. 10, sarn that on the latter vase
the head is turneLl backward, a position ob.-iously inadvisable for a hunter
or warrior. As an early example of the amentum in athletic scenes we
may take the akontistes on the b.-f. stanmos in the :\Iuseo Gregori.mo
(Fig. 7).
A javelin thrown by a thong is necessarily a light weapou, but though
light the akontion used in wur and in the chase was decidedly fonniJable,
and could be useLl effectively ..,
not onlv.,
for throwino·0
but for st:tbbi11,,·
"='"
For the latter purpose it could be held either with clencheLl fist or "·ith
the amen tum. Some of the figures on the Fran~ois vase for example (Fig. :3)
have their jaYelins raised behind their heads like the warriors on the )Iycc11ue

15
Jiithner, Fig. 51. Berlin 31-!S. : ; .1,-,.h. z, it. 1S83, Pl. X.
25-1 E. NOR)IAX GARDIXER

.-a;e,e as if to stab; the hands are clenched and there 1s 110 sign of the
amentum. The type is a common one on vases of all periods. That the
amentum would aftorcl a useful grip both for throwing and stabbing is clear
from the hunting scenes represented in Gerhard's Apulischc Vasenuilcle;·,
PL A.
If the akontion could be used for thrusting, the long spear could
011 occasion be thrown. The Homeric warrior sometimes hurled his
oo"\1xo1naov :!1 xoc;, and so did the l1oplite of the fifth century. The long
spear is eYen represented sometimes with an amentum, for example on
the British Museum r.-f. lekythos E 6D8, on which is drawn a female
figure, po,.,sibly EULlaimonia, holding in lier hand a long spear, or on the rnse
of Hieron from which the detail of Fig. 1 a is taken.17 How far this practice
WDS general, it is impossible to sa~-. The amentum is a detail only occasionally
insertell by tlie .-ase-painterc; whether on javelin or spear, and even when
inserted the thin lines which indicate it are niry liable to wear a,rny.
Certainly the primary use of tl1e long spear was for thrusting: the hoplite
could not affonl to risk its lo~s ancl would rarely throw it. The amentum
therefore if geeerally attached sernd prnbably ratlier as a handle than as
an amentum proper.
The lu11g liea\'y spear ,ms the ,reapon of the fifth century: the real
i111purtance of the j:welin dates from the closing years of the Peloponnesian
wc1 ,·, ,rhen the rnlue of light-armed troops and rnvalry ber;an to be realized.
Tlw liglit-anm,d troops iYere mostly mercenaries, Lydians, Mysians,
~lr<:adians. Aetolians, Thessalians, Thracians.io All these races were skilled
iu tlie u~e of the jarnliu. That the peltasts threw the javelin by means of
tl1c: arne11tum is clear fro111 Xenophon. In the passage of the Ten Thousand
tl1ruugh tlie mountainous territory of the Oanluchi, the Greeks he tells us
l lic:ked u1) the loner,-:, arrows of the enemv ,_, and used them as J·awlins fittino-
n
thongs to them (dva ;Kv1cwvTe<,).rn Elsewhere he orders the peltasts guanliug
0

the rear t,) adrnnce 1vith their fingers in the arnentnrn (0117"1KVA1<rµEvov<,)
l\'a,ly to thr1Jw.
Tbe javelin was uot confined to the mercenaries: at Athens it was the
~pecial weapon of the epheb,)s, ,dw is generally reprEsented holding a pair of
jawlins. Pl. XYII. gi1·es a typical picture of the Athenian ephehos.
[u tl1e thinl c:entun- •
sriecial traine1s called aKOVTl<TTa{ were eno·,wed
0 0
to train tl1e epheboi in tl1e me of the jaxelin. 0° Competitions were
held at Atl1ens allll else1d1ere iu tlmrn·iug the jaxeliu both at a mark
nnll for distance. b,)th on foot and on horsehac:k.c 1 Iu the vases reoresemino-
, 0

the httcr contest the arnentnm is not shown, hut its use is implied by

17 T]1,~ uneI1tllIH oc1~nr-s frerp1t.:11tly u11 i;, -Lu,l,. iL ~- 28, iL 3. 2:3, Y. :?. l:?.
Hiero11'5 v.,,e,, , .g. on ,1 I. •t. kotyle re[•lbCllt• 0
Ditt. Syl1." ii. 520, 521 : cp. 522 uf Ceo,.
"
111g -\.l'h1llf_'s ,twl Hu--d--:; in the Lonrrc, J/.(1. /. 523 ol Teo5.
d. 1~: on ,l kyl::-. l't·I•H·:--,_.nting The~1.:u-, ,tnd " Ditt. Syll. 0 ii. 52:2, 66S, 6,0, Gil. 6i2,
.-1.erhr,t. He1rnitc1ge, E'lil. H ,rri,on ,m,l .:IL,cl_',:,]l G;.}. 6,-l; I,!Su. ur. O,·. 330 : l G. ,·i. H4;
(i,·cd l'a.,, ·p 111,luW'· Pl. XXII. .Ith. Jlit!h. XXX. 1905, p. 21 :J.
lS D,ll'.·~,tgl. S. l. ,,'11,·11!1'111. 1,. 5~~4.
 THROWING THE J A YELIX. 255
the fingering oftlie jawlin, an<l this conclusion is confirmed by the representa-
tiun of a cavalry skirmish on an embossed swordbelt found at \Yatsch
in Carinthia, where the spears flying through the air are all provided
with a loop." 2 or that on a rnse from the Acropolis described bt:-low (Fig. 8).

B.-Tlie Distributio,1 cl tl,c Alfit,dl'm.

The Roman,; are ;;aiLl tu ham botTOWeLl the a111entu111 from the Greeks.'-';;
But the evidence of its distribution seems to remler this statement highly
i111probable. The amentum was wiLlely known in Italy at an early elate. It
,,·as certainly known to the Etruscans, being represented on an Etruscan
w:,rrior's spear in a tomb at Caere, while in another tomb at Chiusi an
Etruscan athlete is depicted iu a typical position, putting his fingers through
the loop."' From other tombs and from Yases represE"nting Italian warrior;,
we learn that the Samnites anLl )Iessapians used the arnentum." 5 A very
interesting painting found in a tomb at Paestum represents a fight between
two warriors, each armed with a shiel1l aml two javelins, fitted with a sort of
semicircular loop."G Two of the javelins have been thrown, one of them is
sticking in the left hand warrior's shield. The other has pierceLl right
tl1rough his opponent's calf, so that its point projects on the other side. With
their rernetiuing javelins they are preparing to :-:tab 011e anotl1er. They hold
the j;1Telins with clenched fists, but in only one ca~e is the thong visible,
forming a loop o,·er the holder's hand but certainly not used as an am1:cutum
proper. Hence the javelim ham been identified \Yith the hastae ansatae
mentioned by Ennius. But ,vhether the object representeLl is an amentum
or ansa, or whether the amentum is the same as the ansa or different. we
cannot say. I am inclined to think that the amentum did at times sene as
a handle or ansa, aml that the object representell is intenJeLl for the
amentum, for ·which ausa is merely another name. But though there is
evidence of the \Yicle distribution of the amentum in It:tly at an early date,
there is no eviLlence of its use in the Roman armies. It is stated indeell that
the hasta velitaris used by the light-armed troops was thrown by the
amentum, but I do not know on what evidence. Certainly the characteristic
Roman weapon was the hea,·y pilnm, and Livy in his account of the battle
of .Magnesia expressly contrasts the heavy weapons of the Roman soldiers
and the light weapons of .Antiochus' forces.~' The damp, he ;;ays, had no
effect on the heavy pila and swords of the Romans, but it haLl softened the
bow-strings, slings, and the 'amenta jacnlorum' used by the king's soldier,.;.
The light javelin was, as we have seen in Greece, essentially the weapon of the
hunter and the light-armed soldier, aml the strength nf Rome by in her

2 24
" Rane .·frdi. 1S8-l, Pl. III. : J[tt!mer, Dcll'.-S~tgl. S,'C, (lJ/l{lz/zt!Jf, fig.-.. ~.35, :250,
pp. 61, 62. ~ lb s. t. hasfr,. p. 38, s. r. l111 ,·ia ,·i, l'· 07 -1.
1

03 F. Krause, Schlcude,rorridztw1gcn fu,, "" lb. Fig. 254.

TV,i,f1caffcn in Internr1fio,1(l/es Archie (Lcy,frn; c~ XXXYii. 41.
1902, pp. 121 •q.
256 E. KOR}L.\.X CHRDINER

heavily annecl legionaries, her light-anne(l troops being suppliell rno5tl,_v by

allies anll at a later period by mercenaries. Among the enemies of Rome
,re umloubtellly find a weapon thrown by means of the amentum. This wa5
the trngula usecl by the Spaniards at the time of the Second Punic "\Yar. In
Caesa1.-s time the tragula i5 the weapon of tl1e Gallic cavalry, serring as
mercenaries in his army.:" From this time we 11am abundant e\·iclence of
the use of the amentum iu the Roman army. \Ye ±inll traces of it in the
Roman ,reapons lliscovered at ~.\.lise Sainte Reine, nnd we ewu ±ind it
representeLl on the Roman legiomuy's spear." 0 But it is unuecessary to go
into details of this period. Enough ha,; been sai, l to sl10,v that the amen tum
was widely distributecl O\·er Italy. c;aul, aml Spain, and that Rome probabls
adopte(l it, not frolll Greece, but from her O\rn allies aml subjects. To suppose
tbat it,; u;,e sp1eaLl from Greece to Rome. and thence to Gaul anLl Spain, i5
surely iuconceiYable.
Tl1is view is supported by eviden2e from otl1er parts of Europe. '\Ye
have already fouml the amentum at '\Yatsch in Austria. A comparison of the
light janJin heads found in large numbers at La Tene with those found at
Alise renders it likely that the weapons to which they belonged were throm1
with a thong:1° From Yergil we gather that the use of the throwing tho11g
was a Teutonic custom. 31 In his catalogue of the Lltin forces he mentions
two apparently similar weapons, the aclys and cateia. The former was
thrown by the' lento t!agello,' the latter· ritn Teutonico.' Unfortunately ,Ye
,lo not knew the exact nature of the ,rnapons mentioned. Proceecling
further north-west we fiml cunclnsive proof of the existence of the amentum
in the early iron age of Denmark.''" Remains of it have actually been found
at Nydam. The spears found are from 8 to 10 feet long. On the midclle of
the shaft are ofteu visible a number of small bronze rivets, between which
the conl was fastened, or a bronze mounting to mark the point of balance.
In some cases the cord was found still fastenecl between the rivets. Lastly ,rn
find the amen tum in Irelancl.3·; In ancient Irish story it is frequently mentioneLl.
Thus in the battle of Moyreth 'Cuanna pressing his foot 011 the solid earth
put his finger in the :string of his broad-headeLl spear aml made a cast at
Cougal.' This loop-called suanem. or suai11eamh-was made of silk or
tiax, and the laigan or spear to which it was attacheLl is ~aid to have been
brought into Ireland by Gaulish mercenaries in the fonrth century B.C.
A mo:=st interesting sun·ival of this old Irish spear with its loop i,: seen
on a picture of (.;aptain Thomas Lee painted in l-3!H, uow in the posse~sion
of Lord Dillon, a priut of which is in the Asl1molean )Iuseum at Oxford.
The tixed amentum ,;eems practically unknown to the modern savao·e o·
The only example tliat I can fincl is a javelin from the Pitt Rivers collection
no. :217, nuw iu the Ashmolean )Iuseum. It is described as comino- 0
from

2 --Livy, xxi. ~- lU . .\.\.1\. -12. 2: Caesar ;:; 2 C'. EngelharLlt De1uaa,i· ui the Eo, l ,, l1•1J1t
IJ.G. i. ~t3, Y. :J.\ -!) : E.O. i. 57. .lye, l'· 56. Pls. X. ;;, ,;, XII. 2. ,
"~ ILr.-~agl. s. l'. lias!,,, p. 39, Fig. 3,29. .
33
P. 'W. Joy~e .I Sodal Histo,·u ,~r' lrt/,,,u1,
:i' Desor L,_s ;,ala]i!!c,, l'· 56. 1. 113 ; O'C'nn y Jla1lilCl'S (I ,ul eusfQ111;, t:,j
Jl .d,:,,. Yil. 130. 141. A,lti,_nt l,·clcnuJ 1 I. cc _·i.:xli-v.
1
 THRO\YING THE JAVELIN. 257
central Africa, where it is probably a sun·fral of the javelins used by the
Roman. mercenaries occupying Africa.Si
Another type of throwing thong, the ounep, is used by the people of New
Caledonia and New Hebrides. It is a thickish cord about 6 or 8 inches long
with a loop at one eud for the finger and a knot at the other. The spears
are 9 to 12 feet long with a slight projection just behind the centre of
gravity, behind which the cord is placed and twisted over the knot in such
a way as to untie as the spear leaves the hand, remaining itself in the
thrower's hand. An illustration of this is taken from a drawing displayed
in the Ethnogrnphical Gallery of the British :Museum (Fig. 4). A
combination of this thong with the throwing stick is used in New Zealand.
The throwing stick is by far the commonest means of increasing the

" C

b d
Fm. 4.-lLu·sTR.-\.TIOX:l OF TRI: U,rn OF THE TnrwWIXG THOXG.

a, b. Jiithner, Figs. 4i, 48. c. B.M. B 134. cl. The Ounep of Xew Caledonia.

throw of a spear. It is widely used in Australia, Mehnesia, Central America,

and among the Eskimos, but is unkno,Yn in Europe, though a similar
implement of bone was apparently used by Palaeolithic 111an in Frnnce. 35
To sum up, the fixed amentum is an exclusively Enropean inventiun. It
is found throughout Greece and Italy, in Spain aml Gaul, in Central Europe, in
Denmark, and in Ireland. The light javelin to which it belongs is essentially
the weapon of the less highly civilized peoples. It is a weapun of the chase, a
weapon of the common people, but it plays little part in the heavily equipped
citizen armies of Greece and Rome. Both in Greece and Rome it comes into
prominence with the organization of light-armed troups, and then it is chiefly
the weapon of the troops of subject states and mercenaries. Under these-

st B,tlmal Green ,llusewn Catalogue, 18,i, ~3 lnternationales Archfr, l.c. B . .lf. Guide
p. 40 ; Pitt Rivers The Erolntion of C11lf1tre, to the Stone Age, p. 49.
pp. 132-4.
H.S.-VOL. XXVII. s
:!58 E. XOR}B.X GARDISER

circumstances it is hardly conceivable that its use should have originated in

Greece, and we are forced to the conclusion that the amentum was a deYice
of the peoples of Central Europe, and in the course of their wanderings was
carried by them thronghout the Southern and ,Yestern portions of the
Continent.
Experiments have amply established the practical use of the amentum
with a light javelin. In the experiments made by General Reffye for the
Emperor Napoleon it was found that a ja,,eliu which could be thrown only
20 metres by hand could be thrown 80 metres with the amentum. Accord-
ing to Jutlrner aB inexperienced thro,ver increased his throw from 2-3 to 6.3
metres. These records are with a light javelin. The javelin used in the
recent Olympic games was of the Swedish type, without the amentum, and
weighed t)00 grammes or 2 lbs. Lemming, the winner, threw it .33·90 metres,
but Colonel Y. Balck informs me that in Sweden he has thrown nearly .3.3
metres. The olll Greek javelin must have been a much lighter weapon.

C.-Thc Mimna af Tlumcing the J1_1relin.

In spite of frequent carelessness and mistakes in the drawing of hands

awl fiugers, in spite of the frequent omission or disappearance of the amentum,
the vases leave no dvnbt as to the method of throwing the javelin with the
amentmn. Two things are necessary: the amentum must be firmly attachell
to the shaft, anll the loop must be llra wn tight by the fingers before the
javelin is thrown. ,Ye haYe alremly seen the akontistes in the act of fasten-
ing the arncntnm. On a r.-f. psykter (Fig. 5) we see a group of javelin
throwers preparing to practise uuder the supervision of a paidotribes and his
assistant, while t,rn nther paidotribai are ob,·iousl_v giving instrnction in
,ne:-tling-. Two of them are te,-;ting the biwlings: resting one encl of the
javelin on the gronwl aml holding it fir111 with the left band, they pass their
riglit lu:nuh along the shaft so as to see that the binding is secure. ~\. thirll
holding the javdin in the :-ame position i~ abont to pac;s his fingers through
the loop. The loop has disappeared, but is clearly indicaterl by the position
•► f the liand. A fourth has alrea,lv ,.J
inserte,l his fingers thrOliah
O
the thon()'
.-::,,

au,l raising the javelin horizontally to a level with his breast, presses it for-
wanl with his left hand so as to draw the thong tight. The attitude of this
fig-me has cau,-ed quite unnecess~ry difficulty: it is a perfectly natural posi-
tion, from which by a half turn to the left any of the preliminary positions
which we ,-hall now de-;cribe may be readied.
Dr. ,Juthrn·r ,fotinguishes twn types c;f javelin throwing, one in which
the javelin is pointed more or less up,varcl:s. the other in which it is hori-
zontal. The distinction, in spite of de RiJder·s denial. is a real one, thotwh
Jntlrner has ll•Jt gra,-pe(l the full meaning nf it. The so-called horizontal
throw is the thrnw of war or the cbase, the other the throw c,f <tthletic
('Orn petition;:. In t lie latter, distance is the one ancl only object, and the
thrvwt:r may take Lis time: in the former llistancc is only a secondary con-
 THROWIXG THE .JAYELIX. 259
sideration, compared with force and accuracy, and everything depends on
rapidity of action. It is the difference between throwing in a cricket-ball to

FIG. 5.-R.-F. P~YKTER OF PHIXTIA". (.-t,1tiZ·€ Dcnk,,dila, ii. :20.)

the wicket aml throwing a cricket-ball in a competition, An examination of

the two types will make this clear.

(a) The Practical St:yle.

The soldier or the huntsman mu;;t have his javelin ready for use at
a moment's notice. He therefore carries it with his fingers passed through
the loop, 6t7J'YKv"A.urµivor;. He may carry it horizontally by his side as does
s 2
260 E. XOR}IAX GARDIXER

the warrior in Fig. ~, a somewhat cramped position owing to the fact that
the arm has to be turned outwards. The freer and more natural position is
,vith the arm bent and the javelin sloped oYer the shoulder or across the body,
the point dowrnrnrds. From this position he can draw it back as does the other
youth from the same vase, or raise the elbow so that the javelin is level with
the head, an excellent position for taking aim. This manner of holding the
ja\·elin is implied or represented on many hunting or battle scenes. It is
equally serviceable on horseback and on foot. But the b2;:;t examples of it
are on the two Panathenaic amphorae (Pl. XYIII and Fig. G). On the British
l\Iuseum vase the athlete wbo leads the procession carries his javelin at the
slope, the other akontistes has raised it horizontally. On the Leyden amphora
the javelin is still sloping slightly downwards. This position, with the javelin
poised on a level with the head, which we may call 'the carry,' is the
natural preliminary position for starting, whether the thrower uses the

FH,, tl.-l'.\X.\THI:X.Ul A)II'HORA, LEYDE~. (Arch. Zeit. 1881, IX.;

amentum or not. In the latter case it enables the thrower to balance

his weapon properly. In a photograph which l\Ir. Bosanquet sent me of
Lemming, the winner in this competition at the last Olympic Games, the
latter is standing with his javelin poised in this Yery position. The javelin
may be kept in this position during the run or may be at once drawn back.
On the two vases in question the thrower certainly appears to be runnino·,
but the position of the left arm clearly proves that he is not in the act ~f
throwing. Where time was no object, as in sports, the thrower might before
starting to run adjust the javelin by pressing the point back with his left
hand so as to draw the amentum tight, and this monment is represented on
a b.-f. stamnos in the 1Iuseo Gregoriano (Fig. 7). From the 'carry' the
thrower immediately before the throw draws back his arm in the manner
represented on the Fran~ois nse (Fig. 3). In the actual throw the move-
 THROWIXG THE J_-\. VELIX. 261
ment is reversed, arm and spear travelling back through the same positions
again, saving that when the amentum is used the tlngers loose their holtl of
the spear which (even before the hand reaches the level of tho head) is helLl
merely by means of the thong. This is clearly shown on a most interesting
b.-f. vase from the Acropolis, the upper z8ne of which represeuts a battle of
chariots and the lower zone a cavalry fight between archers and javelin
throwers. One of the latter is reproduced in Fig. S from a photograph
of the vase for which I am indebted to tl1e kintlnes;, of Drs. \Volters
and GrM, who are engaged in the publication of these rnses.'1'1 Perhaps
the moment before the actual throw is representeLl on a Panathenaic
amphora in tbe )Iuseo GregorianoY The attitude of the javelin throwe1·
is very similar to that shown on the two P,mathenaic amphorae
mentioned above. The action however is decidedly more vigorous, the
body is inclined slightly forwards, and the left hand instead of being

FIG. i.~-B.-F. ST.DL'W,,. (:\Iuseo FIG :3.-B.-F. Y.br:. Acr:oPoLrn, _-\.rm:~s.

Gregoriano II. xvii.)

raised is swung backwards, while the spear points slightly upwards. The
only difficulty in this interpretation is that the spear still rests behveen
the finger and the thumb, and is not as it should be at this point held
only by the amentum. But carnful though the early vase-painters are
in details, the realism of the Acropolis vase is certainly exceptional, nay
as far as I know unique, and I am inclined to think that the artist
of the Gregoriano amphora did intend to represent the actual moment of
the throw. The three amphorae and the other vases discussed all belong
to the sixth century. The style of throw represented is typical of the black-
figured ...-ases and quite distinct from that which we shall find general on the
red-figured vases of the fifth century. It is the practical style of the chase
and war adapted to the palaestra, and in the fifth century, when owing to the

06 Acrop•Jlis va5es, 563, cp..J mhncr, p. 52. ,·,ui.itinn occm-; ou ,m ,irchdi,tic r.-f. amphora
37JI/ls. Greg. xliii. 2. b. The other tignres fignre,l J_.y ,le Witte H,;tel Lambert, Pl. XXIY,
are a ,liskobolo-; and au official. .-\. slight the left firm 1,ein:; close to the side.
 E. :XOIDIAN G ..:\RDIKER

development of the heavy-armed liuplites tl1e light javelin tempornrily lost its
practical importance, this style was sup,~rseded by a purely athletic style.
Before proceeding to discuss the latter we must deal "·ith a question
"·hich naturally arises. If the style of thrmring is that of the chase and
war, does it not follow that these rnses represent throwing the janlin at a
mark rather than for distance ? The question is of importance in connexion
with the nature of the javelin competition in the pentathlon. At first
sight the general attitude seems in favour of throwing at a targEt; but the
care which the artists take to emphasize the fact that tl:e spear point is
blunt is conclusiYe for a distance throw. There is no evidence at any period
for any kind of target or mark for which a blunt spear could be used. :More-
oYer, both in sport and war distance and force are no less important than
accuracy. and it is natural that as long as i.he javelin was regarded ns

l'rc.. \•.--n.-F. K,ux, .:'IIc,rur. i'io2 A. (After Jnthner.)

a military rather than as nn atliletic implement, it should be thrown even in

an athletic competition for Llistance in the style most practically useful.3°
(b) 1'/ic Atldctic Style.
Tl1e purely athletic character of tl1e style depicted on the red-figured
rnses is obvious from the most casual inspection. Till the actual moment of
the throw the head is turned backwards, the c\-cs fixell on the riuht
0~
hancl , :39
a position absurd alike for war aml for the chase, aml for throwin~- at a mark.
After carefully adjusting and testing the arneutu111 i11 the rna1m~r described
and passiug his first finger or first aml middle fingers tl1rough the loop the

J, I h,n-e rec,;ii-e, l c0nfirm,it10n of tl1i, from
a friend ,1 ho h,h lo Hg re,i,k,l in Central .\!ric,t.
Tl1r• n.iti,·e, in \LU' ,tncl Lm1tmg tl,ro11· ,1,e,1r,
mucl, in tl,e ,tyle ,le,,·ril.e,l ,i]_,.,w, rhougl,
withont th~ an1entnrn. ,,nd ill throwi11!! tltt
'['"'ll' i,_,r ui,tdnce in ,port tl!fy lbl' the same
,tyle, nHer the 1•urely arlikti,_· ,tyk l1cscriLed
L1._lo\Y.
 THROWING THE JA YELIX.

tl!l'ower extends the right arm backwards to its full length, while with l1is
left haml opposite his right breast he holds the end of the spear and pushes
it backwards so as to draw the thong tight. Tl1is is the moment depicted
on the B. 1\1. amphora E 256 (Pl. XIX). The javelin is sometimes held
horizontally, more commonly sloping with the butt-end almost on the ground. 4u
As the thrower starts to run he draws his right arm still further backwards
turning bis body sideways and extends his left arm to the front. On the
Munich kylix (Fig. D) the youth on the left still holds the point of the javelin
in his left hand, the youth on the right has just released it. On the Berlin
kylix (Fig. 10) the left arm is follJ' extended. From the position of the head

FIG. 10.-R.-F. Knrs:, Bn,ux. 31?,P. (After Hartwig, Jfeis!e;·sdialen, Pl. XLVI.)

and body it is obvious that the violent, rapid run of which some authors speak
is an impossibility. Just as in throwing the cricket-bali the run consists of
a few short springy steps. Immediately before the throw a further turn of
t.he body to the right takes place, the right knee being well bent and the
right shoulder dropped, while the hand is turned outwards so that the shaft rests
on the palm of the hand. This attitude is vividly depicted on a Torlonia
kvlix, the illnstration of which is taken from Jii.thner (Fig. 11).H
4<• It m·£Ll h,ffdly be saiJ th,,t there is no higher the throw, the greater the carry. Cf.
evidence for the 'tir en ltaut' of whid1 de Xenophon de re equcst. xii. 13, quoted belo"·
Ridder s1,e.1k,. Dar. -Sagi. s. L jacul, 1 ;;1, In p. 2il.
the r.-f. kYlix from the Loune (D,1r.-Sagl. .Jt Cp. the direction~ for ,pear-throwing awl
Fig. 252, Schrl'iber, Atl118 xxii. S) "·hid1 he the illustrations gfren by Col. V. Bakk iu hi,
cites the angle of the spear h,mlly differs from Lekar oclz Idrotts,j;zingar, p. 420.
th,,t iu Figs. P, 11, 14. Gener,tlly s1,eaking the
26-! E. XOR'.\IA::N" G_\.RDIXER

A variation of style is represented in Fig. 10. Here the javelin insteall

of pointing upwards is almost horizontal. A similar rnriation has been note<l
in the preliminary position. The

~/-JJ-'
/
\,r~,
---~---> attitude closely re.sembles that adopted
in throwing at a target, and we might
be tempted so to interpret it. But
this interpretation is put out of court
tirst by the position of the head,
which has been already noticed,
/. secondly by the fact that in all the
I , vase-paintings of this type the javelin

} is blunt. This type occurs on the

British )Iuseum bronze diskos, which
is figured by Jtitbner p. 28. The
Fw. 11.-R.-F. Knrx, To1:Lo 5 r_-1_ 2,0 (148). javelin is represented by a single line,
(.Hter .fothner.) which is misinterpreted in the cata-
logue as a cord. The drawing of the
akontistes is bowe\'er so coarse a11d contrasts so strongly with that of the
rliskobolos on the other side, that )Ir. Cecil Smith has come to the con-
clusion that it is spurioHs. If genuine, the line can only be part of an

FrG. 12.-1..-f. Knrx, )Irsrcn 795. (from A,·d1. Zcif.)

unfinished drawing of a javelin. The clo.,est parallel to the cliskos is the

vase represented in Fig. 10.
 THROWIXG THE J~-\. YELIX.

The actual throw is very rarely shown aml the artists who attempt it are
hopelessly confused. For example, the central youth on the .}Iunich kylix
(Fig. 9) is clearly intended to be throwing the javelin to the right, but the
fingering of the right hand is only compatible with a throw to the left. ~ ot
much better is the drawing on the Panaitios kylix (Fig. 12). The general
attitude is good and lifelike, but the position ot the haml is hopeless and the
amentum is conspicuous by its absence. The careleswess of the reel-figured
Yase-painters as to the amentum is in marked contrast with the carefulness of
their black-figured predecessors. For the former the typical positions of the
akontistes are the preliminary positions describeLl above, which are repeated
with little variation till they become merely com·entional. JioreoYer, whe1:eas
in the black-figured v:1ses the amentum is inserteLl in black in the same way

FIG. 13.-R.-F.•-bIPHuI:A, )It·srcH. (From Furtw,rngler's 1~,,,,,ww/, ,·a·i XL\'.)

as the spear itself, in the red-figured vases it has to be aLldeLl in some other
colour, usually white or purple, after the drawing is finished. Hence this
detail tends to be omitted altogether, and if in~erted is the first to become
obliterated.
Occasionally we find a type that reminds us of the black-figured vases.
On a r.-f. 'kylix' in the :Museo Gregoriano reproduced in Klein's Enplli'onios,
we see a youth striding vigorously forwards with his javelin raised in his
right hand level with his head, and his left hand swung backwards. The
same type occurs on a kylix of Epictetos in Berlin. 4~ The energy of the
action, which on the latter vase is encourageLl by the strains of a :flute, seems
to suggest that the actual moment of the throw is represented. But the fact
tlw.t the 1ight leg i, adnmced seem;; decisiw against tliis \·ie1\·, unless ,ve ca11
suppose that the ja1·eli11 is being tl1rown not for distance b11t at a target, uf
,,·hich, as I ham :-aid, tliere is no evidence.
Similar bnt less vigorous is the dra1ving on the :Munic-11 amphora
(Fig. 1:3). Here ngain the right hand, ,Y11ich in tlie other two rnses i,-.
hidden by the head, is quite impossible, the ,nist being curved 0Yer tlie
shaft instE:a1.l of being bent haek underneath the shaft. It seems safer tlien
to regard this type as representing the nm.
A fe,y small points remain. \Yas the pYelin eYcr thrown without a nm '.
That it was usnally thrown "·ith a run is obvious from the vase paintings, but
a drawing pubfahed by Ji.ithner from tlw
~--l_l'J1a,·at des ,·ii,n. I,1stituts (Fig. H) proves
f.l
that the standing throw was sometimes
practised, the attitude being evidently
bonowed frow tliat of the cliskobolos.
Possibly the Torlonia kylix (Fig. 11) may
also represent a standing throw.
Secondly, was the javelin thrown witl1
tl1e left harnl ns well as with the right? Plato
recommends the trainin 6 of both hands
alike, and the fact that the Greek carried
two spe;.11 s, often one in either hand, ren-
.'trei
Fi, .. 11.-It -F. KYI.IX. i:,,11r:. (-~ ders the f;uggestion probable. But tlie
J titl,ncr.) only direet proof of a left-handed throw
is on a kylix: of ~ icosthenes, in Berlin.~;
E\·en if a left-liawletl tbrow was practised in th8 gymnasia, there is 110
evi1.lence of it in competitions.
Lastly, was the jaYelin eYer thrown without the amen tum? The only
evidence is deriYed from the position of the hand and the omission of the
amentum 011 the Yases, and this evidence is, as has been explained, too
untrushrnrtliy to warrant us in asserti11g that it ,Yas so. Here again common-
~e11se tells us tlwt tlie Greek athlete, used as he was to the arnentum, would
not liaYe rejected its l1elp in competitions.

D.-l'o11,pctdi,;,1, in J(li-cli;i Tlii•o,r?°ng.

In tl1e games of Patroclus j,weliu throwing is a separate ernnt. Here

nn,l in all otl1er passages where it is rnentionell in Horner as a i;port tl1e
eompetitiou is for distm1ce only.-H Throwing at n mark may possibly be
impliell in the associatio11 uf ja\'elin tl1rowiug a111l arcliery/' a combiuatiPn
whicl1 meets u,.. again in fourth-eeutnry inseription,.:, and Pindar definiteh·
de,:,cribes snch a competition in the legendary Olyrnpic gmnes celebrated b~-
l{eracl,_.,-.,
ctKOl'Tl <l>pri(J'Tr,;p if:....arJE a-Kor.01 .-01. x. 71. 1

,.:> 1{1 'lll~L·. xviii. /,, 1 Jc : 1/1 1·:. , . ." -:. 15(1.:-,. r II. ii. ii4: C,,1. i,·. 62•J, '..Yi1. 1tiS.
-.,,. J:. "- -~iiL ti:1; : ( 1,l. \~111. ~2~.
 THTIOWI~G THE .J A YELI~. :!G7

Ent thougl1 in tltis as iu all other sports the chieftain excdleLl the
connnon soldier, the ja,·elin like the bow dill not occupy a Yery higli place in
tlie aristocratic sports of Homer.
'l'o the same prejudice we may ascribe the fact that in the great athletic
festirnls which prese1Ted unchanged through alt their history many of the
aristoc·ratic traditions of their early days, the jaYelin and the diskos, which
as I showed in. my last article may be traced back to the stone thro,rn in
primiti;-e warfare, "·ere not separate events but merely fonnell part of the
pentathlon. But though javelin throwing as a sport was less esteemed lhan
boxing or wrestling, the use of the javelin was uni,·ersal. As the weapon of
the chase every Greek must from boyhooLl have practised tln-owing the
javelin for distance and at any improvised mark. At an early date its use:
wa;,, taught in the gymnasia, and its popularity is shown by the nnmeruu-;
representatiomi of it on the rnses and by the frequent metap110rs which Pindar
borrows from it. There is however uo evillence for any separate competitiou
in jaYelin throwing, with the possible exception of the competition on
horseback, until the fourth century.
The question whether iu the pentathlon the javelin was thrown fur
distauce or at a mark has been lliscussed at wearisome length by archaeolo-
gists and commentators on Pindar. The argument too often revoh-es in a
hopeless circle, the commentators u:,ino- as nremisses the purelv ct 1Jri,,1·i
• C, ..L .,

statements of early archaeologists or conclusions based ou the very passages

which they are discussing. Martin Faber for example exhausts himself iu
tlie Sisyphean task of proving that when Pindar speaks of a-Kor.oc; in
connexion with a javelin, he does not mean a mark but a boundary wali
eYolvecl out of his o-wn imagination. 40 Others argue from conjectural
hypotheses as to the order of event,, in the pentathlon or the method of
deciding this competition as though the hypotheses were established facts.
The question has been admirably discussed by Ji.ttlmer, whose conclusion is, I
think, incontestable, namely that the competition in the pentathlon was one
purely for distance.
Let us first take the witness of the monuments. The vases. as we have
seen, show no evidence for throwing at a mark. The points of the javelin are
blunt, the thro,ver has his head turned away, and there is no sign of any
mark or target. The latter argument is particularly convincing, because on
the oHly three vases which represent throwing the javelin on horseback the
taiget is clearly depicted. It is unnecessary to discu,;:s the delightfully naive
suggestion of M. Girard -1, that the objects fali,ely interpreted as compasses.
which as has been sl10wn above are really nothing more than badly drawn
arnenta, "·ere used for clnnviug circles in the sand which sen-ed as targets, or
the lmrdly le,:s cnrions suggestion of the late )Ir. Freeman that these same
objects were a sort of cro<1net hoop used as a target_-1, The hunter or soldier
does not throw his spear at his victim's feet but at l1is body, and if a target is
used it is at a reasonable height.
268 E. XOR:\L-\X CL-\RDIXER

The litemry eYiLlence agrees with tliat of the monmneuts. The passages
of Pindar referring to a mark with the exception of the account of the games
ofHerncles have no necessary connexion with any competition, certainly not with
the pentathlon. They are metaphors
borrowed from the practice of everyday
life. One pass,1ge certainly refers to the
pentathlon,4:1 two oth1ors possibly: .;o all
three clea1fr indicate a distance throw.
Lastly Luci~n in the ~liurcharsi, 27 defin-
itely states 7rcp'i ltKovT!ov /30?.9, Er:; µ~Kor:;
ltµ1?."i\wvrnt. His e.-idence though late
i;; rnluable because he is speaking of
Olympia, and therefore of the pentathlon,
the only event in which javelin throwiug
occurreLl at Olympia, and it is mo;;t im-
probable that the conditions of the com-
petition \\·ere ever changed in that most
Fw. 15.-H.-F. Knrx. Drnux 2;-2s. consen-ative of festival;,.
(After Juthner.) The pentathlete then threw the
javelin for di;;tm1ce. As in the di;,kos
throw a11Ll jump he was not allowed to overstep a certain line. This line is
perhap5 suggested by the pillar in Fig. 15: it is certainly the TEpµa mentioned
by Pindar in .1Y,ci,1. vii. 70
'!: El'LOa
E,Vs ,~ 7raTpa
, 0E -..: '
....,w~;Ei-<',, , '
a7roµvvw
µ17 TEpµa 7rpopar:; aKov0' 6JTE xaAKomip~lOl' opa-at
0oav ~;?.w<ra-a1 1, O', Eg€7TEµ,frcv 7raA..at<rµ1tTWl'
avxEi-a Kat a-0El'O', llSt'anov, at'0wl'l 7rptv ue"i\/~ ~;v'iov Jµ7TE<5€lV.

Here I must join issue with Ji.itlrner. He argues that the jawlin
thrower with his short run would be most uulikely to oyerstep the mark, and
therefore conclwles that the TEpµa is not the line from which he throw;;;, but
the line on either side of the arena within which he must keep his throw.
This interpretation does violence not only to the natural meaning of TEpµa
but also of r.po/3as, which can only mean 'stepping in front of.' }Ioreover,
experience shows that in the similar competitiom of throwing the cricket-ball
or putting the weight, disqualification for overstepping the line though rare
is by no means unk11own in the excitement of competition. ,vith this resena-
tion, Ji.ithner's interpretation of the passage may be accepted. ,vithout fully
discussing the endless interpretations of these lines I may briefly state
my reasons.
Pindar defends himself throughout this ode against a charge brought
against him by certain .A.eginetans of having transgressed the rules of courtesy
and fairness in some previous mention of their national hero ~ eoptolemus.
These detractors seem to have blamed Thearion for allowing one who hau
 THROWISG THE JA YELIS. 269
insulted their hero to introduce a note of discord into tlie triumph of his son
(v. 69). Pindar had trangresssed the laws and was disqualified thereby.
Perhaps too they had taunted Thearion for his extravagance in employing so
expensive a poet ( v. 18). In reply, Pindar appeals to the fact of his friendship
with Thearion (v. 61), to his position as proxenos at Dodona (Y. 66). He
disclaims all ,·iolence or arrogance (Y. 62); there is nothing discordant in his
praise of Sogenes (Y. 69,i. Then comes the passage in question. 'Soge11es of
the house of the Euxenidae I swear that I did not overstep the mark and
send forth the swift speech of my tongue like a bronze-headed jawlin that
puts out of the wrestling the strong neck sweatless yet, or ever the limbs be
plunged in the sun's fire.' He disclaims all unfairness that would disqualif}'·
'Yet,' he continues, 'if there was trouble, if I was carried somewhat too far,
song can make amends: after trouble delight follows more abundant.'
Such I take to be the thought of the passage. A word or two on points
of detail. The emphatic ar.oµ,vuw followed by µ,17 surely shows that
the disclaimer is not confined to the participle r.po/3a,;; but extends to the
infiniti ,·e opa-at. Professor Bury realizing this proposes to read vr.oµ,vvw, a
purely arbitrary emendation of a scholiast and quite unnecessary. Secondly,
if, as :Oir. Fennell says, the notion of disgrace does not generally attach
to EK-rr~µ,r.w, it frequently does so. It is used of 'divorcing' a wife, and
'sending into exi.le,' while he quotes no instance in which it means 'to
release ' or 'send off in triumph.' The word is however in itself neutral, and
takes its meaning from the context. ,YI1at then is its meaning in athletics ?
Did the Greeks regard the finish of a hard-fought contest as an unnecessary
toil from ,vhich it was an adrnntage to escape ? Every sportsman will
instinctively answer 'no;' and that tlie Greeks really were sportsmen is shown
by the additional honour attaching to a victory in wliich the victor had
fought every round without drawing a bye. Certainly Pindar's ideal athlete
wlio 'rejoices in the cost and the toil' (lsth. v. 10) would feel no satisfaction
in being 'put out of the wrestling' by an opponent's mistake.
This interpretation then does not rest on the 'arbitrary assumption'
that an unfair throw at once disqualified the competitor, it rests on the
natural meaning of the Greek. If, as I believe, the words naturally
imply such a disqualification, it is for those who interpret them
otherwise to show that such disqualification did not t::i.ke place. For my
own part, considering the punctilious, the religious st1·ictness with which
the great games were administered, it seems in the highest degree
probable that the slightest breach of the regulations inYoh-ed disqualifica-
tion. But it is arbitrary to assume that Sogenes himself or a fellow
competitor overstept the line, it is arbitrary to assume that one competitor
frequently won three of the first four events, it is arbitrary to assume that
in consequence the competition was frequently finished before the wrestling
came on, it is arbitrary to assume ( though personally I think it probable)
that the javelin throwing immediately preceded the wrestling. These and
other arbitrary assumptions are made by those who translate JfEr.1:µ'[r1:v
-rra"J\,a1a-µ,aTwv 'saves from the wrestling.'
:2i0 E. :XOR)IAX lL\.TIDIXEH

The competitors then rniglit not o..-erstep the line anll any such breach
of the rules probably inrnh·ed irnrne•liate disqnalification. Further, common-
sense and the safety of tlte spectators required that they should keep
,vithin certain limits as reganls direction, arnl this as JHthner sees is impliell
in the egw &~;&voe; of P!Jth. i. -!-!-. an expression which is not synonymous
with TEpµa 1.po/3lt<;
fA.T.Oµat
µ17 xaAKOT,(tpq,ov G.Kov0' W<J"ElT' ll"/W-
VO', ;3a"'A.EtV ;Jgw 7raA.1tµq, OovEwv,
µaKpa OE p(,Jra1<; aµda-at70' llVTlOV',.

How many throws were alloweLl we cannot say. The fact that on the
Yases youths are represented fre•tuentl.v with two, more rarely ,vith three
javelins in 1.heir hands, renders it probable that, two or three throws were
allowed, but the eYidence is not conclusive. 51 ~or do the javeli11s wl1i.ch
,rn see so commonly in palaestra sc?nes stuck in the ground allow us to
conclude that no throw counted unless the javelin stuck in the ground;
an impossible condition with bhmt points. X or do we know how the throw
,ms measured. In the stadium of Epidanrus there are a number of short
square blocks facing one another on either side at fairly regular intervals
which may well have se1wd for measuring the throw of the diskos or spear
like the measurecl bo:mls on either side of the moclern long jnmp. 52
Towards the close of the fifth century increased importance ,vas given to
the javelin as the weapon of light-armed troops and of the Epheboi; and
from the fourth centnry onwards we find c'iKovTta-µoc; quoted in inscriptions as
a separate competition at Athens aml elsewhere;''' The association of
the javelin and the bow suggest:, that in these competitions some sort
nf target was used. At all eYents the case cited by Antiphon proves that
jaYelin throwing at a mark with a sharp weapon ,rns practised in the
Gymnasia. But the oul_v llirect evidence for sucl1 a competition apart
from that on horseback is furnishell by two inscriptions from Larirn of
the time of Hadrian which mention victors a-Ko1.i, r.E(wv and a-Ko1.rp
ir.nEwz,.:,-1 Of the details of tl1ese compelitions nothing is known.

E.-Cmllpctitions on IIor.seback

From an early date tl1e javelin l1ad been employed by horsemen both
in war aml in the chase. At Athens especially horsemanship ,ms the duty
and also the recreation of the richer classes. Plato tells us that Themistocles
l1imself taught his son Cleophantus not 01Jly to ride, but to throw the javelin

.·., Xothing ,·.m l,e prov~,l from the Ce,m supru, 11. :21. At ~Hheus we hear of it lifot
il1''.l-iption which recor,h 3 ,\o1 xcu ,h ,, prize iu au iuscri1,tion rel.tting to the Thesea, n.c.
tor sp,,.u-throwing. J.G. 2360; Ditt. S'JII.' ii. 160-1. There is no mention of o.Kov-r,(J'µ.(i<
or a,o,·T1(J'T~s after the comme:1cement of
;, 2 IlpctKTLKcf, 1 !H)~ onr e1,t.
.:i-: Ce11s. Sl'--tO", Tr,tlle.s: S,unos, L,ui-,.,1 : c. Cs Ditt. Sv/U ii. 6i0, oil.
 THRO"\YIXG THE .JA \'ELIX.

stamling on horseback anJ other wouJerful tricks, aml in the Li, 1n he recom-
mends javelin thrO\dng on horseback as a useful accornpli3lllnent.i5 Some-
what earlier Xenophon in his treatise on the dutie3 of a cavalrv •
officer uro-es
0

the latter to encourage hi3 men to practise jaYelin throwing, and to stir up
emulation among them by offering J>rizes. 5,; Tl1ey are not merely to practise
indiviLlually, but in sham fights, using Ea-cpa1pwµE1 a llKOVTta. In liis dis-
1

course on Horsemanship he giYes further instruction;;. Yelocity and distance

are the most important points for war. To secure these the thrower must
advance the left side of the body and draw back the right, straightening l1im-
self from the thighs, and holdiug the ja,-elin pointed slightly upward;;. If
ho,rnver the object is simply a~curncy, the ja;-elin shoul,1 point straight at tlie
mark. At A thens tliere seem to lia ve been cumpetitions in this sport as early
as the fifth century. It is mentioned in an early fourth-century inscriptic,n,
where aruong the prizes Lff the Panathenaea five amphorae of oil are
assigned for the first prize, and one for the second acp' t7T'7T'OV ltKOVTttovTL:-· 7
In the second century acp' t'7T'r.ov aK011Titew occurs in inscriptions relating to
the Thesea. 53 In Thessaly, a land always famous for its horses, we find a-Ko7rrp
17r7rEW11 meutioned in the Larisa inscription of the time of Hadrian referred

to above. 59
Fortunately we are able to supplement these scanty notices by three Yases
actually representing this competition. A fifth-century aryballos from Eretria,
now at Athens,00 a fourth-century r.-f. krater in the Louvre,n1 and a hitherto
unpublished Panathenaic amphora presemed by Sir H. Campbell-Bannerman
to the British }Iuseum (Pl. XX). In all three the target is a shiel,l or similar
object with a crown forming a sort of bull's-eye in the centre, rziised on a po~t
to the level of the horses' heruls. On all three vases the competitors gallop
past this target, hurling their javelins at it as they pas:::. On the B. }I. vase
the jaYelins are represented roughly by a single line, on the other two va;:es
they l1ave regular leaf-shaped lteaLls: they are held a little abo\'e the shoulder,
with the point directed somewhat do\\ nwanls towards the target.
On the Eretria vase the riders wear petasoi, elaborately sniped chiton'-'s
secured by~ a belt, ancl high boots. The fir~t riLler has already thrown his
weapon, but his right arm is still extended to the front. His javelin is in mid
air, having missed the target. Another jawlin lies broken below the target.
There is nothing on any of these yases to indicate that the competitm s
started with two javelins and threw both as they pllssed the target. If we see
extra javelins in the field, they merely indicate tlrnt there are more compe-
titors than can be represented on the vase space. Some conYentional shrubs
on this vase suggest that the sport takes place in the open country. In
the fifth centu:-y there was probably no hippodrome at Athens, an,l the

-,; Jfrno, 93 d ; Ltg. 83-1 cl. ,o Dirt. Sy/U Ii. 6;-1.

;>J Hippa,·d,. i. 6. Cf. de ,·c cq. viii. 10. ,, .• Collignon, H7S.
5
I G. ii. 965.
• " )Iillin, i. 45. Doth vases .ne r, pro,1ncc•l
0

59 lb. ii. 44-1, 446, Ath. Jfittlz. xx.., (19051, and ,1i,cnssed in P. ,r olters Zn !Jricdus•_·:',ui
p, 213. -dgo,zen ( Tr,ir:bui'!J I',·07n<ul 1901).
27:?. E. XOR:\IAX GARDIXEH

Panatbenaea were helLl somewhere in the deme of Echelidae near the

Peiraeus.
The krater in the Louvre has a yet more festal appearance. Of the three
riders one has already thrown his jaYelin, the other two are about to throw.
They ·wear chitones like the riders on the Eretria vase, but no boots, and
instead of the petasoi they have crowns on their heads, while over them
hoYer two winged victories bearing crown~.
These two vases were connected by "\Yelcker with 1j d~ "Apyovc; a<r7r{,,
but Wolters rightly refers them to To d<p' f7r1,ov aKovT{SEtv. Their festal
character suggests a definite connexion with some festival, but what festival

FIG. 16.-PA:XAfHE:X-UC A}IPHORA IX BRITISH :MusEU}l. B 146.

we cannot say. The sport was probably a common one in Attica, Thessaly,
and other horse-breeding lands, and formed an attractive feature of other
festivals, besides the Panathenaea and the Thesea. There is certainly no
ground for connecting the vases with the Argive Heraea.
The B.11. vase figured in Plate XX needs no detailed description. The
riders wear the regnbtion dress of the Atheman ephebos, a bright-bordered
chitun fastened over the left shoulder and the petasos. A similar el)hebos
occurs on m1other Panathenaic amphora in the Briti,h Museum (Fig. 16).
He carries two javelins, and beside bim stands another youth naked, and on
foot, also beariug javelins. "\Vhether this vase was a prize for the same event,
we cannot say for certain. It may have been connected with those com-
 THROWIXG THE JA YELI.X. 2'i3

petitions for EvaZ1opta aml Evo7r'Aia mentioned in inscriptions, of the details of

which we are completely ignorant. The immense variety of competitions at the
Panathenaea is best illustratecl by the well-known Panathenaic vase repre-
senting an acrobat tumbling.';"
There remains yet another Panathenaic vase, figured by Gerhard in his
Efrusl·isr:h,: uncl C'w,ipanische V,·,senbild€i'.'; 3 Here we see four youths
galloping to the right, but they are naked: there is no target, and their
javelins are blunt, if we can judge from the illustration. Clearly we have to
do with quite a different event, perhaps with ;:ome sort of sham fight such
as is described by Xenophon, which in later times developed into a
competition.'34
\Ve must think of the Panathenaea as partly a rnst military tournament
with a variety of displays and military competitions, which must have
appealed greatly to the spectacle loving populace of .A.thens. )I° ot the least
attractiYe event was TO l<p' 'tr.7rov a.KOVTtSEtv, an event which finds its modern
analogy in such competitions as healls and posts or lemon-cutting. Of its
details and regulations we know nothing. Its popularity is shown by the
number of vases representing it; but that it did not rank as a serious athletic
event is proved by the fact that only five amphorae were given for the first
prize and one for the secon<l.
The javelin has been admirably treated by Dr. Jtitlmer in his Ant il..e
l'unzgeddhc, to which I owe much. I have endeavoured to aYoid covering the
same ground and to deal with points which he has discussed less fully. I
have received considerable assistance from the practical experience of Colonel
V. Balck, and also from )Ir. Henry Balfour of OxforLl. The rnses from the
British Mnsenm are publishell by kirnl permission of ~Ir. Cecil Smith from
drawings by )fr. Anderson.
E. N OR)L\.X GARDIXER.

62 Sah.rnan ~Ytc,opole de Cam i,-c,,, PL Co112ptcs Ec1l£hls, 1s;-o, p. 52 .

.XXXVII; Sdunber _.J.tl,1s xxiL 2. r., Hip pcm!:. i. 20 : I. U. Hl~l.
•3 i. PL A. 3. 4: A11,,nl,, ii. lfl'l. p. 2:!J. 9;

H.S -YOL. XX VU. T

 TWO KOTES OX PfL0S AXD SPHACTERIA.

I.
THE ROUTE FOLLOWED BY THE JlESSEXIAXS AT THE CAPTURE OF THE
SPARTA5 FORCE ox SPHACTFIUA.

THL""CYDIDES (iv. 3G) describes the h:=.t phase of the long contest which
leLl to the surrender of the 202 sun-iving Spartans on Sphacteria.
Tl1ey had gradually retired to tlie summit of the hill at tlie north end
of the island,-an altitude of something under .500 feet,1 and were making
their last stand in the neighbonrhood of the 1ra'Aa1ov epvµa mentioned by
Thucydides, which had once defemle<l this summit, and of which small
fragments are yet to be seen. These fragments are still there, for since
preliistoric times this practically waterless island has probably never had
inhabitants except a few nomad goathenb.
The ground,-working round west, north, east, south,-is as follows, and.
the photographs reproduced will help to make it clear (Fig. I, and Plan)
To the S."W. is the long slope up which the Spartans had been slowly retiring
from their camp on the low le,~el in the centre of the island. To the
west the hill falls, not Yery steeply, to <t saddle; and from this and all sides
except (as they thought) tlie east,, the Spartans were exposed to attack;
then comes a shoulder before the ground slopes away westwarcl to the open
sea. To the north a 8teep but easy rockstre"·n descent leads to the narrow
Sikia channel dividing Sphacteria from Pylos (J.H.S. vol. xviii. Part I,
Plate IY.). To the E. of the summit there are rocks and a small cliff 30
to 40 feet high, presenting no difficulty to a climber, which drops down into
a fairly level notch ( hereinafter to be ralleLl 'the notc-h ') some thirty yards
wide and easily visible at a distance from a northerly ancl southerly direction
(Figs. 1, -:J:., 6, 7); anLl eastward of the notch the precipice descends almost
sheer some 400 ft. to the ,rnter of tlie Bay of Xavarino, the 'A1µ1fv of this
part of Thucydides.
To the south of this cliff am1 ope11iog into tl1e south end of the notch
there is a steep gu1ly-' the gully,'-Jeading do,vn to the water, apparentl_y
;;,cahble in its whole length. though u·e ouly tested the npper part. South
1 Mr. l;1un,ly·, ,1t1Y, y J.1!.s. ,ol xi":.)
1,.-i,~l,,. ,,wl their eqnaEty i, eo11firnH·1l by photo-
rn~ke5 hnth Pylo, ~Jlfl :':['li.U·t,:1i,, -J.~o lcet !ll gr.L1•J.--
 TWO NOTES ON PYLOS AND SPHACTERIA. 275
again of the gully the line of cliff is quite precipitous, in places actually
overhanging (see Figs. 2, 3). But at the foot of this cliff there runs a narrow-
ledge at the top of an exceedingly steep slope of varying height above the
water; and along thi;; ledge, for tlie most part quite close under the over-
hanging precipice (Fig. 3), a goat-track may be followed from the Panagia
landing-place to tl1e gnlly. The distance from this landing-place to the

, 1~a.na5L,
~,L,lnding-
pLtce.

FIG-. 1.-GE:S-Elt,\L Va:w ::s'OltTH\L\lll>6 FU>~! CLlFF;; ~'JclH OF 'lHE P.\::S-,\GL\.

notch and summit would appear from Grundy's map (of which onr Plan 1s
an adaptation) to be a fow yards under a mile.
The data we find in Thucydides for determining the route taken by the
Messenian force are as follows :
1. They leaYe tlie Athenian main borly at a point from which their
comnrn.nder has just been able to communicate with Cleon and Demosthenes;
arn1
2. They reach their starting-point without attracting attention.

3. Tl1ey are perhaps lell by someone who has reason to think a way along
die cliff exists which "ill take the SpGrLms in rear, though he does not know
T 2
Lagoon

NAVARINO BAY

-p(Ptai,a L(J]td,ifl,y-ptact
o.riagia
Cha,peJ,
 TWO :NOTES OX PYLOS AXD SPH~\.CTERL\. :!.77

it in detail. A Messenian exile from Naupactus might have some such

reminiscences of childhood.
4. Their track was out of sight of both friends and foes upon Sphacteria :
tl1ey were only seen when they appeared upon the summit.
5. It lay along the face of the cliff wherever the ground allowed a
footing (KaTa TO a€t 7rap€tKOV TOV Kpr,µvwSov<;).
6. The summit was gained behind the backs of the Spartaus: the
Messenians when they appeared were f!brn-e them.
7. The ground where tl10 Messenians appeared was nnguarded, owing
to the natural protection that the precipice "-as expected to afford .

... -

FIG. 2.-RED BLl'FF FI\O)[ Sun·n.

The .'.IIes,enLm;,' startiug--point ,,-oultl J_,e this side of it. Summit vi,ible ];eyond (l.-tt).

·with these data before us we are surely justified in drawing the inference
tlrnt it; was in the notch that the Mes3enians gathered their forces befvre they
ascended to the summit.
For the ro!lte taken by the lleosenian general from the time he left
tl1e Athenian main body to the notch there are three conceivable
alternatives:
A. That they rnoved round the northern shore, from the west, and then
clambered up the steep but not precipitous north-east corner. reaching the
notch at its nodlt end (Fig. G).
B. That they took boats from the Pauagia landing-place either to the
foot of the gully or to the north-ea~t corner of the island, and thence
climbed up either to the south or to the north end of the notch.
278 W. C. C03IPTOX AND H. AWDRY

C. That they crept along the face of the diff from the south till they
reached the gully, and then ascended to the south enLl of the notch.
To the selection of the most probable of the5e alternatives the following
remarks may seem to offer some guidance:
A may be dismissed : for although the ascent from the north-east
might possibly, but by no means certainly, be out of :-ight. yet so short is the
distance from the Spartan line of defence to tlie Sikia channel that the
movement of some :WO men (we can hardly suppose less were employed)

1.

FJ,;, 3.-TIIm DrXFF .\XD on: Rnl"TI: DI:l'WEEX CLIFF .urn I3n,IJE,; LOOKI:SG s.
- t-~uat•frai_.k at fuut 1_,t , liff.

,tlong this northern foot of the island to their starting-point could hardly
have passed unnoticed. Furthermore the ascent from the north-east does
not in any way correspond with the difficult climbing suggested by Thucydides'
narrative.
B is open to the objection that (though vario11s ,niters, including
Professor Bury. have assumed the use of boats) there is no mention or hint
of such use in Thucydides' narrative, and the whole 1eads like a land opera-
 TWO SOTES OS PYLOS ~-\SD SPHACTERIA. 279
tion; while a flotilla of boats woulJ be far more likely to be seen than
climbers along the cliff.
C. To prove the possibility-and to pleaJ the probability-of this route,
we offer the following account of a scramble, successfully achieved on
April :2.5, 1!)06, which appears to be the first recorded ascent on the part
of anyone emleavouring to trace the whole route of the )Iessenians from
start to finish.
After larnling at the Pmmgia we followed at first two ,_lifferent routes,

FJG. 4.-LooKI\"<: :X. Fl'.U~I .\uru,'f rJIJ: S.DJI: 1'01> r .\s FIG. 3.
The l',ll t fartltc,t to rhe 1ight is Py!Ga.

one along the shore close to the -water's edge~; the other ascending to the
ground above the cliff and following this in a northerly direction till within
sight of the summit anEl the position that would be coYered by the
Athenian main force, near which the interview woulLl have taken place
between the Messenian leader and the Athenian generals.
Here then we should have the )Iessenian starting-point (Fig. 2), anLl
they would move down over the edge of the cliff ,Yithout attracting attention,
because (1) the diMance from the Spartans \Yas nearly a mile (2) the whole

2 This so far as we could judge ;,1 i:;ld. with a other. awl we ,m:i not in a position to a~sert the
little wading, have proved a pos,ible track. !mt prac:tical.,ility of the water'b edge route.
the probabilities ,eem all in Ltvum of the
i11terveninu 0
ornund wa;;; crowtle,l ,ritl1 troL•l)S anJ 1\ :r; tl1ick witl1 tl1e dm,t
0

of the burnt brushwoorl.

Their route led in a fo,,. minute;; to a point from which the summit and
the Spartans' last stand became inYisible owing to tl1e interposition of a
bluff (Fig. 2_, ,d1icl1 fall;;; precipitously to the bay, almost, or quite,
oYerhanuinO'
.:=, 0
r, see Ficts.
.. C
i, 3 ). This bluff is a conspicuous l)oiut, being ~

about the last shonMer but one fn,rn tlie summit, and its face is more red
tlian the rest of the line of cliffs_·, From this spot the )Iessenians· clamber
,rnuld have commenced :Plan aml Fi::t. ~-. Tlie llescent from the ridge at this
}Joint, though fairly stee11, preseuts n; llifficulty w1iatercr. At the fo~ot of the
cliff some .50 ft. abore thE· water's edge our twc, routes joined. and from thence

.Fi,:. 5. -Lu, •KI'>h vow" FI:031 1111: xorcH, ,-.01." 1 HW.\l:P.

:c;ho11i11g t,,p ot tl,e gnlly, aml 011 the 1i~l1t th0 rocks lea,ling to tl,e ,mnmit.

we JJroceeded togetl1er prncticall_,. all tl1e ,my to the top, using a goat-track
(Fig. 3) that rose aml f,:ll keepi11g close under the main cliff, the general
trend of the track being upwards, :SO that we grmlnally rose to a considerable
l1eight above the water, h:wing on onr rigl1t all the way a full Yiew of the
harbour and the sand-bar with the lagoon beyond it, aml occasionally
catching sight of the notch (Fig. 4;. 1 Here and there a ledge had to be
tnwersecl requiring haml- a:; well as fuot-holll; but both were ahrnys forth-
coming, so tlrnt tl1ere was no point of difficulty for anyone used to rough
country. After going fur about half an hour we saw before u;;; the gully
mentioned by Profes5or Burrows (J.H.S. ml. .ni. Part 1, 1806) which was our
 'f\\'U XOTE~ OX PYLC1S AXlJ SPHACTEHL\.

objective. Professor Bmrows as-;umes that tl1e }fossenians reacheJ the foot of
this gully by boat and ascended it all the way to the notch. It has however
been shown that our track fulfils the requirements of the narrative, in which
no mention is made of the water. \Ye had started from a point where the
Athenian generals could be conferred with, the whole route was completely
out of sight, the cliffs rising vertically above us to a height of 200 ft. or more,
and our track following the cliff as best we could find a footiug (KaTa To
£i€£ -rrap,iiKov). No better cover could be desired (see the illustrations).
On reaching the gully in about three l[Uarters of an l1our from the start,
we proceeded straight up it till our way was closed by a projecting buttress
only allowing of an ascent by a chimney, which involved the use of the back
and knee, for 12 or }.j ft. After this point, which one of us avoided by
de;c:cending to the main gully,-a "·ider hollow to the north of the buttress,-
there ,vas no difficulty. except the thickness uf the bushes, in proceeding
upwards to the notch. The head of the gully was reached in something less
than 1 ½ hour from tl1e start. From the notch to the summit, as has been
shown, the final scramble of the )Iessenians would be accomplished in a
very few minutes: so that we may conclude that they were sighted on
the summit within 1 ~ hour of the time when they offereLl to the Atheni:111
generals the prospect of seeing the Spartans outflanked.
Incidentally also another point comes out. \Ye were of comse· in- full
view of everything to the east and north-east of us; aml ha(l the Spartans
been in possession of any part of the sand-spit they wonld have been near
enough to have found some means of attracting their friends· attention to
the :Messenians' monment, ,vhich clearly they were not. They must there-
fore ha;-e had their camp at a distance away to the east or north-east of the
lagoon. However, this remark applies equally to wl1ichever of the three
alternatin• routes we select.
,Y. c. c( )}[PTox.
H. AWDitY.

II.
THE LAXD DEFESCE (IF PYLOS (see Plan, p. 2-;-c ).

I had greatly wished also to im·estigate thoroughly the competing liues

of the Athenian defence of Pylos on the land side, but time ran short before
I had by any means satisfied myself; indeed, if I express an opinion at all,
it must be with most humble apologies to those of mucl1 greater lucal and
archaeological knowledge than myself.
In a former article on the strategy at Pylos and Sphacteria (J.H.S. vol.
xx. HIOO) I ventnrerl to point out that Demosthenes' line of tlefence "oukl
have been governed by the following three military considerations: (1) the
least possible amount of building to be done, (2) the fortress to be reduced
iu size as far as possible, (3) all dangerous or doubtful ground to be left
outside the fortress.
282 W. C. CO.)IPTOX _-\XD H. A WDRY

The competing lines are two: (A) tlw.t fa\'Onred by 1Ir. Grundy a11Ll
shown in his map (J.H.S. vol. xvi, of which the Plan in this article is an
adaptation), viz. a line running north awl south nlong the saml-hills in
continuation of the east cliff of Pylo~ 1urthwanl to Yoitltio-Kilia; ,:B) that
favoured by Professor Burrow,s, a line running ea&t aml west along the
high part of the: north cliff of Pylos, fr0m "N"estor's cave ,,-estwanls, with a
wall to continue it from the western cud of this cliff to the north-west
corner of Pylos peuinsnla, wl1ere the western precipices m·erhanging the
sea become high.
Of this (A) gives a strong line, for the saml-hills are very steep and sand-
climbing is Yery difficult (Fig. 6), and the piece where a wall woultl have to
be made is short; but it lea\-es much more gr,rnnd on l'ylos for the defenders

.Xe:--tor·~ Cl Ve.
,i

._(
- -.,;I

--~~~~~~-:~-·~-~~~=,~~.:~:~~~~~ !

FIG. 6. -YJEIY 1JF l'l. J_qs AXJJ S!'H.-1.CI ERL.\. Fll01I THE X.

to hold, iucl udiug a , ery cuu~idc1".tbl y longer piei:e of coast. This coast is for
the mo:;t part low, bnt sheer. precipice; bnt I iLtW one spot,-and there may
have been more, for I liacl nut time to r.;;o all round,-at the promontory form-
ing the south side of the entrance to Voithio-Kilia (Fig. 7,', where a ship
or two coultl have lanlled men if 1mopposed, and these once landed could
with ropes or otherwi,-;e have lielpd their comrades up elsewhere. Demo-
sthenes therefore if lie held liue (A) must certainly have spared men from his
small force to watch this coast, a 11ecessity ho wouhl of course wish to avoid.
As to line (B), the northern cliff is really irnpregn:ible, and gaps in it
have been at some ti:~ie strengtltene,1 by fortit:ications rongh and otherwise.
The chief piece of fortiticatiou here i;; of so regnl::tr a character that it c,rnnot
be part of Demo.,tl1eue/ lw,,ty bni!diug, aud wonlll probably belong, like the
extensive Greek fon11dati11113 on wl1ich the neighbonrin 6 mediaeval castle on
 TWO XOTES OX PYLO:-i AXD SPHACTERL-\.. 283
the summit is built, to the pennaHent Athenian fort held by them from
B.C.42.5 to 413. The only vulnerable point is the north-west corr.er between
the north cliff and the sea; and without discussing the question ·whel:her
the still remaiuing wall near that point is the Athenians' work or not, there
would have been no difficulty in the time at Demosthenes' disposal in
supplying an adequate wall. It would therefore seem likely that Demo-
sthenes would be adhering best to military principles in taking the line (B);
and that although this line ga\·e him perhaps slightly more building, he ·would

FIG. i.-Yrr:w OF P,LOB _.\.XD ~['Jl_\<;l'l:IlL.\. FllO)l THI: X. r.01-~D.\llY OF YoIJIIIu-KlLI.\.

XL·sto1's c:a\·e n1ay lJe di~tiugui-,h8d 11ere ,11.;,J.

prefer to contract his fortress, cconomi:;e men, aml lc,we the low sea cliff;; and
the low ground at the 1101 them enJ of Pylos outsicle his fortress.
\Ve must remember that in speaking of Pylos we are 11caling ,vitb
a place where, unlike Sphacteria, there has been much fighting sub-,e11uently
to Demosthenes: (1) in the 12 years of the Athenian occnpatiou, (2) in the
Middle Ages as evidenced by the castle on the summit and the tower at the
south-east corner, (:3) in the ,var of Independence; and that there are the
remains of buildings of all manner of periods npnn the peniusula.
To what pniod do the numerous skeletons sticking out of the ground
at the son them end of Pylos oYer the Sikia Channel belong ?
H. AWDRY.
 ARCHAEOLOGY IX GREECE.
(HIOG-1907. >

THE archaeological acti,·iries of tl1e twelrnmonth from July HlOG to

June 190-;-, "·ith which this paper deals, l1a;-e been ,;ery numerous. Not only
are tl1ere many smaller disconries of interest to be recorded, but also the
more important excanttions, the French at Delos, the German at Pergamon,
to which may uow be added those of the British School at Sparta, ham made
considerable progres~. Especially irnportaut is the scheme for excarnting the
Agora aml the northern slopes of the Acropolis at Athens, no,Y at last begun
after many difficulties by the Greek Archaeological Society.
The work is under the direct supervision of the General Ephor of
Autiqnities, Dr. Kanadliias, with a committee consisting of the Crown
Prince ns chairmnu, the presiLlent of the University, the mayor of Athens
and tl1e clirectors of the foreign Schools of Archaeology. A beginning has
been made by the demolitiou of some houses near the Theseum. The
scheme embraces the clearing of the whole of the northern slopes of the
Acropolis, the ~.\.gora, nncl in general, the region between the Tower of the
,Vind,, and the Theseum. Tliis area is entirely covered with houses, and
this lias given rise to serious difficulties. These are now in a fair way to be
overcome, and gn::i.t results arc to be expected in the course oi the next few
year:-.
Auother interesting excavation at Athens was in progress in August of
tliis year at the Dipylon Gate under the direction of Dr. Briickner and
M. Skias. They have proved that all tl1e monuments were in family groups,
aml stood. not leYel with the road, but on built platforms some nine feet
l1igl1. Each family had its own platform. There is also evidence for dating
all the monuments to the periml between the year 393, the date of the
])exileos f-ltele, and ::n, B.c.
Perhaps the most important excarntion of the Society is that conducted
iu the antnmn of l!JOG by Dr. Stais at Sunium. Whilst digging near the
temple, in the hope of finding relics of the period before the Persian ,vars, he
hit upon a cleft in the artificially smoothed platform of rock, upon which the
temple stauds. In this he fouml two colossal archaic male statues of the
'Apollo' type, with tl1e ba,::e anrl fept of a tliird, and the base and feet of a
fourth figure, tliat was pofsib),1-- female. They were associated with
Curintliian pottery. One of the ·Apollos' has lost its head, and has been
k·ft, with tl1e hase. at Sunim,1. The otlier is now in the centrp of the
 ARCHAEOLOGY IX GHEECE.

Archaic Room in the ~ational Museum at Athens, where its huge stature-
it is eleven feet high-dwarfs all the other 'Apollo:,' amongst which it stan(h.
In style it belongs to the more advanced class, with one foot forward, and
the arms nearly free. It is complete, but for the shins and part of the face.
These have now been restored with plaster, 1mfortunately of so nearly the
same brown as the statue itself, that it is difficult to see exactly what is old
and what new.
Its original position is proved by the di::;co\·ery on the rock-platform
outside the temple of a hewn square depression, that exactly fits the base.
All four statues were probably dellications set up outsille the temple. where
their size must have made them conspicuous objects from tlie :sea. Since
the Persian invasion they have lain in the cleft in which they were found. 1
Dr. Klon Stephanos has continued his researches in tlie prehistoric
cemeteries of ~axos and Syros. These are all of the Cycladic period, with
the skeletons lying on the side and the legs drawn up, and ha\·e yieldetl a
great number of characteristic objects, marble female idols, obsidian knfres
and hanLl-made pottery, either incised or, later, painted with geometrical
patterns. Dr. Stephanos is of opinion that the relatiYe age of the tombs is
indicated by this, but still more by the greater or less t1uantity of brunze
present.
ThesE' cemeteries, which have now been found in so many of the C.\·clades,
suggest some problems that have as yet hardly been answered. "'liere arc
the correspomling settlements, such as that of which scanty remains were
found at the lowest levels at Phylakopi, aml why are the remains between
this period and the }Iycenean age so sc:inty? These Cycladic cemeteries
with their 'Amorgine' culture are contemporary with Early l\Iinoan I [I in
the Cretan scheme, and abound all over the Cyclades. For the succeecliug
Middle Minoan and Late Minoan I and II periods we have in the Cyclades
only Phylakopi in Melos, some vases from Paros, and the prehistoric finds in
Thera. For the Myceuean period (Late :Minoan III) the case is almost the
same: very little has come from tLe islands. It would seem as if there were
three periods in the Bronze Age. In the first, that of the 'Cycladic' or
'Amorgine' cemeteries-the Early llinoan of Crete-the Cyclades held tlie
first place in the Aegean world, and largely influenced Crete.~ In the seeoud
they ga\'e way to Crete, the highest point of whose culture Dr. Evans puts
in Middle Minoan III. In the third and last period the mainland of Ureecl'
took the lead. Only all through the obsidian trade enabled Melos to hold a
good position. It is much to be hoped that some other prPhistoric settlemeut
like Phylakopi will be excavated, to give in the light of present knowledge a
continuous picture of Bronze Age culture in the islands.
At the Amphiareum at Oropos M. Leonardos has found a fountain aml
the remains of houses and shops that were used for the acc()mmodation of
pilgrims tn the shrine.
1 .-Jth . .llittl,. 1906, p. 363. To he fully Cycladi,· style near Chalki, all<l on tb: i,Liwl ,.i
published in the 'E<P~f'Epls 'Apxawl\o-y,,,.;,. l's~ir<1 off Crete.
2 ::iesi below, th~ notices of tombs uf the
 H. )I. D .-\ _,WKIXS

Xear Clialki:-, }I. Papavasileio11 has excavatetl a number of tombs, some

)Iyceneau and some saill to resemble the Cycladic burials. Many rnses are
reported. The )Iycenean tombs are at a place called Yromot'1sa, and belong to
the wry en<l of the J)eriod. One tomb even contnined a geometric vase.
The 'Cycladic' tombs are at )L\nika, about an hour from Chalkis, and consist
of the tomb proper. covered with slabs, and a ~mall dmmcs. Two marble
idols were fonnd, one female, and badly baked pottery. I have not seen the
o~jects.
Besides continuing his wo1 k in Lokris aml at Thennon in Aetolia, Dr
Sotiriadhis has excamted neolithic sites at Chaeronea an(l Drachm,i.ni. No
metal was found, but celts, obsidian, and hand-mnde pottery. Of this some is
black polished ware ornamented with incised patterns, and some has geometric
patterns in reel paint, and resembles the very remarkable pottery found in
the neolithic settlements at Sesklo and Dirnfoi in Thessaly. This northern
Greek neolithic seems to haw no connexion with the Aegean culture of Crete
and southern Greece, but to have its allies rather in the north and west.
The pottery has resemblances to thnt found by Dr. Doerpfeld in Lenkas,
and its context seems to be far more European tban Aegean. The celts from
Thessaly, it is noticeable, liave squared edges, and are entirely different from
those so common in southern Greece and Crete. The special importance of
an examination and comparison of these remains, for the most part still unfor-
tunately unpublished, appears below in the discussion of Dr. Doerpfeld's
recent disc,}wries.
The work of nI. Skias at Coriutl1 will be mentioned in connexion with
the American excan,tion.
An i11teresting disco,·cry is announced from Thebes. In the middle of
the modern town, ,rl1ich occupies the site of the Kaclmeia, a 1Iycenean house
ha-; been accidentally tliscovered, and partly exca.-aterl by l\I. Keram6poulos.
It containetl fragrne11ts of ,Yall paintings, one shewing a forehead with curls,
another a face, anll otl1ers parts of the liair. Besides these, which formed
part of figure subjects, is a piece shewiug a lily. There were also five very
large psemlamphurac. as much as two feet high, and two hundreLl or more
cups and l\Iycenean kylikes, many absolutely new, as if f, om a shop. The
house h::Hl been destroyed by fire. The site is to be expropriated, and fully
c!eared. )Iycenean remains ham been fonnrl befure at Thebes, but nothing
so promising as this house, which from its central situation and fine paintings
seems likely to be a palace or building of some importance.
Great acti,·itv
.,
has been shewn this JYear in buiklinQ· '-'
and enlaraina
0 0

}Iuseums, and for this work, which is Illt)re useful and necessary than
,-howv. the Arcl,aec,logical Society deserves great credit and the thanks of
all m:c'iiaeologists. Tl;e General Ephor, Dr. KavvaLll1ia:::, recognizes that i.t is
uut only 11ecesi'ary to dig up antiL1uities, but also to preserve and exhibit
tliem ade, 111ately. rui,l all students reap the benefit~ of tliis wise policy. The
general tendency is nuw towards building l"cal l\Inseurns, aml, altl1ough this
im·olves tl1e visiti)r in a goo,l rlenl of tnwelling, it is often au advantage to
,-ee tl1e objects in tlie place wliere they were fonn.J.
 ARCHAEOLOGY IX GREECE. 28i
Thus at Epidauros Dr. Kavvadhias has, besides conJuctiug a supple-
mentary excavation, arranged the Museum, and taken measures for the safety
of the architectural remains. Study of the architectural fragments has
also enabled liim to erect in the Museum reconstructe(l p:uts of the more
important:buildings.
Other work of this kind lrns been undertaken at the temple of Bassae,
where the walls have been almost entirely rebuilt from old material, and the
half-columns inside tl1e temple re-erected.
At Corinth, the old temple and Peirene are being put into a safe
condition.
~ or have medieYal builJi11gs been neglected, and the Greeks no longer
deserve the reproach that they are careless of the monuments of their later
hi~tory. In particular, the Byzantine churches at Mistra, which were in a
Yery dangerous state, are being repaired under tl1e care of :M. Adhamandiou.
A new museum has been built at Lycosura, to exhibit the colossal gTonp
of Despoina, Demeter, Artemis, and Anytus by Damophon. The actual
work of re-erecting the statues is now in liand, and casts of the pieces
in Athens have been sent to Lycosura. The work has been undertaken by
}I. Kourouniotis, and the sculptures han been the object of a special study
by 1Ir. Dickins of the British School, ,vho has the permission of the
authorities to publish the reconstructed group. M. Kourouniotis has also
excavated round the temple, finding a part of the ,mil of the sacred
enclosure.
The enlargement of the )Iuseum at Sparta is mentioned below.
A museum has been built at Corcyra, near the tomb of Menecrates,
and the programme of the Society ir:cluJes the building of several more of
these local Museums, which add so much to the pleasure of travel in Greece,
and have moreover the advantage that objects in themselves of minor
importance are not lost, as they me apt to be, in a \'ery large central
)fusenm. 3
This year was the second season of the wor!-:. of the British School at
Sparta. The further excavation of the Sanctuary of Artemis Orthia and of
the city wall continued work begun in !DOG. New ground has been broken
by the discovery of the site of the temple of Athena Chalkioikos.
The main objective was the Sanctuary of Artemis Orthia. The buildings
at this site are a temple built probably in the sixth century R.C, aml lasting
on until the thinl century A..D., although rebuilt during the Hellenistic
period. Secondly, a Roman theatre, built at the eml of the second or begin-
ning of the third century A.D., in which the fat;ade of tl1e temple was included,
cccupying the position of the stage building. The Roman theatre has now
been completely cleared. In tbe arena or orchestral area ,wre found the
remains of the altar, built at the same Roman perio(l as the theatre itself.
Beneath this altar were blocks that be lunged t J the altar of Hellenistic time$,

·' These notes han J,.,,,a hrgely Llr.,wn up f101tt thl' ITpa.1<T11<o'. of 1,1·_6 of the Grcd;: Arch.1eological
Sn,__·iety.
allll in connexion with them a depo,;it of burnt refuse from sacrifice;: and
some late Greek sherds and terra-cottas.
More than a metre below the He'.lenistic level a deposit of archaic Greek
objects was reached: this has now been cleared Jown to solid earth all over
the arena and inside the temple. Above the archaic deposit was a layer of
sand which had been brought from the river to raise the lei;el when the
temple was built-probably, to judge from the objects fouud in the sanJ,
about the middle of the sixth century B.C. The deposit below the sand is in
parts as much as a metre thick, and ranges in time from the eighth, or
possibly the ninth, century to the middle of the sixth century B.C. Very
near the bottom of this structure is a cobble pavement, on which stands
a large altar built of stones in regular courses. This altar is directly
below the Hellenistic and Roman altars. The temple that existed con-
temporaneously with it has not yet been found, but there are indications
that its remains are below the foundations of the Roman building. This
archaic altar was surro1mLled by a mass of burnt matter, amongst which were
a ,1uantity of fragments of burnt bones. The surrounding deposit contained
a great nmuber of small objects and pottery. It was dug in layers, with the
result that at the lowest levels no pottery except 'Geometric' was found;
above this, ' Geometric' mixed with 'Protocorinthian' and a ware akin
to 'Corinthian,' whilst at the highest levels nothing but this last kind
occurred. \Vith the pottery ·were found a large number of small bronzes,
pins, fibulae, and animals, lead figurines, and carved ivories. These latter
were either small figures of animals or men in the round, seals with devices
cut in intaglio, or plaques "ith scenes carved on them in relief. .Many, if
not all, of these plaques were fastened by bronze rivets on to the front of
fibulae. The subjects represented on them comprise male or female "·inged
figures grasping birds, a warrior stabbing a gorgon, a dead man on a bier,
a ship with full rigging and crew, sphinxes, a man on horseback. and others.
Jewellery, engraved gems, terra-cotta fignrines, some representing probably
the image of the goddess, fragments of terra-cotta masks, and other objects
"·ere also found. The occurrence of amber, in view of the northern origin of
the Dorians and of its rarity on classical sites, is of great interest..
Thus the cult of Orthia began in the earliest times with a large altar
aml probably a temple. This altar was covered up when the temple corre-
sponding to it was destroyed in the sixth century, and a new temple built
a little way off, the level being at the same time raised by tlie layer of sand
mentioned above. In Hellenistic times this temple was rebuilt, but lasted on
on the same site until the end of paganism. Under the late empire it was
surrounded by a theatre, from which the rites performed in front of it could
be conveniently witnessed. The altar always was in the same place, which
it occupied with ever-rising level for at least 1100 years. Except one stray
lentoid gem, nothing whatever of the 1Iycenean period lias been fonnd.
The sanctuary of Atheua Clrnlkioikos ,ms found behind the theatre on
the Acropolis Hill. A mass of geometric pottery shews that this sanctuary
also goes back to a VL•ry eaily period. The b1uldiug itself was rnud1 destroyed,
 . ARCHAEOLOGY IS 1_rnEECE.

but tl1e finds were important. .A very fine Panathenaic amphora, bronze
statuettes, and a large archaic inscription were fouml, which proved to
continue, though not to complete, the well-known 'Damonon' inscription.
The work r1f tracing the course of the ancient city wall was continue,l.
This has again been done largely by the discovery of tiles stamped witlt
the information that they were public tiles nsecl for the walls. The name
of the tyrant Xabis found on some of them connects the building of the wall
with him. In a few places the actual wall has been fonnll with remains of
towers.
In looking for the .Agora some Hellenistic tombs were found, well built
of ashlar, and containing vases and discs of stout gold-leaf chased with
patterns of wreaths and flying birds. The5e bracteate5, some of which are
double, are imitations of Sicyonian coins.
It is proposed next year to continue the vrnrk of the Orthia Sanctuary
by removing some of the Roman fonndations, and thus getting at the archaic
deposit below them. In especial it is hoped that the temple connected with
the archaic altar will be found. There is also more work to be done in
digging a mass of' Geometric' deposit at the Chalkioikos site.
An excantion at the site usually known as Cape Sepias on the )Iag-
nesian peninsula resulted in the discovery of a church with a fine mosaic
pasement, and some tombs of the 'Geometric' period. The vases found in
them resemble the Geometric ware of northern Thessaly, of which specimens
have been found in the Islands and in Crete.
The year's work in Crete shews that the island is by no means e:s:hausted.
The excavation by the British School at Palaikastro and that by the University
of Pennsylvania at Gourni,-\. are finished, but fresh discoveries of the greatest
iuterest still continue to be made. Dr. Evans at Knosos, Dr. Xanthoudhidhis
at the Early )Iinoan Settlement of Koum,isa in the Messani. plain, and )Ir.
Seager at a new site on the islarnl of Pseira, have all done work as important
as any that has preceded, aml at all three sites work is to be continued for at
least another year. The greatest promise for the future is still at Knosos,
where Dr. Evans has shewn that much still remains to be done, before it will be
possible to regard the Palace a~ fully excavated.
A building with remains dating from )Iidclle )Iinoan III, the perio,l
regarded by Dr. Evans as the high watermark of the :Minoan civilization, has been
found underneath the pn;rnment of the \Vest Court, and a close examination
of the already excavated parts of the Palace has yielded remarkable results.
These have been so fully <l.escribed by Dr. Evans himself in the letter
to the Tinus 4 from ·which these notes are taken tlrnt it is not necessary here
to do more than briefly note tht> more important. The restoration of
the wall-painting in the miniature style representing a )Iinoan temple has been
completed, and the rains of several winters have so washed the Palace
walls that on the west Fa,;ade of the Crntrnl Palace Court marks of
the bases of two pairs of small columns have been observed. These fit

\ppuring in the T11,us ( TVccl:ly Ed.) of July 19th, 1907.

4 ..

H.S.-VOL. :XXVH. lJ
 H. )I. l>A WK.IXS

the columns on the paintiug so well that, combined with other iu,lications,
they shew that here was the fa~ade of such a buil(ling as is shew11 in the
painting.
Almost equally striking is tl1e discovery of the aetual foundation
of the stepway that led up to the lialls abow the basement rooms of the west
wing. A large ,;outh-western quarter of tbe Palace hitherto unsuspected has
been found, and a huge beehive chamber cut in the rock. This is probably
a great tomb, and its exploration is as full of promise as anything ehe on this
truly wonderful site.
Dr. Luigi Pernier of the Italian Archaeological Mission has kindly
furnished notes on the work this spring at Phaistos and Prinir\.
At Phaistos the excavation of the earlier palace, remains of which exist
below the floors of the later building, has yielded good results. A square
room has been found, and in the micl<lle of it a round ca,·ity contarnmg
lamps, Kamares pottery, and burnt bonts. The latter are considered by the
excavators to prom it to be a sacrificial pit.
The position of the remains of the different periods one above another
has been examined by means of a special trial-pit. The foundations of the
earlier (Middle i\Iinoan) palace were found to go down to about twelrn feet
below the pavement of the later palace. Below these foundations were found
walls made of small stones belonging to a still earlier building, which in its
turn rests on the Neolithic deposit. The general resemblance to the resnlts at
Knosos is striking. At both sites there are the two palaces, and underneath
them the thick layer of Neolithic remains.
\,~ ork has also been done on the later palace, where a careful examin-
ation of the walls has allowed conclusions to be drawn as to the size and
di~position of the now destroyed upper story. 'The area on the highest part
of the acropolis which, from the discovery of two columns, had been already
called the peri.,tiliu, has been cleared, and now justifies its name. A square
conrt has been revealed, no doubt open to the sky, surrounded by twelve
colunrns, four on each side, with a portico running all ronnd. In the hot but
wiudy climate of Crete such a cloistered court must have been a great feature
in a building, pru\·iding sl1elter from sun and wind alike.
Later in the season the excavators resume\l work at Prinia, an elevated
site that o\-erl,>oks the road from Candia to Gortyn. Some •vears aero 0
prehistoric ch1y idols, similar to those from Gourni,i, and those mentioned below
from Ko111rnis:.t, were found here. Now archaic Greek remains have been
disc:overed, u,>tably the ruin::; of a temple. Its importance is attested by the
sculptures that adorned it. Part of the simr,, nenrly three feet high, has
been fouml, d,·corated in low relief with a procession of riders armed with
ro11nd shields and lances. This recalls the tnracotta sima of the temple at
Palaiknstro with its reliefs of chariots and warriors, who are similarlv armed"
In both cases abo traces of colour have been found. Besides these, "there ar~
numerous fragments of statues in soft stone. One of the best is part of a

'B.8.A. xi, PL XY.

 ARCHAEOLOGY IX GREECE. 291

statue c,f a {t;male divinity seated on a high-backed tlirone, decorated with

figures in low relief. To a. larger. but similar figure, half life-size, belong
part of a very fine head, waving hair, and part of the breast. Associated
with the fragments of the si,nr,_ were remains of some very fine pithoi,
adorned with various figures in relief. Notable amongst these is the
standing full-face figure of a winged goddess, between a pair of horses.
The scarcity of Greek remains in Crete makes these discoveries all the more
interesting. It is in the work;; of this period th·tt the influence of
Dipoenus and Skyllis is to be looked for, and it is greatly to be hoped that
the work at Prinia will yield still more in the future.
The most important work on a new site has been that of .Mr. Seager, who
has continued the excavation he began in 1906 on the small island of Psefra,
which lies about two miles off the north coast of Crete in the gulf of Mira-
bello, off the modern village of Kavousi. That so small an island, only a mile
and a half long by one wide, and now quite uninhabit,~d, should have been
the site of a prehistoric town, is eloquent for the populous condition of
Minoan Crete. The town, whose existence was proved in the beginning of the
campaign of 1906, lies mainly on the south-east side of the island, where a
long rocky point forms a good harbour for small boats. From the old landing-
place in this harbour a long flight of stone steps leads to the summit of the
point, and there divides into four roads intersecting the top of the hill. Owing to
the abundance of stone at hand, no brick seems to have been nsl'd in the upper
parts of the walls, as was tlie case at Palaikastro, and the hou:ses were built
throughout of roughly hewn stones. The result of this solid co11structi0n is
that some of the walls still stand to the height of nine feet, clearly :shewing the
thresholds and floor-levels of the upper story. On the other hand, the
quantity of fallen stones has made the work very laborious, and broken the
very fine pottery rather badly. Potsherds, found in crences of the rock, prove
that the founding of the town goes back to the Early .Minoan period, and in
fact, underlying the existing houses, were well preserved Middle Minoan I
house-walls. Directly below the floors of the houses are deposits dating to
.Middle Minoan III, and the objects found in the ho11ses tl,emselves are Late
Minoan I and II. Between these two styles no dividing line in the stratifica-
tion of the site can be discuverecl and Mr. Seager is iuciinetl to think that the
Late Minoan II (Palace Style) objects may be importation;;. Of anytliing later
than Late Minoan II not a trace has been fo 1md, audit would Sl'em that the
island town, which could only have been i11habited when the Cretans had
command of the sea, was deserted after the catastropbe which involved the
destruction of tbe Palace of Knosos. On the other l,an,I tlil' town of Gourni,i
on tl1e mainland of Crete near by lasted on until the cl, ,se ut the Brouze Age .
.Many of the tiuds are very i1nport·mt.. Beside,; other frng1uents, a
painted gesso dnro relief of a lady in a very richly embroidered dress was
found. Of this work, which mnst have been about a yard lugh, tlie bust and
part of the skirt are well preserved. The best known example of s11ch
painted reliefs in h.tr~l plaster 1s the tignre wearing a lily crown from Knosos.
That such works should be found here shews that Mr. :,:ieager is right in
r 2
:-upposing that it was a richer settlement than Gourni:i. ~o palace h:B beL'n
found, but one yery fine hou:c:e is built on three terraces rising from the sea to
the top of the hill. Of Late )Iinoan I pottery, large jars painted in white are
reported, one very fine example having three large bull's-heads on the shoulder,
"ith double axes between their horns, and rows of Llonble axes round the rim
and foot, with bands of spirals filleLl with flowers. To the two painteLl clay
lmlls that were found last year, a third example has now been added, and
parts of six in all have now been found. The rest of the pottery requires
mending before any more can be said of it. The richest finds were
perhaps the stone vases, of which some sixty have been found, comprising
lamps and bowls of Llifferent patterns. Another season is required to finish the
excavation, and in the meanwhile t1 ials are being made on the neighbouring
island of Moklos.
A later notice sent me by )Ir. Sea;er reports the discovery of an early
cemetery on Pseirn. About thirty-three tombs have be€n opened, and more
1emain. They all date to Early .hlinoan II and III and Middle ~linoan I,
and are of two types: rock-shelter burials, common in east Crete, where the
body is laid under an overhanging ledge of rock, and cist-graves. The cist is
formed of stone slabs for tlie bottom anrt walls, and the resulting box
covered with large flat stones. About 100 vases of terracotta, and 90 of
stone are reported. The latter are especially fine, and interesting both for
tlieir shapes and their materials, being made of breccia of all sorts, alabaster,
rock crystal, and finely coloured stones. The presence of cist-graves is a point
-0f great interest, as this is the type of grave that characterizes the con-
temporary 'Amorgine' cemeteries of the Cyclades. It has been recognized
for some time that at the end of the Early ~Iinoan period there was a strong
,save of Cycladic influence in Crete, but tliis is the first time that actml
graves of tlie Cycladic type have been found. The Early Minoan burials
found elsewhere have been tholoi as at Phaistos and Kournasa, complexes of
walled compartments, like rooms in a house, as at Palaikastro and Gonrnia,
-0r burials in rock-shelters.
In July of 1906 Dr. Xanthoudhidhis continued his work at the pre-
historic ,::ite of Koumasa in the central plain of Crete, ten kilometres south
-0f Gortyn. At this site he has previously excavated three circular ossuaries,
which containe1l bones and numerous Early :Minoan III remains, notably
ivory seals with geometric designs, triangular daggers, and objects that
suggest a strong Cycladic influence. Outside these tombs he has now found
a kind of courtyard, in which was a great mass of charcoal and half-burned
bones. These he takes to be human, and draws the conclusion that before
burial the bodies were partially crernate,l outside the tomb proper. This
observation is of the first importance, for it has always been supposed
hitherto that cremation was altogether unknown in the Bronze Aoe 0
in
Greece. Associated with these remains were found Cycladic and Kamares
( Early Minoan III and ~Iiddle )Iinoan) pottery, an,l stone and ivory seals.
At the same time an examination was made of the settlement on the
north and west slopes of the hill above the tombs, which proved to be of the
 ARCHAEOLOGY IN GREECE.

~ame period. The houses, built tf undressed stones, wer~ much deotroye<l,
but one at least shewed traces of a secoml story. On the top of the hill was
the shrine, and this at all e\·ents continued in use until the Late .Minoan III
period, since it contained terracotta idols like those found at Gournia and
Prini,i,.
The shrine itself consisted of seYera] small compartments, the most
important of which was paved, and had a central column supporting the
roof. In this were found two aniconic idols c,f clay, a cone and a cylinder,
and by them a steatite table of offerings, with a hemispherical hollow above,
exactly :i.ike the one found in the Middle Minoan shrine in the palace of
Phaisto::-, together with a sacred laitylos. The association of these sacral
objects ·with a pillared room is yet one more piece of evidence for the religious
character of these central pillars, found in so many Aegean buildings. There
are excellent examples at Phylakopi and Knosos.U
In another compartment were the terracotta idols nientioned above.
At Haghia Eirene, lialf an hour east of Koumrisa, are traces of another
conternporary settlement, and close to it Dr. :X.antl10ndhidhis has excavate(l
two more tombs like those of Komn,1sa, but robbed and re-used in :Myceneau
(Late Minoan III) times. A large ossuary ,rns exarninetl at Porti, four to
five kilometres north-west of Koum{tsa. The internal diameter of the tholos
is 23 feet (, metres), and the layer of bones three feet tliick may represent
as many as a thousand bodies. Here again were the same signs of cremation.
Tl1e objects resemble those from Koum,lsa. Traces of other tombs were
found and of the settlement belonging to them. \York is being continued
at this most important site in the July of this year.'
\Vith all these fruitful excavations going on, the Candia Museum grows
steadily richer. A new Musemn is being built on the eastern part of the
Y enetian fortification of the town, near the Treis Kanuhes Sq nare.
The French School is continuing its great task of the excavation of
Delos, and much progress has been made in clearing the town and public
buildings. The most interesting discovery is that of .Mycenean remains,
carrying the history of Delos back into prehistoric times. These consist
of an ossnary by the Colonnade of Antigonus, near the Apollo Temple.
It is built without mortar, and surrounded by a wall of Hellenistic date.
Adjacent to the wall is an oblong platform. In the ossuary were Mycenean
vases, including pseudamphorae, arnl some two-handled spouted jars of a
type well-known in Crete, that goes back very much earlier. It is most
probable that this difference is accounted for by the re-use of the ossuary.
Another similar enclosure has been found inscribed a/3aTov, which leaves little
doubt that this was also an aiaton, a sacred enclosure o,·er the tomb of a
hero of the prehistoric age. It is yet another case of that continuity of a
sacred site from .Mycenean times onwards, which occurs in so many other
places, and is of so much importance for the history of Greek religion.

6 For thi, ~ubj~et, ,ee En111s, T,·cc aucl Pd/or • Tlic,e notes are largely inLlebte,l to na, 0

1/"vrship. a811va~a, Oct 15th, 190ti.

 A most interesting paper ,ra;; rea.l at the French School this spri11g,
the object of which was to iJenti(y an archaic marble lion, now in front of
the Arsenal at Venice, with one of the series of such figures now at Delos.
The very convincing argument resteLl on the similarity of the statues, anLl
the fact tliat, when Tournefort visited the island, he saw a lion which
certainly is no longer at Delos. To this we have to a(ld tlie natural fondne:-:-s
,)f Venetians for statues of lions, as being the badge of their patron St. Mark.
The work of the American School at the site of ancient Corinth was
broken off for a year, owing to the untimely death at Athens of the late
<lirector, Dr. Heermance. It has now been resumed nuder the new director,
.Mr. B. H. Hill, who has kindly sent some notes of the work this spring.
As before, the depth of soil to be remo,-ecl has been ,-ery great, aml the
fact that the Roman level is very dose above the Greek has been against
the discovery of many rem:iins of tlie earlier period. Among the finds are
inscriptions, a considerable part of an ornate circular building, tledicate<l
by Babbius PLilinus, and four headless, though otherwise c01nplete, statues
of good Roman workmanship. Tlie Odeum has been located, halfway between
tlie Theatre aml the Fountain of Glauke, exactly in the position given hy
Pausanias. It has a diameter of about 98 yards (80 metres), and is partly
cut in the solid rock and partly built of up11s ince1·tam.
The greater part of the work has been devoted to clearing the Roman
shops north of the ·western part of the Agora, and what was still covered
of the long Greek stoa north of these shops. It was here that the depth
was very great, anJ some half a dozen systems of walls, modern, medie.-al,
and Byzantine, had to be removed before the Roman level was reached. In
the face of these llifficulties the excavators deserve great c1wlit for their
perseverance, and their efforts have now removed all doubt as to the i<lentiti-
cation of tlie olLl temple as that of _\.pollo, aml of the sites of the Fountain
,,f Glauke and the ~.\gora. 1Jr. Skias, however, who has also Jug at Corinth,
on belialf of the Greek Archaeological Society, woulLl put the Agora much
further east than tlie American excavators think possible.
Preliistoric objects abo are not lacking. ~ ear the south edge of the
liill, on which the temple of Apollo stamh, fragments of prehistoric pottery
have been founJ, togetlier "·ith stone age implements of obsidian and flint,
and the torso of a primitive nuJe female statuette of marble about six inches
l1i:;h. The obsidian ,ms fouml close to the native rock, and the statuette
about a foot higher up. It will be of great interest to know whether this
tind belongs to the neolithic series of Thessaly and Boeotia or not.
The olLl temple has been strengthened by the Greek Archaeological
Society, and its appearance improved by the removal of an uufinislieLl school
built by Kapotfotrias, a11,l by tlie complete clearing of the foundations.
Besides the gr~·at work at Pergamon the German Institute ha-, made
~eventl sm..iller Lut extremely iuteresting excavations, at Tirym, Olympia,
arnl Pylus, be:-i,les Dr. Duerpfeld',c; ,rork at Lenka-,. 0
 .\HCH_.\EOLOGY I~ GHEECE.

At Tiryus the luwer strata of the Palace were examined, with the same
excellent results tliat always attend the dissection of a prehistoric site, the
lower citadel was trenche<l, an<l search was made for tombs.
By making trial-pits through the floors of the palace, remains were founll
of an ulder fortress aml palace. Already in l!)0.5 an earlier gate was
discovered below the great Propylaeuru,'1 am1 this has now been cleared.
The walls, preserved to a height of as much as niue feet, are built of
large stones. It was also fuuml that the walls of the f01 tress are of different
L1ates. In particular, the eastern part of the wall, the galleries, and the gre::it
tower in the south ,vall are pro,-ed to be later c@strnctions dating from the
period of the second palace.
The great antiquity of the site is shewn by the discovery, below the floor
of the earlier palace, of graves, and again below the,;e of two strata of remains
of walls. Similar results were obtaine,1 in the mid,.lle fortress. The conclusion
of this examination of the lower strata at Tiryus onght to go a long
way in shewing us the comlition of the mainlaml of Greece in pre-mycenean
times.
The post-mycenean history of Tiryns has alsu been illustrated by
the disco,-ery of a thick layer of terracotta figures outside the south-east
corner of the upper citadel. These come apparently from a sanctuary of Hera,
anJ represent a seated goddess and her worshippers bringing gifts. Similar
figures were found in the }Iegaron of the upper citaLlel, and it is probable that
they all come from the Temple of He1\t, that occupie,l the site after the
destruction of the 1.Iycenean palace.
1.\. number of graves of the' Geomeuic' peri,)l_l, genernlly small built square
structures, haw been found between tl1e c:itadel a11,l the railway statiun.
The excavation is to be continued next year.
At Olympia the work at the Temple "f Hera and the Pelopion begun in
1006 has been continued. 10 ~lore trial-pits were sunk below the opisthodomos
and cella of the temple. Again sherds were foun,l ot the peculiar kind that
Dr. Doerpfeld has found at Leukas, and now alsu at Pylos in the exc::isation
mentioned below, and reganls as the earliest Achaean pottery. Holding
that the culture of }lycenae is that of Aegeanized Achaeans, of an invading
race with northern affinities, who had adopted the arts of the Aegean
civilization, he consiLlers that these finds proYe that the earliest sanctuaries at
Olympia are prehistoric, and not post-myceuean. Apwt from the •1nestiou of
the Achaean origin of the pottery in ,1uestio11, this is Yety prubable, but few
will follow him in his revolutionary Yiew that the ' Geometric' fiuds at
Olympia are pre- aucl not post-myceuean. When these news were first
formulated, after his earlier excaYation at Olympia, they ,rnre ;-igorously
criticized by Furtwaenglcr. That some of his tind-; at Leukas, aml
possibly at Olympia also, are altogether out vf the Aegean context, and
are more related to the culture of central Europe, aml e\·en that some of
them are earlier than Mycenean, is very probable, but that the · Geometrie'

" 1Luk,·,l I in Pl. II of Sd1liem,ma's Tin;n,, ·' .lrl,. JJ,lfh. 1006, p. :21)5.
:296

brouzes of Olympia are pre-rnycenean is a view that it is impo:,sible to

maintain. Similar bronzes liave been fonml this year at the Spartau
sanctuary of Artemis Orthia, mixed with Geometric pottery, which immed-
iately underlies and gradually gi\·es place to, uot )Iyce11ean, but Protocorintl1ian
and Corinthian pottery.
The excarntion by which Dr. DoerpfelLl claims to lrnn~ foun<l the site of
the Homeric Pylos, is near Zacharo, a little way north of Samikon. Tlm::e
1hcenean beehirn-tombs have been disco\·ered, and these, togetl1er with
th~ remains of a contemporary building, Dr. Doerpfeld, following tl1e
'0µ7]ptKWTEpot of Strab,:,,11 considers to nrnrk the site of the Homeric Pylo~.
The biggest of the tombs is thirteen yards (tweh·e metres) in diameter, with
a droiJWi, about eigl1t yard:;; long cut in the rock. The crown of the rnult of
the tlwlos, destroyed in antiquity, was perhaps as much as nearly forty feet
(twehe metres) high. After the burial the tloor of the tomb was dosed with
a wall cf small stones. In the floor of the tholos was a grave, cowred with a
slab, but almost completely rifled. Better results lwwe,-er ,vere obtained
from the tlwlos itself and the entrance, where many objects in amber, gold,
bronze, and irnry ,vere found, besides bones and potsherds. The presence of
Roman graves abow the clel,·is shewed that the tomb ,rn3 despoiled in
ancient times, and tliat these objects were only the remnants of its original
furnitnre. No psendamphorae were fouud, and there were frn 6 ments of large
three-handled jars that recall the Cretan Palace Style. The period seems to
be that of the shaft-gra.-es of )Iycenae. It is of the greatest importance tliat,
whilst some of the bones shewell as usual 110 traces of fire. a number are
reported as being burnt.
On a hillock near by are walls, in which Doerpfeld recognizes an
Acl1:1ean building contemporary with tl1e tomb. He girns it this name on the
strength of finding certain monochrome s11erds like those of Leukas and
Olympin.
This practice of cremation points to the place being actually a very
early settlement of 11ortl1erners, kinsmen to the later ~-\.chaeans of Homer, who
had assimilated the Aegean culture, but retained their own ancestral metlwd
of dispo5ing of the dead and partially their own style of pottery. The early
date however makes it clearly pre-hnmeric, a tomb possibly of the ancestors
of Xestor.
The excavations in Leukas, the Homeric Ithaka of Doerpfeld, have
been continued. In the summer of 1906 he dug in several places on the
island, notably the Nidri plain, where he locates tlie town of Odysseus, and
in a ca,·e called Choirospifoi. In both tl1ese places prehistoric shenls with
geometric patterns, either incised or painted, were found. This i,; again
his 'earliest Aehaean ' pottery, found in all Adrnean places, Leukas,
Olympia, and Pylos. He dissociates it altogetl1er from the 1\Iycenean, and
regards it as allied to the pottery of Halstatt and Yiilanorn. It is difficult

Ii 'Ot...11p,x~•Ttpu, TuLs l1rECn1,, Cl.Ko,\udJui•v-;-ES rui:Tu:-' Eii a.i <pu.<TL T~v ToV NirrTopos nVAoi·. ol, T1]v
x_.::pa.v O~e{E!O"tJ: () .Ai\.~EL()S. ~tialio. ,S. l~l -;.
 AHCHAEOLOG-Y IX Gltl::ECE.

at present to know ho,,· mucl1 stress is to be laid 011 this 'Achaean ' pottery.
At Olympia he reganls it as pre-myceuean, aml makes it carry back with it
tl1e geometric bronzes ; at the Pylos settlement it is founcl with Mycenean
objects. He would perhaps regard it rather as national than as all of Olle
peri,)J. This is probably correct, only there seems no sound rearnn for
calling it Achaean.
To whatever criticism however Doerpfekl's views on :\Iycenean and
'geometric ' chronology may be open, he has made it clear that one of the
most pressing problems of prehistoric Greek Archaeology is to clear up the
relations of these fabrics of north and west Greece, taking into account on
the one hand the neolithic pottery of Thessaly and the fabrics of ceutrnl
Europe, and on the other determining their chronological position in the
sequence of the Aegean styles.
An important paper was read at the German Institute on the dis-
coveries which Dr. Prantl has made in working on tlie Parthenon sculptures.
By a careful study of the fragments he has made several new identifications.
For the east pediment the most important are tlie heel of Hephaistos, a
piece of the robe of Zeus, and two fragments of tl1e "·ings of the ::Xike.
In the ,vest pediment he has identified the neck and part of the head uf
Athena, a part of tlie body of Cecrop;;, and a great part of the figure of
Erichthonios .
.Much progress has been made in excaYating the great sites in A:;,ia
.Minor. The Ottoman .Museum at Alnbamla, tho Austrians at Ephesus,
the Germans at Uilctns and Pergamon, and the Danes iu Rlwdes are all
engaged on the work. Although the remains are generally of the Hellenistic
period, earlier and even archaic things are not lacking, and add greatly to
the interest of the re.;;ults.
The chief work of tlie German exc<n-atit>u at PergawuH in the smumer
of 1906 was to clear the great gyrnrn1siurn. This lies halfo-ay up tlie hill,
aml is on the highest of tliree terraces, on the lowest of which is the
gymnasium of the boys, and on tlio second tlint of the ephebes.
The results are extremely imposing. The gymnasium consists of a
large court, measuring 78 by 3fl yards (70 by :3.'5 metres). On the north
side the bases are all 1,i situ. aml it is proposed this yea:· to replace as mauy
of the drums as possible. Along this side three fine balls have been cleared,
tlie westernmost of whicl1 had a Roman 01cl1estra and auditorium built
over it.
Some houses iu tlie tuwn hani been excarnteJ, of ,vhich the · House of
Attalos' contained interesting mural paintings. It is i11tended ultimately
to clear all the lo,,·er towu.
Kot the least interesting pat t uf the programme fvr the future is t lie
excavation of rnme tunrnli, tl1e lmgest of wl1id1, Jigrna Tepe, is perhaps
undisturbed, and may contain Attnlid tombs. A small tumulus that has
been dug co11tained a bm ial of the second century B.C. "'itlt the skeleton
were two swords nml a gold crown formetl of iYy leans and decorated with
a figure of :Nike.
 H. JI. D_-\. "\Y KIXS

The late,;t results from the Austrian excavations at Ephesus in 191)5 am!
rn06 are to appear in the next number of the Jal11·c~li(J'tc, of which Dr.
Hebenlev . has kindly" let me --ee the manuscript, for the purposes of this
paper.
)lore pieces of slabs sculptured in low relief, and resembling a piece
previously discovert'll near the Librnry, have now been found. These slabs had
been m,we,l from their original position to be re-use,l, aml are fragmentary,
but it is clear that they once decorated an important buikli11g of the
Aurelian period. The nature at1tl exact position of this monument remain
uncertain.
Bet,,·een the Theatre mlll the Gate of )Iithradates a large marble hall
in the Doric style with two na,·es has been excarntecl. The ,rnrkmanship
points to the late Hellenistic perio,l. The intercolunmiations of the front
pillars ·were walle,l n p later, possibly when an inscription running: Dianae
Ephesiae, Di,·o Clau[ dio Imp. ~ eroni Caesari Augusto Germa Jnico, Agri[ppi]-
1ne Aug[u-;tae, civita]ti Ephesiorurn, was cut on the architrave of the
s,mtbcrn wall. ~ln earthquake in the reign of Tiberius may have necessitated
the restoration. The very late inscriptions on the walls prove that it
remained standing for many centuries. The longest of these is from the third
:•,ear of the Byzantine emperor Tiberius (s\..D. 581). The bnlk of it is in
Greek, but the last few lines, which give the date, are in Latin, cut by a
mason who eYidently <lid not understand the language. A still later
inscription from the time of the emperor Heraclius and his son runs:
+ 'HpaKA(t7ov) KaL 'HpaKA?)OV TWl/ 0Eocpv:\.aKTW1/ ryµwv 0E0"7T"OTW1J, with the
addition in later lettering, KaL TWl/ 7rpaO"i1J(,J)J 7rOAAa Ta ETYJ +
Sonth of this hall a circular building dating from the Greek peri,xl has
been found, and a late Roman rectangular hali, which may be the
avOEtn;;pwv, mentioned in an inscription published in the J,,Juc.~he;'tc vii.
Bciblatt, p..)~.
Xo work was done at the Church of the Virgin in 1906, but the as yet
unpublished results of l!)l).j are of some interest. 12 It occupied a space about
470 by 10.) feet, and consisteil of three parts. In the west was a large rect-
angular court communicating by doors on the east with a church with narthex
and atrium. This had a nave aml two narrow side aisles, and an apse at the
east end, aml was roofed with a Jome and barrel vaults. East of this again
was a second church with aisles, and to the south of this a baptistery.
Dr. \Yiegan<l has kindly sent me tlrn following notes on the work at
)liletus and Didynrn in the season of 1906. At }Iiletus the Baths of the Empress
Faustina and the Lion Harbour have been folly excavated, and between the
Delphiuion awl the Xymphaion a fine Hellenistic building with Provylou,
inner court, and halls has been found, that seems to have been the Prytaneiou.
Belonging to a later date is an old Byzantine Basilica nearly 90 yards
(80 metre;;) long. It posse-;ses an atrium, martyrium, and baptistery, aud an
interestin~ circular plan an,l a mosaic tloor. In the necropolis numerous
 .UtCHAEOLOGY IX GREECE.

Hellenistic graves have been found. The work was much hiudereLl by the
unusually heavy winter floods of the 1Iaeander, and is to be continued this
autumn, with the special object of finding archaic remains.
Much has also been done to clear the temple of Apollo at Didyma, anLl
the re-erection of fallen blocks has greatly improved its appearance. The
systematic clearing of the Sacred \Vay has begun, and remains of several
archaic marble statues h,we been found.13
The work of the Danish Archaeologists at Lindos in Rhodes conducteLl
by Dr. Kinch was finished in the summer of 10Uo. The main results have
been to clear the temple of Athena with its accompanying propylaea, portico,
and exedra. The temple, which replaced an earlier building, elates from the
fourth century. In this last campaign three important deposits were found
on the Acropolis of various statuettes, elating respectively from the seventh
or ::;ixth, the end of the fifth, anLl the fourth century. A large number of
bases with artists' signatures were also found. There are as many as 11-:1!
examples and G4< different names. A fine relief of a ship cut in the rock
was found near thA entrance to the Acropolis, and in the neighbourhood
a rock-cut tomb with a two-storied fa<;ade. The upper of these is adorne,l
with four altars, and from its resemblance to a stage building Dr. Kinch
regards it of importance for the structure of the ancient theatre.
Lindos being now finished, Dr. Kinch is turning his attention to the
remains of a city that he has discovered at the south end of the island,
·where almost all the visible remains, fragments of vases and statuettes,
belong to one and the same age, the epoch of the so-called · Rhodian'
(1Iilesian) vases. This town is now to be excavated, antl the early <.late gives
promise of extremely interesting results.
In a letter dated August of this year Dr. Kiuch l1as very kindly
communicated the discovery of the necropolis of the town. The graves
he assigns to 800-600 B.c. No further details are yet to hand, b11t
good results may be confidently expected,
It remains for me to thank the archaeologists in charge of the Yarious
excavations, who have so generously furnished the notes of their latest
results, from which this summary has been dra,vn up.
R. 11. DAWKINS.

13 For notices of 11reYions ,rnrks, .,ee .-/.,·,_•7, • .--l.,1-:. l\'106.

 MO~ E~IYASIA.

Additional J..Yote.s.

Srxc E the article on this subject (pp. 22!J ff. above) was passed for
prec-S I l,ave obtained some additional idornrntion in Yeuice wl1ich it seews
desirable to put on record.
Of the two coats of arms illustrated on p. 240, that on the left belongs
tu Sebastiano Renier. The other is of Antonio Garzoni, who was elected
l'odu;tl~ of }lonemvasia in l.j26, aud again in 15:38, when he was the last
podcdt1 before the Turkish cunquest. The identification of this latter coat I
owe to the assistance of }Ir. H. F. Brown.
Hopf's statement, reproduced by me on p. 235, that Monernvasia was
Venetian in Hl!), is. I find, not justified by the evidence. I ham had some
difficulty in tracing the Llocumenh cited by Hopf, as the pagination of the
Yienna copy of the Jllisti used by him differs from that in the copy at Venice.
The three Llocuments merely shew that Venetian wine-merchants were
engaged in tl1e wine-trade at :Oionennasia. They are as follows (I liave
altered tlie \' enetiau dates to }Iodern Style; :
9 Jo;,. 14:20.
C'upfu.
Attenta hmnili et ckn,ta snpplicatione fideliurn civimn nr,"trornm mercatornn,
J'lionavaxie et Romanie et consitlerctto qnoLl 111ereantia lrniusmodi vinornw hoc anno
parnnn n:l nid1il Yaluit, ob quixl ipsi mercatores multa et maxima damna "ustinuenmt.
ol, quilius (.,ic) nullo modo possnnt ml tenninum qnatuor mensium sil,i limitatum solvere
eorum llatia pront no bis snpplican,rnnt; Yadit p,m, quud ultra terminnm quatuor mensiurn
5ibi conce,,mn per terram a,] ,oh-emlum llatia sua pro suis monava"iis et romanii~, conce-
datur eisLlem et prorugetnr dictns terminu, rn,que ad duos menses ultra predictos menses
(1uatuor sil.i statnitos per terram ut snpra dando plezariam ita l,onam et ~ufficientem pro
i-ta prorogatio11e terrni11i, (1unll cornnne 1w,trmn sit secunnn de datio H10, ,ohemlo a,l
terminmn rlel,itum.
De pmte omnes.
(Archidu lli Statu Yenczia--l>elil.erazi.,11i Se1Htu jfi,ti He:;.;,;{. c. 21.)

l!) Feb. 1421.

Cu1,ta.
Quo,] audita ,levota SlljJ]_JlicatiL•He fillt:,litllll civimn nostu,rnm wcrcatc,rum Romanie
tt ::'ilonornsie Yem,tii, exi,tentium, et intdlectis llamnis ,1ne recepernnt iam annis tribus
,le ipsi, \ inis et maxime hoc anno '1 uia per pirata, accepte ,ibi fuerunt plnres vegetes
ltuinsm,.,,.li vinorum, d cousillerat,., r1w ....l ilia r1uc htLent uc,n pu-,t,nt expedire, propter qu&
 3IO~E~IVASIA.
,lamna Jl(Jn poswnt -,ohere sua ,lati,1 a,l terminnm ,ibi limit,1rnm p~r online~ n,,;,tr,-,,. Et
.1udita superinde 1 espomione offitialium nostrornm datii vini ex nnnc captum sit qtFHl
ultra <lictnm terminum sibi limitatum per ,:,rdines no--trr,, dons(etur termim:s S•)lvemli
dicta datia ipsorum vinorum us,1ue duos alio~ meuFes. -
De parte umnes.
De non - - 0.
X on sinceri 0.
(Archivi•J ,li Stato Yenezia-Deliberazi,,ni Sen,tto ::lli-ti Reg. Z>3. c. 112.)

In Con,ili,_. Ro~,tr,,rnm.
Capta.
Quod mercatoribu, 1Iono\·,uie et Romani?, •1ui n,)n pornernnt expe,Jire vina ,na
propter novitates pn,sentes elongetur terminus ,oh·ernli datia ,ua per umtm rnec:,em ultra
terminum limitatum per onlines no,tro,.
De parte omnes alii.
Denon--2.
Non sinceri 1.
(Arcbivio di Stato Yenezia-Deliberazioni Se1Mt•} ::IIisti Reg.."')6 carte. 76t '.

Finally I note that the exact title of }Ir. Papamichalopoulos' monograph

1s: IToAtopK[a Kat a"t..r,un<:; TY]<, ~Iov€µ~au{a, vr.o
TWV '£;\;\17vwv T<p 1821.
'luTOpt!C~ 7rparyµaT€La V'TTO Kwva-T. X. IJa7raµtxaAO'lrOVAOV, TEA€tocpofrou
T1J', VOjl,lKI]',, 'A_017vr]<J"t 181 -f'.
\Y. }lILLER.
 KOTICES OF BOOKS.

Essays and Addresses. By Sm RICH~l:D JEBB, o.::\I. Pp. Yii + 648.

UIJiversity Press, 190,. 10.<. 6d.
Our late President's occasional papers were in variably so carefully prepared that the
decision to publish a selection of them was amply justifiell. The present volume contains
the admirable stn,ly of Pindar and the monograph on Delos which appearetl in the early
parts of this Journal. It aho contains papers on 'The Genius of Sophocles,' 'The Age of
Pericles,' 'Ancient Organs of Pul,lic Opinion' (an address to Harvard ·stndents), 'Lucian,'
'The Speeches of Thucy,lide",' and 'Snidas on Sophocles and the Trilogy,' which deal
directly with Greek literature ; a re,iew of Froude's Caesar, the Rede Lecture on Erasmus,
the Romanes Lecture on Humaniom in Eclncatiun, and a Newnham lecture on Samuel
Johnson, which enter upon different fields of literary culture; and five addresses dealing,
from various points of view, with tl,e ,1uestion of the position of University studies in
general, dn<l classical studies in particular, with regard to modern life. The last of these
is the :uklress to the British ..\ssociation in South .Africa on 'University Education and
Kational Life,' which was practically the author's last public utterance. The volume
as a whole is full of weighty :rnbstance, expressed with characteristic care and scholarly
moderation, and may be cordially recommended to the friends of classical studies.

Berliner Klassikertexte. Heft \-., Griechische Dichterfragmente: Erste Hiilfte

epi,che um1 elef.<ische Frngmente ; Zweite H£i!fte, lyriscl1e und <lraroatische Frag-
mente. Bearbeitet YOU \Y. ScHUBART und u. Y0X \\'JLAMOWITZ-)foELLEXDORFF.
Pp. viii+ 136, with 2 facsimiles, and ii+ 160 with 6 facsimiles. Berlin : Weiclmannsche
Bnchhar.<llun~, HlOi. 8 m. and 10 m.
The two parts which make up the fifth volume of the Berlin Kl,usil.:erte.1te are a general
g,ithering of the minor Yerse fragments, on papyrus and vellum, in the Berlin :Museum,
including senirnl which ha,·e been previously published in periodicals. The first part
inclrnle$ a list of Homeric pap_, 1·i, a paraphrase of an Orphic poem on the rape of
Persephone, which is closely connected with the Homeric hymn to Demeter; four frag-
ments of the Hesioclic Cutalo_qu-, and a bcrap of the n-o1'h and Days ; portions of Aratus
(i42-801, 855-883, 922-934 ; Theocritus xi. 20-24, and xiY. 59-63, and a scrap of scholia;
M lines of Euphorion (the chief nonlty of the part) ; 84 imperfect lines of a late
epic on the fortune-; of the family and estate of Diomede during his ai,sence before
Troy; porti"ns of 5 or 6 epigrams from a tiny roll, only two inches high ; two other
epiµ-rams: Oppian, llalieut. v. 104-15, ; two fourth-century elegies on professors at
Berytns; Xonnns, DwnyH. xiv. 386-xvi. 30 (with lacunas); and three Byzantine
pmll'g_yrico, uf the kind he,t known to us from Clauclian. The second part is more
inter.-~tiuf(, auJ c11ntau1,, a, its ~pedal uon:lty, cousideraule fragmeuts of Corinna, in
strongly marked dialect; 20 lines of one ode and 40 of another are in a good ~tate
of p1e,ervation. In ad,1ition there are the Alcaeus aml Sappho fragments which are
already known; borne well-wiitten drinking songs, not much (if at all) later than 300 n.c.;
 KOTICES OF BOOK:'-- 303
2--l line, of the 'Axaiwv a-tA.A.oyo~ of Sopl10cles; 32 line,, of Enripicle,' Cretun.s, inck,ling
a Yigorous rhetorieal defence of herself by Pa;,iphae ; ;35 chc,ice lines from the Phaethon,
mutilated, but fo1tunatel.r coinciuing with the lines already prcsernd in th('. Codex
Claromont:mus of the Pauline Epistles; :50 lines of the .l[elonippe ; Hippo[. 2-!3-430, -!9:3-
515, 616-62-!; :llerlea. 513-560; Troade-5 8,6-879; Aristophanes, Ach. 598-600, 631-63:3,
747-977 (with lacunas); Frou-~, 2:3-!-262, 273-300, -!0-!-410, 607-611; a few Jette-rs c•f
Bird.,, 819-8:29, 860-864 ; Clouds, 177-IB0, 207-20::l, 233-233, 268-270, 936-!)72, mul in
another :us. 955-988, 1007-101-!; 30 imperfect lines from one pla~- r,f tl1e Xew Comedv
and 101 from another ; fragments c,f a Florilegium (including Eur. Hi11p. 403--!2:3) ; some
120 anapaestic monometers of the f\r,;t century, of ,loubtful purport ; aml a few u11-
important scraps. The two parts contain a tew intere,ting and impo1·tant pieces itl,e
Sappho, Corinna, Creta,1.,, and Eupho1ion;. and the pnl,]ication of the rest at lea,t frees tb,
consciences of the curator, of the Berlin ~foseum. •

Etude sur Didymos, d'apres un papyrus de Berlin. B., P. Focc.rnT. Paii,

(extrnit des )Iemoire.; de l'Acaclemie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, tume xxxviii,
1907). Pp. 193. 7 f. 30 C.
This is an important study uf the conuueutary of Didymus on tht Fhilippics, originally
pnblishe,l in the 1Jerli,1er KlassiJ.:erle.de, vul. i. The conclusions of Foucart with regarJ to
the character of Didymm and his compilatiom deserve to be studied in connexion witlt
those of Diels ; aud the second part, which contains separate studi6 of all the copiou~
quotations from other authors (especially Philoch 1 ,rns1, supplie~ most usefully a ,1eficiency
in the original pnl,li•:atiun.

Das Buch bei den Griechen und Romern. By "\Y. S. HU BART. Pp. 1.5!) ; 11
illustrations in text. Berlin: Handbiicher der kgl. ~Iu,een, 1907. 3 m.
A very useful summary of present knowledge on the subject of Buch,ce,tn in antiquity,
written in a clear and popular style, without foot-notes or references. The information i~
Yel'y complete so far as it goes, and the author (who i~ curator of the Greek papyri in the
Berlin ~Iuseum) has matle g0od use of his opportunities of being acquainted with the
results of modern di~coveries. The four chapters deal with 'Writing ~Iaterials,' ' the
Roll,' 'the Codex,' and 'Copying- and the Book-trade.'

Greek Papyri in the British Museum : Cat:llogue, with texts, vol. III. Edited 1,y
F. G. KEXYOX and H. I. BELL. Pp. lxxiv + 388. £2 10s. Atlas of facsimiles to the
abow (100 plates). London, 1907. £3 3s.
The third volume of the British Museum Catalogue of P,1pyri i~ on the same lines a, its
predecessors. It contains a numerical catalogue of 8-!6 ptpyri, anu texts (with brief
introductions and note;,) of 248 (all non-literary documents). These are divided into
chronological groups as Ptolemaic, Roman, Early Byzantine, aud Late Byzantine, with
rnbdivisions in each group, except the first, acconling to. ~ubject. The texts are of the
usual kind. They include some well-preserved Ptolemaic contracts from Pathyri,, some
long land-registers of the fir&t century, the accounts of the waterwurks-commi;,sione1,; of
some town (pro1ably Aroinoe or Hermopolis), a brief narrative of a voyage up the Nile,
and a diploma of mernl,ership in an athletic club, granted to a boxer at the great games at
Naples in A.D. 192. The indices are on the usual full ~cale. The atlas of facsimiles
provides a series of 100 plates, most of them precisely dated, and ran;;ing from 192 n.c. to
711 A.D.
 ~UTICES OF BOOKS
The Tebtunis Papyri. Part II. E<lite..1 by B. P. GRHFELL ,m,l _-L S. Hi.:xT, with
the assistance oi E. J. GOODSPEED. (l-ni\·ersity of Californi,l pul,lications, Grneco-
Roman archaeology. vol. IL) Pp. xv+483, with ,1 map an<l :! plates. Lornlon ancl
:XewYork, 1907. £2 5a. net.
The second volume of the TelJtunis papyri (,liswvere,l an,1 eclitecl l,y ~Iessrs. Grenfell an,l
Hunt on behalf of the University of California) has appeared, through the munificence of
:'.\lrs. Hearst, without being ,lelayed 1,y the disaster which befell the Fniversity in the
recent earthquake. Its intere,t is mainly for the regnLtr stn<lent of papyri. It contains
only four literary texts (apart from small fragments). Two nf these are from Horner (Il. ii
and xi), and one from Demosthenes ,,De Fala. Leg.) : the fourth, and most interesting, is
a portion of the lost Greek ori:,;inal of Didys Cretensis. Thi,, being in a han,l of the early
third century. prows that the wor·k mn-t h,we been corn~iosed not later than the second
century, and possibly earlier. The Llocumentary texts are of the usual miscellaneous kind,
excellently edited, an,l proYide,l with full indice-. Thei e is a lnng appen,1ix on the
t•Jpogr,iphy of the Ar.-;inoite n,)me, with ,t map.

Die Griechische Skulptur. ,T,m R. KEKl~Lt vo~ STR.-1.noxrTz. [Handbi.icher Jer

k,jniglichen :\Inseen zn Berlin.] Pp. iv+ 38:3; 133 illustrations. Berlin : Reimer,
1906.
This wuc·k 1s a manual uf Greek sculpture, Je,cribell in historical sequence, and is
prirnarily intended for the use of vioitors to the Berlin collections of original sculptures
and of casts. For the purposes of the hook, Greek sculpture begins with the primitive
examples from the Athenian Acr,Jpolis, aml closes with examples of Roman imperial
architecture, and sarcophagi. In accordance with the scheme ancl object of the writer, the
chief stress is laiLl on those sections which can 1,e illustrated by original works at Berlin,
anll the literary side of the history of sculpture is only intro·luced as far as is necessary.
The work could, however, be used to a considerable extent, as a companion in any gallery
of casts.

A Handbook of Greek Sculpture. By ERXEST .ARTHUR G.-1.RD:SER. [Han,lbooks of

Archaeology and Anti,1uitie,.] Pp. xxxiv+591. London ()Iacmillan) ancl New
York (The ::\Iacmillan Co.), 1907. 10.s.
In this reisme of the revised edition of Prof. Gardner's handbook (~ee J. H.S. xxvi. p. 183)
it is sath,factory to he able to say that the illnstratiom, the condition of which previously
left something tu l,e LlesireJ, have been thorou:,;hly onrhaule,I, and me now worthy of the
text. .An outline reproclnction of Prof. Furtwiingler's reconstruction of the .Aegina
pediments serve, as frontispiece.

Roman Sculpture from Augustus to Constantine. By :'.\Irs. ARTHL"R STROXG,

LL.D. Pp. xx +-108. 1:30 pLites. Lornlon: Duckworth anu Cu., 1907. I Os. 6d.
}fr,. Strong 11a, made a courageon, attempt to deal in a small compass with the great mu,,
c,f Roman sculptnre from ~-\ugustus to Constantine, and has performed a senice to
arcl1aeol11gi,ts and particularly to 6tnJenb arnl teachers of Roman l,istorv and civilisation.
Her book contains by far the most complete enumeration of R"rnan ~10numents in the
English tongue, and a great number of plate,, on the ,\'Jwl-· a,lrnfrably reprmlucecl. In
a,hlition, ::\Ir~. Strong's wide ac'luaint,,nce with continental archatol"gical literature
pruvi,les in the notes reference, to the most important treati-es dealmg w1th the particular
 :'.\OTICES OF BOOK:-; 30:5
monuments. Of the;,e the reliefs .i.re in many WJ.F the must impurtant reuuin-, ,rnJ at
the same time the least accessible. :\Ir-. Strong's c,ueful description anJ full illustration
r;f the three :-;reat hi-torical documents in relief, the .A.r,1 Pacis Augusti, the Column of
Trajan, ,rnd the Column of ~larcus Aurelius, alone make her work indispensable t,J
English -tudents of Roman hi.,tory. For the treatment •}f all three she mainly relies on
Peter,en':; careful studies, awl the description of the _-\..ra Pacis is as complete as m ..1y be,
until the innumeralile fragments in the ::\I use} delle Terme are pieced together and
tlescribetl. The Column of Trajan is illustrated liy tweln pbtec; anll a running com-
mentary on the whole, the Column of ::\farcus Aurelius by seYen plates. In chronological
relation to thec;e, ::\Irs. Strong reproduces and discusses the remaining important reliefs, the
p,mels of the arch of Titus, the arch of Trajan at Benewnt,), the Hadrianic and Anrelian
reliefs in the Palazzo dei ConserY,1tori, and the whole complex of heterogeneou'i panels
which ilecor-ate the arch erected by a grateful Rome to Constantine. ::\Irs. Strong ha;
-elected wisely l;oth from tl1e vast mass of monument, at her disposal and from the no
less Yast abundance of idea, thmwn out by such writers as Wickhoff and Riegl. The
reliefs of the arch of Titus, on which as a basis Wickhoff founded his theory Df the
independence and pre-eminence of Roman Art, receive, on the technical side, at le,ist a
due appreciation; and Riegh bold advocacy of neglected Yirtues in the -!th century
friezes on the Constantinian arch is briefly expounded. The last chapter, on Roman
Portraiture from _-\ugustus to Constantine, is the least satisfactory. The illustrations,
which include three plates of Imperial coins, are good an,l reproduce less known and finer
busts. The text, howeYer, attempt-, to deal with the Imperi,11 lm.,t< in general, a t:1sk tno
great for the space allowed.

Nouvelles Archives des missions scientifiques et litteraires. Tome xm.

fooc. -!. rue Forteresse Iberi11ue i1 Osnna (Fonilles de 1903\ Par ::\BI. ARTHCR
E:~GEL et PIERRE P_rnrs. Pp. 131, with JO Plates. Paris: fo1primerie Xationale,
1906.
This well-illustr;itetl number of the X ouvelles _.\rchiYes contains the results of the
excavation of the older portion of the site of the antique Ur,o, the modern Osuna in
Southe1·n Spain. The existence of Roman remains there ha, long l;een known, bnt the
9timulus to the French archaeologists was the hope of the cliscoYery of the enigmatical
pre-Roman Iberian work. _.\. portion of a hastily built fortress, which can be dated by
umnerous sling gland, inscribed with C~. :HAG. DIP., was dismembered and contained
,culptured fragment, of earlier date. These fragments and the finds generally are carefully
tabulated and reproduced. The work present., that known admixture of archaic form,
and incompetent execution which inevitably suggest., the local imitation of impor·ted
models and the character of the for1m permits a compari~on with prototypes oi the most
various dates and ~ources, early Greek and Phoenician, enn Chaldaean a11d :Mycenaean.
Two tombs found on the site lmt earlier than the fortress contained remains whic:h by
comparison with articles found in Punic tombs at Carthage are inferred to he also Punic.

L'art Greco-Bouddhique du Gandhara. By A. Fot:CHER. Vol. i. Pp. xii+G:W,

:300 illu,tration°, 1 plate, aml a map of the Gancl!iiira district. Paris: I1uprimerie
:N'ationale, 1903.
This admirable work, when completed, will comtitute much the most exhanstfre a~~ount
yet undertaken ,}f the Buddhist art of the :N. W. pml'inces of India, an art so interesting
from the extraonlinary flexibility shewn by the Graeco-Roman mould in adapting it-self tu
absolutely alien modes of thought. This volume deals with the lrnilding, and ba.,-relief,,
so far as the latter are ac.:es~ible ; vol. i1 is to c,mtain the statues, presumably includin"
H.S.-VOL. XX.YU. X
306 ~OTICES OF BOOK:-:
Dr. Stein', nE:w m,ttl:ri,tl for their ~tudy. ThE: authc,r takb the traditi01,,,l life c,f Buddl,a.
step by step, tracing each act 0r scene in the mom1menb,-a great ad rnnce on anything yet
done; while the sectioas in whfrh ht: di"eutangles the dassical and natin, deim·nb in the
art of Gandhiira, aml analyse;, the two W,1\'es of we-tern influence tliat, at separatr, times,
reache,l lndia, shew the ,kill and sobriety of a master. That old problem, the Mathura
~culptures, troublb no longer ; these now fall into their place a~ imitations of Gam1h::tra
art, as indeeu l\Ir. Yimeut Smith has aLo recently seen. The questi,,n of the del'imtion of
the classical inflnenceo in the G::mdhiira ;,chool is, ho,.-e,er, so lightly treated as to suggest
a fuller discussion tu CC•llle. unless )I. Foucher has nothing to add tu the brilliant •~ssay in
which be put forward hL theory of ' wamlering arti,ts ' thirteen years ago. As to date, he
follows Senart in placing the inferior limit for the main outbtm,t of thi,- art not later than
the rniddle of the sel.'.ond century .\.D ., on the strength of the AmriivatI inscriptions. But
the superior limit fluctuate,, with .Kanishka. He appears to fayour the encl of the first
!:entury A.D., and two or three yearn ago it :,eE-mecl tolerably safe to connect the Leginnings
of the Gandhiira schoc,l with the great peace c,f Hadrian and the .Antonines ; Lnt now,
should Dr. Fleet l,e right in 1eferri1,g Kanishka's elate to the Yikrama era 1'.58 B.c.), one
11W!f ha Ye again tc, reckon with the poi'.~ibility of a mnLh earliel' commencement. In any
rnse, there is a 1emarkal,le re,,eml,lance 1,etween these long acts of the Bnddha, unwinding
themseh·es round the base of sollle stfrpa. and Trajan's column. If one grumble at this
splendirl book he permi,-sible, it is onr its title. )I. Foucher could, if he would, haw
killeL1 off the term '(;raecc,-Buddhist.' witl1 its mislea,ling associatiom. Now it is too late.

Ancient Khotan. By )I. AlREL STEIX. Yol. i. Pp. xxh-+6:21, aucl 72 illus-
trations. Y ol. ii. 119 plate,,, and a map of Khotan. Oxfonl: Clarendon Preos,
1907.
These magnificent .-olnme:, Cl•litain the cletaileLl r~port of the archaeological explorations in
Chinese Turkestan carried out Ly Dr. Stein in 1900-1 on behalf nf the lnclian Go,·ernment,
together with appendices l,y leading experts in nuious branches of Oriental research.
The main outline of Dr. Stein'~ discoveries at the desert sites excavated by him is already
familiar from his Preliminmy Report (1901; and his personal narrative, 'Sand-burieLl
ruins of Khotan' ( 1903) ; it is now pos&ible to disengage the re&ults of interest to the
cla~;,ical student. The outstandi11g fact is the influence, in the early centnrie& A.D., of
India, and more eopecially of the 'Graeco-BndLll1ist' art of Gandhiira, on the art of
Khotan, through which channel some classical forms, e.g. the anangement of the drapery on
the ,:landing Buddha-figure, reachecl Japan; but Khotan throws no light on the orio-iu
of the Uamll111ra -chool itself. The celebr,1ted classical seals on wooden Kharos~h'f
docnments of the thir,l century A.D., and the cla&si.cal intag'io, from Moji, aTe ~~w
definitely callell Romcin \l·ork of tlie thinl or possil.1ly of the second cPntur,v A.D. A restored
enlargement by l\Ir. F. H. Andrews of one of the figures of Athene Pr ,n1,1el10~, with aegis
and thunderbolt, adorns the title-page ; but perhapo even more Btriking than the juxta-
position of Runun and Chinese seals on records from the same office is the resemblance of
the ~figinI of ,,hrine D. ii at Dan,1:in-Uiliq to the Yen us de' :Medici. Doubtless the seals
came in by the great trade route to China, describe-cl by .\Iarinus, as to which Dr. Stein
now aband,ms his former adherence to the identification of Ptolemv's ).,,0,vos m5pyos with
Tashkurgan. Iranian artistic influences, as well a, speech, are seen extewlin!s to Khotan .
c,f Greek i11fl11ence proper, unless filtered through India, no trace appear,. Whether am'.
or wha1 elements at Khotan came from Bactria we cannot say, a8 we do nnt know whdt
Ur,1eco-Bactrian civilisation was lih. If only Dr. Stein conld excavate Balkh !
 ~OTICES OF BOOKS 30,
Quelques Reformes de Solon. Es$ai de critique histori,1ue. Par C'H_\RLES GILLL\Rk
Lausanne : G. Bridel & Cie, 1907. Pp. 32--!.
2\1. Gillia1d deals princip,lly with the economical and financial reforms. In the extant
fragments of Solon's own poems this part of his work is wry prominent, and these
fragments are the most reliable evidence for the life and work of their author : the ancients
did not understand th~ir middle ages as we do ours. A considerable part of the book j,
then devoted to an nccount of the economic troubles in pre-Soloninn Athens, with
chapters on such subjects as the Rich, tl1e Poor (rr,Xa·ra,, B~ns, iKTTJµ,opo,, etc), Debt an,l
Mortgage (with a disc,1ssion of the Solonian opo,). Solon's reforms are dealt with under
rnch main headings as the Law agaimt seizing the Debtor's Person, The Right of Bequest,
the Seisachtheia, the Solonian Classes, Solon's :Monetary Reforms. One chapter before the
end discusses Solun's political reforms. The book contains a complete collection of
Solon's poems, a bibliography, and an excellent table of contents.

Thucydides Mythistoricus. By F. M. CORSFORD. Pp. xvi+232. Loml011:

Arnold, 1907. l0s. 6d.
Mr. Cornford's book is dh-ided into two parts. The first ('Thucydides Historicu~ · 1 deal,
with what he regards as the inadequate explanation given by the lnstorian of the cau:;e ot
the Peloponnesian '\Var. It was, he holds, really brought on by the commercial party wh0
dictated the policy of Pericles. The Megarian decrees were the first ,tep in thi~ policy,
and were part and parcel of the design to secure .A 1henian trade with the \Vest at the
expense of Corinth. All this Thucydides more or less ignons, bec,rnse he bas no trne
c<,nception of social and economic conditions, in which we Letter imtructed moderns fin,l
the explanation of historical events. The second p,,rt (' Thncyui<les Mythicn& '! attempt,
to shew bow the historian's mind 'IYas-as was inevital,le in hi;; a;se-clominitted l,y
conceptions such as Tyche, Elpis, Eros, etc., which are for h:m not mere abstraction,.
names givt,n Ly men to the nrious forms in "hich natural J,,w expresse~ itselt~ hut
living agencies. This attitude of mind leads the hi:;torian to arran~e and mould the
material, of history much as a dramatic poet of the time would deal w,th them. The
mythical atmosphere causes the actual facts to be uncnnsciou,;ly omitted or, from the
modern and mor · privileged point of view, distorted. Mr Cornford has written a mo,t
brilliant e:;:say, but cannot be said to have penetrated below the su,face of bis subject
llis acquaintance with previ0us writers thereon, or with the archaeological questions that
are occa~ionally involved, leaves a good deal to be d1:sized. But that is a min0r ol,jection.
He proceeds on the somewhat naive a~sumption that wars are sufficiently explained J.y
economic motives. -whereas no questions of trmle will bring tvro states into conflict unle"~
the p!'yd1ological conditions are Javonrable ; and tbe,e conditions are adeqnate'y recogni~e,1
by Thucydides. It is also difficult to bt-l1eve that Tbucydide;s wns so deme, or so little in
the , 011tidence of the politicians of his time, as :\Ir. Cornford's the.,ry prt-supposes. As
regards the method of the book, Mr. Cornford forgets that, once it is a-sumPd that the real
meaning of an authoT's words is something very different from what he t1,inb he is sayi11g, tJ1e
critic's intnpretation becomes pnrely subjecthe ; it becomes, too, intere:;:ting not because of
the ligl,t which it seems to throw on his su!,ject, but heeanse of the attitude of miml
whieh it reveals in the critic him,elf. From the purely liteiary point of view it may be
justifi-1 1,le to make an unoflending historian the object of a p;syclwl.,gical Jeu d'esprit, and
to tr at !tis perfectly reasonable nrsions of a most contt·mporary e\·ents-such a-; the
story of Harmodius and .Aristogeiton-as episodes in a work of the imagination. But for
the :;:ake of the advance of historical criticism, the habit is to be deprecated. XapfrvTa µ,iv

X 2
:303 XOTICES OF BOOKH
The Second Athenian Confederacy. By F. H. ::\Lrn,,H.\LL [C\m1b1"iJge Hi,torical
Essap, ~o. XIII]. Pp. x+ 136. Cambridge rniversity Press, 1905.
,ve ha,e ,lelaye.J too long to notice ::\Ir. Mars1rnll's little book, which, unlike 1110,t Pri1.e
Essays, is .i solid and permanent contribution to the study of its subject. So much has
been discoyereJ in the form of inscriptions since the publication of Bnsolt's monograph
more th,m thirty years ago that, penJing the completion of his history, one is grateful for
,'- careful and lucid summary of the present state of our knowledge of this difficult
transitional period. :For the histories of Holm and Beloch are either- too sketchy or too
trnden~ius to be thoroughly satisfactory. }Ir. Marshall's first chapter gives a bl'ief
c1escription of the events leading up to the fouw1ation of the confederacy, of which the
most important was the formation of an anti-Spartan league in 39-!-3 B.c. It is well known
that the evidence for this league is chiefly numirnrntic ; but a coin of Byzantium, which was
unpnblishell when )Ir. ::\Iarshall was writing, has introduced an element of difficulty into
the chronology. This coin, which is uniform with those of the other members of the league,
~hews that Byzantium belonged to it; l:iut whereas Ephesus, Samos, and Cnidus joined
Sparta and, in )Ir. )Iarshall's opinion, broke up the league in 391, it is improbable that
Byzantium can ha,e joined it before the expellition of ThrasyLulus in 389. Chapter II deals
with the general principles of the Confeueracy, the remainuer of the book describes its
history, which is one of llecline from the very befiinning. The economic historian would
attribute this melaneholy fact to the imperfect financial organisation of the league ; but
that was only a s:-mptom of the real causes. These lay first in the inability of Athens to
regard herself as merely the chief member of the league, and not its mistress ; and second
in the rise, in )Iacedonia, of a power which was hampereu neither by any scruples as to
the subjection of other powers, nor by lack of men or money to carry its policy of con-
<1uest into effect. )Ir. :Marshall rightly regards the Confederacy as the forerunner of true
folleration in Greece, but it is e,1ually significant as the last futile appearance of the city-
state a~ an imperial power.

Sources for Greek History between the Persian and Peloponnesian

Wars. Collected and arranged by G. F. HILL. Second Issue. Pp. xii+439.
Oxford : Clarendon Press, 1907. lOs. 6d. net.
In this re-i.,sne an .lppendix of seventeen pages of newly ac,piired material and conigenda
has been aclLletl ancl the list of ,trchons re,-ised. Otherwi~e the book is the same as it was
when first pnbli,hell in 1897.

The Greatness and Decline of Rome. Yolurne I. The Empire Builders: Yolnme
IL ,Julius Cae,al'. By Gt::,;LIEI.110 FERRERO; tramlated l:v ALFRED E. ZnrnERX.
Pp. vi+3:28, Yi+389. London: Heinemann, 1907. 17s. net.
These two volumes contain a history of the age of Caesar from the death of Sulla to the
Ides of ~larch, with five introductory chapters giving a broad outline of the four precedino·
centuries. Though complete in themselves, they do not conclulle Professor Ferrero's task~
His inte~tion is to ~ontinue_ the narrative, in succ~edin:,.; volumes, llown to the break-up of
the Empire, and reterences m the work now pnbhshec1 sng-gest the early appearance of a
further volume.
The lletailed narrative tranrse~ a much studieLl generation, presenting not a few of the
familiar questions in an unfamiliar light. The characters are ,1rawn with areat skill and
insight. The political adventurer Yatiniu,, Crassm the aspiring financier, Clodius the tur-
bulent demagog11e, and the varied crowd of politicians and generals that pass across the staoe
al~ are portrayed w_it~ life-like ,~i~our: in p~rticular the picture of the old campaigni':i~
.mstocr_at Lucnllu., 1s/ntensely nnd. In t>ilhmating the political aims and powers both nf
~ompe1:1s anll o~ t 1cero, the_ ant~or ha~ pursued the ria media; Cicero especially is
gIYen 111, Jue, wlnle the author's en,Ient Lhvergence from :U,nnmseu has not led him into
 XOTICES OF BOOKS
undue eulo;::y. Dnt of m,ces,ity the chamcttr which dominates the work i;, that c,f Jnliu-
Caes,1r, and here the devout folliJwer of )fommsen will be disappointed or disillusioned.
Cae:;ar's early career, we find, was largely determined by the pressure of his debh. The
Helvetian campaign was a cardinal mi~take, 1xirely redeemed by the expedition against
Ariovistus. A brilliant gentral and a brilliant opportunbt, Caesar appears in the end not
as a state~man Lut as an arch-dest10yer unable to restore the fabric "·hich he had helped to
shatter. Though this view c,f the true Julius Caesar is deYeloped and elalJorated with
great ingenuity, it would be diftirnlt to accept it without reserw.
While the book contains many fine pen-portraits, it is les~ a history of men than of
monments. It is aboye all note,rnrthy for its correlation of social with political history.
The condition of the capital, of Italy, and of the Empire, finds its proper place as a key
to the shifting and almost bewildering scl1emes of parties ; and the preYalence of the slaYe
traffic, the temporary influx of wealth, and the long-continuing ,1nestion of deU are r'ghtly
emphasfoed. The treatment of the social questions never fails to be interesting, for the
author writes in an exhilarating &tyle which J,urries the reader along. Ent, partly nc,
doubt on account of the difficulty and obscurity of the subject, it appears "ometimes to Le
repetitive and circumscribed. In the history of sociabmonments, the notes here and there
confess to conjectures in the text, and in other cases the reader looks in n1in for any sub-
stantial authority cited il! support of the author's view&. Professor Ferrero denies to his
protagonists wmething of the sagacity and power in moulding ennts which other historians
concede to them, and, lays greater stress on the broad unconscious rno,ements of the time".
Probably in doing so he attains a truer perspecth·e, but he essays a more ditficnlt task.
The result is a work which is always stimulating but not always convincing. Still, while
suggesting that the final word on the age of Caesr,r remains unspoken, the work undoul.>tedly
constitutes a rnluable addition to existing knowledge of tl1e period.
As i;; natural in so long a book, points of detail suggest themselns for criticism. Fo1
instance, the dating of the Le:,, Aeb11tio cil'ca 100 B. c. will hardly find gentml acceptance.
)Ir. Zimmern has carried out the translation with singular felicity.

Studies in Roman Histor.1·. By E. G. IL~RnY, )I. A., D. Litt. Pp. viii+ :3-!3.
Londc,n : Swan Sonnenschein and Co., 19015. fis.
In this book l\Ir. Hardy republishes hi;, ten Es;,ays on' Clu·istianitr ancl the Rornan Govern-
ment,' and adds six miscellaneous ;,tudie~ touching on aspects of imperial hbtory. The essays
on Christianity ~i,-e a judicious and compemlious account of the attitude of the Gonrnment
to the new religion from its first appearance in the Empire to the time of the Antonine,.
A subject often viewed in the spirit of partisanship or prejm1ice i;, here treate,1 in the sober
light of scholarship, and Mr. Hardy's well-reasoned conclusions leave an impression of the
remarkable forbearance of the Government towards a mo,·ement which it diu not, and
could not, umlerstaml,-a forbearance which contrasts strangely with the hi;,tory of similar
rnlations in other epochs.
One of the farther stm1ies which nuw first appear in the book deals witl1 the little-
known provincfal assemblies, of which the priumry oliject w,1-, the re;!ulation of tl.e wor~h1p
of' Rome and the reigning Emperor,' and which kept up in the provincial pfJpulation, the
sense of their connexion with, and dependence upon, the imperial city. }Ir. Hardy's study
is of exceptional ,alne for the side lights \\'hich it throws on the dark •1nestions of provin•
cial organisation.
Other stmlies deal with the constitution of the army in the time of Augustn;,, the
monments of tl1e legions in the first two centuries, ,1 Bodleian }IS. of Pliny, and c,ther
detached question•. They are Yery technical and their intere;,t nry specialised ; while
they add ::-omething of value to the ma"s of re;,earch, they rather ,poil the tmiformity c,f }Ir.
Hardy's book. The first ten studies fo1m a comecutin narratiYe which will J.e geuerall~-
read with interest and profit: the remaining essays form a rni5cellany in which 0111., the
expert will find much intere"t.
310 :XOTICES OF BOOKS
The Stoic Creed. By WILLIAM L. DAYID~ox. Pp. Yi+274. EJinburgh: T. and T
Clark, 1907. 4B. tid.

The public whom Profes~or Davidson has in view is not any limiteJ circle of specialists
hit the larger world of general culture which may be concerned to know the broad features
of Stoicism anJ the hearings of Greek philosophy on modern life. If therefore one must
pronounce that to the serious student of philosophy or dassical antiquity the book fa not of
much use, this is not to deny that it will have its u~e in the sphere for which it was
intended. It is perhap to look at it from a somewhat narrow point of view, although that
may be appropriate to a journal devoted to Hellenic studirs. It would indeed be unreason-
able to complain of its not being what it doe" not profess to be-a monograph intended to
,heLl new light upon the <larker parts of its sul,ject, or a handbook which might guide
heginners over the fielJ. Since it is neither, there was no obligation to indicate the special
literature on Stoicism. But it is not that important works which have appeared in the
last twenty years are not mentioned (by Bonhii:ffer, Schmekel, Dyroff, Aal) : the suspicion
i, forced upon one that Professor Davidson has not himself taken the trouble to become
acquainted with them. His Zeller, of course, he knows, and he mentions Stein's 'Psycho-
logie' (Y ol. II, 1888)-the most unsafe guide, by the way, to whom any one taking up
Stoicism coulJ t,e referreJ. The careful and elaborate study of the Stoical philosophy,
c,mtaineJ in Bonhuffer)s two volumes on Epictetu::; (1890, 1894), put many points in a
wholly new light. Professor Davidson repeats old suppositions as if tl1ey had never been
11uestioneJ-the view for instance that all knowledge, according to Stoicism, had a sensuous
ungm. The idea again that the goodne.~s of the Deity was not recognized by the Older
Stoics (pp. 60, 90) is certainly wrong (cf. Chrysippns ap. Plut. de Stoic. rep. 105le). The
account of t<aBijt<ov, with the statement 'that it is applicable only to things indifferent'
(p. 154) is wry unsatisfactory. Professor Davidson's terminology is sometimes curious.
'Affects,' for instance (p. 49), as a translation of rraBTJ, though familiar in German, is new to
me in English, and does not seem to correspond with the technical meaning of the term
given in Baldwin's 'Dictionary of Philosophy.' 'Artificial fire' (p. 88) will hardly do a2 a
translation for 1rvp uxvi1<6v; can Professor Davi<lson have lieen thinking offeu,: d' artifice?
'Homocentric' (p. 183) is not the same as 'anthrnpocentric' : it does not mean 'having man
fur a centre,' the sense re,1uired, but 'having the same centre.' One may freely adll}it, in
cnncln,ion, that Profe,sor Davidson's hook contains many just reflections and that it gives
., very readable survey of what was the current doctrine about Stoicism twenty years ago.

Aristotle's Theory of Conduct. By T. 3£.\R~H.\LL. Pp. xxi+378. LonLlon:

T. Fisher Unwin, 1906.
1Ir. :ifarshairs idea fa a good one. If he doe, not lVil'e to make the Ethics 'a popular
book,' in the ,ense of its finding a large numl1er nf readers, he has set out to present it in a
1eadable slrnpe which rnay bring it into touch with the or<linary person of intelligent
interests. Like Professor Davidson's l,ook therefore, )Ir. l\Iarshall's is not to he judo-ed as
a contribution to special research, but as an e-,ay in the laudable work of populari;ation.
The Ethics is a hook which raises Yariuus prulhrns for the student of Greek philosophy.
It was compo,ed in constant reference to the cmrent popular ideas and the doctrines of
~nntemporary schonls. It has therefore some of the difticulties of a controversial work torn
nnt of its context. Tl1i::; is especially so, ,ince the argument-; of Ari::;totle seem to be often
otl hc111i11em, and the question may he raised how far his premisses represent his own
•,pinions, and how far they ::;erve a merely dialectical purpose. It is r1uestions of this kind
"hich must engag: the attenti_on of those who ma,ke a_ s:ieritific study of Greek philosophy.
They take a prornrnent plate m Professor Bnrnet's ed1trnn of the Ethics. Of that edition,
~trnnge to 0 ay, )Ir. :'larshall has apparent'.y no knowle,lge. Profe,sor Burnet's departures
from the common ne\\· Jre not calculated rn all ,,a,es to c,trry conviction, lmt one cannot
 .XOTICES OF BOOKS 311
l1e1p thinking th,1t if :.\Ir. ::.\Iarshall had given condderation b the fre,;h light in which
Professor Burnet often places a well-known p,1s~age, many of his observations would. have
fallen out otherwise. Deficiencies uf thi,; kin,l are not howe\·er ,o serious in a work with
the aims of :Mr. :'.\farshall's a, in one intended for strid1y aca<lemic use. Aristotle's ethical
system, by the Yer;v lack of schematic precision, which in this tle1,1 he held it an error to
seek, was able to embody and represent the mass of feeling, and judgments on ethical
questions operath·e in the world of his contemporaries better than a doctrinaire theory .
.Ancl it is becau:;e these general feelings t1iffer Ie~s fr.Jm one age to another than the
constructions of philosophers that Aristotle's Ethic', is still a book ,Jf fresh interest for the
ordinary man to-Jay. :.\Ir. :,Iarsha!L \rnrk has the essential •1nalitie, of a healthy sense of
actuality and an agreeable style. His judgment is sane and ,wll informed. It i,
impossible, of cour;,e, for anyone who expounds a philosophical the,1ry to keep his own
philosophical procliYitie, in abeyance. And where )Ir. )Iarshall's nm counter to those ,)i
some particular rea"der, :.\Ir. l\Iarshall will ine,itably appear wrong and 3uch reader will
probably be inclined to re;id -·histotle in a somewhat different sense. This is not the place
to note particular pass,1ges where l\Ir. )far-,haffs rentlering appears to us •1uestionable, bur
serious exception can surely be taken to his ,iew that the ethical stam.lard, in _.\.ri,tot1e·s
view, is deri,ed merely fron1 the general sense of the community in which the agent lh-e,.
If this were so, it would be impos,ible to arrange the communities them',elves in ,m ethical
~cale. )Ir. ::.\Iarshall seems hardly to realize the unexpressed presuppo'3itions upon which
the Aristotelian ethical theory rests, pre,uppositions \\·hich perh,1ps justify }Ir. Stewart in
Eaying that 'in all creatures there is a BEtuv n which directs their effort-; tvwarcls tlut which
is naturally good.'

'H Ila.Tpls To-0 'OSuo-o-lws. TramL1teLl fnm the GernMn l,v Xr,_•JLA~ K. P.\l:LATO'i.
Pp. 308. _\thens, HJO,.
The 01iginal of this translation is supplieJ by a treati,e of the _.\.1chduke LuLlwig Salvator
on the Homeric Ithaca, ancl part of another lJy Dr. Gushi.\' Lan~, entitled Unte,·,u,. lw,1t1e,i
0

'?.11,· Oeogmphie de,· Oclyx.•ee. Three sections of the latter treatise are omitted in the Greek
veTSion for lack of ~pace. The tramlator is an enthusiastic antl convinced Ithacan, ancl
nee,lles,s to say, the German works, which he places before his countrymen, are stron~ly
opposed to Durpfeltl's Leucadian theory. They consist in the main of an array of literar:v
anthoritie'l ancient and modern fayouring the localisation of O,h·ssen-' home in the acttrnl
Ithaca, awl make no serious ,1riginal contribution to the •1ue,tion, which in the opini,m
of both the German autltorn an,l the Greek tramhtor ou;,;ht never to h,n-e been rai.,e.J.

Schools of Hellas: _.\.n essay on the practice ancl theory of _.\udent Greek Eclrn:.ati,m
from 600 to 300 B.c. By KEXXETH FREE,L\X. Pp.· xix+:!99: 1-l full-page illui,-
tration.,. London : ~Iacmill,m and Co. ·h. net.
A melancholy interest attaches to this book, written by the ,rnthor with ,1 view to hi~
cancli<lature for a fellowship, aml edited after hi,; untimely death 1Jy his friencl ancl colleaguP,
~Ir. :.\I. J. Rentlall with a preface by Dr. Yerrall. Though nuder the cir·cmnstances
necessarily incomplete, it forms a rnlualile and sugge,tive introduction to ,m attractfre
su1Jject which is for first time presented to English readers under an ,1ttractfre form. The
first part deals with the Practice of E,lucation in Sp.uta antl _\then,, where the author
sees the types respectively of the boar,ling school and the day ,cbool. Sparta is tre.1te l with 1

a sympathy which forms a ·wholesome ,:orredive to the eL1g,,erated _.\.tticism to which we are
all incline,l ; but the bulk of the b,)ok i, tlevotefl to the Athenian ,y,tem, which is ,t~-ume,1
on 'lomewhat imufficient e,·itlence t,J he typic,11 of Greek Education ,c!;eneral;y. Speci,11
c1rnpters are cleYoted to Primary E,laeati,m, which t1sted fr,Jin the a:::e •)f j' to 1-l: Sec,,n,Iary
 ::SOTICES OF B00KS
Edn,:atic,n occupyin;,: the next fonr year;,, dmfo~ wliich tlte pu1,il atte1ttletl tl1e lecttm:-, of
wamh:ring :,ophisti-, or at a latu period ,choobsnch ao that of hucrate,; Tertiary Education,
l1y "·hich name is de;,criLetl the two year,· compulsory traiuing of the EpheLoi, from which
a;, it lo;,t its rnilitary character was den loped the' Fninr;,ity of Athen-.' Phy~ical training-
is treRted in a :,eparate char,ter, "hich is perhaps less sati-fado1y than the re,t of the work,
because the- author cc,ntrary to liis u;,nal cnstorn has relietl too much on a11ti11nated text•
l,ook-. The Sec@t1 Part ,1eals with the Theory of Et1ncation. Unf"rtn11ately the chaptel's
on Socrate;,, Plato, an,1 .hi;,totle wEcre left in a state nc,t sufficiently fini,,htd for puUication.
There 1einain three rn~gestfre essays on Religiou aml Education, A1t, }Insic, ant1 Poetry,
an,1 Xenophon, the la,t a particularly fresh and original t:Ssay.
It i,, impossible here to ,1we1l on the countless point, of practical interest raise,1
]jy tliis book, which should l,e read and pondered by all eclncationalii-ts rmd schoolmaster&.
It is proYided with an Index English am1 Greek, and a select Bibliography. The illn-•
tratiom of Yases are effectiYely printed on tenacotta r•aper. The &pelling of Greek names
is an original but hardly &ati-iactory com1,romi;,e.

Leichenverbrennung und Leichenbestattung im alten Hellas nebst den

verschiedenen Formen der Graber. By JosEPH ZEHEDLUER. (Beitnige
zur Knmtgeschichte. N ene :Folge xxxY.] Pp. 193. Leipzig : E. A. Seemann, 1907. 3 Ill,
A u&eful treatise, whid1 collects all the publislietl eYiclence as to the &tale in which the remaim
c,f corp&es ban been fonnd in Greek ;uan,s from the X eolithic to the Hellenistic periods.
'fhe autl,or sho'-'"s that, while inhumation (inducling 'skeletoni:'ation ') has lJeen the
preYailin~ practice in all ages of Aege,m ciYilirntion, there i& al.,o eYiclence for incineration
i11 eYery period. He conclntle- that the latter ,ms a rite practised only l,y certain richer
familie- : in cases of emergency, as e.f/. after battle in foreign lanrls, when tr,rn&port home
c,f the whcle corp,e wonld h,n-e been clitticnlt; during epitlemics of contagir,us diseaoe; and
in the ca,e of aliens tlecease,l on Greek ~oil. He consit1er, not only the archaeological
eYiclence, lrnt also the Homeric;, havillt:; no difficulty in ,.howing that incinerution is by no
means tlte only proce,-, ,lescril ,eel in the Iliad and Ody;sey. The author's evidence i,
11erlrn1,s more useful and cum·incins- than his conclu,ions. The ideas which are implie(l in
tl1e two processe- uf corr,se-tli;,posal are so Llifferent that oue is hardly prepared to accept the
tontentir,n that one and the sm11e people practised both in one aml the fame pe1io,l ; and Dr.
Zehetmaier's fir,t exception-certain richer farnilieo-might ha,·e ,-uggested to him that the
true key b to be fouml in Llifferen.:e of ra~ial origin. Some t1ay we may be in a position
to t1i.-tingui,h the rncial element.- in the prehistoric and histGric sc,cieties uf Greece by
jn,t the-e facts ao to burial wliich lie has oo laboriomly collected.

The Role of the MArEIPOI in the Life of the Ancient Greeks, as Depicted
in Greek Literature and Inscriptions. By EMnx }IrnnE Il.\x.r;:rx, Ph.D.
Pp. [):!. C'liicago : The Cniver-it,\· of Chicago 1'1e;,s, 1907.
Thi, hc,k. which was c,riginally a the,.i, prb,-nted fur the degree of Doct,JI of P]1ilosophy
at ILn va1cl, deal, mainly" ith tl1,- ,ocinl ,,tatu- aml 1,er&om1l chamcteri;tic~ of the )layELpo,,
while the perl1aps· more impo1tant r111e,tion r,f l1i- functions is left in ,01ae doubt. The auth, ,r
recognise- the Llitticnlh·, l,ut an,i,ls it Ly keepin;.: to the Greek tec1m )layHpo,, ,d1ich, a, he
~;iy,, has not the Eame "i;;nifi,_,mc12 at all ti1m,,. Thus his imtanee& range from a speciali&t
m cl1ee,e-, akec, to ,ornetliinc: mr,1e tl1,m ,t saciificial L11tcl1e1 : n111l in an inw;,tiuation of
tl1ei1 pul.Ji,_ an,] piYate con,liti,:,ns ,n, h wi,lely dilfere11t peiH,ns eannot p1ofitabh- be
,li,cus~ecd tc,::;ether. lJut ,ritl1 tl1i- re-en-.... the place,:,! the MayHpo, iu Greeck life is fully
 .NOTICES O:F BOOKS 313
illustrated fu,rn the litt::l'a1y evidence, and especially from ~11medy. It is insisted that
befo1e the time of .Alexander he was a profes&ional man 0f education and repute, anLl
certainly not of serdle &tation. Other points are shortly imlilated. More might perhaps
be made of the connexion of the i\IayELpo, with the .Athenian KrypvK,;; and of their official
control by the I'vvatKov6µm. The many passages which Dr. Rankin ha, collected must
necessarily be used in all further study of the subject ; arnl rt is therefore a pity that
he Im, not completed hi, rnrnll treatise by the addition of an index.
 I.-IXDEX OF srB.JECTS.
A _\si us on the Pelasgi,ms, 186
ABA.TOX, in Delo8, 293
Achaean : opposed to Pela,:gian in Homer,
181; D,jrpfeld's theory of 'Achaean'
pottery, 295, 296.
-~cusilaus on the Pelasgians, 186
Aegates Insulae, fleets at, 56
Aeginetan thalassocracy in Eu~ebius S-1 f.
Aeolis, Seleucid coins ,truck in, 1-16 f.
Aeschylus on the Pelasgians, 190, 211, 212
.Agon on Peparethian coin;:, 92, 95
Aigialeis, Pela~gian, 199, 200
Alpat Keui (2\Iysia), inscr. from, 63
Amasis: diskobolos on r.-f. krater hy, 16
Ambar-arassy, sarcophagus from, 101
Amber from Sparta, 288
Amentwn, 251 f.
Amorgine ce111eteries, 285
-~mphiareum at Oropus, 285
Antandrus, Pela,,gians in, 19-1
Anticleides on the Pelasgians, 213
Antioch, source of Asia 2\finor sarcophagi
and other works of art, 113 f., 122
Antiochus I., coin with ~eate<l Heracles, 146
Antiochns II., coins of, 1-!,j f.
Antioclrns III., coins of, 145
Antiochus Hierax, coins of, 145
Aphorisms, inscr. from Kermasti with, 62 f.
Apollo, dedication to, from Pamlerma, 61 ;
' .Apollo '-tvpe ~tatues, colos,al, from
Sunium, 284
.Apollonius Rhouius: i. 1021--!,222 f.; the
Argonauts at Portus Argons (iv. 6.i5), ;3
Arcadia, Pelasgian, 200, 209
Argonauts at Cyzicus, 222 f.
Argos, Pelasgic, 178 f.
Argos (Peloponnesian) connected with Pelas-
gians, 188, 190, 200
Ar~os, Thessalian, 188, 190
Aristoxenns on the enharmonic scale. 161
Artemis Orthia, temple at Sparta, 28,
A 5Clepios 'Em()avpw, IlfP)'UfL1JIIO!, ()twpvya
ICUTOIK.WII, 227 ; _j_t<iJjlt',ftT1J,, ibid.
_\thena : lJirth, and coi1te,t \\'ith P,1;,eido11,
in Parthenon pediments, de., 2-12 f. ;
Chalkioiko,, sanctuaiy at ~par ta, 288 :
head of, on Peparethian c,,ins, ~18.
Athens : Acropoli,o, X. slop~, excavation,,
28-1 ; -~~ora excaYations, 28-! ; Dipylon
Gate, excavations, 28-1
_-\thens ::\Imenm : b.-f. vase from _\cropolis
with mounted jaYelineer 261 ; aryhallo,
from Eretria, 271 ; bronze diskos, 6
_\tbos. PeLhgians in, 20-1 f.
Attica, Pelasgians in, 191, 199, 201 f.
_\xe 0 , ,Iouble, on 3Iinoan pottery, 202
B
R~BYLOX, ca]Jtnre of, Hero,fotu,' account of,
40 f., -!5 f.
Eaitylos from 0 hrine at Koum,isa, 293
Balbis, the, 9 f.
Barbarism antl Hellenism, ThucydiLle,111
view of, 20, f.
Bassae, reconstruction of temple at, 28,
Bas,oon, on late sarcophagus, 16-">
Bel,rycia conquered hy Thracian,, 88, 12~
Berlin 2\Iuseum :
Bronze ,md lead L1iskoi, (:i
Coins of .Antiochus IT., 150 f.
t}en1:, with Jiskoholos, ';35
Relief with Christ, 108 f.
Ya,e~: b.-f. Tripod (1727) with ,liskobolcs,
19; r.-f. k:dix (3139), 263 ; (2728), 2liS
Boeotia, terracottas from, GS f.
Bombaliu,n, musical in,trnn1ent, 163
Boulogne : _\ttic lekythos, 3:3 ; r.-f. kylix, ;3-1
Bracteates, ,:,:old, from Sparta, 28!)
Br,rnron, Pelasgian raid ,m, 202.
British ~Iusenm :
Bronzes: di,ktJbolos (Etruscan) fwm lelJe,:,
17: Greek •'.675), 21, :!2: diskoi, G,
215-!
 I~DEX TO YOLC)IE XXTII.
Briti;,h }Iusenm :
Coins : Antiochns I., 1-!6 ; Antioclms II.,
130 f. : Co;,. 31 : Cynk. 1-±7; )lyrina.
134 ; Peparetlrns. 90 f.
frory dirtych ,:st. }Iicbael). 117
Sculpture : Parthenon pe,liments, :242 f. ;
sarcoplrngu;,-fragment of Selefkeh type,
110: ,arcopli. with we,llling of Cupid
and Psyche, 164
Yases: b.-f. amphora (B 271;,l-±. 19. Pl. I. ;
keleue (B 36l) 13: krater (B 37), :233;
kylix (B 3SO), 252: kkythos (B 376),
ll, :27, Pl. II.; Panathenaic amphorae
(B 13-!;,260 Pl. :S:TIII.; (B 1-!6), 272;
(Campl_1e1l-Bannerman), :271, Pl. XX,
r.-f. hylhia (E 16-!\ 32 ; kylix (E 6\
13; pelikai !E 3n. 393 ., l!J, PL III. ;
(E -HO'. :24:1
Brusa. in,cr. at. 61
Bybon in~cripti,,n, 1 f.
Byzantines in l'o,,ession vf }Ionenn-asia,
23:2 f.
C.uno, niche in cemetery of Tulnnic1s, llJ f.
Cambridge, Fitzwilliam ;\[n~eum : Coins of
Antioch us II., V,3 : of }Iyrina, 134
Capital, de-.elopment of. on Asia }Iinor
sarcophagi, 107 f.
Carian thalassocr,tcY in Eu,elJius, 87. 128
Carthaginian fleet fo First Punic War, 48 f.
Caimne, Athenian expedition again;t, 43
C(:rigo and l\Ionemrnsia, :23:2 f.
Chaeronea. excaYations ut, :286
Chukidicc, ethnology of iulancl ,listl'ict of.
195 f.
Chalcis, prehistoric tombs near. 2S6
Chariot-group, tenacotta, from C1ete, 73
Christ on relief at Berlin. 10" f.
Cbt-grnves c,n P&eira (0ft: Crete • :29:2
Cloistered court at Phaestn,, :2\➔0
Constantinople :\Imenm:
Sarcophague of the monrnin:,.: wc,men, 113;
Selefkeh &arcophagus. l0J f. ; Siclamam
sarcophagu,, 101 f.
Cook, Sir Frederick. sarcophagus belonging
to, 9£1 ff.
Corcyra, new mn,emn at. 2H7
C'OI'inth : exc:avatiom at, 2D-lc : pre,ervation
c,f remains at, :287
Cortona. nllc-;.;ed Pela,uian. lH,""i
Cos: coh1s \\\th ,liskobolv,. :2(J
Cr,maans. Pela,gian, l 9!l ·
Cn,matiuu : in Brvuze age. :2!l:2 : in Zach,iro
lerneterr. :296
Cre"ton, Pela,gi,m, aboYe. 1:1-! f., :205
Crete: l!XcaYations in. :!-"9 : l'elasgia11s in.
17G f. ; rel.ttic,n tr, C~vcladic cnlt11re. 28.) ;
relations ,Yith }I, ,nemrn;ia. :2:39; terra-
cottas from, 7:2 f.
('tesia-· an "nnt of Per,i.1. -le l f.
Crdade,: Pebsgi::ms in l!l!I ; Cyclm1ic
cernekric--, :2c..5 : intlnu1ce in Crete, :W2
Cyme, mint of Anti,,chu~ I. and II., 147 f. ;
allieLl with }Iyrina and Plwrnea, 1:i8
Cynuria, Pel::i,;.;ian, in. :200
Cyrene, coin, of Peparethns attributed to,
1)0 f.
Cyzicus: and the Pelasgian•. :2:3:l f. : in,cr.
from near, 61 f.
D
DA.:HOXl•X inscr.. 289
Delos, excavations in, :!9a
Demosthenes at Sphacteria, :27 -l, f.
Diadem, wingel1, of Selencil1 kings, 143
Didyma, excavations at, :299
Dies, interchange of, on Pepar·ethian cc.ins,
92 ; practice of importing, I 4!.l
Dionysos seated : type of Peparethian coins,
91 f., 93, 97: head of, on do., 98; dedi-
cation to D. of Keuren, 65
Dioscuri on Sidamara and other .-arrnphagi,
103 f.
Diskol.>olos 1 f. ; }Iyron·s : see )Iyron ; of
X ancydes, 12 f .. 2J f.
Diskos. thro"·ing the, 1 f.
Dodona : Epb1,rns o □, :211 ; Herodotus on,
198 : Pelasgian, and Pelasgic Zeus of,
180 f., 18.j
Dolionl!s in Argonautica of Apc,llonius, 223
Dolphin-1iL1er, on coin of Peparethus, 92,
9J, 97
Dornitins (Cn.) Corliulo, fl±
Dooi- on sarcophagi. 99 f.
Dorian, i □ Homeric Crete, 176 f.
Draclnwini. cxcaYations at, 28G
Dresden Museum :
')Iatron uf Herculaneum,' 11:2
E
EcXO)ff::<, tleeb at, 48 f.
Egyptian thalassocracy in Emel,ius, Si
Ephet.os, Athenian, use of javelin l.1y, 234
Ephesus, exca.-ations at, 298
Ephorus : on the Pelasgians, 209 f. ; on the
Tnrhenian~, 218 f.
Epi~laurus, archaeological work at, 287
Eretria: arylmllos from, 271; cliskobolo, on
lekythos from, :21. :23
Eretrian tlrnla~socracy in EnseLins, 85
Etrnscan: amentnm, 255 ; brunze disko-
1,ulos, 17; pipe, 16F\; srr also Tyrrhe-
nians
Euphronins: ,li,kol ,olus 1111 r.-f. kylix, 16,
20
Euripides un the Pelasgians, 191
Ensebins : list o± tliala,socmcies in, 75 f.,
123 f. ; chrono;;rnphical works of, 75 f.,
124 f.

F Italian uoe ,:,f ,unentum, 25,'i
FAGGOTS, tenacotta horseman c,\l'ryin~, 7-!
Fibulae, ivory plaques a·.tach,,d t,,, 288
Fleets in the First Punic iV,ir, -!5 f. ; in the
Secoml War, 58
Flute playetl by Cupid, urn in Capitul, 165
Foreshortening un coins, 29, :30
Franr,ois vase, ,pear-thrower-; on, 2.'i3
:Franks at )Iunemvasia, 230 f.
G Jerome's list ,,f th,1la,sr,crncies, 81, 127
GARZONI, Antonio, pode,t,\ of 11onemrnsia,
300
Geometric antiquities of Olympia, etc.,
Dorpfekl's theory of, 295
Gesso tluro relief from Pseira, 291
Glasgow, Hnnter Collection: ,,,,in, of
Antiochus II., 150
Glauce : fountain of, at Corinth, 29-!
Gracchis Secundus, irncr. of, 227
Grapes, hunch of, type of Peparethirm coins,
91 f., 95 f., 98
H
HAGHIA EIRE:SE (Crete\ excav,ltions, 293
Harp, various forms of, 162
llastae aasatae, 255
Hecataens on the Pelasgians, 186, 189, 201
Hellanicus on the Pelasgians, 187, 189, 19-!;
on the Tyrrhenians, 215
Hellene opposed to Pelasgian, 182 f., 206
Hellespontine area, Homeric ethnology of,
183 f.
Helmet on Peparethian crJins, 91, 93, 96
Hera, sanctuary of, at Tiryns, 295
Heracles : head of, on Peparethian coins, 91,
93, 95 ; seated, type of Seleucid coins,
1-!5 f. ; of Enthydemus I. and Spart.1,
158
Herculaneum, 'Matron' of, 112
Hermaea, fleets at, 52 f.
Herodotus : his Persian friends, 37 f. ; on
the Pelasgians, 191 f.; on the Tyrrhenian,,
215 f.
Hesiod, Pelasgians in, 185 f.
Homeric evidence on the Pelasgians, 172 f.
Horseman : carrying faggots, terracotta
from Crete, 7-1; throwing javelin, 270 f.
I )Ianika (Euboea), 'Cycladic' tombs at, 2815
lKONOST.ASIS derived from proskenion of
theatre, 119 f.
lmbros: Homer on, 183 f; Pclasgians in,
192 ; Strabo on, 213
Ionia, Seleucid coins struck in, 146 f.
IrelanJ, use of throwing thong in, 256
Isidore of llonemYasia, 235
Ismidt sarcophagus, 102
317
I ,·ory : throne of St. )Iaximian at Ravenna,
ll:"> ; diptych in British )Iuseum, 117 f.,
plaques for .1ttachrnent t<J filJUlae, from
:-iparta, 288
I Yy-wreath : ry1,e ,_,f Peparethian coins, 91,
93, 97 ; <ledic,1ted 1,,- Pep,lrethians at
Delphi, 93
.J
J_-1.vnr:s, throwing the, 2-!9 f.
K (sfe cd,o C)
K.A:sTH.-I.R 1)"1 type of Peparethian coins, 9S
Kermasti (7\Iysia) inscrr. from, 61 f.
Kertch va-;e with contest of Athene awl
.Poseidon, 2-!6
Kn,Jsos, excaYations at, 289
Koum,isa (Crete), ex,"aYati,111° at, 292
L
LACED.\EMO:--IA:s thalassocr,1cy in Eu-e1iu,,
85
Larisa, Pelasgian, 173 f.
Lemnos, Homer on, 183 f.; Pelasgian- in,
192, 201 f. ; Stiaho on, 213
Leukas, excavations of, 296
Leyden, Panathenaic amphora. 261)
Lindos, excarntions at, 299
Lion from Delo, at Yenice, 29-!
Logographers, ea1ly, on the Pel,1sgian,,
l86f.
London: ,u Driti,h :Museum
Loune: see Paris
Lycaon, ::;enealogy of, 187
Lycosura, recon,truction of group t,y D.uuo-
phon, 28i
Lydians: thalas,mcrncy of, in Ensel_iiu,, 83 :
relation with Tyrrheni.ms, 21 i
)L-1.cEDOX not mentioned in the Iliad, 177
Madrid puteal, 246
Jfagadis, 162 .
)lalmsey ,vine from )fonemvasfa, 232 f. :
from other places, 238
l\iantinean hasis, )Inse from, 111
l\Iaximian, St., throne of, 115 f.
Megabyzus: Ctesias and Herodotus on, 41 f.
)Ielde, inscr. from, 6-!
)lesseuians at Sphacteria, 27-! f.
)Iihrab niche 0 , form of, IH f.
)Iiletopolis, inscr. from, lil, 6-1
)Iiletus: excavation-; at, 2~!8 ; thalassocracv
of, 87, 128 · ·
 IXVEX TO YOLL\IE
Milo the athlete, :?
l\Iistr,i, rep.iir of clnnc!tes at, 2S7
l\[ohammed II. att.tc ks l\Ionemrnsi,t, :?:~6
.\lonemrnsia, 2:?9 f., 300
Moudania, inscr. from, 226 f.
l\fousomo,, .\farcns, l\Ietrupolitan of .\Ionem-
,a-ia, ::!38
.\Iunich : 1.-f. amplwrae, 265 ; kylike~
(.56:2-.1), :!c:!; (7H5, hy Panaetin- 2Gf.,
::!64f.
llI use frc,m l\fantinean l,a,is, 111
l\Iusic, instrumental, 160 f.
l\lycenae, warrior rn~e of, 2.52
:Mycenaean remains : Di:irpfdd's theory of,
295 f. ; near Chalcis, 286 ; at Delo", 293 ;
at Thebes, 286 : at Zach:.\ro, 296
:Myrina, miut of Antiochus IL, 152 f.; allied
with Cyme and Phocaea, 158
:,lyrlea : sPe .\loudania, 228
Myron's di-,kol.olos, 9 t., 12 f.• 28 f.
XABIS, tiles with name of, 289
Xaples l\Iuseum: sarcophagus with figures
playing pandura, 164. Ya-es: Bourgui-
gnon r.-f. kylix by Euphronius (disko-
bolo~). 19, :!O; Panathenaic vase, 31, 32.
,Vall-painting: Cupid playiug sambuca,
162
Xaucyde,, diskobolos attributerl to, 12
Naxos: prehistoric cemetery, 285; thalas"o-
cracy of, 8.5
Neolithic pottery of N. Greece, 286
New Caledonian throwing tl111ng, 257
~ew Hebrides throwing thon;r, 257
Xike in Centrnl Group5 of Parthenon pedi-
ments, 242 f.
0 Pomak Keui (Mysia), inscr. from, 66 f.
OBsrnn;s- from Corinth, 29-!
Oclenrn at Corinth, 29,l
Olymprn : brunze diRkoi from, 6 ; excava-
tions (1906-7), 29'3 ; Dorpf-.·ld's theory of
date of earliest sanctua1 ies, 295
Ornamentation on Asia Minor sarcophagi,
99 f.
Oropus, Amphiarn1m, excavation at, 285
Ounep, throwin:; tlwug, 257
p Pylos: Homeric, supposed site of, at
P A~.iETics : ky Ii :c at M uni,·h, 26 f., 264 f.
Panathenaii;amplwme; in Brit. us. (B 134).
2n0, Pl. XV Ill; (B 1-16) i 2; (Campbell-
Bannermann), :271, Pl. XX ; at Leyden,
260 ; from Sparta, :289
xxnr.
P,mathenaic festi\·al : at Athens, jan,lin
throwing at, 271 ; at Troy, 2:!6.
Panderma, in~cr. from, 61
Pandura or lute, 163 f.
Panec!yris of the Ilian union at Troy, 226
Pan-pipe, 166 f.
Paris:
Brbliotheque Nationale: coins uf Anti-
ochus lI., 151 f.
Louvre: krater with mountedjan,lineer.,
272 ; r.-f. kylix (G 96), 2
Parthenon : central groups of pediments,
242 f. ; new fragments of pedirneut sculp-
ture, 297
Pecti.,, 162
Pelasgia, name for Peloponnese, 210
Pelasgian : thalaswcracy in Eusel;ius, 83 ;
theory, history of, l 7tJ f.
Pela,gns, eponym of the Pelasgians, 186
Peparethus and its coinage, 90 f. ~-
Pergamum : excavations at, 297 ; extent of
kingdom in time of Antit1chus IL, 159
Per~ia, Herodotus' account of, 37 f.
Petrowicz Collection : coins of Antioch us II.,
1.53, 155
Phaestus, excavations at, 290
Pherecydes on the Pelasgians, 187
Philistus on the Pelasgiaus, 219
Philochorus on the Pela:-giam, 213
Philostratus : Im. i. 2--1 (description of
/3a11/3,~), 9 f.
Phintias, r.-f. psykter, 2.59
Phocaea: allied with C_vme and l\Iyrina, 1.58;
mint of .Antiochus II., 155 f. ; thalasso-
cracy of, 85
Phoenician thalassocmcy in Ensebius 88,
129
Phrantze& of Monemvasia, 229, 235
Pillar, sacrell, in slirine at Kounu\sa, 29:3
Placie, Pelasgian, 191
Plato on mu&1c. 160 f.
Polyl,ius v. 77 emendell, 159
Pompeian wa~l-pa;ntings shewing &tagt:-
fa1;ades, 119 t.
Pompeius .Magnus, inscr. in honour of, 64
Porti (Crete), ossuary at, 293
Portraits, early Seleucid, 145 f.
Pozzi Collection : Attic lekythos from, 33
Praxitelean influence in sarcophagi of 4th
cent. A.D., 111
Prini,( (Crete), excaYations at, 290
Psalteri1111,, lti3
Pseira (off Crete), excavations at, 291
Punic \Var, Fi1 st, the fleets in, --18 f. ; Secom]
58 '
Zach,\ro, 296 ; Spa, tans and Athenrnns
at, 27 4 f.
Q
Q11i·,11111ere111is in Li\'Y, 5!1
 I~ DEX OF Sl'B,J El'T;o:;.
R Socrates on music, loll
IL\. VEXNA, throne uf St. Maximian at, 115 f.
Reliefs, gesso dnro, painted, from Crete,
291
Renier, Sebastiano, Podest,\ of Monenn·asia,
240,300
Retimo, terracottas from, 73 f.
Rhodes, excavations at, 299
Richmond (Surrey) : Cook Collection. &ar-
cophagus of Sidamara type, 99 f., Pl.
V.-XI.
Roman fleet in First Punic War, 48 f.
Rome, supposed Pelasgian settlemel!t in,
222
Rome, ;\fuseums:
Barracco : Hellenistic relief of Pan and
Nymphs, 167
Capitol : urn of L. i.\linucius Felix, 165
Deutschen arch. Instituts, Apparat des :
r.-f. kylix, 266
Kircheriano : diskos, 6
Lateran : sarcoph. with siren playing
pandura, 164
Palazzo Lancellotti : :\Iyron's diskobolos,
28
Torlonia: r.-f. kylix (270), 264
Vatican : b.-f. stamnos ( l\Ius. Gregor.)
253, 260 f. ; sarcoph. with figure play-
ing bassoon. 165 ; standing diskobolos,
2-!f.
s Target-practice with the javelin, 262, 267
SALAMIS tributary to Monem,aoia, 234
Sambuca, Hi2
Samos : Herodotm,' connexion with 44 ;
thalassocracy of, 85
Samothrace, Pelasgians in, 193
Sanis-type of terracottas, 68 f.
Sarcophagus of Sidarnara type, in Cook
collection, 99 f., from Selefkeh, 10-1 f. :
with musicians, 164, 165
Sataspes, Herodotus' account of, 41
Scopelos : see Peparethus.
Scylace, Pela;:gian, 191
Scyros, supposed Tyrrhenians in, 221
Selefhh sarcophagus, 104 f.
Seleucid portraits, 145 f.
Sepias, Cape, excavations at, 289
Serpents on reliefs relating to Asclepios, 227
Shell-niche, Eastern origin of, 114 f.
Shell-pediment on sarcophagi, 100 f.
Sicyon, bracteates imitating coins of, 289
Sidamara sarcophagus, 101 f.
Sillon sarcophagus of the mourning women,
113
Sirna with relief of armed riders. at Prini,\.
WO . .
Sinties in Hellanicus, 189; in Horner, 184;
in Thucydides, 205
Srner<lis conspiracy, Herodotu,' account of,
39 f.
Smyrna, sarcophagus fragments at. 102 f.
319
Sophocles: on the Pela,,gian,,, 190 : on the
T.,-rrhenians. 215
Spaita, excavations at, 28,
Spartans captured on Sphaderia, 27 4 f.
Spear: see javelin.
Sphacteria, 27 4 f.
Stage-fat;:ades in Pompeian wall-painting-,
119 f.
Staphylus, founder of Peparethus, 91
Stone vases from Pseira (Crete), 292
Stones : lifted or thrown bv athlete;.. l f. ;
games with, 5 ·
Str-abo's use of Epltc,rn- c,1t the Pelasgian,,
209f.
Stradioti of Corfu, 240
Stryrnonian district, etlmolog:· of, 1913
Sunium, exca\·ations, 284
Susa (Hadrumetum) : terracottas, worna1t
playing zither, 163; woman with pandura,
165
Syncellus and Eusebius, 80, 124 f.
Syrian influence on art in 4th cent. A.D.,
113 f.
Syrinx=pan-pipe, 166 f.
Syro,, prehistoric cemetery, 285
T
TaORMI.Sa 1It:sEnr: late Rornan sarcopha•
gus, 165
Tchakyrdja, inscrr. from, 65 f.
Tchatal-Aghil, near Brusa, i11sc1._ at, 67
Terracottas from Boeotia and Crete, 68 f. :
from Susa, 163, 165 ·
Teutonic throwing thong, 256
Tiryns, excavations at, 295
Thalassocracies, Eusebius' list of, 75 f., 123 f.
Theatre, Roman, at sanctuary of Artemi,
Orthia, Sparta, 288
Thebes, :\lycenean house at, 286
Thes~alian Argos, Pelasgic, I 79 f.
Th .. ssaly, Pelasgians in, 198, 210
Thong tor throwing spears, ;ee amentnll!.
Thracian : in,·asiuns of A.,,ia, 88, 129, 18-1 ;
thalassocracy, 84
Throwing-btick, 257
Throwing-thong, see arnentnm
Thucydides : on the capture of the Spartan~
on ::-.phacteria 27 4 f. ; on the Pela-gians
and Tyrrhenians, 195, 20-1 f., 215 ; on the
thala,soeracies, 12/\
Tragula, 256
T1·igo1111m, 162
Tripod, musical instrument, 163
Troy, inscr. Imm, 226
Tunis, l\lu,ee Alaoui, terracutb, c,f man
playing pirnLlura, 165
Turin :\In-emu : relief of Orpheuo, 164.
Tyrr!tenians and Pelasgians, 214 f.
Tyrsenian, of Creston 195 ; see afoo Etrus-
cans
320 lSDEX TO VOLU)IE XXVII.
u "\Ynrzburg: alaLastr,m fragment with di&ko-
lnlos, 36 and Pl. III.
UMBRLI. in Herotlotus. 217
tTmmidius Qnadratu,, 6-!
X
V
X--1.sTHl"S the Ly,Ii,m 011 Tonhelrns, 217
YE~ETIASS at Monemvasia, 235, 237, 30U
Yenice, provenance of lion at Arsenal in,
29-!
Yienna ::\Iuseum : b.-f. hyuria, 3-! ; bl'onze y
diskos, 6 ; coins of Antiochus II., 153,
155 YALI Chiftlik (.\Iysia) inscr. from 6:'>
Yillehardouin,Guillaume, conquers Monem- Yeui Manyas (2\Iysia), in$Cf. from, 6.''i
vasia, 231
Vrom01\sa ,:Enboea), prehistoTic tombs at,
286
z
w
ZACH.A.RO, see Pylos
"\YI~E-TRADEof :.\IonemY,,sia, 300 Zeus: Bponaios, 66 ; of DoLloua, 180 f., 198
Winged goddess between horses, on pitlir:,s Zither, ancient, 162 f.
from Prinia, :Wl Zopyrus, son of Megabyzu~, his career, 38 f.
 IL-GREEK IXDEX.

ay1<vX17 , 251 1. KaAaiipoy, 5

alyav/17, 252 rnv6v,s, for measuri11::< jump, ~49
a1<01.,nov, 249 f. K,(3pryvto, .1t6vv<To,, 65
<lJ<OVTLCTfL<;,. 270
<ll<OVTUTTUL, 254 X,,'31J,, ,onrnlin;:;-box, 16:3
lfo:,.•v, 249 f. ;\,v1<,a = white poplar, 66
arroroµa,, 249 f.
µ~<TayKVAov, 249, 251
(3aX(3i,, 9 f.
Bpovrafo,, Zev~, 66 ol1<odoµry = ol1<odoµ{a, 228

Ilavryyvp<> at Troy, 226

IIEAO<T}'LKO,. 178 f.
t5'.1JYl<VA~<Tµivo,. 259 ,.,vrryp1J, in Polybius, 39
t5L<TKO,, D
t5,wpvya KOTOIKWII, 'A<TKAl/7Tt<;,, 221'< <T,yvvvos, 249 f.
Ll,wpvy,[TTJ,, 'A<TKA1Jnto,, 227 <ToXo,r{;;-n,. 3
<ToAo, ai rox6wvo,, I f.
larwv, 226
'E'TTT}Koo~ 8£0~, '_-\crKA1Jr.1.0~, 2:27 ripµa, in janlin con1p<?tition. 2C:3
<<Tcpatpwµiva ,11<ovrw, 24!), 271

H.S.-YOL XXVII. y
 III.-BOOKS KOTICED.
Antlwlugin Graew III. 1 (Stalltmueller,\,
132
--Select Epigrams (Mackail\ 132
Aristotle : see ~Iarshall (T.)
Bacchilide (Taccone l, 133
Bell (H. I.), G1'eek Papyri III., 303
Breal CM.), Pow· iaiew· com,oitl'e Homere,
131
Campbell (L.), Parul1po1ne1W Sopl,oclea,
133 , ,
Chal,ert (S.J Histoirt des Etuc/eg d'Epi-
g,·apltie grec9.ue, 138
Claflin (E. F, ), Syata,,_· c:f Boeotian Dialect
lnsctiptions, 139
Cornforcl (F. M.), Thucydide, Jfythistorici1s,
307
Corolf,, Nwnismatica, 139
DaYid,un (W, L.), Stoic Creecl, 310
Didnnoo : see Foucart
Drt!i-u p (E.) : Isocrutes, 13~
En~d (A•, Fortu·,sse luen9.ue, 30.:;
Farnell (L. R.), C"lt; ,:f the Graf. SwteB
111. IY., 134
.Ferrero 'G,), G,·tol,ieEs and Dccli,1e of Rome,
308
F,:,uc;,rt '_P.), i:tude .,ur Di,lyn,o,, 303
Fomhe1 ( •.\. ·, L'art Gd, o-Hovddlii9.ue I.,
30,-,
Frazer (J. t:.): Ad,,"i', Alt,.,, /Join,, 133
F1L"c-1uan _K.,, ,'frhoc,/,, ot IIeltu.,, 311
Gm,Llc-r ,H.). Alli. Jf,,,,:eh i:on Jlakedonia
,,. l'aio;,iu. 140
Ga1dner ,E. A.), Greek Sculptur,. 30-1
Gilli,ud (C. \ Quclq,,e, R(r'on"f' de Solon.
307
GooJ,peed (E. J. , 1'd.1tw,is Pt1p11,·i II., 304
l;renfdl (B. P. , 1'eutuni.< Papuri II., 30-1
HurJy _E. G. , Stucli£.< iu R"uwn Historu,
30!1
Hill G. F.), So, 1 ,·cc, fc,,· I; ,·eel.- Hielur!f, 308
Heat\ B. Y.i. Corc,/[a Xum:s11,uticu. 139
Ho11,c/o,1d ,;;s Aue t_A... Lang;, 131 ·
llo111ire, z;r,ur 111:e,,,,. cnn,1oit,e (H. Breal).
131
Hunt A. S. , Tel,t",,is P"J',,,.; TI.. 30-!
Kaibel ;G.), C1·l.-1uulen d,·a11wti.-,cl,erAujj'1ihr-
u,1ge11, 138
Kalinka (E.), Antih Denl,.1,weler in Bul-
gurien, 1~,
Keknle ;-on Stradunitz (R. \ G;'iechis,-he
Sh!lptur, 30-1
Kenyon (F. G.\ Grul,· Papuri III., 303
Lang (A.), Homer and His Age, 131
Macllonald ,:G.), Bar Hill, 136
l\'Iackail (J. W.), Select Epigrwns from the
Greek A,,tholugy, 132
Malinin (A.) : Enneahwws-Epi.~ode, 137
Marshall (F. H.), Seco11cl Athe1tian Confed-
eruc11, 308
~larshall (T.), Arhtotze·., l'heo,·y of Conduct,
310
~Iayser (E.), Grn;nmatih der griecl,. Papyri,
142
Paris (P.), ForfeN,Be Jl,eri9.11e, 303
Park (A.) Bm· Hill, 136
Panlatos (N. K.), 'H Ilarpl~ TOV ·oavuuiwr,
311
Polites (K. G.,i, ITapo,µiai. 1-1:3
- - ITapa/luuEL~. 1-14
Pr:,sek (J. Y.), Uml,ic1,te der Jieder 11nd
Per,er I., 137
Rarnsay ('IY. ~I.), Ea,tern Prurinces. 136
Rankin (E. ~L), RMe of the Jia!Jeiroi, 312
Re'.,!:ling (K.), .iammluny TVi, Ne;,, l-11
- - Terina, 1-11
Rodd (R.\ I'rincP, nf Adwiu, 1-1:!
Schubart (W.), Das Bud,, :303
- - Bediner Klassihrte:,;te. 3(1~
Sophoclea, Parnlipou,rna (Campbell), 133
Stadtnrneller (H.): ..Jnt1wlogia Graeca III.
1. 13~
Stein (\I. A.), Ancient Eluda11, 306
Strong (Mrn. A.), Roman 8c11lpture, 30-!
Taccone (}1..' : Bacd,ilidt. 133
Tlmcnlides : ~ee Cornford
Tucker (T. G.'.. Lir~ i,1 A11de1d Athens,
1-!2 , .
Waltcr:3 1.H. B.), Art ,:f tl,e G,uks, 133
Wilamow itz-'.\Ioellentl•-,l'ff (U. Yon), Bel'liner
1
A-la,sil:utu:te, 30~
Willtdm (A.), Crl, ,,,1Cle" drm,wti;cl,er A uf-
fii1,rui1:1rn. 138 ·
Zehd111aie1 (,J.), Leicl,r:11ue, l.re,uw111}, 312
!tr, 'IL\RIJ l'L,, A:S 1> ~u:s~, LDflTED,
rnn:\l, '-TREET ![!LL. E.C., A~IJ
t:l·,r..\ Y. sl"FfOLK.
 I
V
 1
,, -------------------~-...,,._------·-~ --~~~~-~•--- - --~---------~--·-....,
.,A book th.at is shut is but a b'lock"
c't\AEOLOG~
?'--~ . <:4< \
~ GOVT. OF INDIA ('~ .
1,,.,-'li Department of Archaeology :,P
.J NEW DELID. ~
CJ .t.

Please help us to keep the book

clean and moving.

S. a., 148. N. DELHI.