No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 December 2013
The marble which I described with little comprehension and several errors in a letter to the Athenaeum, 1909, p. 736 (repeating the same words in a popular book on the Revolution in Turkey, 1909), is characterised as a forgery by Professor Calder in the preceding pages. I consider it genuine, a unique monument of the old Anatolian religion, when that almost disused cult was revived in the alliance between the Empire and Paganism against Christianity; and the date of the work is in the fourth century. On that alliance see Aberystwyth Studies, iv. p. 1 f. Several very excellent authorities have on careful inspection pronounced it indubitably genuine: I consulted them, as I have always hated the thought of being in any way connected with a forgery; and I have rejected many forgeries. All the facts collected by Calder in 1913 were known to me in 1909, and many more. I could tell about several other forgeries by Missak, whom I heard of only as ‘the Armenian,’ not as Missak, whether it be a true or false name.
1 An old Anatolian monument used to be exhibited in the British Museum, before 1881, and is in the basement, No. 2143. There are two other early Anatolian monuments (wrongly called Hittite, really pre-Hittite) at Fassiller and at Iflatun Bunar.
2 This should have warned Professor Calder that there was something wrong in the gossip.
3 Exceptions (the most important published by me long ago) must not detain us here.