The matter of this paper has been a subject of consideration with me for some time past, and I venture to put forward the conclusion I have arrived at, not because I consider it to be a certain one, but as possibly affording a working hypothesis providing an explanation of what has been to me, and may have been to others, an obscure and difficult point. That the subject demands the earnest attention of those who study Thukydides will, I think, be generally admitted, and this, together with the fact that I have formed the conclusion on a certain amount of first-hand experience, may afford some excuse for the publication of my views.

The vast majority of the incidents in the Peloponnesian War are treated by Thukydides with great brevity, in some cases with a brevity disproportionate to their importance. There are, however, according to the ordinary acceptation, three incidents into which he enters with a peculiar and striking amount of detail.

The pretty vase figured at the head of this paper passed from Prince Louis Napoleon's possession into the hands of the late Auguste Dutuit, who bequeathed it along with his other treasures to the city of Paris. The same subject, a winged woman holding bow and arrow and bending to touch a fawn, is repeated with very slight variations on an unpublished lekythos in Syracuse. To judge from her weapons, the woman must be the winged Artemis who is familiar to us from primitive Greek art: but small, brisk, and dainty, she is greatly changed from the strong-armed Potnia Theron. Although it may often be observed that hunters love in a curious sort the fleet or violent people of the woodland whom they pursue and destroy; yet no one could think that this little lady ever used the weapons she carries to hurt or kill: borne on wings, she overtakes the swift feet, but the chase is not in earnest and ends not in death but in a caress: she is kindly to the rough young of fiery lions, and delightful to tender forest creatures that love the breast.

There is in the British Museum a colossal marble lion which was found near Cnidos by Sir Charles Newton (Cat. of Sculpt., ii. p. 214, No. 1350). It is recumbent and sculptured out of one block, the underside being hollowed out to diminish the weight. Its length is 9 feet 7 inches. (Fig. 1.) In the Guide to Greek and Roman Antiquities (1908) the sculpture is thus described and discussed:—

‘A colossal lion which was found lying overturned on a lofty promontory. about three miles to the east of Cnidos. On the site where it was lying were the remains of a great tomb, which consisted of a square basement surrounded by engaged columns of the Doric order and surmounted by a pyramid.

The lecythus which is the subject of the present paper, and which is represented, after a drawing by M. Gilliéron, on Pl. IX., was bought by me at Chalcis in December 1893, and is now in the British School at Athens. It is said to come from Eretria, and this statement is doubtless true. Eretria is well known to be a mine of graves of all periods, especially the finest; and many excavations there, both authorized and unauthorized, have enriched the museum of Athens, and, by clandestine export, those of many foreign capitals also. Most conspicuous among the treasures recovered have been the lecythi with paintings upon a white ground. Our lecythus belongs to an uncommon class; a similar, but not identical variety is familiar to readers of the Hellenic Journal from the three examples published last year by Miss Sellers. Of the style and technique of the vase I shall speak later; at present we need only notice that the figures are in black or rather a rich dark brown varnish, laid on over a white ground, and that the style of the drawing, which, especially in the profiled outlines of the faces, is much finer than in the lecythi published by Miss Sellers, seems to belong to the beginning of the fifth century—a date which we shall, I think, find consistent with the results derived from more technical evidence.

Mr. Hogarth in his Devia Cypria, page 9, describes a scarab found near Chrysochou, as follows :—

‘It is beautifully engraved with a group of Heracles, armed with bow, quiver and skin, wrestling with a lion, while behind him stands a draped female figure, without any distinguishing attributes. Over the group are cut the following characters:

i.e., genitive of the name , which occurs in the twenty-first line of the bronze tablet of Dali (Sammlung der gricch. dialekt-Inschr. i. p. 28). I was unable to take an impression of the scarab, or to examine it satisfactorily; but I should judge the lettering to be of the fourth century B.C.’

In describing the recent excavations at Zakro (Annual of the British School at Athens, vii. p. 121 ff.) I stated that the pottery found there could not be fully published yet. Pending the resumption of its study, however, three vases of exceptional excellence, which were copied in Candia by Monsieur E. Gilliéron, may be made known. One of these (No. 1) was found in fragments in the principal house (A) of the Lower Town (ibid. p. 129 ff.), which yielded also the hoard of sealings published in the previous issue of this Journal. The precise findspot was the doorway between the rooms 3 and 5 (v. plan, ibid. p. 131), which. I believe to have contained a stairway of two flights leading to an upper level or storey. These rooms were full of collapsed ruin, among which the fragments of this vase were dispersed. I offered a special reward, and had all sherds dug out of this house minutely examined; but about a third of the vase was not recovered. Part of a second vase (lip and neck) of precisely similar character came from the same rubbish. The other two vases (Nos. 2, 3) figured in the accompanying Plate (XII.) were built up from fragments found in the Λάκκος (Pit I.) on the western spur (ibid. p. 126) among countless sherds of Bronze-Age pottery of the best Cnossian period.

In March, 1947, as Antiquities Officer of the British Military Administration, Dodecanese, I examined the spoil earth from a well dug a few years before in the valley of Vathy on Calymnus; a previous visit had shown that it contained prehistoric potsherds. The well had reached, at about nine metres down, the remains of a village of late neolithic and early Bronze Age date. No trace of the strata of occupation was found in situ, but the amount of pottery in the spoil heap compared with the size of the shaft did not indicate that those strata were thick. The neolithic wares included pieces of rather thin polished pottery, silvery-grey, greyishbrown or reddish in colour, seldom of a uniform tint. Such pottery is, in surface and colours, not unlike late neolithic from Knossos, but it is less thick. A piece of a large handle of round section and polished red surface, decorated with knobs at intervals along the convex edge, was found. This type of decoration on a similar handle is paralleled in Stratum I. at Lianokladhi. The Bronze Age pottery, mostly grey or black in colour, is more or less rough in texture. Very little similar to the black polished wares of Thermi I appeared, but a few examples of striated ware, and of incised decoration, were found. There was also part of a spoon covered with red wash decoration, and sherds ornamented with the addition of a ribbon of clay, pressed flat at intervals, and with imitation rivet-heads. Simply shaped legs from tripod or other vessels were found, and flat solid handles placed rising from the rim and shaped with two points or horns. Another find consisted of part of the rim of a large vessel with internal ledge handles and a row of holes pierced just below the rim. Handles included both ribbon and round (in section) varieties, one type of ribbon handle being similar to a characteristic Cypriote type of handle. Two flat bases are paralleled in Crete and Hissarlik. A plain black single conical spindle whorl is paralleled at Thermi.

In a note to volume cxi of this journal, I observed that the word , although a diminutive, did not at all periods describe a piglet. In the classical period, it seems to have meant a small but not necessarily immature pig; in Hellenistic Delos and in Egypt, a pig fullgrown or nearly so, apparently synonymous with the non-diminutive ; then by the first post-Christian century the term came indeed to mean ‘piglet’, a meaning previously expressed by .

The subject of the exploits of Theseus as seen on Greek vase-paintings has recently been treated by Professor Milani in a long and interesting paper in the Museo Italiano di antichità classica (iii. 1, p. 236). I propose therefore to set aside all general consideration of the myth and its typography, and to confine myself to the discussion and elucidation of two hitherto unpublished vases (plates I., II.), one of them included in Professor Milani's list, one entirely unknown to him, and both, as I hope to show, having strong claims on the attention of archaeologists. They are (1) a red-figured vase, which for convenience sake I shall call from its owner the Tricoupi cylix; (2) the fragments of a red-figured cylix from the De Luynes collection in the Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris.

1. The Tricoupi cylix, plate I. When I was in Athens in the spring of 1888, Miss Tricoupi with her accustomed kindness, so familiar to all visitors to Athens, allowed me to examine at my leisure her brother's collection of antiquities. I found to my surprise that it contained a vase which I have reason to believe is from the hand of Duris, and of which, so far as I am aware, no mention has been made in the numerous discussions of vases dealing with the exploits of Theseus, and which therefore, I suppose to be entirely unknown. I record here my grateful thanks to Miss Tricoupi for her kind permission to publish the vase, and for her goodness in facilitating its exact reproduction. The drawing from which plate I. is facsimiled was made for me by M. Gilliéron under my own personal supervision, and I can therefore vouch for its perfect accuracy. I was specially anxious to secure its.immediate publication as, though the vase is at present in such safe hands, the security of antiquities in private collections is always precarious.

Poésie d'apparat et de célébration, la lyrique de Pindare s'identifie à la préciosité d'un métal ou d'une pierre, et à l'art somptueux de l'orfèvrerie ou de l'architecture. Rivalisant avec elle, l'éloquence d'apparat reprend et développe ces images à l'époque impériale, pour se représenter et exposer son esthétique, l'esthétique de la seconde sophistique, qui, inspirée de celle de Pindare et de Platon, unit la fable et la vérité de l'ailleurs, l'illusion et la sagesse divine.

When I first saw this head, I was at once struck by its marked individuality: if any portrait could be recognized from a coin, it seemed to be this, for features so personal the poorest engraver could scarcely conceal. My hopes were realized, as a comparison of the accompanying photographs with the coin reproduced beneath will I hope prove.

In both we see the same treatment of the hair in front, the same fashion of wearing it behind: the long upper lip, the nose with its curiously distended nostrils—the marble preserving just enough to make the agreement certain—the long ears, the deep lines on the cheek, the shape of jaw and forehead, the prominent Adam's apple; these too are common to both.

An interesting contrast may be drawn between the results obtained from the study of Vitruvius in the early years of the sixteenth century and the exposition of his meaning and text by the scholars of to-day. This contrast is almost always to the advantage of the latter-day scholars. Archaeology has done everything in recent times to clear up by consideration of existing monuments a host of difficulties not dreamed of in the days of the Renaissance, and archaeologists—so far as they are agreed as to the testimony of recent discoveries—have little or nothing to learn from remote predecessors. But a serious disagreement exists among them in regard to the stage of the Greek theatre. This want of agreement is reflected in the current interpretations of a difficult passage in Vitruvius. About this very passage the scholars of the early Renaissance were agreed, and since their explanation of it differs in some material respects from any now offered, it may be of some use to us to-day.

The Florentine Leo Battista Alberti reproduced the meaning of Vitruvius, without undertaking to construe his text, then very corrupt. In 1511 was printed the text of Vitruvius which, in spite of many subsequent labours, has bravely held its own up to the present day. This text we owe to Fra Giocondo, a Franciscan friar who was equally great as an inspiring teacher, a painstaking scholar, and a daring and original architect. The condition of the text in the three first editions was lamentable, as appears in the passage describing the Greek theatre which especially concerns the present inquiry.

Headlam wrote: ‘ἔτι ἄγχϵι in conjunction with 1.18 n. suggests amatory capabilities[1] … [Battaros'] powers of “wrestling” being compared with Mennes' old victories at boxing. Either this or Blass' supposition that he is a street rowdy will suit τοῦ ἡλίου δύντος: the former hypothesis suits better the character of Battaros…’ I have no doubt that the word ἄγχϵι, like the πύξ which it matches in 1. 11, is a double-meaning one, and contains the sense: ἔτι οἴός τε ἐστὶ γυναικὶ συγγίγνεσθαι. That, as a buffoon's method of raising a laugh, the punning use of ἅγχω and a congener in their agonistic and erotic senses would not be alien to the proceedings of even a real court, let alone the fictional court of a literary genre having affinities with Old Comedy, is shown by Dem. liv 20 (Contra. Con. 1263.5), where it is assumed that defendants on a charge of assault will try τὸ πρᾶγμα ‥ εἰς γέλωτα καὶ σκώμματ᾽ ἐμβαλεῖν (liv 13 = 1261.13).

My excuse for adding another item to the literature of the Hellenistic ruler-cult is that two new ideas have recently come into prominence. One is that the founder of the official ruler-cult was not Ptolemy II but Alexander; the other is that what was worshipped was not the ruler himself but his daemon. The former idea originated with Dr. P. Schnabel, and was derived by him from a new interpretation of the proskynesis scene at Bactra; he argued that Chares' account in Plutarch (Alexander 54) showed that the proskynesis was made to a statue of Alexander standing on an altar (ἑστία) among the hearth-gods: whether Macedonians in the fourth century had hearth-gods he did not consider, but quoted Roman analogies of a later time. This idea has been much criticised, and I know of no one but Professor L. R. Taylor who has accepted it; in particular, Professor Berve has made a strong case for preferring Arrian's version of the proskynesis scene. But, in fact, Schnabel's interpretation of Chares was killed dead at once by Dr. Th. Birt, though this has not been much noticed, perhaps because it only needed one sentence: Chares in the same passage makes Demetrius say to Alexander οὖτος γάρ σε μόνος οὐ προσεκύνησε where the word σε is conclusive that the proskynesis was made to Alexander (and not to a statue on an altar).