The remarkable Treasure, found on December 8, 1949, near the railway station of Panagjurischte, about 40 km north-west of Plovdiv (Bulgaria) on the fringe of a site where traces of earlier settlements had been observed, has attracted less attention in Western periodicals than its interest and importance deserve. I have had two opportunities of viewing the Treasure (in 1968 and 1972) in the Museum at Plovdiv. It is well displayed, but security arrangements are (very properly) such that it would be unreasonable to ask to handle the objects. Fortunately photographs are available giving accurate information on details, though these inevitably fail to reflect the overwhelming impression produced on the spectator by the find as a whole (plate 1a).

Date and Place of Manufacture

Metrological and epigraphical considerations conspire to date the find to the closing years of the fourth century B.C. (or possibly soon after the turn of the century) and suggest North-West Asia Minor as the place of origin. The total weight of the nine pieces is 6·172 kg of high-quality gold. Except for minor damage to two rhytons, all is excellently preserved; some small jewels which served for details such as eyeballs have been lost, but hardly anything is dented. Considered as bullion, this amount of gold is equivalent within 4 g to 730 darics (at 8·45 g) or to 1430 Attic drachmas (at 4·31 g), within 9 g. Since the phiale (plate IIId) scales 845·7 g, the figures neatly inscribed on the outside below the rim in small acrophonic numerals between 3—4 mm high (plate Ib) advertise its weight in terms of both these standards: these are H (=100, sc. darics) and ΗΓΔΔΔΔΙΙΙ, plus an indeterminate fraction, i.e. something over 196 Attic drachmas.

‘In the pottery of the Geometric style,’ says Dr. Buschor in his Greek Vase Painting, ‘are latent the forces which we see afterwards expanding in contact with the East as well as the oldest beginnings that we can trace of that brilliant continuous development which led to the proud heights of Klitias, Euphronios and Meidias. Its producers may be unreservedly described as Greeks.’

The statement is a challenge to the less cautious supporters of the continuity of Bronze and Iron Age culture in Greece. But it is concerned only with vases and vase-painting. One is tempted to search farther afield for fuller illumination, particularly in branches of art other than vase-painting. Whatever stage of development a culture may be in, it always requires pottery, however crude and in however small a quantity, since pottery is for use: objects purely ornamental, however, can, under certain circumstances, be dispensed with. In pottery, therefore, a certain minimum of continuity in tradition and inheritance from previous cultures is inevitable; but in the arts of pure adornment this may not be the case. Thus sculpture and bronze work are branches of art which may remain submerged during periods of unrest and upheaval.

This article attempts to summarise the results (1) of those excavations carried out in Greek lands in 1924 of which no report was available in time for my account printed in the last volume of the Journal, and (2) of the excavations of 1925 of which reports had come to hand before the end of September. This system will be followed in the accounts which I hope to contribute annually henceforward.

American School

The varied activities of the American School included excavations at the sites of Corinth, the Argive Heraeum, and Eutresis in Boeotia. At Nemea and Phlius, the opening campaigns at which sites were described in my report of a year ago, no further work was done in the summer of 1925. At Corinth, thanks to a generous subsidy by, and the personal enterprise of, Professor T. L. Shear, substantial progress was made with the Herculean task of clearing the theatre, where, on the south side of the orchestra, the depth of the deposit of earth proved to be 12 metres; before the season closed, over 5000 tons of debris had been removed to a dump a quarter of a mile away. In the west of the cavea the seats proved to be all destroyed, but a remarkable discovery was made, in the form of a wall, originally ca. 2·80 metres high, surrounding the orchestra. This where cleared was preserved to a height of 1·70 m., and was painted in fresco with scenes of life-sized figures engaged in combat with lions. One combatant, in action with a lion which charges him from the left, is clad in a long purple under-garment, with a white over-garment fastened at the knee; another wears a short garment which hangs down in front, leaving the legs bare to the hips, and white sandals; other figures, variously clad, and also fighting lions, appear in other scenes.

The ‘hierarchy of herdsmen’ in pastoral (cowherd > shepherd > goatherd) as discussed by ancient critics of Theocritus and Virgil was an important facet of ancient readers' engagement with this literature; it was known to imperial authors of prose pastoral Longus (1.16.1) and Alciphron (2.33.1-2), who each allude to it and adapt it to their own unique receptions of the pastoral tradition. Alciphron is concerned with hierarchies of wealth and status among his ‘low’ characters; he uses his readers' awareness of hierarchy as a theme of his pastoral hypotexts to sustain a theme of social status throughout his Letters and to order his four books according to their protagonists' position in the hierarchy. His relocation of ‘Idylls’ to a Classical Attic setting, and transposition into the Sophistic Atticizing prose valued by contemporary authors, follows up Longus' attempt to reclaim the pastoral tradition from Virgil for Greek literature. Menander is proposed as an authorial figure for Alciphron in Letters 4.18–19.

This article reviews the historical accuracy of the account of the Spartan wedding ceremony in Plutarch’s Vita Lycurgi. It surveys the texts that are usually quoted in support of Plutarch’s account and argues that none offers a relevant parallel. It also suggests a different kind of wedding ceremony for Archaic and Classical Sparta.

This article discusses a passage in Athenaeus (14.620d) that refers to the performance of Herodotus’ work in a theatre in Hellenistic Alexandria. In his edition of Athenaeus, highly valued and still influential, August Meineke replaces Herodotus’ name (unanimously transmitted in Athenaeus’ manuscripts) with Hesiod’s. In this article I set out to overturn a widespread tendency to accept Meineke’s emendation of Athenaeus 14.620d, reconsidering the possibility that Athenaeus did in fact name Herodotus in the light of (a) the difficulty of explaining the origin of the alleged mistake in Athenaeus’ manuscript tradition and (b) the ancients’ tendency to draw parallels between Herodotus’ style and language and Homeric poetry. The fact that Athenaeus refers to theatrical performances of both Herodotus’ work and the Homeric poems will be shown to be very much in line with the ancient rhetorical, historiographical and biographical tradition which regarded Herodotus as the most Homeric of all prose writers.

Amongst the varied literary output of the fifth-century empress Aelia Eudocia is a hexameter paraphrase of the martyrdom of Saints Cyprian and Justina. The opening lines of the poem, which were rediscovered in the second half of the 20th century, describe the conversion of Justina (Justa) to Christianity through the preaching of a deacon named Praulius. Even as Eudocia remains close to her prose model(s), she imposes her own interpretation upon the text through subtle variation and careful choice of poetic vocabulary. In her version, she depicts the preacher Praulius as a Christian counterpart to the traditional singer of hexameter poetry, linked also to her own poetic activity. This description of Praulius’ transformational preaching, prominently placed at the outset of the poem, constitutes another programmatic passage in late antique Christian verse.

Thucydides' and Herodotus' comments on a portentous (and unique) Delian earthquake contain the same phrase, but date the event almost 60 years apart and mutually rule out each other's datings. Two additional problems in these passages – geology demonstrates that Delos has never in fact had an earthquake of any significance and κινεῖν is not the word for an earthquake – point to an explanation for the historians' treatment. They are based on the Delphic oracle quoted by Herodotus which promised to ‘move unmoved Delos’, a paradox based on the island's mythical transition from floating to fixed (Pindar), but liable to confusion with its equally well-known aseismicity. Normally κινεῖν τὰ ἀκίνητα is used of interfering with religious sites; but the oracle's prediction was interpreted as an earthquake, that was assumed to have occurred in due course (although it had not). Both historians accepted the interpretation, but followed different datings since they invested it with different symbolism, Herodotus of the evils of the Persian and subsequent Greek wars, Thucydides of excited anticipation on the eve of the Peloponnesian War, since for him κίνησις meant ‘mobilization’ (1.1).

Miss W. Lamb has kindly asked me to publish the terracotta sarcophagus in Cambridge, which comes from Rhodes. Fig. 1 explains the system of reference to the various parts of the face of the typical Clazomenian sarophagus. Unless it is otherwise stated, figures and heads of men and animals face towards the centre of the sarcophagus.

The sarcophagi listed below consist of five found in Rhodes and presumed to be of local manufacture, and of three probably from Clazomenae which are loosely related.

Plate V represents a small Attic bell-krater in the collection of Mr. Edward Armytage, who has kindly permitted its publication. The subject is novel: it appears to be the arrival in Attica of Theseus, and shews in detail a close correspondence with our main literary source, the seventeenth ode of Bacchylides. The two youths on the left are the two companions of Theseus, Peirithoos and Phorbas—δύο (F)οι φῶτε μόνους ὰμαρτεῖν λέγει (l.c. line 45). They arein travelling costume, booted and cloaked, wearing ephebic fillets and bearing pairs ofspears—ξεστοὺς δὲ δύ᾿ ἐν χέρεσς᾿ ἀκοντας (1. 49, though said of Theseus himself, not of his comrades).

Basic Structure: A broad flight of twenty-one steps leads up from the south-west angle of the Temple of Apollo to a partially paved court immediately in front of the lower face of the scarp. This is given a quadrilateral delimitation by the angular revetment of an irregularity in the scarp to the west, and by the monumental water tank to the east of the entrance to the grotto. The entrance was hewn in the cliff face in the form of three arches (now much destroyed), and was revetted with large well-draughted limestone blocks. Of these, only the lower two courses are now in situ, but individual blocks of the upper courses have been collected and amongst them are those with crowning mouldings and one bearing the fragment of a Greek inscription (height:of letters, 25 cm. approximately).

The interior of the grotto consists basically of a central oblong depression, paved and cemented, surrounded on the two sides and the back by a raised staging—thus giving rise to the term of reference ‘TRICLINIUM’—while between the staging and the walls are the tanks and channels: associated with the water supply and drainage.

Considered longitudinally, the interior may be divided into three entities. The first extends from the entrance to a pair of rock-hewn columns bearing rude inscriptions. Immediately above this compartment lay the terrace of an ancient rock-cut path and its collapse has breached the path and totally unroofed this section of the grotto.

The two vase fragments reproduced in the accompanying illustration were among those brought by Mr. Hogarth from Naukratis in 1903, and are now in the Ashmolean Museum at Oxford. The subject is painted in black silhouette, no other colour occurring in the fragment of the scene which remains: incised lines are used, not only for the inner markings, but for a great part of the outlines. Immediately below the design are two bands of purple: below these again the vase, which was of considerable size, was covered with black paint. The execution is careless, the paint of the design being very unevenly applied.