The influence of the Aegean civilisation on South Palestine can hardly be said to be appreciably felt before the latter half of the Bronze Age. At this period the Mycenaean civilisation, though already decadent, was still flourishing very vigorously in the East Mediterranean, especially in places like Rhodes and Cyprus, the latter of which chiefly concerns us here. In the case of Cyprus this is natural, since, owing to its geographical position, the island served as an intermediary between East and West, and was peopled, partly at least, by representatives of the Mycenaean civilisation—though, of course, this says nothing as to the racial affinities of the area in question—and here seemingly this civilisation lasted on later than in the actual Aegean area.

The principal results of the work of the first two seasons on the Acropolis were described in the Annual two years ago (xxvi. pp. 240–76), and it remains to complete the account for the two following years (1926–27). The task is fairly simple, since the main features of the stratification of the area which yielded finds of predominantly Hellenic date have been already described, and the results obtained from the other parts of the Acropolis which we explored are of much less interest and importance, and can be dismissed briefly. The Byzantine church on the eastern spur of the main summit must be reserved for a separate report.

The following paper, which completes the series of papers on the classical topography of Laconia, is an account of the hill-country on the eastern side of Taÿgetos, bounded on the north by the road from Sparta to Anavryté, on the south by Gytheion and Pánitsa. (Fig.1.)

Our knowledge of Damophon of Messene is primarily derived from the fragments of the great group made by him for the temple of Despoina at Lycosura, and discovered there by M. Cavvadias during the excavations undertaken in the summer of 1889. The best known fragments are the three heads and the piece of embroidered drapery in the National Museum at Athens, but a great number of smaller pieces exist in the magazines at Athens and in the museum recently erected at Lycosura.

From Pausanias we learn that Damophon erected many statues in Messene and in the sanctuary of the Great Goddesses at Megalopolis; that he worked at Aigion and Lycosura; and that he was entrusted with the repairs of the Zeus of Pheidias at Olympia. There is no mention of Damophon in other classical writers.

Excavations on this site in 1907 were confined to the western half of the sanctuary, and their results, with a general discussion of the Hieron, will be found in the Annual for last year. The present paper is a brief account of the much less productive excavation of the eastern half of the area in 1908. The main results were, firstly, to confirm the general conclusions drawn from the data provided by the western half; secondly, to establish the fact that the lower Geometric stratum extended over the whole width of the sanctuary with its central, or highest and thickest, point near the dividing line of the two years' work, and consequently near the wall suggested as part of a Geometric altar; thirdly, in regard to the second or classical settlement, to show that the centres of interest, the οἴκημα and the altar, were undoubtedly in the western half of the sanctuary, since objects of interest were found only in the south-western corner of the eastern half, although a similar system of embanking provided a pocket all along the south side.

A preliminary report of this tomb, dug by Bosanquet in 1902, appeared in BSA viii. 303–5, where it was termed the ‘Beehive Tomb’. This was a misleading term for what was in fact a rock-cut chamber tomb with a dromos. The contents of the tomb listed in that report were not subsequently published in full, although individual items have since been considered of sufficient importance to merit especial attention by scholars. It seems, therefore, worth while to publish all the surviving items of this interesting tomb group, and to re-examine the L.M. IIIA 2 early date assigned to it by Furumark.

While completing a study of an unusual group of Roman Corinthian capitals from Athens, I was led to reconsider the current attribution of two members of the group, an anta and a full capital, to an Augustan propylon said to have been built in the Asklepieion. The capitals shared the same source of design and traits of technique as the series made for Hadrian's Arch and for the interior of the Olympieion. It was difficult to accept their association with an inscribed epistyle block, indubitably Augustan in date, that was said to form part of the Asklepieion propylon. Furthermore, the epistyle was too narrow (0·41 m.) to fit over the bedding surfaces of the capitals (0·70 × 0·70 m.), and there was no indication that a backing block had been used.

The birth and childhood of the Greek male gods and heroes are themes well documented in classical Athenian art and myth. By contrast, contemporary Athenian iconography and mythology are remarkably empty of references to the birth and infancy of the female heroes and female gods, or alternatively present the newborn goddesses as adult women. This article seeks to shed light on the apparently missing childhood phase of the goddesses and heroines, by examining the evidence of fifth-century Athenian iconography in its socio-historical context. Consequently, in the case of the goddesses, it is proposed that the female child figure represented a state of being incompatible with the nature and manifestation of divinity. It is further suggested that the mythological heroines enter classical Athenian art and myth only once they have attained puberty, because it is at this point that their potential for relations with the male gains significance. And just as was the case with their mortal female counterparts, it is this capacity for interaction with the male sex that makes them of interest to society.

Professor Frankfort's article Ishtar at Troy suggests a new explanation for the Trojan face-urns, and a pedigree which connects them with Mesopotamian or north-Syrian prototypes. The series he discusses includes the winged vessels and covers from Thermi. These are also referred to by Professor Mallowan in his account of the idols from Brak. Professor Mallowan's interpretation differs from Professor Frankfort's, and to a student of Anatolian prehistory may seem more convincing.

§ I.—The interest of the excavation at Phylakopi in 1898 reached its climax just at the close of the season with the discovery in a small room in G 2 of the “Fishermen Vase” (lamp-stand), and with the equally interesting find in a house in G 3 of part of a wall-painting of flying fish (B.S.A. 1897–8, pp. 26–7). The south part of this region had to be left unfinished when excavation came to an end last year and it was desirable that, before we proceeded to any other undertaking, this piece of work should be completed.

On reference to the plan, it will be seen that the N.E. part of G 3 is taken up with an apparently domestic building containing a room with a square pillar near its east wall. This house was the one in which last year were discovered, in the room with the pillar, the frescofragments with flying fish.

Evidence is adduced to show that the toponym Dikta and its adjectival form Diktaios, which have been applied to a variety of locations in Central and Eastern Crete, belong properly to the ancient site currently being reinvestigated by the British School at Palaikastro. Alternative identifications are attributed to the confusion of the various traditions concerning the birth and upbringing of Cretan Zeus which becomes evident in ancient sources in the Hellenistic period. The invention of a Diktaian cave is shown to be the product of a similar process of conflation. A further element of confusion has been added by the citation of a Hellenistic boundary text. The correct identification of Dikta provides a toponymic continuity linking the phases of occupation of the archaeological site at Palakastro.

The object of this paper is to endeavour to attach their right names to the ancient sites which lie close to the Peneios on either side of the river in its course from Trikkala to Larissa.

The first site which we reach in travelling down stream is that of Palaeo-Gardiki, halfway between Trikkala and Zarkos, close to the high road, on the left bank of the river, which is here some six kilometres distant. On a small spur of the mountains, with which it is only connected by a narrow neck or spur which slopes down to the plain, lie the remains of an ancient acropolis with walls built of both polygonal and ashlar masonry. In front of the acropolis in the plain the remains of a city of no small extent are visible. The walls of ashlar masonry remain to a height of four or five courses, and the foundations of houses and public buildings are clearly marked. The name Palaeo-Gardiki comes from a Byzantine village, Gardiki, which once stood upon the acropolis, but of which no traces now remain except the ruined church. In front of the city lies a marsh, which, combined with the mountain behind, makes the position very strong.

Pindakas is a small and low hill lying about 1·5 km. from the harbour at Emporio in South Chios. It is at the foot of the hills which divide the modern town of Pyrgi from the Emporio valley, but it also commands access to the adjacent valley to the north, that leading to modern Kalamoti (see Figs, 1 and 2). The position is, however, one which is better called convenient than strategic. The name must derive from πίδαξ, ‘spring’ or ‘fountain’, and, although there is no water on the hill itself, an excellent well lies close to its slopes on the west. Ano- and Kato-Pindakas have been distinguished, but the distinction is lost today, and Ano-Pindakas, rather nearer Emporio, is as bare of human habitation as Kato-Pindakas, which is our site.

Today the flat top of the hill is bare and rocky with scattered olive trees, though the fields around are rich in corn and mastika. Zolotas had noted antiquities there but it is the great polygonal walls at the west which make two terraces of the hill-top that are the most conspicuous remains (Plate 72a–b). It was on these two terraces that excavations were conducted by the writer in July 1954, in the course of the British School at Athens' excavations at Emporio. Sections were cut east–west through the upper and lower terraces, and north–south through the upper terrace (Figs. 3 and 4, AA and BB) and these, with minor trenches and some ground observation, tell a clear story of the site's history and buildings.

The campaign of 1909 at Sparta was marked by the conclusion of the excavation of the sanctuary of Artemis Orthia, and the site may now be regarded as definitely exhausted. This report gives an account of the results of this last season with a General Plan of the excavation (Pl. I). A full resumptive account of the whole work from its beginning in 1906, with final plans and a summary of results is in preparation; the present account will, in the main, be confined to the new results gained this year, and will thus be parallel to the three yearly reports already published in the previous volumes of this Annual.

A very large proportion of the statues that fill our museums are liable to be dismissed somewhat curtly in descriptions as belonging to the ‘School of Praxiteles.’ It would be interesting to know exactly what percentage of the total number of ancient statues which have come down to us is formed by the Aphrodites, Satyrs, Erotes, and others usually classed under this head, but it must certainly be a very large proportion.

Considering the very large number of statues which we treat in this way, it is startling to discover that our literary evidence contains no record at all of any such school ever having been in existence. We know of followers and pupils of Pheidias, of Polycleitus, and of Lysippus, but we hear of no followers or pupils of Praxiteles or of Scopas, in spite of the undoubted and obvious influence of their style upon the sculpture that now fills our museums. It is true that we know of two sons of Praxiteles, Cephisodotus and Timarchus, but the list of their works, though containing a Leto, an Aphrodite, and two statues of Artemis, includes a greater number of statues which we should be inclined to call un-Praxitelean in character.

Not only were more good vases produced by the further excavation of the sanctuary of Orthia in 1909, but much has also been done since the last report was written, in the matter of fitting together, restoring, and photographing those already found, so that it is now possible to proceed with a fuller publication of the Laconian style than could be made a year ago.

On the road from new Sparta to Magoula the most noticeable remains of the ancient city are the extensive brick ruins called ‘Arapissa,’ from the localization here of a legend common in all parts of Greece of a negress or a negro guarding buried treasure. Since so large a building, if it existed in the time of Pausanias, is not likely to have been omitted by him in his description of the city, it was decided to test this site to determine its nature and date. Accordingly from April 20th to the 30th twenty-five men were employed digging round the walls visible above the surface, and sinking trial-pits in other parts to obtain some idea of the plan. Owing to the apparent want of symmetry and to the loose nature of the soil, which was full of rubble, the work proved more difficult and dangerous than had been anticipated.

Discussed here, are the public inscriptions produced by two Attic masons of the late 4th century B.C., from the point of view of identifying and describing epigraphic ‘hands.’ The identification of their work rests upon the way in which certain key letter-shapes are used, and the consistency with which they are employed. Private documents have not been examined in this study. The first of these masons, the ‘Mason of IG ii2. 1195’ (to which is added IG ii2. 620), was active between c. 330 and 318 B.C. I identify seventeen inscriptions by this man, nearly all of them decrees of the Athenian State; four are, as yet, unpublished and are not discussed here. The second mason discussed here, the ‘Mason of IG ii2. 497’, seems to have begun work in the late 320s B.C., and was still active c. 299/8 B.C. I attribute thirty-two inscriptions to this man, again most of them decrees of the Athenian State. Six are, as yet, unpublished and are not discussed. The work of these masons is distinctive, but not distinguished: there are sufficient similarities between them to suggest that they may have been master and pupil.

The yield of inscriptions from our two seasons' work at the Theatre would not have been extensive but for the fact that the marble facing-blocks of the East Parodos-wall proved to be almost covered with a series of texts, for a distance of some fifteen metres from its west end (adjoining the Orchestra). When we had finished excavating this wall, past the point where the inscriptions ended, we had before us an inscribed monument, second only, among monumental inscriptions of the Greek mainland, to the great Terrace-wall at Delphi. Our documents consist of lists of Magistrates, and the cursus honorum of individual Spartan officials, dating from the first half of the second century of our era. Twenty-eight separate documents are recorded on the wall as it stands, and other twenty-four are contained, in whole or part, on fallen blocks and fragments, some of the latter very small, which came to light in front of the wall, or a short distance away from it. In addition, three fragments of similar records, Nos. 1 E 25–27, were discovered close to the east end of the corresponding West Parodos-wall, which has had its marble facing-blocks almost all stripped away, and none of the inscriptions, which we may presume it bore, have survived in situ.