¹ See A II p. 48, where Dr. Dörpfeld is doubtful, and A I, pp. 75 f., where he clearly proves the foundations and walls in this case to have heen too slight to allow of more than an outside veneer applied to a solid core,— that presumably of an altar. Remains on the spot exhibit traces of heavy stucco coatings, and remains of a stucco moulding running about the base of this altar as about that of many others on the site. Dr. Dörpfeld suggests that this may be the altar of Gê, mentioned by Pausanias (VI xiv 10) just after his notice of the altar of Heracles lying west of the westernmost treasury (I). N.B.—References to A = Olympia, Textband.

² Böckh emended the fifth paragraph in Pausanias VI xix before the German excavations at Olympia shewed that there were eleven treasuries. Hence he connected the mention of the Byzantines' treasury,—absolutely required by the opening of paragraph seven,—with the fourth treasury, knowing that both the third and the fourth could not be given to the Epidamnians. Böckh's emendation prevented the excavators from an unbiassed consideration of their data, and led them (a) to make sure, in spite of evidence to the contrary, that No. VIII was a treasury and not an altar, and (b) to persuade themselves, on what Dr. Dörpfeld lately assured me was not certain evidence, that Pausanias could never have had sight of Nos. II and III. Thus, by suppressing these two among the eleven in situ, and by mistaking No. VIII for a treasury, they made out that Pausanias saw only ten treasuries, the names of which he gives, I, IV–XII. This whole scheme breaks down through the establishment of two facts (a) that there is no convincing reason for supposing that a road up Mt. Cronius was carried over II and III before Pausanias saw the terrace and the treasuries,—on the contrary there is every reason to make us sure the road up to the summit was always where it now is, on the north side, the south side being too steep,—(b) that Pausanias saw and actually mentions eleven and not ten treasuries, although the name of one of them has fallen out of our text, which has also lost the words,—toward the end of VI xix 5,—in which he first mentions the Byzantines' treasury. See A I pp. 75 f.

³ The wording of Pausanias VI xix 7 excludes the notion of any altar or building between IX and X, whose walls in fact all but touch in their foundations, justifying our author's while he says of VI, the Sybarites', and VII, the Cyrenaeans' treasury: pointedly coupling VI and VII at the beginning of a sentence. His next sentence begins and there is just room at the intervening full stop for an altar like No. VIII.

⁴ The facts about differences of level must not be pressed too far. Foundations at a mean level, higher than the lowest and lower than the highest should not be grouped together chronologically on that ground. But see Dr. Dörpfeld A II. pp. 206 f.

⁵ The foundations of No. VII are mere trenches 0·3 m. deep filled in with sand and gravel. Small segments of walls still standing in situ shew a settling of 0·016 m. In fact these flimsy foundations are so primitive and so insignificant that, without their neighbours and the general statement of Pausanias about the terrace, there would scarcely be reason to restore VII as a ‘treasury.’ See A II p. 48.

⁶ The antiquity of VIII is proved (1) by its occupying the highest level, (2) by the variation of spacing between it and No. IX on the east and No. VII on the west. The eastern part of the foundations of VIII is of marly limestone, its later western part is of poros. No clamps appear, but on some of the limestone blocks are left the bosses used in lifting them. A II p. 48.

⁷ No one familiar with this phenomenon, exhibited in many forms by the rival cities which sprang up in the Mississippi Valley between 1820 and 1890, will ever underrate its energizing effectiveness.

⁸ The interval on either side of VII is 2·8 m.; that between VI and V is 2 m.; that between V and IV is 1·3 m.

⁹ Strabo p. 263:

¹⁰ Inspection of the remains of V yield few data. Its foundations on the south have completely disappeared. Its width is greater than that of any other treasury except the Geloans'. Like the Geloans' (XII) it had six columns in front. Curtius has pointed out that the Byzantines' treasury is likely to have been founded before 513 B.C., the date of Darius' Scythian campaign, after which the Byzantines were hampered.

¹¹ Epidamnus was founded in 625 B.C. After its foundation, says Thucydides, as time went on ( I xxiv 3) it became a flourishing place Allowing three generations for this growth, we have ca. 525 B.C. for the foundation of IV, if IV was the Epidamnians' house. The only circumstantial evidence that is lacking is in regard to the white limestone used in building IV. Nothing of the kind has been found at Syracuse. If a thorough search on the site of Epidamnus were to shew this limestone abounding there as the tawny sandstone of I abounds at Sicyon, then IV might be named the Epidamnians' treasury with more confidence.

¹² Proofs of this as indicated by Ernst Curtius are chiefly a priori, but there is also (1) Pausanias' statement that Myron founded I, obviously built long after Myron's day, and (2) the fact that tiles clearly belonging to an archaic building were found among the broken stones on which are bedded the foundations of I.

¹³ See i 14, where he says the Corinthians' treasury at Delphi was properly Cypselus', and iv 162, where he speaks of the censer of Euelthon of Cypriote Salamis in the Corinthians' Delphian treasury. Contrast however iii 57 on the Siphnians' Delphian treasury.

¹⁴ This makes it absurd to class either the Leonidaeum or the Philippeum among θησαυροί.

¹⁵ Note on Hdt. i 14 (1856).

¹⁶ See Bötticher's, Olympia p. 225Google Scholar, on Fisher's visit to Olympia in 1853.

¹⁷ Tektonik pp. 434–454; Baumeultus pp. 156–162.

¹⁸ The foundations of six small buildings were found at Delos before anything of the kind was turned up elsewhere. Of these one was presumably the temple of Eilithyia mentioned in the inventories. The five others were ‘treasuries.’ Of these the two largest were probably the and the (treasuries) of the inventories. Of the remaining three, two were probably the and the of the inventories. These last supply no name for a fifth treasury, since the frequently mentioned, is identified with a large square building quite away from the group of the communal houses clustering around the Letoon and the temple of Apollo.

¹⁹ The Olympian treasuries, V and XII, vary from the templum in antis, XII having a south porch with six columns and no antae, V being a regular Doric hexa-style building. For the absent see below p. 307.

²⁰ X xi 5:

²¹ See Hdt. iii 57 ad fin.

²² Pausanias often uses the word χρήματα for what we sometimes call treasure.

²³ Hdt. (vi 125, ii 150, vii 190) uses for any sort of treasury or treasure-box: see ix 106, where it has the sense of safe or strong-box. Cf. Suidas, s.v. This last = in Herodotus and Pausanias. Contrast Strabo's account of carried off from Delphi by the Tectosages and consisting apparently of ingots of gold and silver (IV p. 188).

²⁴ Ditt. 589, 411–402 B.C., or 386–377 B.C.

²⁵ Ditt. 587, 11. 302–309, or 329–8 B.C.

²⁶ Ditt. 653, 11. 90–96: where are given details inspired from Eleusis and providing for the building of a treasury sacred to Persephone. Minute regulations about the keys and their custody are entered into.

²⁷ See Ditt. 629, where seven men are put in charge of an Olbian θησαυρός and sums to be deposited by worshippers sacrificing are enumerated (third century). See also a Pergamene inscription (566, 12), and a Halicarnassian inscription (601, 30).

²⁸ In these θησαυρός applies strictly and solely to various θησαυροφυλάκια or strongboxes within the precinct and in one case inside a temple. For ‘treasuries’ such as Pausanias saw on the Olympian terrace, the invariable word used is οἶκος.

²⁹ For formalities, not unlike those observed at Eleusis though simpler, see I. G. I, 1570.

³⁰ Selymbria was founded in 662 B.C. by the Megarians a little before they founded Byzantium (657 B.C.), and ceased to be on the highroad of any lucrative trade as soon as Byzantium on the east (42 miles distant) and Perinthus on the west (22 miles distant) were founded. The presence of Selymbrians in the temple of Samos, the metropolis of Perinthus, was doubtless in the natural course of events, when Perinthus shot ahead of Selymbria as apparently it did long before the end of the Peloponnesian war. Indeed Selymbrians had a fierce life of it in the face of their constant exposure during more than 2000 years to raiders from Thrace, who made it very difficult for them to maintain their hold on Hellenic traditions and culture. Xenophon's friend, Clearchus, spoiling for a fight at the close of the Peloponnesian war, went out with a squadron to attack the Thracians as Xenophon, has it (Anab. II vi 2)Google Scholar, describing the district of Selymbria. The very name of Selymbria is Thracian and not Greek. The readiness of the Thracians to raid Selymbria is well illustrated by Plutarch's account of the proceedings of Alcibiades after the battle of Cyzicus (410 B.C.), when one of his chief motives for giving easy terms to Selymbria was fear that his Thracian contingent would get out of hand (Alcib. 30, cf. Xen., Hell. I i 21)Google Scholar. Selymbria throve, while fighting with Thracians or Macedonians was the order of the day, but sank under Philip of Macedonia only to emerge as an outpost for the defence of Constantinople in Byzantine days. When Anastasius I was hard pressed by the Bulgarians in 507 A.D., he built a wall from Selymbria nearly 30 miles across Thrace to Delkon on the Euxine. The last memorable siege of Selymbria was that by the Genoese against whom it was stoutly defended by Manuel Phakrase Cantacuzene in 1341 A.D.

³¹ Philemon was born about 359 B.C., his death was about 262 B.C. Alexis was his senior by about twelve years.

³² Spina in the valley of the Po seems, like Selymbria, to have been out of touch with the main current of Hellenic culture, in spite of the comparatively ancient legend of its Hellenic foundation by Diomedes, and of a certain early prosperity witnessed to (a) by the Delphian treasury of the Spinatae, and (b) by the name Spineticum ostium borne by the southern mouth of the Po throughout antiquity and long after the day when Spina had seen its harbour silted up and itself transformed into an obscure inland town. The mouth at Ravenna was artificially made by the Augusta fossa. North of this was the Eridanum ostium, named for the short tributary Rhenus, but also named the ‘Spineticum ostium,’ says Pliny, ‘ab urbe Spina quae fuit juxta praevalens, ut Delphicis ereditum est thesauris, condita a Diomede.’ Of Spina's obscurity all ordinary maps of the district of the Lingones assure us for it appears on none of them. Strabo's account (v. p. 214b) exhausts all the facts known:

³³ iii 60: Herodotus goes out of his way to descant upon the Samian Heraeum as one of the three ‘biggest things in the world,’ all of them at Samos.

³⁴ See p. 637:

³⁵ Pausanias VI xix 1:

³⁶ See Frazer's, Pausanias, V, pp. 357Google Scholar ff.

³⁷ See Brunn, H., Geschichte der Griechischen Künstler, ii, pp. 11 f.Google Scholar, where it is observed that Simonides may have written the lines quoted by Plutarch, , De Defectu Oraculorum (ch. xlvi, p. 447)Google Scholar while in Sicily. This is possible but rather forces the situation. It seems more likely that Simonides wrote the lines at Delphi, and saw the paintings there before his departure for Sicily in 477 B.C. or earlier.

³⁸ Hesychius, confusing together the meanings of both words, yet vaguely recognizes the Delian sacral term where he says:

³⁹ VI, p. 1319b 11. 19 if.:

⁴⁰ Ditt. 571, Michel, , Recueil ď Inscriptions Grecques, 997Google Scholar.

⁴¹ Dittenberger describes its characters as: ‘Litterae volgares dispositae while Michel places the inscription towards the end of the fourth century, B.C.

⁴²

⁴³ B.C.H. xvii (1893), p. 612, The words are cited as occurring in an Athenian decree inscribed upon the treasury. Another decree is cited where occur the words

⁴⁴ Cc. XII, XIII, and XIV init. But note that in the middle of c. XIV Philinus reverts to the term for the same ‘treasury’ of the Corinthians, which everywhere else in the dialogue is called the

⁴⁵ Plutarch, Symposiae. V ii:

⁴⁶ See Athenaeus 480a; the whole passage comes apparently from the regarded by some as an epitome of a more extended work of Polemo.

⁴⁷ i 14 and 50; iv 162.

⁴⁸ Lest it be maintained that articles of plate, once dedicated within the precincts, were invariably regarded as withdrawn from further use, consider the loan made to the Segestans of φιάλας τϵ καὶ οἰνοχόας from the temple of Aphrodite at Eryx, Th. vi 46, 3.

⁴⁹ Such sacred vessels abounded in the Parthenon, , but those for deputations abroad were probably kept in the Pompeium (Paus. I ii, 4)Google Scholar — words which might apply to any one of the Olympian or Delphian treasuries. It seems not unlikely that Olympian delegates from the ‘home counties’ (Arcadia and Elis) would find similar vessels stored for their use in the Olympian Prytaneium, unless they simply brought them along from home. In any case it is a striking fact that there is no trace or record of such a thing at Olympia as an Arcadian treasury of any denomination.

⁵⁰ Plutarch, Nicias iii.

⁵¹ Th. vi 16, 2.

⁵²

⁵³ Inventory of Demades, ll. 165–170.

⁵⁴ Asclepiades of Chios figures twice with the Antipater of Cyrene, Timocrates, son of Antigonus, Antigonus and Stratonice, as well as one Medeias, If the community of Cos could have its stored in the Andrians' house, why not the Andrians?

⁵⁵ See Homolle, M.Comptes des Hiéropes Déliens (B.C.H. 1882)Google Scholar. Offerings were put on the same footing with other treasury assets,—this might account for the absence of any mention of hypothetical Andrian plate which would not appropriately figure as offerings, since it was stored for use by the Andrians,—and accounted for by the as bestowed (A) in the temple of Apollo and (B) in other buildings sometimes fewer, but never more than four in number: (a) the (b) the Artemision, (c) the (d) the temple of Eilithyia. The and the figure on the inventories as mere storehouses. This need not however have interfered with their use by the home deputations at the time of the festival. Considering that the Athenians came in 478 B.C., not as politically supreme, but as Amphictyons, and preempted the (which they re-named the ) for their yearly offerings, an anomalous position in their own home-sanctuary was created for the Delians. This is no doubt indicated by the mention in inscriptions of the used by the Delians for a Pompeium, but only, be it remarked, while the Athenians had charge of the sanctuary.

⁵⁶ X ix 5:

⁵⁷ It occurs in the solemn message entrusted by the Athenians to Alexander for delivery to Mardonius (viii 144): first among standing between Athenians and adhesion to Persia,—even supposing them eager for it,—are

⁵⁸ Frazer's, Pausanias V, p. 350Google Scholar.

⁵⁹ In Pauly's, Real-Encyclopaedie (1848)Google Scholar, s.v. Polygnotus.

⁶⁰ Witschl here refers to Pliny xxxv 35: Hic et Delphis aedem pinxit, the allusion being to the paintings of Polygnotus in the Cnidians' treasury, nicknamed Lesche.

⁶¹ Witschl here cites Pliny xxxv 31: Aristoclides qui pinxit aedem Apollinis Delphis, the allusion being to the main temple at Delphi.

⁶² Lycurgus, as quoted by Harpocration, evidently gathers up, without sifting them, two conflicting rumours explaining why Athenian citizenship was conferred on Polygnotus: (a) (the Stoa Eleutherios, see Gardner's, Athens pp. 389Google Scholar f.) (b) (the Delphian ‘Lesche’) (the temple of the Diosenri, Gardner's, Athens pp. 97 and 393)Google Scholar. Even these who were doubtless muddle-headed gossips, were dimly conscious that painting gratis for the Cnidians would hardly earn the gift of citizenship from the Athenians, and threw in the paintings in the temple of the Dioscuri at Athens, working Polygnotus rather hard even for such a high honour. Or again they may merely have mentioned the Delphian ‘Lesche’ by an incoherent trick of short-hand speech, as the place where Polygnotus won his spurs,—the reputation on the strength of which he got the chance of painting the temple of the Dioscuri.

⁶³ It is noticeable that Brunn, who does not commit himself expressly to Witschl's wresting of Pliny's words in favour of Polygnotus, nevertheless suppresses all mention of the paintings by Aristoclides in the temple of Apollo at Delphi.

⁶⁴ X xxxv 1: