The following inscriptions were copied on a journey made in April and May, 1911, in Lycia. We were accompanied throughout by Mr. Nikola Michael Ferteklis of Adalia, to whom our best thanks are due. We have also to acknowledge assistance from Mr. Tod and Mr. Woodward in the publication of the texts, and from Mr. Arkwright in the interpretation of the Lycian fragment from the Fellendagh (No. 29), and with certain of the names. Our other obligations are noted in their place. An accident to one of our horses, while we were crossing the Xanthus marshes on the way to Patara, damageda great part of our squeeze paper and we have had in a number of cases to rely only on our copies. It has seemed better therefore to state the cases where we had an impression, and where we had only a copy on which to rely.

The following list of coins bought on our journey may be of interest as showing what the currency of the districts must have been. Only Greek coins are here treated; of Roman coins it was noticed that denarii rarely occur earlier than Trajan, after whom they become increasingly common, while the copper hardly appears till the second quarter of the third century.

Among the most important bronzes in the British Museum is the statuette of a philosopher, said to have been found in dredging the harbour at Brindisi, which was acquired in 1865 (Pl. II). It measures 20 inches (50·8 cm.) in height, and represents a bearded man seated—though the original seat has disappeared—and resting his chin on his right hand; his left arm, muffled in his only garment, the himation that passes over his left shoulder, lies across his lap and supports the right arm; the right foot is drawn back behind the left, and he wears sandals elaborately tied. The thoughtful and interesting head (Pl. III.) suggests in type and period the pleasanter portraits of Aeschines and the newly discovered Aristotle; hair and beard are cut close, the features are small and well shaped, the whole effect in singular harmony with the reflective pose of the figure. The surface has suffered from the action of water, and there is a large hole on the left shoulder, and a crack running down the arm.

The editor of the recent volume of the Inscriptiones Graecae, which comprises the inscriptions of Laconia and Messenia, is to be congratulated upon the conclusion of a long and arduous task, and still more upon the careful and scholarly manner in which that task has been accomplished. Undertaken originally by Max Fraenkel, who devoted to it the few months of life which remained to him after editing the Argolic inscriptions (I.G. iv.), it was carried on by Hans von Prott, and after his sudden death in 1903 was entrusted by the Berlin Academy to Walter Kolbe, now Professor at the University of Rostock, who after almost ten years has completed it in a manner worthy of the august body under whose auspices it has been carried through. Out of 1626 inscriptions, 158 had not been previously published, while the texts of those which were already known have gained much by correction, based usually upon the copies of the editor or of von Prott, and by judicious restoration. The present writer has to acknowlege a number of errors and omissions in the epigraphical section of the Sparta Museum Catalogue which are set right in this volume.

In Herodotus iii. 90, in the second satrapy, along with the Mysians and Lydians, are included the Lasonians and the Cabalians and the ’ϒγϵννϵȋς. A distinction is made between the Lasonians and the Cabalians. In vii. 76–77, three tribes are commanded in the army of Xerxes by Badres, son of Hystanes. The first name has dropped out, the second people are the Maeonian Cabalians who are called Lasonians, the third are the Milyae. The words Καβηλέϵς οἱ Μηΐονϵς seem to make a distinction between the Lasonians and other Cabalians who are not Maeonians. Probably therefore the missing name in ch. 76 is Καβηλέϵς, omitted by copyists under the impression that the same people were being counted twice over. But the historian really meant to distinguish between the native Cabalians and the Lasonians who were of Maeonian origin and presumably immigrants. Accordingly in iii. 90, instead of Λασονίων καὶ Καβαλίων καὶ ’ϒγϵννέων, we should perhaps read Λασονίων καὶ Καβαλίων ἐγγϵνέων.

In the last volume of this Journal is an article by Professor E. A. Gardner entitled ‘The Boston Counterpart of the “Ludovisi Throne.”’ In the following pages I wish to make clear that had Professor Gardner been more familiar with the marble itself of which he wrote, and had he not based his criticism mainly upon a study of photographs and casts, he could hardly hold the very poor opinion of it which he expresses. His article is difficult to answer point by point because statements of personal feeling are largely mingled with others of fact or assumed fact; aesthetic criticism is interspersed with archaeological statement, and both, I believe it can be shown, with some misunderstanding and error. The article really refutes itself by proposing several alternative origins for the ‘Throne.’ Such a criticism is worth but little, if the criteria for detecting a forgery are so uncertain that the critic is not sure whether they prove the object Neo-Attic or modern.

The Square Pedestals.—In some notes on the sculpture from the Artemision at the British Museum, printed in the last volume of this Journal (p. 87), I suggested that the fragment No. 1201 most probably belonged to a relief representing either Herakles in the Garden of the Hesperides or Herakles and the Hydra. Subsequent examination and the attempt to make a restoration from the given data have made me sure that the former was the subject of the sculpture. Only this would account for the quiet action of the left hand of Herakles and for the closely associated female figure. If this were indeed the subject, how could its normal elements be arranged so as to suit the conditions of the square pedestal having a vertical joint in the centre, and making proper use of the existing fragment of which Fig. 1 is a rough sketch? This question I have tried to answer. The fragment is now fixed in the side of a built-up pedestal close to its left-hand angle, but there is nothing which settles this position and it is a practically impossible one, for there is not room left in which to complete the figure of Herakles. If, however, we shift the piece to the right hand half of the pedestal, and sketch in the completion of the two figures, we at once see how perfectly the tree and serpent would occupy the centre of the composition and leave the left-hand space for the two other watching maidens—the whole making a symmetrical group.

If we are seeking an authoritative solution of the outstanding problems of ancient Greek music, it would seem that the most valuable assistance could be got from a consideration of the αὐλός, inasmuch as specimens more or less complete are to be found in plenty, scattered through the museums of different countries: in practice, this study has been found the most puzzling of all. Though many of the bodies of such flutes have been found, the mechanism of the mouthpiece, at once the most important and the most perishable portion of the instrument, has naturally disappeared, and all hope of extraneous aid from vase-pictures seems to vanish when we notice that in all the later pictures the mouth of the player, and consequently the mouthpiece of the instrument, is hidden by the ϕορβεία, a band passing across the mouth, and encircling the head of the player.

Still I hope to show that not all these difficulties are insuperable: for example, much of the mystery of the ϕορβεία disappears when we see two terracotta figures of dancers wearing the ϕορβεία without the flutes. It is then clear that this band held the flutes rigidly in place, and we are able to form some conclusion as to the shape of the mouthpieces; but this will be discussed later.

A complete drawing is reproduced in Plate IX. of a kylix in the Ashmolean Museum, signed on the handle ΒΡ∨↾ΟΣ ΕΓΕΣΕΝ. Apart from the interest of its signature, the vase is important for its subject, which appears to be rare if not unique. I have, however, been unable to determine with certainty either subject or authorship, and shall content myself with trying to establish a sound basis for further investigation, and suggesting features of probable significance.

The kylix is large, with a comparatively small design in the interior. The chief measurements are: height, 12 cm., diameter, 33 cm., breadth across handles, 41 cm., diameter of inner circle, 14 cm. The cup is fragmentary, but the existing surface is well preserved, and the black, which is laid on rather thickly in parts, is deep and glossy throughout.

The interior scene has a border of stopped maeander in sets of 2, 3, or 4 broken alternately by chequer squares and saltire squares with dots at the ends of the cross-arms. The two scenes on the exterior have no border but a reserved red line above and below. There is a fragmentary palmette design beneath one handle.

The scene in the interior (Plate IX.) is practically complete except for a gap at the bottom of the circle, which, though it leaves the figures intact, possibly deprives us of some clue to the interpretation of the subject. All that is certain is that the two figures are kneeling on some level surface, the horizontal line of which marks off a reserved segment of the circle with depth equal to about a quarter of its diameter. The horizontal border of egg and tongue suggests, though it does not invariably denote, a definite part of the scene, such as an altar.

This set of instruments and the large beaker were found about three years ago near the site of Kolophon in Ionia. The objects are thirty-seven in number. With two exceptions all are of bronze. The blades of the knives were originally of steel, but this metal has in each case been almost destroyed by oxidation. The date is uncertain—it may have been before the Christian era but is more probably the first or second century A.D. The glass beaker belongs to a type which is said to occur so late as the fourth century.

The town of Keryneia is situate on the northern coast of the Island of Cyprus, between the ancient city of Lapethos and the town of Macaria. It was founded by Kepheus, the leader of an Achaean colony in Cyprus, simultaneously with Lapethos, which was founded by Praxandros of Therapnae in Laconia. Keryneia figured as one of the nine kingdoms of Cyprus during her naval supremacy about the tenth-ninth century B.C. The last king or tyrannus of Keryneia was Themison, who was taken prisoner and deposed by Ptolemaeus Soter I. in 312 B.C., together with the last king of Lapethos, Praxippus, on the ground that they made alliance with Antigonus against him. By the seashore at the western end of the town there is an extensive necropolis of rock-cut tombs, some containing more than one chamber, which were rifled in ancient times; these the inhabitants of the small modern town, following ancient tradition, call ‘the Tombs of the Greeks,’ Τάϕους τῶν Ἑλλήνων. The ancient town obviously extended southwards, on the plateau overlooking the coast, and included the present quarter of ‘Ρηάτικον or ‘Ρηγάτικον (Royal Residence), a word handed down from the Frankish period. Keryneia played a prominent part in mediaeval history from the deposition of Isaac Comnenus, the last Byzantine King of Cyprus, by Richard the Lion-Hearted in 1191, until 1570.

Before accepting Sir Charles Waldstein's amazing theory that the colossal female head at Holkham Hall belongs to the East Pediment of the Parthenon, we have the right to demand from him some evidence on the following points :—

(1) That there is reason to connect the head with Athens and the Acropolis,

(2) That the material is identical with the other pediment marbles,

(3) That the style is Pheidian, or at any rate fifth-century Attic, and

(4) That it is an architectural and not an independent piece of sculpture.

The name ‘Minyan’ has recently been given to a kind of pottery which was first noticed at Orchomenos by Schliemann in 1881. In the report of his excavation which Schliemann contributed to the second volume of the Hellenic Journal, he carefully described the nature and position of this ware. ‘It is very remarkable that at Orchomenos painted pottery, with spirals and other Mycenean ornamentation, also cows with two long horns and the same variegated colours as at Mycenae, as well as goblets of the very same form and colour as at Mycenae, are generally only found down to a depth of about six feet below the surface of the ground, and that at a greater depth, monochrome, black, red, or yellow, hand-made or wheelmade pottery is found almost exclusively, analogous to some of that collected by me in the royal sepulchres at Mycenae. Very frequent here are the large hand-made black goblets or bowls, with a hollow foot and horizontal flutings in the middle, which I also found at Mycenae. . .