that such is the case, to waste more words about it. In Carrey's drawing itself, the heads of eight figures are wanting; and perhaps it is these very heads which the workmen who built the wall beside Poseidon as a support of the gable, or other pious persons, had knocked off. In p. 436, there is a serious misunderstanding, whereby I am made to place the marble slab, with the feet of Athena, in whom I recognize the newly-born Promachos of the eastern side, into the Western Pediment. How was it possible to believe this, as the Athena of the contest is not only composed quite differently, but also of far larger dimensions, or to speak of "a strange blunder," and, at the same time, to quote the words of my essay, (p. 392,) which express the contrary? The words in p. 391 refer to the stump in the centre of the slab: “the fragment can have belonged only to a naked male figure, which the stump served to support ;" and it is not to be wondered at that these words should have occasioned a misunderstanding, for they do not express the meaning of my own words in the German original, which were and still are, als Pflock passt das Ueberbleibsel nur zu einer männlichen Figur. The fragment, therefore, cannot be a trunk such as we often find supporting naked male figures; in a clothed female figure, such as this one must have been, judging from the feet and other circumstances, the outstretched leg requires no support, for the whole figure forms only one mass surrounded by drapery, and of it therefore this stump must be a fragment, belonging to the middle part. The fact that my opponent places the figure of Ares standing by the side of Nice upon this slab, and again takes the rising piece of marble to be the trunk of the olive tree, which accordingly Athena, while yet engaged with her arms to repel the flood of Poseidon, (as the climax of the dispute,) must already have created, whereas, properly speaking, it ought not to have been produced till after the actual repulse to decide the original dispute about Attica,-this fact may be considered as a climax, as the highest pitch of the dispute between the expositors. I must leave the examination of this explanation of the fragment to those who can themselves put their feet upon the slab and the feet attached to it; and I hope that those who may have undertaken it, may acquit me of the suspicion of arrogance, if, even without having seen both together, I decline believing in Cecrops with his serpent. It is, however, this very Cecrops alone-who has been reported to have been authenticated by the fragment of the serpent, and hence perhaps the belief has found supporters, that instead of the contest of the two divinities, we have a representation of the inundation, with which Poseidon, in his indignation at the verdict, and the train of marine divinities assembled around him, threatened Athens and the family of Cecrops-that has induced me to undertake the disagreeable task of this refutation. It is superfluous for every one who, above all things, tries to penetrate into the spirit of myths and of the works of art themselves, and takes it as his guide; that is, for every one who, possessing a general survey, and steadily comparing, is accustomed not to take up any thing isolated, without feeling its agreement and analogy with other contemporaneous or homogeneous phenomena, and its harmony with every thing else, and with the character of ancient poetry and composition. But he who takes the opposite point of view, trusting to his own inspirations, little concerned about the custom and taste of the ancient world, and does not take into account the great internal connection of things which arises from a natural development, but sets forth an idea at random, and then exerts all his industry and powers of invention to prop it up by arguments and analysis, which, of course, must be managed in an equally arbitrary manner, or it may be with sophistry, because only the things which are simply true, or at least probable, agree with one another, as it were spontaneously, will not be very willing to admit reasons derived from the opposite method. It is not likely that my opponent and I should often meet in our views, understand each other, or agree with each other, and we should therefore not war against each other, nor try to reconcile our views; and, in fact, he would be greatly mistaken, if he were to believe that I am trying to return his attacks or to prove the untenableness of his assertions, in order to deny to him acumen and learning. His Cecrops, and the circumstance that I cannot form an opinion from personal inspection, alone must be my excuse for these lengthened remarks. BONN, F. G. WELCKER. 297 τρον. XXI. MISCELLANIES. 1. VICTORY IN THE HORSE-RACE. THIS is an amphora of the panathenaic shape with black figures, either an actual prize vase, or else the imitation of one, belonging to S. Basseggio; the style is archaic, and evidently from the Etruscan territory. On the obverse are, Pallas Athene, armed as usual, standing in the centre, and holding on her left arm a large circular argolic buckler, the Topov of which is a star, and Hermes, wearing the petasus, the short tunic, and his chlamys thrown over his shoulders, facing Pallas Athene, holding in his hands the кyрvкеîov, or caduceus. At the other side of Pallas Athene, and facing her, stands Zeus, as an old bearded figure, draped in a tunic, over which is thrown an outer garment, probably the ampechonion, holding a páßôos or akŶtThese are the divinities of the festival; on the other side is represented the termination of the race:-an old bearded figure advances to the right, draped exactly as Zeus; before him is an inscription, reading κιονηδόν from left to right,-ΔΥΛΕΙΚΕΤΥ : ΗΙΠΟΣ : ΝΙΚΑ Δυλεικέτ[ο]υ : ἵππος : νικᾶ :" the horse of Duleiletes wins.” The old man is followed by a boy wearing only a short tunic, mounted on a horse; behind them walks a man entirely naked, bearing on his head a large tripod, the feet of which come down over him; he holds it steadily by one leg in the right hand, his left hand is stretched out and holds a crown. There are some interesting points about the palæography of this inscription :-the first word is apparently AvλKETV -it may however be AvλEKETʊ—both of which words are equally difficult of explanation: but it is apparently the proper name; if the first reading is correct, probably some compound of Aoûλos, if not an ethnical name derived from the town Dulichium. The v is unusual for the genitive on the vases, which contract, as the Sigean inscription and other similar monuments, in O; thus the potter Tleson constantly writes TAHΣΟΝ ΠΟΝΕΑΡΧΟ ΕΠΟΙΕΣΕΝ. Τλῆσον ὁ Νεάρχο[υ] ἐποίησεν'_the potter Euthymides ΕΥΘΥΜΙΔΕΣΗΟΠΟΛΙΟΕΓΡΑΣΦΕΝ, Εὐθυμίδης ὁ Πολίο[υ] γραφεν (ἔγραψεν.) ΕΥΚΕΡΟΣ: ΕΠΟΙΕΣΕΝ ΗΟΡΓΟΤΙΜΟ ΗΥΙΗΥΣ, Εὔχερος ἐποίεσεν 1 For the vases with the name of the potter, Tleson, see Cat. Dur. p. 84, No. 260. 2 De Witte, Description d'une Collection de Vases peints provenant des fouilles de l'Etrurie, p. 93, No. 146. 8vo. ບ Eucheros inscribes upon his vases, Paris, 1837. The name written Eveudivns is evidently the potter's blunder; another vase with the same potter in the Duc de Luyne's collection.-Ibid. No. 2. i[1]vs.1 6 10 11 'Epyoripo[v] Tvs.3 In all these instances the vase inscriptions follow the usual form :-an approximation to an interchange of the v and o is in the word vios, which Eucheros writes vivs; and another potter, Simon, writes fus, as ΣΙΜΟΝΗ ΛΕΙΤΑΗΟΥΣ, Σίμων Ηλειτα []us. The second word is imos for os, for it occurs in exactly the same form, and as the name of the Satyr Hippos," the absence of the double being of occasional occurrence on the vases; thus, EIAIПIO is the manner in which the artist Pedimos writes his name, ΙΠΟΚΡΑΤΕΣ" for Ἱπποκρατης, ΑΝΧΙΠΟΣ for Ανχιππος, ΙΠΟΔΑMEIA on an Apulian vase for 'ITоdaμeia, Analogous examples are not uncommon on the vases of Vulci: thus, KAAITOX' is found for the name of the courtesan Καλλίθους—ΚΑΛΙΠΕ for Καλλιππη ΚΑΛΙΦΟ ΜΕ and ΚΑΛΙΦΟΡΑ for Καλλικο μη and Καλλιφορα —ΝΙΚΟΘΕΝΕΣ for ΝικοσθενηςΠΕΡΟΦΑΤΑ for Περοφαντα ΚΕΚΡΟΣ for Κέκροπς οι Κέκροψ ΤΙΜΑΑΡΑ for Τιμάνδρα—ΚΑΛΙΡΕΚΡΕΝΕ for Καλλιροη κρηνη 15—ΤΥΤΑΡΕΟΣ for Τυνδάρεος—ΝΥΦΕΣ for Νυμ φης—and ΝΥΦΙΟΔΟΡΟΣ for Νυμφίοδορος "ΛΑΠΟΣ for Λαμπος18 -ΑΔΡΟΜΑΧΕ for Ανδρομαχη —ΣΑΦΟ for Σαπφω, with the π omitted-XANOA for Koáv0a=ávou,"1—and again, IOONAX (retrograde) for Κσανθοη—Ξανθοη22_ΧΑΝΘΟΣ for Κσανθος-Ξάνθος23 in the name of a horse. As many of these names are correctly written on other and contemporaneous vases, these forms of writing must be attributed to the ignorance of the potter, or else to dialectical causes,— the vague state of the written language, and the different manner in which it was pronounced at the period.-There are one or two inscriptions of the same kind with respect to their athletic purport on the vases. The first is that found on a vase with black figures over 19 21 20 10 Bröndsted, Descr. of Thirty-two Vases, 8vo. London, 1832, p. 83; Dur. Cat. 643. 11 Cat. Dur. p. 98, No. 296. 13 De Witte, Descr. p. 11, No. 19. 16 De Witte, Descr. No. 129, p. 78. 18 Cat. Dur. p. 71, No. 231. 20 Millingen. Anc. Un. Mon. pl. XXXIII. 21 Mus. Etr., No. 802; Kramer über den Styl, &c. s. 61. 22 Cat. Dur. p. 49, No. 145. the horses of the quadriga which Pallas Athene drives for Hercules. ΔΙΠΥΟΙΛΣΚΑΛΟΣ ΗΙΠΟΣ, according to M. De Witte, Διπύθιας και Xos irmos, "the fine horse twice victor in the Pythian games."24 This phrase, however, seems extraordinary to apply to the four horses of Hercules, and still more so to inscribe upon a vase not in connection with the subject, since the same sentiment could not apply to the horse which did to the athletes. It is difficult to propose another explanation, supposing the inscription to be correctly decyphered. It is possible to read Διπλοίας κελὸς ἵππος, Diploias is a good horse! as the name given to one of the horses, as Kalıpópa and Kaλλkóμŋ are inscribed over two other quadriga. The other inscription is more particularly agonistic: it is found on the pedestal of a figure, and reads, AKAMANΤΙΣΕΝΙΚΑ ΦΥΛΕ, 25" The tribe of Akamantis was the victorious one!" This must have been for a musical contest similar to that for which the monument of Lysicrates, and other choragic trophies, were erected. The inscription is an exclamation,-it is the speech of the herald on the occasion of the victory repeated on the vase, and inscribed for posterity on the monument. 129 26 27 28 Most of the inscriptions in Greek are of this character, and thus invest the material word with a spiritual existence. Hence there is a perpetual ellipsis to be supplied. On the prize vases it is indifferently, ΤΟ ΝΑΘΕΝΕΘΕΝ ΑΘΛΟΝ, ΟΙ ΤΟΝ ΑΘΕΝΕΘΕΝ ΑΘΛΟΝ ΕΜΙ, τῶν ̓Αθήνηθεν ἄθλων, οι τῶν ̓Αθήνηθεν ἄθλων εἶμι, “I am a prize from Athens ! So in the case of the formula ΜΕΠΟΙΕΣΕΝ, μὲ ποίησεν, which certain potters used, and ΕΓΡΑΦΣΕΚΑΠΟΕΕΕΜΕ, έγραψε kai éπоiŋσev éμé" which others employed; and in the Naples lecythus, ΤΑΤΑΙΗΣ ΕΙΜΙ ΛΗΚΥΘΟΣ, Ταταλης είμι ληκύθος; “I am the lecythus of Tataie.” And on the Eboli Vase, ΔΙΟΝΥΣΙΟΥ Α ΛΑΧΥΘΟΣ ΤΟΥ ΜΑΤΑΛΟΥ, Διονυσίου ὁ λάχυθος τοῦ Ματάλου ; and in the case of the vases with the inscriptions, TPEMIO EMI, Тpoμiov ε(1)μ, Τρομίου εἶμι, and ΚΑΡΩΝΟΣΕΜΙ, Χαράνος (ι)μι; and on another vase, ΣΟΣΤΡΑΤΟ ΕΙΜΙΣωστράτου) εἶμι, 33 the vase is invested as it were with this character of identity. Even with the formula KAAO, there is a certain address from the vase itself to the spectator, 24 Cat. Dur. p. 115, No. 327. 25 Musée Blacas, pl. 1 ; Boeckh, Ind. lect., 1831-32, p. 10. sq. 26 Dur. Cat. 702. Cf. Gerhard, Vases Etrusges et Campaniens. fo. Berlin, 1843. taf. A. B. 27 Millingen, Anc. Un. Mon. Pl. 1. p. 1, and foll. 28 Amasis, Dur. Cat. No. 33. Theoxotos, Ibid. 884. 32 31 29 Gerhard, Rapporto Volcente. Annali. 1831, p. 180, n. (722.) 30 Bull. Arch. Nap. tom. 11. tav. 1, No. 1. 31 Bull. dell' Inst. 1830, p. 155. 32 Raoul Rochette, Journal des Savans, 1830, p. 118. 33 Rhein. Mus. 1837, s. 132. |