These drawings agree with Spon and Wheler in showing that very little of the quarter of Hadrianopolis then remained. A few cottages are seen near the fountain Enneacrunus, and some others standing in a range of gardens, on the banks of the Ilissus, which extended below Enneacrunus as far as the bridge in the road to Sunium. We learn from Spon, that Callirhoe, the ancient name of Enneacrunus, which is still applied to the river Ilissus, as well as to the fountain, was then attached also to the hamlet near it'. In the time of Chandler there were no houses at the fountain, but two or three remained on the opposite side of the river2, which have long since disappeared.

It further appears from Carrey, that there existed the ruins of a building attached to the northern end of the bridge of the Stadium; of which a fragment, together with an arched entrance to the bridge, remained in the time of Stuart. We learn from Spon that this ruin had been a monastery of nuns abandoned at the Turkish conquest 3. The columns of the Olympium were in the same state in the time of Carrey as at present, with the exception of the single column, which Stuart and Chandler mention to have been taken down a little before their visit to Athens. Within the area of the great cluster of these columns, Carrey has represented a Greek church, which no longer exists. It was called the church of St. John at the Columns (σraiç кodóvvais), and its position, not connected with any part of the

3

' Travels, p. 88. 8vo. 1766. Voyage II. p. 123.

ancient building, seems to indicate that the ruin of the Olympium took place at a remote period.

In the year 1675, Athens was visited by the Earl of Winchelsea, English ambassador to the Porte, and in the following year by Mr. Vernon, of whose travels in Greece a short account was soon afterwards published in the Philosophical Transactions. The same year was distinguished in Athenian annals by the visit of Dr. Spon and Sir George Wheler, from whom, and from the drawings of Carrey, we derive all our knowledge of the state of Athens prior to that siege, which forms the chief æra in the modern history of Athenian antiquities; for, as to Guillet, who published in 1675 the pretended travels in 1669 of his brother La Guilletière, it is evident that the work is nothing more than a romance, constructed indeed with some degree of learning and ingenuity, and founded probably upon some correct information acquired by Guillet from Greeks or from the missionaries, then recently established in Greece, added to that which he may have found in the printed account of the Père Babin; but confounding places and objects in a manner which could not have occurred to any one personally acquainted with the localities, and mixing up with adventures of his own invention, descriptions taken from Pausanias or other ancient authors, of buildings and monuments which had been long annihilated, but which he represents as still in existence'.

1

What

Spon at first was inclined to defend Guillet against Vernon, who, having carried Guillet's book with him to Athens, gave testimony to its falsehood in his letter to the Royal Society. In the Voyage of Spon, first published at Lyons in 1677, he even

are we to think, in the present day, of a traveller who asserts that he saw an inscription to the Unknown God on the front of the Parthenon, who describes a Pantheon near the Bazár more magnificent than the Pantheon at Rome', who pretends to have seen ruins of the temple of Neptune, of the Prytaneium, of the Metroum, of the Bucoleium, and of several of the porticos of the Cerameicus, together with many of the statues described in that quarter by Pausanias,-who discovers the theatre of Bacchus in the plain half-hidden amidst trees and grass-who finds a circular building called the Lanthorn of Diogenes, which Spon inquired for in vain 2 -who discovers a magnificent temple of Jupiter, and temples of Vulcan and Venus Urania, where Spon and Wheler saw only a Greek church and two mosques-and who finds the marble seats still remaining in the Stadium, although none of them

2

allows that La Guilletière had been seven days at Athens; but feeling himself unable at the same time to avoid making some observations upon Guilletière's absurdities, Guillet replied in a "Dissertation sur un Voyage, publié par un Médecin Antiquaire. Paris, 12mo. 1679." Spon immediately published a "Réponse à la Critique, publiée par M. Guillet, sur le Voyage de Grèce de Jacob Spon. 12mo. Lyons, 1679." In this work Spon expresses doubts that such a person as La Guilletière had ever existed, brings proofs of the manner in which Guillet's information was obtained, and gives a list of 112 errors in his book.

'Before it, he adds, were two horses, the work of Praxiteles, evidently borrowing the blunder of Zygomalás, as to the Parthenon, and applying it to his pretended Pantheon in the city.

2 Voyage II. p. 128.

were to be seen six years after his pretended journey?

As frequent reference will be made in the course of the present work to the description given of the buildings of Athens, by Spon and Wheler, it will be unnecessary to say more at present upon the state of Athens in their time.

One cannot, however, pass the mention of their names without expressing surprise that their publications, which first gave civilized Europe an adequate idea of the treasures of ancient art which Athens still retained, should not have roused any government or individual to some more effectual mode of rendering those treasures useful, than that of the Marquis de Nointel; that Louis XIV., in particular, who obtained some glory as a patron of art and learning, and sent out missions to the Levant to collect drawings, coins, and inscriptions, should not have endeavoured to enrich his capital with copies derived from the purest school of architecture and sculpture, or at least that an interest should not have been created in favour of the Athenian monuments, sufficient to save them from the artillery of Morosini. But the ignorance and barbarism of feudal times was still too profoundly rooted and too extensively diffused.

It was not until ninety years after the publication of the travels of Spon and Wheler, that an English artist, studying at Rome, having perceived that he was not yet at the fountain-head of true taste in architecture, determined to proceed to Athens and to reside there, until he should have made technical drawings of all the principal remains of antiquity. Stuart, having engaged Revett, another architect, to join him, they

The

arrived at Athens in the year 1751, and remained there during the greater part of three years'. first part of the result of their labours was published in 1762; soon after which some further knowledge of Greece and of its remains of antiquity was obtained by a private society in London, which has done more for the improvement of the arts by such researches than any government in Europe.

In the year 1764, the society of Dilettanti engaged Mr. Revett to return to Greece, in company with Mr. Pars and Dr. Chandler; the former an able draftsman, the latter well qualified to illustrate the geography and antiquities of the country by his erudition. The result of this mission placed the public in possession of the designs of several Athenian monuments, left imperfectly examined by Stuart, together with architectural details of some of the most celebrated temples of Asiatic Greece, a volume of Greek inscriptions by Dr. Chandler, and two volumes of travels in Asia Minor and Greece by the same person.

As Chandler, with the exception of Spon and Wheler, is the earliest modern traveller who has applied a competent share of judgment and learning to the examination of any part of Greece; and as

See Preface to Stuart's Antiq. of Athens, vol. i. In the year 1755, Athens was visited by Leroy, a French architect, for a similar purpose, and the result was published in one volume in 1758. From such a rapid proceeding, great accuracy could not be expected, and accordingly we find fourteen columns on the sides of the temple of Theseus in Leroy's drawing of that building.

H