rical amplification, must have had some foundation. The streets at the same time were crooked and narrow 1.

Julius Pollux has given an idea of some of the principal features of Athens, in enumerating several of the constituent parts of a city. πόλεως δὲ μέρη—στοαὶ καὶ δρόμοι καὶ στρατήγια καὶ ἀρχεῖα καὶ γραμματεῖα καὶ διδασκαλεῖα καὶ παιδ αγώγια ἃ καὶ φωλεοὺς ὠνόμαζον. 9, 41. The walks (ἡ περίπατος) were ἐν στοᾷ ἢ δρόμῳ ἢ ἄλσει. 10, 57.

1 ' Dicaearch. p. 8, Hudson.

APPENDIX VIII.

Page 166.

ON THE MONUMENT OF PHILOPAPPUS.

THE monument of Philopappus was built in a form slightly concave towards the front. The chord of the curve was about thirty feet in length. In front it presented three niches between four pilasters; the central niche was wider than the two lateral ones, concave and with a semicircular top; the others were quadrangular. A seated statue in the central niche was obviously that of the person to whom the monument was erected. An inscription below the niche shows that he was named Philopappus, son of Epiphanes, an Attic citizen of the demus Besa (Φιλόπαππος Επιφάνους Βησαιεύς). On the right hand of this statue was seated a king Antiochus, son of a king Antiochus, as we learn from the inscription below it (βασιλεὺς ̓Αντίοχος βασιλέως Αντιόχου). In the niche on the other side was seated Seleucus Nicator (βασιλεὺς Σέλευκος ̓Αντιόχου NikάTwo). On the pilaster to the right of Philopappus of Besa, is the inscription: c(aius) JULIUS C(aii) F(ilius) FAB(iâ), ANTIOCHUS PHILOPAPPUS, COS. FRATER ARVALIS, ALLECTUS INTER PRETORIOS AB IMP(eratore) CESARE NERVA TRAJANO OPTUMO GERMANICO DACICO. On that to the left of Philopappus was inscribed Βασιλεὺς ̓Αντίοχος Φιλόπαππος, βασιλέως Επιφάνους, τοῦ ̓Αντιόχου. Between the niches and the base of the monument, in a single compartment, there is a representation in high relief of the

triumph of a Roman emperor, similar to that on the arch of Titus at Rome.

The part of the monument now remaining consists of the central and eastern niches, with remains of the two pilasters on that side of the centre. The statues in the niches still remain, but without heads and otherwise imperfect; the figures of the triumph, in the lower compartment, are not much better preserved. Although the monument stood so near the wall, the back front was not without ornament; there are remains of two pilasters at the back of the great niche 1.

The monument of Philopappus appears, from Spon and Wheler, to have been nearly in the same state in 1676 as it is at present and it is to Ciriaco d'Ancona, who visited Athens two centuries earlier, that we are indebted for a knowledge of the deficient parts of the monument. Stuart in the year 1751 found two statues lying on the ground at the foot of the hill below the monument, which had evidently from the style formed a part of it. These statues in the year 1785 had been carried away, and are now probably in some collection, where their origin may be forgotten. Stuart had no knowledge of the MS. of Ciriaco, which is in the Barbarini library at Rome; but judging from what he saw, he rightly concluded that the two statues stood on the summits of the two pilasters, and were intended for the persons whose names were inscribed on the pilasters below them.

We learn from Josephus, that in the fourth year of Vespasian (A. D. 72), Samosata the capital of Commagene was taken by Pætus, whom Vespasian had left in the government of Syria. Antiochus, the king of Commagene, retired to Cilicia with his wife and daughter, but his two sons Epiphanes and Callinicus held out for a short time in arms, and even engaged successfully in action with the Romans, but at length having been deserted by their soldiers, they

1 Here Mr. Kinnard thinks there may have been some monument in honour of Epiphanes, father of the Philopappi.

crossed the Euphrates into the territory of Vologeses, king of Parthia. Vespasian showed no resentment against them, but permitted both the father and sons to proceed to Rome, where he treated them with distinction. We may infer from the inscriptions, that Philopappus of Besa, and king Antiochus Philopappus, were sons of Epiphanes, and had assumed the name of Philopappus from respect to the grandfather, the last de facto king of their family. The name was similar to many adjuncts of those days, such as Philometor and Philoromæus. While one of the brothers affected the republican simplicity of an Attic citizen, the other still adhered to the empty title of king, which of course he bestowed also on his father Epiphanes. As to the Latin inscription, I am inclined to believe with Stuart, that it was intended for a son of Callinicus; he could not have been a brother of the titular king Antiochus Philopappus, their two Greek names having been the same; but for that very reason he was likely to have been a first-cousin. The Caii filius show that his father was a citizen of Rome as well as himself, and it appears that they were enrolled in the Fabian tribe and Julian family.

From the Latin inscription, we learn nearly the date of the monument. Trajan is styled Dacicus, but not Parthicus, which title, if the senate had then bestowed it upon him, would not have been omitted, especially as there was a sufficient space for it on the pilaster. The monument, therefore, was erected between the years 101 and 108' of the Christian æra. As Epiphanes is stated by Josephus to have been young in the year 72, his son Philopappus must have died at a middle age; and the monument was probably erected by his surviving brother and cousin, who may have intended to explain this fact by their own statues having been erect while the two others were seated. The

If we refer the titles Dacicus and Parthicus to the two triumphs of Trajan, the years will be 105 and 115 instead of 101 and 108. Optumus was bestowed upon Trajan as early as the year 99, though seldom found on monuments until near the end of his reign. But Philopappus would probably be early in doing honour to his patron.

treatise of Plutarch on "How to distinguish a flatterer from a friend," is addressed to an Antiochus Philopappus, and in another place he mentions a βασιλεὺς Φιλόπαππος as having executed with great munificence the office of Agonothetes, and that of Choregus for all the tribes on some particular occasion'. The title and the two names are suited to the person whose statue stood on the left hand of Philopappus of Besa. But it is possible that Plutarch may have referred to two persons; and that one of them may have been Philopappus of Besa, who residing among the Athenians, may have been usually known as king Philopappus, although an Attic citizen; for it was probably in the latter capacity that he filled the offices mentioned by Plutarch. The magnificence of the monument, and its position within the city in one of the most honorable and conspicuous situations, show it to have been that of some person who had obtained the special favour of the Athenians. One hundred and fifty years before, they had refused to permit M. Claudius Marcellus a consular, who was killed at Athens by one of his attendants, to be buried within the walls, but erected a monument to him in the Academy'.

1 Quæst. Sympos. 1, 10.

2 Locum sepulturæ intra urbem impetrare non potui, quod religione se impediri dicerent : neque tamen id antea cuiquam concesserant. Servius Sulpicius Rufus M. Ciceroni ap. Epist. ad Div. 4. 12. V. Ep. ad Attic. 13, 13.