<S1

^<S)-^i&k:
^t:
5>;

(J)

.CO
.CO

-CD

THE ARGIVE
HERAEUM
<j5:1\',«^

&

CHArtLES WALDSTEIN

1"^-

i;v=<rr>'-'^

'
g. i»« ij » B > »»\)it;.- i,
a
«;iM >
I
r
THE ARGIVE HERAEUM
 HEAD OF HERA (page 189)
Pbobablt from the Western Pediment of tbe Second Temple
 WJ(SlU1:ov,,^-> CV^a.
» V-

^rdjacological Justitutc of !3imcnca

amcricau ^cl)ool of Clajsgicnl ^twDicg at 3tl)cn0

THE ARGIYE IIEKAEUM

BT

CHARLES WALDSTEIN III

I'll. IK, L. 11. D., LiTT. D.

SOMETIME DIRECTOR OF THE AMERICA.V SCHOOL OF CI.AHSIIAI. KTVIHF.S AT ATIIEK8

irSIVERSITY READER /\ CI.AS.SICAl, ARCHAEOI.OiiY, ASD FELLOW OF
KINO'S COLI.EUE. CAMIIRIIKIE
SOMETIME DIRECTOR OF THE FIT/.WII.I.IAM MISEIM. AS'D SLADE PBOFES.SOR
OF FINK ART, CAMURIDOE, ETC., ETC.

WITH THE COOPEKATION OF

GEORGE HENRY CHASE, HERBERT FLETCHER DE COU, THEC)IX)RE WOOLSKY

HEERMANCE, JOSEPH CLARK HOPPIN, ALBERT JMORTON LYTHGOE, RICHARD
NORTON, RUFUS BYAM RICHARDSON, EDWARD LIIMMNCOTI' TILTON
HENRY STEPHENS WASHINGTON, AND JAMES RIGNALL WHEELER

IN TWO VOLUMES
VOLUME I

GENERAL INTRODUCTION, GEOLOGY. ARCHITECTURE,

MARBLE STATUARY, AND INSCRIFFIONS

BOSTON AND NEW YORK

HOUGHTON, MIFFLIN AND COMPANY
tEt)C l4tt)cc0tDr )Drr$0, CauibrtDgc
1902

MICROFILMED BY
UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO
UBRARY
MASTER NEGATIVE NO.;

XSC>U2 Mm
 COPYRIGHT, 1902
BY THE TRUSTEES OK THE AMERICAN SCHOOL OF CLASSICAL STUDIES AT ATHENS
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

Published September^ igo2

 TO

CHARLES ELIOT NORTON

FIRST PRESIDENT OF THE

ARCHAEOLOGICAL INSTITUTE OF AMERICA

THIS WORK IS DEDICATED

 NOTE
This work is by the authority and under the auspices of the Archaeological
issued

Institute of America and the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, which
share the financial responsibility for it. The supervision of its publication has been
intrusted to a Committee which consists of representatives of both bodies.

Each contributor has been left entirely free to express his opinions and sentiments
regarding the subjects treated by him
— even where in these he differed from his asso-
ciates — and is therefore solely responsible for the statements made in the articles

written by him.
Committee on Publication :
—
JOHN WILLIAMS WHITE,
HAROLD N. FOWLER,
EDWARD ROBINSON,
On behalf of the Institute.
THOMAS D. SEYMOUR,
JAMES R. WHEELER,
JOHN H. WRIGHT,
On behalf of the School at Athens.
 PREFACE
Thk excavations on the site; of tlie Argive Iluraeum were carried on by tlie Aniericun
School of Classical Studies at Athens, witli the active siipport of the Archaeological
Institute of America, under my direction, durinjr the four Hprings from iHifcJ to 1H{)5.

In presenting this official record of the work there done,

venture to hoi>c tluit thin I

publication will in some degree be worthy of the excavations themiudves. It ennnot

be denied that the site itself and the remains there discovered by us are of extreme and

exceptional importance. No period of ancient Hellenic life, historic or prehistoric, is

known to us at the present day, of which our excavations have not yielde<l instructive

illustration. All the new evidence concerning the prehistoric ]H;riod of the ancient
classical world furnished by the lleraeum and other sites becomes the more im|H)rtjint
and illuminating from the fact that our excavations show an undoubted and c«)ntinuous
connection between the Mycenaean age, its immediate precursors and successors, and the
historical periods of ancient Hellas. No other site can furnish such evidence in the
same way and to the same degree. In this respect the Argive Heraeum holds a posi-
tion unique among all sites of the ancient world hitherto excavated.

Should this publication be at all worthy of the results of our excavations, I feel that

this will have been achieved in the face of exceptional difficulties, which made them-
selves felt in the work of excavation itself, as well as in every j)hase of the pre|)anttion

and elaboration of the finds and their publication.

The young men who acted as my assistants at the excavations, who one and all stood

by me so loyally in all difficulties and ultimately became so efficient in their work, came
to me, with hardly an exception, as novices who, in those days, had not even been able
to pursue a complete course in archaeology in any of the home universities (a want
which is now being rapidly supplied in many American universities). In most cases,
when they had thus become really efficient assistants they were called away by the offer

of some appointment at home or by some other inducement, the organiaition of the st;iff

was disturbed, and the same period of preparation and probatif)n had to be gone through
anew with others. Among those who remained with me for more than one campaign,
and whose help was in consequence the more efficient, as the part they played in the
excavations was more important, are Professor J. C. Hoppin, Professor Richard Nor-

ton, and Dr. H. S. Washington.

I should like to say at once that the proportion of work done by the several assist-

ants at the excavations is not adequately shown by the part they take in the publica-
tion. This I regret much ;
but it has been inevitjible. I had hoped that all those who had
done service at the excavations might in some way be directly associated with the publi-
X PKEFACE
cation. But it happened in many cases that, when it came to the work of preparing the

material at Athens, and, still later, of writing on the material thus prepared, the former
assistants were occupied elsewhere or could not find time for the work. Professor

Norton, who has since been made Director of the American School in Rome, is repre-
sented in this book by a short chapter, which is far from showing the prominent part he
took in the excavation at the Heraeum and in the sorting and arranging of the finds at
Athens. The same is true of Dr. Washington. So too the prominent part taken by
Professor C. L. Brownson during the first
year's work
no acknowledgment atreceives

all, so far as his participation in this book is concerned, owing to the fact that his Uni-

versity work has kept him occupied

in America since 1893. The same was the case with
his colleague, our architectduring the first year, Mr. Thomas A. Fox, who furnished the
excellent plan of 1892 {American Journal of Archaeology, 1893, VIII. PI. xii.). His

place was taken in the last year of excavation by

his able successor, Mr. E. L. Tilton.

Among those who find no place at all in the publication are Professor W. C. Poland,
Mr. John Aldbn, Dr. C. L. Meader, Professor Barker Newhall, and Dr. J. D.

Rogers. The latter has, however, given a careful preliminary publication of the inscrip-
tion on a bronze tablet found in 1895 {Ainerican Journal of Archaeology, Second
Series, 1901, V. pp. 159 if.).

In looking back upon my association with all these scholars, so different in tempera-

ment and training, I cannot help feeling intensely gratified when I recognize that all

have become and remain my sincere fi'iends.

I must further thank the Greek authorities, notably M. Cavvadias and his ephors,

for the manner which they furthered the work of excavation and were always ready
in

to meet my wishes, while conscientiously fulfilling the duties which their office laid upon
them. Our from beginning to end those of complete and undis-
relations have been

turbed harmony and friendliness. I must also express my thanks in this connection

to the Archaeological Institute of America, which provided about half of the funds

for this excavation ;

and among those persons who privately contributed when funds
were most needed I must record my sense of gratitude to the late Mr. John Taylor
Johnston and to Mrs. J. W. Clark, as well as to Professor Hoppin and Mr. W. C.

Schbrmerhorn.
Few readers are aware how large and important a part of the labor in such archaeo-

logical undertakings is given to the work of cleaning, piecing together, classifying,

and studying the remains which an excavation has produced, before the results can be
made public in a book. When
but mention, among other similar tasks, that about
I

265 baskets of vase fragments had to be cleaned, sorted, and, as far as possible, pieced
together before they could be studied properly that the same is true of thousands of
;

small terra-cottas ;
that bronzes often were found in a shapeless mass in which all indi-

cation of their form, probable design, and insci-ibed marks were hidden by corrosion
and incrustation, and that these bronzes had to be treated by a laborious and lengthy

process of immersion in acids and of cleaning, before the original design and decoration
 PREFACE xi

could hti restored,

— wlieii I merely enumerate thene factM, wime idea will Ix* }r:iiiie<l of
the im|)()rtunt preliminary work necessitated before an account of the excavation could
he presented in book form.
If such work always presents many difliculties,
they were much enlutiicetl in our cane :

(1) The i)lan of our excavation could not lie Liid out on a larjje and |MTiiuineMt wale
at the outset, and therefore provision could not he nmde for the pro|M;r nUminf and
arriiiif^eincnt of the objects found that all mi}»;lit be kept tojfether from niw mMtum to
anotlier.

(2) All our portable finds had to be transferred from Ar^os to AtheuB, where they were

deposited in the National Museum. If such a transference of uncLissiKeil mut«riul —

some in baskets, some in boxes, and 8<Mne unpacked
— contributed to confusion, the fact

that in the National Museum we had twice to move from one r(H)m to another did not
diminish these diificulties. In spite of these unavoidable iuconvenienceH, I must here
record the willingness on the part of the ofRcials of the Museum to further «Hir work,

and I have much pleasure thanking M. Cavvadias, the Director, and his diHtinguishetl
in

assistiints, MM. Staih, Tsountas, Cahtuiotks, and Lionakdos.

(3) Our difficulties in this stage of the work were still further increased by my desire
to carry out the suggestion, informally made, of the Managing Committee of the ScIuniI,
that all the students should make, for purposes of study, direct use of the nuiterial fur-

nished by the School's excavations, and should therefore be drawn into the actual work
of sorting and cleaning. I complied with this suggestion for a time, but soon found
that not only the students, unprepared for such work, gained but little
advantige, but
the labor of arranging and classifying the material was impeded and made much more
difficult.

(4) Finally, although, after I had resigned the Directorship of the School, I came to

Athens every year and hiid down the system of classification to be f(dlowe<l, the great

difficulty to which I have referred above made itself felt most banefully in this phase of
the work for the main supervision passed from one hand to another, and, in matters of
;

detail, one new man had to take up the half-finished work of another at the |M»int where
it had been left.
All these difficulties recurred in another form when it came to the actiuil writing of

the book. Not one of my assistiints intrusted with the separate deimrtments was present

during the whole of the excavation, nor could they

—
with the exception of Professor
HoPPiN and Mr. De Cou —
remain for any continuous time in Greece while ekiboniting
their material and writing their chapters. Still, the principle I followetl wa.s to allow

each member intrusted with a department as much independence as possible ; and though
I have arranged with each the general lines of his publication and have revised all the

manuscripts, so that I may claim an organic unity of conception and execution for the
book as a whole, I have not stood in the way of the expression of well-founded individual
opinion, for which each collaborator deserves the credit
and retains the responsibility.
But, scattered as these workers were and changing their residence all over the globe, from
xii PREFACE

Egypt, Greece, and Italy to various parts of the United States, the extra labor
which was
entailed by the attempt to keep in touch with each man, the correspondence it necessi-

tated,and the complications which increased the difficulties incidental to the publication
of such work even under the conditions most favorable to speedy and facile publica-

tion, can easily be imagined.

The work of conducting all these matters through correspondence and the consequent
the fact that from England I had to communicate
delays were considerably increased by
and arrange, not directly with the publisher and jii'i'iter in America, but with a Com-
mittee which had to decide upon the ways and means of publication (which occupied
some years),
—a task to which the members devoted themselves with much sacrifice of

time and labor.

The inevitable result was considerable delay in publication. For it is but right that I
should state that my own manuscript (written more than four years ago), as well as that of
Professor Hoppin, has been in the hands of the Committee on Publication, ready for the

press, for nearly three years. Thus, besides the difficulty of returning, when correcting

proofs, to a subject which had lost much of its freshness and some of its familiarity, it

was impossible to take note of the results of similar excavations which have since been
undertiiken and are still in progress ;
while anticipations of important new light thrown

upon archaeological inquiry by our finds and our publication, and for which a certain
amount of honorable credit might be claimed, are not so manifest at this sfcige of publi-
cation. To recast the whole book was not possible. I have therefore left the manuscript

as it few footnotes with regard to work done since 1898.

stood, only adding a
I had hoped to publish both volumes at the same time, but owing to the delay of one

contributor, we have determined to publish the first volume at once and to leave the
second volume to follow within a few months. I regret this the more as Professor Hop-
pin's work on the Vases, which has been ready for press since 1899, will thus be kept

back still longer.

In spite of these regrettable delays, I do not think that we have been exceptionally
the public after their conq)letion
long in bringing the results of our excavations before
in 1895. When it is remembered that an interval of seventeen years elapsed between

the completion of the excavations of Olympia in 1879 and the official publication in

1896, and that the excavations of the Acropolis of Athens, completed in 1889, have not
yet been published, our own publication
must be considered a comparatively speedy one.
Nor can I be unmindful of the kind help tendered me by all members of the Committee.
But I must especially mention with gratitude that received from Professor Seymour and
Professor Fowler, who looked over the manuscript of my General Introduction and

offered useful criticism and correction from Professor White, Professor Wheeler, and
;

Mr. Robinson, who also made valuable suggestions at different stages and, above all,;

from Professor Wright (assistedby Dr. Chase), who acted in my stead while the book
went through the press in America, and without whose labor and kindness the publica-
tion must have been indefinitely delayed.
 PREFACE xtii

All other ackiiowled^nentH will, I hope, l>e found

due place in Uie (mmiU.
in tlieir

The (liHicultieH with which I huve hud U> contend have l>een raheaned aliove, and I

have thuuirht ri^ht and juHt that they hIiouKI he known.

it Painful and diNtretutinfr bh
these oonditions were, they vanish from the horizon now that the work in done, and I

look back upon the scencH of labor behind ine with unmixed pleaiture and with deep ^rati*

tude,
—
j^ratitude first to the American School at Athens which, in 1889, when for nearly
ten years 1 had boon occupied with official work here in Kn^Iand, slionld have (»iven me
such brilliant opportunities of research in Greece and of direct asstK-iation with an institu-

tion of learning belonging to my native home ; gratitude to the University of Cambridge

and to my own College here, in my adopted home, which allowed me to undertake work
officially associated with another country, gave me the necessary leave of absence, and

enabled me to retain the post in this University which I have now held continuously for

twenty-two years. venture to think that this example of international comity and
I

generosity in the cause of science, of which I have been the immediate l)eneticuiry, iH not
only a significant inst^mce and result of the uniting power of science and learning, but is
more directly an earnest of the confraternity of the two great English-speaking nationn.
That it should be in the cause of Hellenic culture that this international and fraternal

spirit should manifest itself against the survival (if not revival) in our times of blind and

savage international alienation and hatred sounds like the faint echo to the pledge of
civilized humanity made in Athens more than two thoussmd years ago by Aeschylus in

the Eumenides. That great drama seems to me to glorify, with all the consummate skill

of artistic expression, the establishment of civilization and its laws, superseding the blind

spirit of savagery, hatred, and revengeful fury. By the intercession of the great gcMldess

of Wisdom is founded the Areopagus, the first court of law to embody the ideas of
human justice the hounding Erinyes are converted into Eumenides by the jHjrsuasive
; ;

and gladdening language of Reason, blending Truth and Beauty with Goodness, the
vindictive Furies are tamed and are given a home in the centre of civilized life, violet-

crowned Athens ; and, adopting the tuneful and joyous measure of Attic poetry, tliey

sing :
—
Ae^ofiaL IlaXXaSo? ^vvoiKiav.
CHARLES WALDSTKIN.
King's College, Cambridge, April 30, 1902.
 CONTENTS

GENERAL INTRODUCTION
BY CHAULES WAI.USTKIN
vnam
Antiquity and SiaNiFicANCE of thk Cult or tiik Akoivr Hkra I

ToI"0«KAI>HY OK TIIK AK<1IVK IIkUAKUM K)

TiiK Eaki.v History ok tiik Hkuakdm 25
TllK EVIDKNCK OK THK FIND8 A8 TO THK AOE OK THE HkKAEUM .'{8

Tkkka-cotta Imauks 42
Vasks 49
Hkonzks 01
ENdKAVKi) Stonrs (VI

EdYITIAN Ok.JK()TS IWI

History ok Prkvious Excavations iVX

EXCAYATIONS KY THK AmEKICAN SoHOOL AT AthKXS 70

Campaign ok 1892 73
Campaign ok 1893 74
Campaign ok 1894 76
Note A Stbabo on the Akgive Hekaeum
: 85
Note B View from the Site
: 86

THE GEOLOGY OF THE HERAEUM REGION

BY HENRY STEPHENS WASHINGTON
Geology ok Aroolis 91
Burial ok Ancient Remains 94
The Hekaeum Site and its Bukial 97
NftTE on the Igneous Rocks found in the Excavations at the Hekaeum 99

THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE ARGIVE HERAEUM

BY EDWARD LIPPINCOTT TILTON
Topogkaphy and Survey 105
Old Walls 108
Cyclopean Walls .... 109
The Old Temple Platporm and the Old Temple 110
The Uppek Stoa IT-'

The Northeast Stoa 114

East Building 116
The Second Temple 117
The South Stoa 1-7
The Steps l-W)

The We.st Building 131

The Northwe.st Building 134
The Roman Building 134
xvi CONTENTS
The Lower Stoa 136
Cisterns 136

MARBLE STATUARY FROM THE HERAEUM

BY CHARLES WALDSTEIN
Single Statues 140
Architectural Sculpturk . 144
The Metopes 146
The Peihments 148
The General Style ok the Heraeum Marbles 153
The Period and School of the Heraeum Marbles 160
POLYCLEITUS AND THE HeRAEUM MaRBLES 162
Description of the Plates 177

INSCRIPTIONS FROM THE ARGIVE HERAEUM

BY RUFUS BYAM RICHARDSON AND JAMES RIGNALL WHEELER
PART I. Inscriptions on Stone 197
PART II. Stamped Tiles 216

Index 225
 ILLUSTRATIONS IN THE TEXT
FIOCKE rAOS
1. Map of the Reoion about the Hekakum. Enlarged from SUffen'i Karten vm M^kenai
(Argolis), with additions 7
2. Genkbal Pi-ax ok the Site : actual utate after excavation 9
3. The Auoive Plain, witli the Second Temple in the foreground 11
4. The Akoive Plain, with excavated remains of the Old Temple in the foregroand 12
5. View ok Mount Euboea, with South Stoa in the foreground 13
6. Site of Hkkaeum kkom the E^ast 14
7. Site of Heraeum from the Southwest 15
8. Man-hole and Rock-cut Conduit at Stream-bed ok Revma-tou-Kahtkou 17
9. Drum and Capital from Second Temple, as found behind the Soutii Stoa 19
10. Foundations ok the Second Temple, showing statue-bases at the eastern end .... 21
11. «, b,Two Coins op Aroos. The Hera of Polycleitus 22
12. Coin ok Aroos. The head of Polycleitus's Hera 22
Early Shakt-tomb, " "
13. containing vases of dull-colored Mycenaean style 41
14. Beehive Tomb, near the Heraeum, on the road to Mycenae 42
15. Early Stone " Pillar Imaoe." From the Heraeum 43
16. Primitive Terra-cotta Figurine. From the Heraeum ... 43
17. Early Female Figure, showing development of drapery. From the Heraeum 44
18. Early Seated Figure. From the Heraeum 44
19. Mycenaean Type of Terra-cotta. From a Tomb near the Heraeum 45
20. Figure of the Dipylon " Clas.s. From the Heraeum
'•
46
21. Figure of Advanced Argive Style (with human face). From the Heraeum ..... 47
22. Mycenaean Vase, with dull unglazed color. From Furtwttngler and Loeschcke, Mykenitche
Vasen, pi. xxiv. No. 175 60
23. Mycenaean Vase (from lalysus), naturalistic, with lustrous glaze. From Fnrtwttngler and
Loeschcke, Mijken'ische Vasen, pi. v. No. 281 50
24. Mycenaean Vase, with lustrous glaze, conventional. From Furtwilngler and Loeschcke,
Mi/kenische Vasen, p. 29, fig. 17 51
25. Dipylon Vase. From Mon. d. Inst. IX. pi. 39 52
26. Argive (Proto-Corinthian) Vase, Linear style. From the Heraeum 53
27. Argive (Proto-Corinthian) Vase, later style. From the Heraeum 53
28. Mycenaean Tombstone, with carved and painted decoration. From Tsountas, 'E<^77/icp<s

'Ap;^aioA.oyiKj}, 1896 54
29. Examples of Incised Linear Ornament. From the Heraeum 55
30. Examples of Painted Linear Ornament. From the Heraeum 57
31. Iron Bars excavated at the Heraeum 63
32. Colonel Mure's Plan of the Site of the Heraeum. From his Journal of A Tour
in Greece, vol. I. p. 179 65
33. General Gordon's Plan of the Site of the Heraeum. From Leake's Feloponnesiaca,
1846 66
34. Rangabis's Plan of the Site ok the Heraeum. From his Aiisgrabung beim Tempel der
Hera unwelt Argos, 1855 67
35. Bursian's Plan ok his Excavations 68
36. The Second Temple Platform, before the American excavations 71
37. Site of the Old Temple Platform, before excavation 72
38. The Second Temple, at the close of the season of 1892 73
39. Work on the Slope between the Old Temple and the Second Temple, in the second
season 75
xviii ILLUSTRATIONS IN THE TEXT
40. Piece of Wall from West Building, first appearance 76
41. Corner of the Second Platform, with front of East Building in right foreground ... 78
42. The Roman Building, with Southwest Stoa on the left, and portion of West Building in the

foreground 80
43. First Trench dug at South Stoa 81
44. South Stoa, after excavation 82
45. West
Building, after excavation 83
45a. Section back of South Stoa, 1894 98
46. View of the Argive Hebaeum from the North 105
47. Argive Heraeum View of the site from the east
:
106
48. Argive Hekaeum View of the site from the west
:
107
49. View looking North upon the Cyclopean Wall and Northeast Stoa 109
50. Old Temple Plan restored :
Ill
51. Argive Heraeum Capitals, and details of their profiles drawn to a large scale
:
113
52. Columns. Fromthe Argive Heraeum 114
53. Argive Heraeum Stone with doves carved in relief
: 115
54. Argive Heraeum Stone carved with fisli and waves, by incised lines
: 115
55. View looking Northeast upon the East Building and the retaining wall on its northwest side 117
56. Argive Heraeum East Building, restored
:
118
57. View from the Southeast, looking upon the flight of steps the South Stoa and the Second
;

Temple above 119

58. Actual State of a Stylobate Stone of the Second Temple 120
59. Front Elevation of Second Temple. Restored by Edward L. Tilton 121
60. Column and Stylobate Stone of Second Temple 122
61. Marble Cyma-moulding and Lion's Head Watek-spout. From Second Temple one fifth :

the actual size. Measured and restored by Edward L. Tilton 124

62. Marble Lion's Head Gargoyle and Water-spout. From Second Temple: one fifth the
actual size 125
63. Metope from the Second Temple. Restored from fragment 126
64. Argive Heraeum Restored Section of Second Temple, showing
: statue of Hera 127
65. View looking East on the South Stoa 129
66. West Building free restoration of the elevation
; 131
67. View looking Northwest upon the Northwest Building 133
68. View looking West from the Nokthvstest Building 134
69. Roman Building plan and elevation restored
: 135
70. Fragment of a Stone Pillar 139
71. Fragments of Archaic Sculpture 140
72. Marble Fragments, probably part of a Female Figure of the Graeco-Roman period .... 141
73. Late Torso, found on the South Slope 143
74. Miscellaneous Marble Fragments. From the Argive Heraeum 144
75. Marble Fragments, as arranged for sorting on the floor of a Room in the Central Museum,
Athens 147
76. Marble Image, with hand grasping it at the back. Probably from the Western Pediment of
the Second Temple 149
77. Fragment of a Metope, with pelta 150
78. Corner of the Room in the Central Museum, Athens, containing fragments of drapery.
From figures in the round, probably from the pediments of the Heraeum 151
79. Fragment of a Leg resting upon a Cushion. Probably from a pediment of the Heraeum 152
80. Fragment of a Pedimental Figure. From the Heraeum 153
81. Legs and other Fragments. Probably from the pediments of the Heraeum 154
82. Fragments from the Metopes Hands that held swords and spears, and feet
: 155
83. Fragments from the Metopes, illustrating chiefly the sharp yet delicate cutting of the folds
in drapery 156
84. Small Marble Head from Brauron. In the possession of Professor Furtwangler . . . 166
85. Head of one of the Korai. From the Erechtlieum 167
86. Head of the Doryphorus (Naples) 168
87. Head of the Diadumenus (Dresden) 169
 ILLUSTRATIONS IN THE TEXT xix

88. a, The Lines op the Mouth. From the Heraeuin MeU>]>eii 171>
88. h, The Lines ok the Mouth. In the Leinnian Athena 179
89. a, Pkofile ok the Uim-ek Lii'. Front the Iluriwiini ML-topeii 180
89. b, Pboku.k ok the Ui-i-kk Lir. In the Li-ninian AthtMia 180
90. Miscellaneous Makble FuAaMENTs. From tliu Henieuin 194
 PLATES
Plate p^„
Frontisplexe. Hkad of Hkka Probably from the Wontern Pc<liment of tlie Serond T<!in|i!o
: in profile. IH'J
I. Dktails ok the Skcond Temi-lk, and Cvma-mouliunmm kkom thk SoitTii Htua . 104
II. ViKW OK THK Skcond Temhlk, looking south from the Cyc\o\ieM\ Wnll 106
III. View of the Site ok the Aboive Hkrakum kko.m the South 106
IV. General Plan of the .Site uctnnl stiite after excavation
:
106
v., Genebal Plan of the Site restored :
1()8
VI. Restobation of the Aboive Hebaeum in Persi'ective. In colon 108
VII. View L00KiN(i Northeast upon the Flight of Stki-s 108
VIII. Old Temple Platform: actual state 108
IX. The Old Temi-lk and the North and Nokthea.st Stoa«: actual state and restoration 108
X. View looking Southwest upon the Old Temple and ith Platkokm 110
XI. Section thbough the Site from North to South actual state and restoration : . 110
XII. Plan of North Stoa, Northeast Stoa. and Eaut Buildino: actual state . . . 112
XIII. Plans and Elevations of Various Walls 116
XIV. View looking Southwest upon the Second Temple. From the Cyclopean Wall . 118
XV. View looking Southeast upon the West BinLDiNo 118
XVI. Second Temple actual state
: 1 18

XVII. Plan of the Second I'emple: restored 118

XVIII. Side Elevation of the Second Temple: restored 118
XIX. Outline Plan and Elevations, showing the projiortions of the Second Temple . . 120
XX. South Stoa and Steps leading to Upper Level actual state : 126
"

XXI. South Stoa Plan and Elevation. Restored

: . . 128
XXII. South Stoa Section and Details. Restored
: 128
XXIII. Painted Tebka-cotta Architectural Fragments 130
XXIV. West Building actual state : 130
XXV. View looking Southwest upon the West Building 132
XXVI. West Building: plan and details 132
XXVII. Northwest Building actual state : 134
XXVIII. Roman Building and Lower Stoa actual state : 134
XXIX. Roman Building floor-construction, and fi-agments from other buildings
: 134
XXX. Metope from the Heraeum 177
XXXI. Three Heads fboji the Metopes. Two views of a youth's head head ; of Amazon ;

head of a warrior . .
i
1^"
XXXII. Three Female Heads prom the Metopes 181
XXXIII. Head of Athena, from the Metoi-es portions of two heads in the round ;
.... 183
XXXIV. Torso of Nude Youth from the Metopes 185
XXXV. Three Draped Torsos from the Metopes warrior mth breastplate »ii Amazon ;
; ;

another female torso 187

XXXVI. Head Hera three views. Probably from the Western Petliment
of :
189
XXXVII. Torso of a Draped Female Figure from the Pediments 191
XXXVIII. Fragments of Drapery from the Pediments 192
193
XXXIX., XL. Additional Markle Fragments from the Metopks
XLI. Additional Fbagments of Drapery and Feet. Probably from the PedimenU . . 193

*,* The Plates are described at the pages indicated, but Plates II.-XXIX. are groigied after page 135, and PUUee XXX.-XLL
after page IW.
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
Bv CHARLES WALDSTEIN

The Argive Heraeum was one of tlie moHt important wnctiiariuH of ancient Hfllaii ;

indeed, position its of the imcient GreokH, and more

in tlie life itit relatiun
eM|M'cially
to und illustration of the eurliest history of the Hellenic
|>eo|)le, make it ap|)ear to
have been at one time the foremost sanctiwry of Peh)ponneHUH,
|>«rhupH of the whule of
Greece.

Arehaeologically, too, the Heraeum holds a unique ]M>Hition in regard to the early
history of Greece, and the finds made on this site have in
conseipience a H|iecial
importjince. For while similar objects have been found at Hiswirlik, on the IslundM, at
Tiryns, and Mycenae, their relation to the i)lacc in which they were found d(H's not give
them the siime significance as pertjiins to the objects from the Heraeum. For the
Heraeum lay not only in Greece proper, but was the centre of the enrlieHt Greek life an
such,
—
which cannot be said for Hissarlik or even for the Islands while the
;
continuity
of history transfers the element of continuity to the objects there found,
its and tiuH —
cannot be siiid for Tiryns or Mycenae, each of which represents definite and dixtinet
periods only.
To write a complete history of this sjinctuary would be to write the history of the
Argolic plain.' For while Tiryns, Mycenae, and Argos, in turn, had political preemi-
nence in this district, the Heraeum always remained
the chief religious centre. And iw
these three cities, in the early ages, were the most importiint political centres of Hellenic

civilization, the history of the Heraeum is an imporfcmt part of the history of Greece.
Whenever these three political centres Tiryns, Mycenae, and Argos
—
were distinct —
and separate stiites, they clashed and struggled for preeminence. In the earliest days,
indeed (according to tradition the days of Phoroneus and his successors down to Abiis),
" "
there was unity of dominion over the Argive land but, as we shall see, the sub- ;

division began uilder the sons of Abas ; and from this time on, until the final suprenuicy
"
A clear definition of the name Argolis was not given evident from the existence of the Orestian Argo* in the
to the land before Roman times; though Argos, with interior of Macedonia, the Pelasgian in Thessniy, and the
alt the confusing vacillation in the use of this term to modern survival of the term tu designate small plains
wliicli I sliall recur, certainly designated the same district surrounded by mountains in the interior of several islands,
in the earliest period. It comprised three districts: (Cf. Kie\>eTt, Lfhrhuchder AUenOeoffraphif,p.27l.) This
(1) the eastern peninsula, Acte, (2^ the northern slopes Argive plain is of light chalk soil, has much less rain-

from the mountains to the Gulf of Corinth, and (3) the fall than the western coast of Peluponnesns, and is thus
southern slope from these mountains down to the gulf of subjected to drought (woKvSl^iMti 'Apyti). The moaotain
Nauplia. The third portion is Argolis proper. The plain, streams run dry in the summer ;
biit in the rainy i

bounded by the .Vrachnacan range on the east and the all combine to swell the Inachus. To sink wells i* tliar*-
mountains of Artemisinm on the west, which converge — fore of great importance in the present day and was so
at the nortliern end, while to the south the plain opens out in the earliest times, as is evident from the myths of the

to the gulf, —
was called Argos in the earliest prehistoric Danaides. Danaus (explained as (vpit by the gnunma-
tinie, and is the district to which we shall specifically rians) is the inventor of the art of digging wells, and •
apply the term Argive. The original meaning of the Archegetes of the Danaans, the inhabitants of the plain, i«
word 'Ap7os must have been lost to the later Greeks, so himself a representative of the plain. Through thisarti-
tliat Stephanus Byzantinus explains it as ffx'**" ""»" »«8>'<»' ficial irrigation by means of wells, the plain wa* and ia

Karit 9i\a<r<ray. But this meaning is too restricted, as is fertile in com and pasture, roAiimpor, irri0»nr 'Afyn-
3
4 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
of the city of Argos, there was rivahy between the several cities. But through all periods
the one point of union in the Argolid amid all the elements of rivahy and disruption,
even when the ties of blood and common descent were of no cohesive efficiency, was
this central sanctuary, which represented at once the oldest as well as the most con-
tinuously ruling religious cult in the district, the worship of Hera. Apparently
—
only during one short period was the worship of Hera superseded by another in the

city of Argos, namely, when the Dorian sujiremacy was established and when the
" "
cities which fell to the lot of Temenus formed a kind of confederacy under
the direction of Argos,* with the sanctuary of Apollo Pythaeus, at the foot of the
Larisa of Argos, as the centre. The Argives maintained that theirs was the oldest
^
sanctuary of Apollo Pythaeus ;
even in times the Argives collected contribu-
later

tions for this sanctuary,^ and made it the repository of treaties.* But the supreme
^
importance which the Heraeum liad for the city of Argos from the earliest to the
latest times is amply proved, among other evidence, by the fact that the Argives always

reckoned their time by the years of office of the priestesses of Hera, and that these
chronological tables were used also elsewhere in Greece.''
The cult of Hera at our Heraeum was thus the principal worship of the city of Argos,
and before the preeminence of the city of Argos in the Argive district, the Heraeimi
was the chief sanctuary of Mycenae. As Strabo puts it,' it was the sanctuary used
in common by both these cities.
Not only was Hera the earliest divinity for the peoples which dwelt in the Argive
plain, but the Argive Heraeum presented the earliest form of this divinity and her wor-
ship in ancient Hellas.
In Homer, Hera is called 'Apyeurj.^
In the Iliad (iv. 51), Argos, Sparta, and

Mycenae are her favorite cities. The oldest of the sanctuaries of Hera mentioned at
^ " founded
Sparta is evidently that of "Hpa 'ApyeCa, said to be by Eurydice, daughter
of Lacedaemon and wife of Acrisius, the son of Abas." Thus not only the attribute
"Argive," but also the tradition of its original dedication, through the Argive kings
Acrisius and Abas, immediately point to its Argive derivation.
No doubt in this use of the term "Apyo^ and the attribute 'Apyetry, the ancient Argive
district, including, both geographically and historically, Tiryns and Mycenae, is
meant,
and not the city of Argos.'" The city of Argos itself had four —
possibly six
— separate
sanctuaries of Hera," each with a separate cult. Still, as we have seen, our Heraeum
remained its chief sanctuary, as it was the oldest.
'
Herod. I. 82 ;
Strabo VIII. 3. 33. of Mytilene, his 'Upeiai as well as the Atthis and Persica,
2 Paus. II. 35. 2 (Telesilla, Fmgm. 3). see Busolt, Or. Geschichle, I. pp. 151 ff.
' Le Bas, '
Thucyd. V. 53 and Diod. XII. 78. 1. Inscr. Ttfre 'Apyos kol ras Muk^vos, kk! ri 'Hpahv elvai Koivhv

rec. a Argos, No. 8. tfphv to irphs this Muk^vois aijL<poh. Strabo VIII. 6. 10.
* «
Thucyd. V. 47. 13. Horn. II. v. 908 ;
of. Hesiod, Theog. 12 ;
Aescli. Suppl.
^
It looks also as if at one time the Poseidon cult 299. Piud. Nem. x. 2, certainly refers to the Ileraenra

endangered Hera's supremacy, which may be inferred when he says "Ap-yos 'Hpas 5ai/<ci fleo^peTrfs. Cf. also Eurip.
from the legend (which probably has some foundation in Tro. 23, Heracl. 349.
' The temple mentioned by
the earliest ethnological history of the land) related by Paus. III. 13. 8. Pausani.is
Pausanias (II. 15. 5, 22. 4 cf. also Pint. Q. Conv. xi.
; (III. 11. 9) as iu the market-place, whicli she apparently
6). Compare the similar struggle between Athena and held in conjunction with Apollo, as well as tliat of Hera
Poseidon at Athens. The division of national patronage Aphrodite (which may be the same as the Argeia) and
between her and Zeus Nemeios (Paus. IV. 27. 6) is evi- Hera Aigophagos (III. 13. 8 and III. 15. 9) are evidently

dently of later origin and naturally arises out of the Upbs later.

yipLos and its special cult.

">
See Note A.
*
Thue. II. 2, IV. 133. For references to Hellanicus ''
Cf. Roscher in Roscher's Lexicon d. Gr. and Rom
Mythologie, I.
pp. 2075 fF.
 ANTIQUITY OF THE CULT OF THE AKGIVE HEKA 6

There can hardly be a doubt that the other cult« of Hera, Huch an thoie of SaiuoH,
all

Corinth, Olynipia, Attica, Boeotia, Euboeii, those in Thrace, on LehboH, and niany other
Sicily and Magna Graecia, e. g.
islands of the Aej^ean, as well as the important cults of
at Croton and on Vajx, are all directly derived from the Arjfive cult.' The most
important of all other cults, after that of the lleraeum (in later timefi
tiiese
|>erha|Mi
suii)as8ing this in splendor), was the famous sanctimry on Samos. But all the evidence
goes to show that this Samian cult was derived and imported from Argos. Tradition
had it" that the Samian temple was founded
by the Argonauts, who brought their
sacred image with them from Argos. The Samians, of course, maintained that Hera
was born on their island, on the banks of the Imbrasus or Parthenius,' under a
willow {\vyo<;), which was preserved in the Samiiin Heraeum in the times of PauManias.
But the development of the Epidaurian myths concerning the birth of Aiiclepiuii,
a divinity evidently imported from the north, and many similar instjtnces in ancient

mythology, show too well the prevailing tendency to make a divinity and a cult au-
tochthonous, to allow us to attiich much weight to an isolated tradition. Moreover, this
tradition may have arisen merely out of a confusion of the traditions grouping round the

\vyo^, itself again a survival of a more ancient rite of which the original meaning
still

was lost. According to Menodotus of Samos ^ the Samuin Heraeum is an Arjpve foun-
dation by Admete, daughter of Eurystheus. We
stand on much firmer historical ground
when we hear that the first human-shaped (di/Spiai/roeiSe?) image of Hera was intro-
duced into Samos from the Argolid (Epidaurus) iirl UpoK\eov<; a.p)(ovTO<;/' i. e. about
the time of the Ionian migration. At all events, the change from the board to the
image assigned by Clement to the immigration of Procles seems to me to imply the
importation by him of the cult of his house. These traditions, all of which indicate
the dependence of the Samian on the Argive Heraeum, while this dependence is reversed
in none, establish the primacy of our sjinctuary and cult.
The nature and evolution of the Argive Hera and her worship is a question of
great complexity, and would demand an elaborate exposition." In studying carefully
all the indications in ancient authors concerning this divinity, the customs and rites of

her worship, and the archaeological evidence concerning her sanctuaries, we see that
" "
long before she had been defined by the Homeric theology in the Olympian circle

of divinities as the spouse of Zeus, she was the supreme goddess of an earlier jieople,
or of earlier peoples. Whether we callthe people who originally worshiped her as

'Hpa IleXao-yi?," Pelasgians, or by any other name, this fact remains: that all the

1
Cf. O. Miiller, Dorier, I. 39C. Die Hockzeit des Zeus und der Hera (Breslau, 1867), and
^
Paus. VII. 4. 4. Uelier die iilteslen Uernhilder (1868). Of course for her
* Schol.
ApoU. Rhod. I. 187 Appiileius, Met. 6. 4.
; ciiltiis, Iwaii Miiller'.s Handhuch (vol. v. part 3) on Gr.
Ap. Allien. XV. 072 a-e.
*
SakralallerthUmer, by Stengel, A. Mwiimsen's Heorlolofie
5 Clem. AIe.x. Pioli: IV. 46. See infra the evidence and Fesle Alhenx, and the older worJt^, K. Fr. Hermaun'*
furnished by the terra-tottas found in our exeavation.s. fiollesdienstl. Allerthilmer, and Sehiiniann's Or. AUertk.,
' Most of the passages relating to Hera and the cult of are In the Argonautic tales Jaxon
im|Hirtant. U alao

Hera will be found in Iloseher's able monograph on .Juno founder of temples of Hera Strabo VI. I. 1 ;
: Fkns.
und Hera, 1875, and his article in Roscher's Lexicon, as well VII. 4. 4.

as an account of tlie literature which deals with the sul>- '

I it to my friends. Professor Ridgewajr and
leave

jeet. His work, however, seems soniewhat vitiated by his Mr. G. Frazer, to enlarge u|H>n the ethnological signif-
.1.

" icance of this female deity, as well as to explain further

tendency to consider Hera above all as a moon-goddess,"
which, so far as her primitive nature is concerned, is nn- the interesting features in the Samian rites, the I«^t

tenable. woidd also make special mention of two older

I yiiioi. by means of the excellent methods of e<>ni|>iira-

monographs which enumerate the greater part of the tivc mythology which Mr. Frarer hjis applied to good
literature on the subject of her cult, namely, R. Forster's purpose.
6 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
indications seen in a careful study of the material now before us point to Hera

among these early peoples, not as the spouse of the sujjreme King, but as herself the
Queen,' though she may have had her consort. Had these peoples dwelling in the
remained in supreme and unbroken possession of the land, and refciined
Argolic plain
the sway over and had Argolis maintained its hegemony over the Greek peoples in
it,

historic times, theHeraeum might have become the Olympia of Hellas, and would have
brought the Greek peoples together in the highest form of national federation, as in the
oldest Greek colonies the cultus of the Lacinian Hera at the promontory near Croton

brought all the Greek communities of Magna Graecia together at her festival.'- We
might then have had a Panhellenic Hera as the presiding Hellenic divinity and Zeus ;

might possibly have found his place as Consort to the Queen of the gods.
Of this primitive divinity we can
out several clear characteristics, some of
single
which the subsequent adaptation to the prevailing theology accentuated or repressed.
That Hera was, as we have said, the chief divinity of the peoples who dwelt in the
Argolic plain, and of those who were derived from them, is evident from the simple fact
that her worship remained supreme in this region through all times. She is then the
chief guardian of the city and the citadel, and from this conception must be derived the

epithet Acria, which maintained itself at Argos^ and places which derive their cult
from Argolis.^ For as the selection and fortification of such a citadel was one of the
first community which had come to occupy fixed habitations, so the consecra-
acts of a
tion to the national divinity would be a necessary consequence. There can be but little
doubt that Tiryns and Midea had a worship of Hera on their citadels though the ;

importance of these cities and, in consequence, of the worship on their citadels was
destroyed at a comparatively early date.
Thus we may suppose that the Argive Hera guarded the land and the life and pros-
perity and presided over the occupations of the people who spread about the foot of this
fortified stronghold. The dwellers in the l-mrofioTov and iroXvirvpov Argive plain clearly
led a pastoral and agriciiltural life. The name Euboea given ''

upon which
to the hillock
the Heraeum stood clearly points to it as a favorable site for the grazing of cattle, and
the intimate connection with the cow, the sacred herds at the temple," the position
of the white cows in her rites,' and perhaps the immediate relation of the /Sowttis

goddess herself to the cow into which she is once changed and with which the myth
of lo is so curiously connected, and finally the transplanting of these associations into
the Hera-cult of other districts, —
all this clearly indicates the original life of the early

' C I. A. 172 KXeiiavxos ;8a<nA7j(8os "Upas. Cf. Find. (VIII. 6. 22), wliicli was ail ancient oracle, iind thus
Nem. i. 59 (39); Horn. Hymn. xii. 1 seq. ; Nonnus, Dionys. points to a primitive goddess of the land. Liv. XXXII.
viii.207; Kaibel, Epig. 208. 3; 822 a, 7; Kiukel, Epic. 33; Xen. Hell. IV. o. o. Cf. Boucli^-Leclercq, Hist, de
Graec. Fragg. p. 211. la divination dans VAntiq. II. pp. 395 f.

2
Aristot. AfJraft. 90 Strab. VI. 1. 11 (Kramer); Dion.
;
^ Paus. II. 17. 1. The whole island of Kuboea was
Perieg. 371. sacred to Hera (Apoll. Rhod. iv. 1138), and here, too, the
' She is especially
Paus. II. 24. 1; Hesych. s. v. lixpla. Cf. Panofka, Uphs ydixos takes au important place.
'
Die Gottheiten auf Larissa, der Hochburg von Argos,' associated with the mountains Oches and Dirphys. It is

Abh. d. Berl. Akad. 1854, pp. 552-554. It is a notewor- also worthy of note that similar importance is given to

thy fact that the district of the Heraeum was divided into her, and similar rites are found in Boeotia, especially on
Euboea, Acraea, and Prosyinna Paus. ;
II. 17. the Cithaeron (Eurip. Phoen. 24). Cf. Cephal. ap. Malal.
*
Among these the most important is the one on the p. 45, and Schol. to 24 as well as 1760. Cf. also Pint.
Acropolis of Corinth (Apollod. I. 9. 28 Eurip. Med. ; ap. Euseb. Pr. Ev. III. 83; Pans. IX. 2, 7; III. 1-9.
'
1379; Musaeus ap. Schol. Eur. Med. 10; Didymus and Arg. Pind. Nem. iii.
p. 425 (Boeckh) ; Palaei)h. 51 ;

Creophylus np. ScAo^. Enr. Af erf. 273. Another very ancient Herod. I. 31.
sanctuary of Hera Acraea lay between LeclLieiim and Pa-
'
Sem. Agam. 364.
gae, probably the same as the one mentioned in Strabo
 myce:naf

Fig. 1. — Map of tiik Kwiiox akoit thk IIkkaki-m.

Enlarged from Steffeii's Karlen mn Mykenai (ArgolLs), with additions. IleighU in metres. The recUugle incloses
au enlarged section of the Ueracum Site as indicated on the Map (see Fig. 2).
7
8 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
Hera-worshipers in the Argive plain. Perhaps also the fact that sacred horses were
kept at Argos for Hera points to the same conclusion.^ As to Hera as the protectress of
^
vegetation, the epithet 'Ai^^eta and the ceremonies connected with this aspect of the
divinity, as well as the survivals of ceremonies connected with the hiding of the image
under the Xvyo'; at Samos and various customs in the lepos ydfio's all make her out —
as a goddess of vegetation and vernal power.
But besides presiding over the land and the occupation of its inhabitants, Hera guarded
and regulated the social and domestic life of her people. By itself the fact that the
chief divinity of these early peoples was a goddess indicates that the woman and the
mother may have held a dominant position in the family and tribal history of these
communities, and, in the beautiful story of Cleobis and Biton, and the filial piety which
it illustrates, we may see, perhaps, a survival of the supreme position occupied by the
mother in Argive tradition. In the tepos yayiAos or siicred marriage, which formed a
central feature of the great festival of Hera at Argos and elsewhere,* her relation to
Zeus appears to reflect a change of classification in Greek theology in the process of
organization to which subsequent ages led, as well as corresponding social changes in
the domestic and tribal life of the Greek nation ;
but that side of Hera Avhich makes her

preside over the domestic and family life, as the guardian of women and of marriage,

always remains prominent.

*
The ceremonies in connection with this tepo? were reproductions of the actual ya/Lios

marriage ceremonies of ancient Greece, in which probably some of the forgotten customs
of a ruder nature-worship of agricultural jjeoples survived. No doubt the young
affianced couples made dedications at this temple (and hence may have come many of
the votive offerings found in our excavations), as the affianced girl visited the temple
and performed certain functions before the wedding. Hera was thus also the protectress
of maidens.'' But was
chiefly to the mother, the child-bearing mother, that Hera ex-
it

tended her helpful protection ; and this she does as Hera Eileithyia. There is but little
doubt in my mind that, as in the relation of Nike to Athene, so here Eileithyia was Hera
in one of her functions, developed into a separate divinity. Most of her
and only later

temples in other parts of Greece and those of Juno in Italy were centres of a worship
where the goddess responded and offerings of the women who required
to the prayers
such help ;
and thus the Heraeum of Argos, with its baths, formed a kind of special
sanitarium for women in their troubles."
Besides the ceremonies connected with the lepo<; -ydfjio^
at the Heraeum, there was a
great public offering of cows, of which perhaps even one hundred were offered iqi at the
chief festival, and those cattle were probably taken from the temple-herds sacred to
Hera.' The feast was thus called e/card/x/Saia.^
°
1
Diodor. IV. 15. Cf. wliat I have said in the preliminary publication
'
2 Pollux IV. 78, Cometas Anthol.
Pans. II. 22. 1; cf. (Excavations of the American School of Athens at the He-
Gr. ix. 586. raion of Argos, 1892), p. 20, and note the terra-cotta, PI.
* viii. No. 19, as well as No. 8, which corresponds to an-
Herniione, Attica, Boeotia, Cithaeron (the Daidala),
Euboea, Samos, Lesbos, Cyme, Cnossus, etc. other holding the bow as an attribute of Hera Eileithyia
*
For the numerous passages on this subject we can — the latter dating from about B. c. 500.
'
best refer to R. Fiirster, Die Hochzeit des Zeus und der Pind. Nem. x. 22, Boufluo-iav "Hpat Partlien. Narr.
;

Hera, cited above, and Roscher, Lex. I. pp. 298 ff. 13 ; Eurip. Electr. 172 seq. Sen. A gam. 364.
;

5 A
very curious and significant feature of the myth
^
C. /. G. 1515 a, 1. 10, b, 1. 8, 1715 Schol. Pind. ;

isthat she herself, after bathing in the fountain Canathus 01. vii. 152 ;
cf . also the customs at tlie Olympian He-
at Nauplia every year, became a virgin (Pans. II. 38. 2; raeum and the prize of olive wreath and part of the victim
Schol. Pind. 01. vi. 149), and that as Tlap94vof she protects sacrificed to the maiden runners (Pans. V. 16 and 17).
maidens.
10 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
Another great feature of the chief festival at the Argive Heraeum were th e games,
wliich, from the nature of the prizes olt'ered, were culled dcTTrt? iu "Apyeu or i^ "Apyous
or ;^aX/ceos ayotv,' a name sometimes given to the whole festival. The prize
'
do-TTis

to the victors in these contests consisted of a bronze shield or some other object in bronze
and a myrtle wreath.^ This may in part account for the nimierous objects in bronze
found Oil this site during our excavations.^ The games were supposed to have been
founded by Lynceus or Archinus/ and in historical times took place in the sfcidium of
Argos." Then followed a great ttohttt]' or procession in which were armed youths,
maidens, etc., reminding us of the main features of the Panathenaic procession. In the
times of the supremacy of the city of Argos this procession probably traversed the whole
distance from the stadium of Argos to the Heraeum, a feature which no doubt was intro-
duced when the chief care of the Heraeum was transferred to Argos from Tiryns and
Mycenae.
TOPOGRAPHY.

To
appreciate the historical relation which the Heraeum bore to the three great cen-
tres of early Greek history in the Argolid we must consider the topography of the

temple precinct (Figs. 1-4).**

Pausanias" tells us that the Heraeum from Mycenae. Strabo,'" on is fifteen stadia
the other hand, says that the forty Heraeum was
from Ar^s and ten from stadia

Mycenae. Both authors underestimate the distance from Mycenae, which is about
twenty-five more than three miles while the distance from Argos is
stjidia, or a little ;

forty-live stadia, or a little more than five miles. The distance from the Heraeum to the
site of the ancient Midea is slightly greater than to Mycenae, Avliile that from the

Heraeum to Tiryns is about six miles, i. e. slightly greater than to Argos.

Were we to judge merely from actual distance, the Heraeum would thus be most closely
associated with Mycenae. We
must, moreover, note that both Pausanias and Strabo
appear to associate the Heraeum only with Mycenae and Argos. The closer association
with Mycenae implied in the notice of Pausanias is to be ascribed simply to the fact that
his journey naturally took him from Mycenae to the Heraeum. Strabo, on the other
hand, makes Argos his centre ;
and while he recognizes the priority of Mycenae in the

1
C. I. G. 234 ;
10G8. 264 Miire's Journal, II. pp. 177-182
; Cuitiiis, Der Pelo- ;

2
Piiid. Nem. x. 22 ; Hesyeli. s. v. ponnes, II. pp. 390-400, 569 S. W. G. Clark, Pelopnn- ;

"
Kiiibel, Epiyr. 846. nesun, pp. 81 ff.

*
An epigram
on the base of a statue erected to King °
Tlie passage in Pansanias, so far as it relates to the
Nieocreon of Cyprus mentions as the cause of erecting topography runs (II. 17. 1 and 2): MuK-rivai'Se tv apiarfpS

the statue the sending by him of bronze "Hpaihp eis ^portv TreVre airt;^f( wai ScKaCTclSioTii'Hpaio*'. pel Se KaraT^i/ oShv uouip
'

nfixTro[v &f]e\a ye'ois, Le Bas-Foucart, Pelop. 122 Koscher, ; 'E\tv6fpiov KaKovfifvov xpt^vrai Se aurip irphs KaSdpa-ta oi wepl
Lex I. p. 2077. '"^ tfphv Koi rwv 6vaiwv is ray airoppiiTous. aurh Se rh Up6v itmv
^ X^'^f^o-'^^'^hv '^"S Eu^oms. ri yap upos toOto dvo^id^ovaiv
Hyg. Fab. 275, 170
'*' 5?;
;
Schol. Piud. 01. vii. 152.
^ Pans IT *^4 *^ ECjSoiaf, KfyaVTfs ^Aar^ptwi/l y^v^ffOat r^ irora/i^ Qvyaripas

'A^pc'a^ a.a.^ U Tpo,pob, T^s"Hp«

•
'^'^^°""' «"' «al
'
Aen. Tact" l."l7, Eurip. EL 172 Dion. Hal. I. 21. np,^<r„;.y
o
' ™. ,

Ihe chiei passages

. «.
in
,
;

ancient authors on
,1 ,1-1
this sub-
Kal airo A«paiay rii ijpos KaKovai rh airayriKpu tov 'Hpatov. airh
, . , ^- , \, % - , v . .

Ti- .- «. 1 ci TTTTT ^ 5e Eupoias oaov tr.pi rh i^php, Tlpoavfivav oe Ti}v vno ro HpaOf
lect are lausan. 11. lo it., and strabo V 111. 0. , !,:>.. t - v •„ ~ j .
j, ' . > '
•'

_ x^pav. Of A(TTfpiu>v ovTos pfutv vTTfp TO Hpatoif 4s (papayyo.

The cliief modern books on the topography are these :
faniirrwv axpavi{,(Tai.
Steffen, Karlen vonMykenai, Berlin, 1884, and pp. 39-42; ,o
-phe passages in Strabo are (VIII. 6. 2. ,368) airb : U
Bursiau, Geographie von Griechenland II. pp. 47 seq. witli ,
.^oQ 'Ap7i)«s els rh 'Hpafov rffffffpiKovra, iv9fv SJ fls MvKiivas

map of the Heraeum (Tapei); W. Viseher, Erinnerimgen ^.^^^ ^^^ (VIII. 6. 10. 372) t6 r( 'Apyos /ca! ras VlvKhoas,
und Eindrucke aus Griechenland, pp. 316, 317, and the ex- ^„| ^^ 'HpaTo;/ thai xowhv Uphv rh irphs to.~s UvK-nvais a,i<poh,
cellent short account in Frazer's Pausanias, III. pp. 165- ^ t A
181. For earlier books cf Leake, Peloponnesiaca, pp. 258-
.
 T()I'()(iUAPIIY 11

plujise TO Trpos rai? MvK7Juai<;, in other k .|.i( is, when (h-alinjj with the hiMtorv 'if the«e
two centres of early history, he reverts to Argos as tlie liistorical
protiiKonist uiid if^oiw
the liistorical iinporbincu of Tiryns and Midea.
We can iinderstiind then (see Notk A)
why we find no mention in Stralwi of the n-Ia-
tioii which the Ileractuni holds to
Tiryns. The iniporbince of this remark will Itecmne

FlO. a. — TllK AuiaVK 1'i.AI.N with THK SkooNII TkMPLK in THK KOKKIiKUCNII.
Argos and Larisa are at the upper right-hand corner, the Nauplian Gulf at the left.

clearer when we come to the history of the Heraeum and consider the archaeol<)<rica]
evidence which the excavations have yielded. But it is well to sjiy at once, what will
require and receive fuller confirmation as we proceed, that three main (H-riods are dis-
tinguishable in the history of the Heraeum the first, the period of its construction,
:

and its connection with Tiryns the second, the Mycenaean period and the third, that
; ;

in which the Heraeum is

directly under the influence of the city of Argos.
Though nearer in space to Mycenae and to Argos than to Tiryns and Midea, tlie

Heraeiuii is not so as regards natural connections. It is most improbable that the site

of the Heraeum would have been chosen

as that of the sanctuary by the inhabit^ints of
either Mycenae or the city of Argos. For, as regiirds Mycenae, far n\> in a moun-
tainous corner at the northeast extremity of the Argive plain, it is not visible from the

Heraeum, nor could the Mycenaeans see their sanctuary from their citadel. And as
regards the city of Argos, the Heraeum is separated from it by the Inachus, which is at
times unfordable, and the two have, in so far, no innnediate connection. The Inachus
divides the plain into halves, and, as we shall see, this division is recognized by the early
traditions of the Argive region. The district on the western bank is well define<l, and
completely commanded by the heights which terminate in the Larisa or citadel of the
city of Argos, jutting out into the centre of this part of the plain. The wider eastern
12 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
half occupies the greater part, and while it directly overlooks the sea, the best means
of protecting the plain were found in the fortresses built on elevations somewhat farther
inland, namely, at Tiryns and Midea. Furthermore, the marshy nature of the soil close
by the sea naturally led the inhabitants in the northerly direction inland. thus haveWe
a well-defined broad plain, bounded on the south by the sea, on the west by the Inachus,
on the east and north by the Arachnaean group of hills, and on the north by the
Euboean group. This northern moreover, in a southerly direction into
hill projects,

the plain in a similar manner to that in which the Lycone-Larisa hills project in an east-

erly direction into the western portion of the Argive plain. The Heraeum is thus the
fittest northern ending to the district commanded by Tiryns and Midea, and is really
most accessible from Tiryns, as the plain is comparatively level from the foot of Euboea
"
to Tiryns itself. Mycenae behind its hills is a kind of after-thought," built in this
northernmost corner for special reasons of inland defense, and the earliest traditions,
as we shall see, when subdividing the regions of the Argive country, do not know even

Fig. 4. — Argive Plain with excavated remains of the Old Temple in the foreground.
Argos and Larisa are near the upper left-hand corner.

its name. But as approached from the south, the sanctuary of the
the visitor
Heraeum in its commanding position could be seen from every point. And as the
visitor stands upon its platforms, the most entrancing survey of the whole plain lies

before him (see Note B).

" on one of the lower
According to Pausanias the Heraeum stood slopes of Euboea."
The term Euboea did not designate the eminence upon which the Heraeum is placed, or
 MOUNT EUBOEA 13

^^';..r..:.,^:^«-*;" '^^wrr;

Fig. 5. — View of Mount Kuboea, with South Stoa in the roRKORouND.

The foundations of the Second Temple rise above the South Stoa, and above tbeae the Cyclopean lupportiag
wall of the Old Temple.

only the inounfciin-top behind the Heraeum hut, as Pau.sanias distinctly indicates, the
;

group of foothills and the hilly district adjoining the mountain. When once we admit
that Euboea designated not only the hill immediately hehuid (to the northeast of) the He-
raeum (Fig. 5) which is 532 meti-es high, but also the hilly district adjoining it, the gen-
eral scale of distance on which we identify the sites mentioned by Pausanias must grow

larger. He divides the territory of the Heraeum into three parts, viz., Euboea, Acraea,
'

and Prosymna. Two of these (Euboea and Acraea) are manifestly mountainous districts ;
the other designates the plain. We shoiUd thus follow StefFen in his identification of
Euboea (see Fig. 1), which, even among the modern inhabitants, has the name of
"
Evvia, while we should see Acraea, lying opposite the Heraeum," opposite Euboea to
the east, in the mountsiin now called Elias Berbatiotikos. While it is diflicult to define
the extent of each hill-coimtry, it is still more difficult to fix the bounds of the low-
" the district below tlie Heraeum." I
lying land Prosymna, which Pausanias defines as
am inclined to believe that this part of the " sacred domain," which, though below the
hill-land of the Heraeum, was, relatively to the plain, nearer Tiryns and the banks of
"
the Inachus, " lofty and green as Statins calls it,'- was of considerable extent. The
passages in Strabo* {ravrr) [MtSea] S'o/io/sos Upoarvfiva) and Stephanus
of Byzantium
'
The land belonging to the sanctuary, the glebe land, under Proaynina. So too in the
tract of grazing land

must liave extended far beyond the rififvos itself, as is passage quoted from Stephanus Byz., his definition of
already suggested by the fact that from the sacred herds wpoKTviuxuas as i otirfiTup, shows that a habitable district is

probably one hundred head were sacrificed at the festival meant. Cf. the curious epithet wpodiir^ of Deiueter at
alone. In the passages quoted below from Statins, the poet Lerna. Pans. II. 37. 1.

is clearly speaking of large and wide tracts and subdivi- Theb. .325; iv. 44.
•-•
i. 383; iii.

» VIII. 6. 11. 373.

sions of points on the whole Argive plain :
Larisa, I^erna,

Prosymna, Midea, — and thus evidently implies a large

14 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
" ^
(Upoa-vixpa, fioipa tov A.pyov<;) might lead one to believe that it bordered to the soxxtli
on the territory of Midea, and to the west on the territory of the city of Argos. It
would thus perhaps have included the site of such modern villages as Chonica, Anyphi,
and Pasia. But it is uncertain whether we have any right to include the passage from
Strabo as applying to the Prosymna of our Heraeum. The passage in Strabo, as it now
stands, tells us that Prosymna was near Midea, and also contained a temple of Hera.^
And though the coins of Midea have on the reverse a head of Hera Argeia,^ and that
place possibly may have had a small Hera temple of its own, it would be a curious
coincidence if it also had a district bordering on the Heraeum to which the same name
was given as to that of the adjoining Heraeum territory still, the Greek of the passage ;

in Strabo, which, moreover, mentions the lepov (and he has been speaking of the Heraeum
but a page before this) without the article, points to a separate temple and a separate
Prosymna. In the time of Stephanus, we must remember (see above) that the term
Argos might well have been used to include the great sanctuary of that city, namely, the
Heraeum.
Pausanias begins his description of the Heraeum by telUng us that " beside the road
flows a water which is called the Water of Freedom (Eleutherion)." And he subse-
" the Asterion [he calls it a river, Trora/no?, a few lines before]
quently informs us that

Fig. C. — Site ok IIkkui m fuom thk East.

The East Revina in the immediate foreground ; beyond it the three terraces : the Old Temple,
the Second Temple, and the South Stoa.

flowing above the Heraeum

falls into a gully and disappears." Early travelers and topo-
graphers whose
like
Mure,* whole scale of identification was smaller, saw the Asterion
in the Glykia stream which descends from the mountain behind the Heraeum, and
loses itself in the gully or Revma to the southeast of the temple rock ;
while the Eleu-
therion would be the present Revma-tou-Kastrou bordering the rock on the northeast.
This view was held also by us when we began our work at the Heraeum." But Captain
Steffen's" convincing arguments in favor of his new identification of this river have

'
Steph. Byz. .s. v. irpiavfiva. oStt/, and the omission of tlie article before Upop, point to
^
Speaking of Midea he continues: rairri S'ii/iapos llp6- a second temple.
'
crv/iva [koI] aSri] Uphv Ixowa'Hpas. Unfortunately there Head, Historia Niimor. p. 370.
*
are nine or ten letters missing in one MS. between irpoffv Journal, II. p. 180.
and oStt). Kramer's note says sed ia>a modo sec. m.
: Cf. C. L. Brownson, Amer. Journ. Arch. VIII. (1803),
•'•

restituit : inde ital om. cgh. Videtur autem scriptum p. 206.

fuisse Tlp6iTvfivd icrri, koI avrtj k. t. \. Kal— —
"Hpas om. B
« L. c.
pp. 40 ff.
(sed sec. m. in marg. add.) I. Whatever is done, the
 THE STREAMS NEAR THE IIEUAEUM 16

conunaiuled acceptunce. He identifies the AHterion with " the river which riuen aniuiif;
the inountaiiiH to the nortlieast uf Myeenae, Howh down to the eaNt^ni HaiikM of the

Prophet Elias mountain and Euhoea, and then, after traverHinf; tlie narrow jjh'n of
the Kli.sura, cnterH the Ar<rolic plain ahont two and a half niilcH to the mtiitheut of the
Heiaeinn. Many Hniall trilmtjirifs dewcnd to it from the hIoih-h of Mount Euboea and
Acraea, the two niountJiinH which were mythically reprew»nt4Hl an the daiifrJiterH of the
river. Pausniiias's statement that the Asterion diwip|H>ared in a
f^dly applieH well t4i the
river in cpiestion, tlie water of which, ahout a quarter of a mile Konth of itn fMitranco

Fio. 7. — Site of tub IIkkaii m kkom thk Soutiiwkht.

The Kevmn-toii-Kastrou in iininediate foreground ; Iwyoiid, tlic succession of terraces. Tlie I'onicr
of the Southwest Stoa shows in the foreground ;
above it, in the middle, the West Kiiildini;.

into the narrow Klisiira glen, vanishes wholly among the shingle and houlders of ita
'
rugged bed." So soon as we interpret Euboea, Acraea, and Prosymna as larger heights
and districts, and not merely as the immediate border-lines of the temple itself, and
remember that Asterion was considered the father of the three localities personified, we
cannot identify him with the small Glykia stream (smaller than the one on the north-
west), but must seek him in one of the larger rivers of the whole Argive district. When
Pausanias, moreover, mentions Inachus, Cephisus, and Asterion as the arbitrators in the
legend of the strife between Poseidon and Hera,* this river must be on a scale with
the other two. (Cf. Figs. 6, 7.)
The same claim for size does not hold good for the Eleutherion. Pausanias at onc-e
indicates the difference in speaking of the Asterion as Trora/id?, while the other, Eleu-

therion, he calls vBcop. We must first examine the passage itself, is given by
Pausjinias,' and see how itdefines the exact position and the nature of the Eleutherion.
A good deal will depend upon how we translate the phrase Kara rrfv oSou. As Pausa-
nias has just left Mycenae, and speaks of the distance between it and the Heraeuni, it
is but natural that his next remark, in which he mentions the road, is made an if from
" beside or down
the road. The
usual translation of the phrase in question would be

by the road flows," etc. In this case the Eleutherion would be identified with the
Revma-tou-Kastrou running round the northern side of the Heraeum, and ininie<ii<itely
below its westei-n peribolus towards the south of the plain.
* Pans.
1
Frazer, Pausanias, vol. III. p. 181. Pans. II. 15. 6. /. c.
16 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
Those who would look for the Eleutlieiion on the road to Mycenae at some distance
fiom the Heraeiim may well point to the phrase avro 8e to lepov, which immediately
follows Pausanias's words on the Eleutherion, and which, marking this phrase as the

opening of the descrijjtion of the temple itself, implies that in the passage preceding
'
it the writer is not yet supposed to have arrived at the sanctuary. Captain Stett'en
thus supports the view, first expressed by Lolling, that the Eleutherion is to be found
in a well which flows day near the Panagia chapel, near the road which
to the present

leads from Mycenae to the

Heraeum, and about three quarters of a mile from the latter.
He points out, further, that the form of the name (Eleutherion) is not suited to the
"
designation of a stream. We
at once raise the question, Why, then, did Pausanias
not use the term Kptjvr), which was used for the Eleutherion drinking-fountain by
"
Hesychius and Eusfcithius ? ^ The answer may be that he is here referring to baths,
while the others refer to drinking-fountains ; and that both baths and drinking-foun-
tains were supplied by the water in the stream. But SteflEen would answer this by
maintaining the fact that the stream in question was dry for the greater part of the
year, and thus would not yield
water. On the other hand, the well near the Panagia
" on the road " is a branch of the stream Avhich is fed
chapel by a basin from which the
shepherds now take their water. This again is supplied by a well with fine old masonry,

a little higher up, about which are grouped ruins of very ancient dwelling-houses. Steffen

surmises that these dwellinjjs belonfjed to the Heraeum and served for the attendants of
the temple as well as for the freed slaves who drank from the well, of which the special
name was Cynadra. In support of this view we might urge that during our excavations
we were forced to get our supply of drinking-water from a distance, and, finding the
water of this very Panagia well purer and cooler than that of the well in the village
of Chonica, the continuous journeys of the donkeys with water-barrels along the
" road " formed one of the
Mycenae many picturesque scenes which lent a peculiar
charm to our day's work. Furthermore, if in identifying the landmarks given by
Pausanias, the large scale which we have adopted as
we arrange our topography on
regards Euboea, Acraea, Prosymna, and Asterion, then the Panagia well and stream, on
the very slopes of Euboea, would come within the domain of the sanctuary, and would
not appear too far removed from the temple.
But, on the other hand, we must recall the definite statement of Pausanias, which,
—
considering the paucity of his remarks on the great sanctuary, and the numerous remains
and interesting works and records before him, throws this fact into the strongest
relief,
—
" that the women who minister at the
sanctuary employ it (the water of Eleu-
therion) for purifications and for secret sacrifices." Now it seems to me hard to believe,
when we consider the integral part which this water played in the important, nay essen-

tial, functions of the temple, in the rites and ceremonies, by

the very nature of the cult,
that we must look for it over a hilly path three quarters of a mile from the sanctuary
itself.^ And this doubtgreatly confirmed
is —
nay, becomes almost insurmountable
— when we consider the elaborate system of water-works which our excavations have
so clearly laid bare within the sanctuary itself, and which are manifestly in immediate
relation to the Revma-tou-Kastrou. We
have here not only cisterns and aqueducts, but
also baths and drinking-fountains, and they form a marked feature of the whole site.

*
Op. cit.
pp. 41 and 42. tion we often experienced at the delay of donkeys and
chatting agoyats in bringing the water over this rough
2 See below, p. 18.
^
Especially when I recall the impatience and irrita- and hilly path from such a distance.
 CISTERNS AND CONDUITS 17

Indeed,
the
I believe that the exteiinive

the Ronuin house on the

eurly-Greek S«,uthwe«t Stoa (the hrgMt buildiiif; un _
site), west, an<I the huth and well-houM.- on the WMit tide of
the Nortli Htoa, and perhaps also the West
Hnihlinjr, were in more or lew direct connec-
tion vvitii these water-works, tiie ceremonies to whieh
they ministered, and the elmnu-ter
of (piasi health-resort which the mnst have ha«l.
siinctiuiry
Cisterns are scattered about the
sjinctuary, all, however, in the direction of the bed
of tlu! stream. With
the exception of the moi-e
o|hmi ciMtern nwrked A, to the went of
the Old Temple, they are cave-like, or in the forms of
rock-<ut tombs.' Anionff them
the cross-shaped one, mentioned
by ejirlier travelers, below the West Huil<linff ( VII)
and the northeast end of the Lower Stoa
(X), is closest to the actuiU temple bnildingi..
Inimcdiately beside this is the semicircuLir basin cut into the rock* in which a wan Htrigil
found, and which was probably a bath the cisU-rn. Another
adj..iiiinjr riK-k-cut CMteni
running- far into the iiillside is below the northwest s1o|h; of the Henienm hill towanhi
the bed of the stream, and seems to have been fed
by the .iverHow fnun the river. For
although, as is the case even with the Inachus and most rivers of Greece, the \m\ of the
stream is f,reneially dry, after rains the stream swells to a
very t^jrrent and overflows iu
banks.' Still more do we realize this intimate connection of the
clearly
temple with the
stream when we consider the
underground cisterns, bath-like chambers cut into the nx-k,
and rock-cut aqueducts, on the river bank about two hundred to the
yards southwest
of the temple, at which Mr. Brownson * and Mr. Fox excavated
with untirinjf
energy.
Here, also, we find a subterranean conduit (Fig. 8) cut into the 8oli<l with three
" avenues rwk,
leading, one toward the plain
and town of Argos, the second back
toward the temple, the third at right
angles to the direction of the other two,
or about southeast." The second and
third lead back into the bed of the

river, and were thus evidently feeders for

the main channel of the waters in the
stream. The
runs back, however,
first

at least 13.70 m. towards the temple, and

was followed by Mr. Brownson and Mr.
Fox with " "
their gang of miners for
34.70 m. in the direction of Argos.
This hard work was not carried farther.
Mr. Brownson suggests that this might
have been connected with a system of
irrigation for the plain. There is another FiG. 8. —
Man-hole a.nd kock-cct CoxDurr at
possibility to which we shall return pre- STRKAM-BED OF ReVMA-TOI'-KaSTROO.

sently. Meanwhile I must at once re-

mark that this rock-cut watercourse reminds us of that discovered by Diirpfeld at
Athens with the identification of the Enneacrunus, and I shall have to
in connection

point to other resemblances between the waters of Eleutherion and those of Enneacru-
'
We at first considered them such. They were prob- Athens at the Heraion of Argos, 1801!, p. 4; cf. aUu Btuwn-
ably used as dwellings or churches in Byzantine times. son, /.
pp. 210, 211.
c.
' Kiu Mr. Fox's plan of the excavations of 1892. See » Cf. C. L. RrownsoD, /. c. p. 206.
*
Twelfth Annual Report of the Arch. Inst, of America, 1804. L. c.
pp. 211 ff.

See also Waldstein, Excavations of the American School of

18 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
nus. Besides these water-works immediately connected with the stream, there was an
elaborate well-house and bath with chambers on the southwest corner of the second 2)lat-
form, abutting- on the North Stoa (II). Adjoining this well-house, which no doubt
contiiined water for drinking- and sacrificial purposes, we recognized a bath in a flat,
'

cemented square with a channel for the off-flow of water, found during the first year of
our work. A j)ipes ran from this well-house, between the north
channel of terra-cotta
side of the Second Temple and the North Stoa towards the northeast end of the temple.
It is probable that the sacred water was thus conducted to the east platform to be used
in the sacrifices and ceremonies which took place before the temple.

Enough has been said to show how elaborate and important were these water-works
within the temple precinct, and that they bear some immediate relation to the stream
— these facts all being in favor of the identification of the latter with the Eleutherion
mentioned by Pausanias. It is possible that the waters of the stream, stored in these
cisterns, were fed also by some other watercourses belonging to its immediate system,"
but the stream itself would be the centre and bear the name and so this name could ;

not be given to the Panagia well.

Mr. Frazer^ strives to reconcile the two conflicting views by suggesting that possibly
the waters from the Panagia well may have been conveyed in the rock-cut aqueduct
to the temple. But even if the direction of our aqueducts did not contradict this, it
would not solve the difficulty. For the name Eleutherion, if given to the water drunk
" which flows
at the Heraeum and led in the conduits by the stream-bed by the road,"
would have to apjjly not to this transported water but to the stream itself, or to the
distjint well.^

The puzzling question is further complicated by the passages in Eustathius^ and

Hesychius," according to whom this water of freedom came from a well called Cynadra
at Argos, of which the slaves drank on being freed. Not much weight need be given
to the term Argos as used loosely
by Still, if their evidence stands,
these late writers.
it seems to me worth suggesting that the rock-hewn aqueduct discovered by us leading
in the direction of Argos may have taken the sacred water from the sanctuary to the

market-place of Argos, and have been there used in the ceremony of freeing slaves.
The water of Eleutherion was thus used primarily by the priestesses for the immediate
ceremonies of their own cult, and secondarily in the ceremony of freeing- slaves. It is

worth considering for a moment whether there may not be some inner connection be-
tween these two uses.
This old lustral ceremony of the temple of Argive Hera reappears in other cults. At
the temple of Artemis Triclaria at Patrae it is connected with the offering which took the

place of human sacrifice and with the beautiful story of Comaetho and Melanippus.^
There it is the river Amilichus, "the stream," in the waters of which the children must

Report and Excavations, neighborhood. For a well there might be immediately

'
See first I. c.

2
I was told by some workmen that there was a vrisi connected with the stream —
or perhaps there may have
and walled well the gully immediately to the north-
in been one which is now dried tip.
west of the Heraeum and belonging to this system, and '
Pausanias, vol. III. p. 181.
once set out to hunt for it but without success. Owing to the
*
See also Mr. Frazer's pertinent criticism (Paiwanjos,
multifarious and continuous tasks befoi-e me, necessarily vol. III. p. 180) of Wilamowitz-Mdllendorff's sugges-
connected with the work of directing such excavations, tions in Hermes, XIX. (1884), pp. 463-465.
*
and to the impossibility of realizing at the time how impor- Eustathius, VIII. 408.
°
taut each smallest point may become, I did not sift this Hesych. s. v.

hope some member of the

'
question to the bottom. I Pans. VII. 19-20, 2.

American School will some day again explore the whole

 THE ELEUTIIEKIOxN 19

hatho. At Lel)a(lea
the river Hereyim in whoHe waten iie who winlied to c«iiiHult
it 18
'

th(! ()ia(;le of Iiad to hatlif, " while

Trophonius ohHurving Htrict rulwj of purity and not
hathiii<>- in warm water."
-
At tlie teiuph- of the Cranaean Atliena nwir Klateu tlie
" acts as L.y
priest priest for five yejirs, during which he lodjrj.s witli tin- ir,,.I.Ii-,H :mmI butiiM
in tubs after the ancient fashion."'

Now, these ceremonies point to

all At the Henuniin no douht
very ancient cuHtonw.
these were connectc'd with the siicred and " secret Hiu-rifi(reH " of tlio
Up6<: ydfio^, the
type of actual marriaj^e ceremo-
nies. It is well to remend)er the

important part Avhich the hath

played in the wedding- of the an-
cients.^ For this s2)ecial wati-r
was The Xovrpov vv(i(f>LK6i^
used.®
was taken at Athens from the well
Callirrhoo, made over hy Pisistra-
tus into the Enneacrunus ;" at
Thehes the water was from
t^iken
the Ismenus;' at Troy from the
Scamander.*
This lustral use of the water in

connection with marriaji^e would

precede use as a part of the

its

ceremony of emancipation, which

already presupposes a th()rou<>;hly Fio. 0. — Ukum ani> Caimtai, hiom .Skcomd TI'^mi'lk, ah
FOUND BKIU.VD THE ijOUTH STOA.
developed and complicated civic
organ iziition but we can under-
;

stand that the Eleutherion water, when used for nuptial ceremonies at Arj^os, might lie
"
used also in the emancipation of slaves, and that " drinking the water of freedom might
become a proverbial phrase for being freed. Strange as it
may appear to us, the act of

marriage to the ancient Greek, especially to the Greek maiden, kept in the strict seclu-
sion of her Trap0eu(ou, the step which made her yafierrj or even a iraWaiaj, was one of

comparative freedom and emancipation.®

While the balance in the weight of evidence thus appears to ns to incline towards the
identification of the Revma-tou-Kastrou with the ancient Eleutherion, the arginnents in
favor of the Panagia well appear to us still to be very strong, and we can therefore not
speak with anything approaching to cei'tainty on this point of topography.
»
>
Piuis. IX. 39, 2-7. Athen. X. 680.
°
^
perhaps wortli noting that the ohler city of I^-
It is The passages quoted by Athenaeus, III., 123, from
badea " originally stood on Iiigli ground, and was named Antiphanes or Alexis, in which a w>jiiian says: "may
Midea," bearing the same name as the high ancient city I never drink of the water of freedom, if," etc., ii prob-
"
in tlie Argive plain. ably said by a slave-woman aa meaning may I nerer be
» Paus. X. 34, 8. freed." But it is just conceivable that tbey might haTe
* 1 cannot enter here into the interesting question of been used by .1 girl aa meaning " may I never find a lius-
the Kourpotp6pos. bnnd." For other passages referring to this use of the
^ Cf.
Lasaulx,
'
Zur Gesehichte und Pliilos. dcr Ehe term Eleutherion see Casaubon on the aliove paaaage of
bei den Grieclien,' Abh. d. k. Bayr. Akud. IS.")!, phil. cl. Athenaeus. Attention may be drawn alio to the fart
VII. Abth. 1, p. Becker, Charikiea, III. i>. WM).
73; cf. that by the end of the fourth century B. c. it was custom-

ary for freed slaves at Athens to dedicate to Athene filver

"
Aristoph. LysiMr. 378; Tlmcyd. II. 15; Poll. III. 43;
— Ilarpocrat. s. \ovTpo<f>6poi. saucers which wen- known by the name of ^liAai ^{<Ami#>^
' Ktl. Cf. e.g. r. I II. 2. 720.
Kiirip. Phoen. 347.
-I.
20 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
Pausanias, having fixed the general topography of the Heraeum, proceeds to describe
the site, and what he considered the objects of chief interest there. He begins with the
temple which he saw before him in perfect condition in his own day, and tells us that
"
they say that the architect of the temple was Eupolemus, an Argive." This Argive
architect is otherwise unknown to us. The foundations of this temple (the Second
Temple), Avhicli was built immediately after the burning of the Old Temple in 423 b. c,
were laid completely bare by us after previous excavators had made shallow cuttings
at the east, north, and south sides. A sufficient number of architectural details (cf. Fig. 9)
were discovered to enable Mr. Tilton to draw not only ground-plans, but also elevations
of this important and beautiful building.* The temple, as far as the south, southwest,
and southeast was constructed on elaborate foundatiims of limestone,
sides are concerned,

rising, at the southwest corner, to a height of about three metres. The rock on which
the temple stood was cut and leveled, especially on the north side and in the interior,
"
while the remaining inequalities of the rocky summit of this " platform were removed
by elaborate filling up Avith dry rid)bish, similar to the procedure on the Acropolis of
Athens in Cimonian times. Before the Second Temple was built, this rocky platform
must have been used from the earliest times.'
Pausanias then describes, in the following terms, the sculptures which decorated the
^ "
temple The sculptures over the columns represent, some the birth of Zeus and the
:

battle of gods and giants, others the Trojan war and the taking of Ilium." These sculp-

tures, of Avhich many interesting fragments have been found, will be dealt with at length
in the special chapter on Sculpture. But we may say here that the expression virep tov<;
KLova<; refers not only to the metopes, of Avhich there were sixty-two in the temple,
but also to the pediments, from the sculptures of which undoubted fragments have been
discovered by us. We
to prove, also, that the sculptured decorations of the temple
hope
illustrate Polycleitan art at its best.

Having described the outside of the temple, and standing at its east end, or entrance,
Pausanias continues :
" Before the entrance stand statues of women Avho have been

priestesses of Hera, and statues of heroes," etc.* Some of the bases for such statues
have been found in our excavations to the northeast of the Second Temple (see Fig-
ures 2 and 10). It is important to note that there are no traces of such statues at
the west side of the temple, where, moreover, the nature of the space would not have
admitted of their erection. This fact alone would contradict the assumption that
'
See chapter on Architecture (pp. 117 ff.).
•"
Cf. also Pans. III. 5, G ;Thucyd. IV. 133; Ariiob. VI.
'^
One or more large altars doubtless stood on the 23 Such statues were certainly placed
ed. Ileiff. p. 207.

occupied by the Second Temple. Some vestiges

site later there before the middle of the fifth century B. C, and
of these altars may remain in the rough masonry within probably much earlier; for Chrysei's had been priestess
the foundations of the temple, while the so-called black for forty-eiglit years at the beginning of the Peloponne-

layers of soil, to which reference will be made below, sian War (Thucyd. II. 2). Moreover, as Curtius (Ges.
tliougli almost continuous round and below the founda- Ahhandl. I. 44) has drawn attention to the fact that the
tions of thetemple from east to west on the south side, Argives did not remove the statue of Chryseis in spite of
were thicker and richer in finds at certain points or " pock- the destruction of the temple through her negligence,
ets," and must, as at Olympia, have marked the locality such statues of priestesses must have been erected during
of ail ancient altar. The slight remains of the rudest the lifetime of the priestesses: Hitzig-Bliimner, Paw-
form of early walls, to my mind antedating the C3'clope.an sanias, I. 2, p. 568. Similar statues are mentioned by
wall of the upper terrace, to be seen on the bed-rock on in Cynneia in Achaia
Pausanias at Ilermione (II. 35, 8) and
the southernmost slope and to the west of this temple (VII. 25, and were probably placed before the temple
7),

platform, also confirm the earlier use to which this part of Asclepius at Epidaurus. See Cavvadias, Fouilles (V
of the Heraeum precinct was put before the building of Epidaiire ; Frazer, Pausanias, III. pp. 182 f ; Hitzig- .

the Second Temple. Bliimner, I. 2, p. 505.

' I
give throughout Mr. Frazer's translation.
 THE STATUE OF IIKUA 21
such stiitueH existed at the west end, even if PausiiiiiiiH did not dijjtinetly limit theui to
the east end.
Now, enteiino- the teiiiph', Pausiinias "In the fon^-teniple are aneient inuigen of
:
sjiys
the Graces on the left, and on the is a conch <tf Hem, and a votive
lijrlit offerinff conHiMtr
ing of the shiehl which Menelans once took from Kni>h«»rhns at Uinni." He then enters the
va6<; proper, and is there at once confronted
hy the j^reat j;oId and ivory iniafje of Hera
hy Polycleitns, the cnhninatinj;; work of art of tlie whole sanctiuiry, of the whide Arjfive
district, nay, with the Olympian Zeus and the Athene Parthenos of Phidiiis,of the whole
of ancient Greece. For we must never
for<;et that ancient authorities use terms of praise
with regard to this work (upon which the fame of
Polycleitns to a jfreat extent rest***!)
which correspond to those applied to the frivut works of Phidias,' and that «ine
autlioritv,
" the most
Straho,- calls it heautiful work of all.',' Thoudi colossal in dimensions the

Fiu. 10. — Foundations of the Second Templk, showing statck-uasks at the i:At>TKU.N i^\i».

statue of Hera was not so large as either the Zeus or theAthena of Phidias. Accord-
''

ing to Mr. Tilton the tottd height of the image, including the hase and the top of the
throne, was about eight metres, the seated Hgiu-e of the goddess alone about 5.50 metres.
Pausanias describes it as follows :
—
"The statue of Hera is seated on a throne, and is of colossal size : it is nia<(e of gold and ivory,
and a work of Polycleitns. On her head is a crown with the Graces and Iseasons wrought on it
is

in relief in one hand she carries a pomegranate, in the other a sceptre.

: The story aliout the
it is of a somewhat mystic nature ; but the cuckoo percheil on
omit as
pomegranate I shall
the sceptre is explained by a story that when Zeus was in love with the maiden Hera he changed
'
See Overbeck, Schrifiquellen, pp. 166 and 167. Liician while Martial (X. 89) sars Phidias would bare bceb

(^Somn. 8), while referring to the four greatest artists glad to claim the Hera aa his work.
(Phidias, Polycleitns, Praxiteles, and Myron), singles out VIII. p. 372 (Overb. Schri/iipieUen, No. 033).
•'

two works —
the Zeus of Phidias and the Ilera of Poly- '
See his own account of the tciuple below, pp. 117 T.
cleitns. Plutarch {Pericl, 2) couples the same two statues,
22 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
himself into this bird, and that Hera caught the bird to jilay with it. It is said that beside . . .

the image of Hera once stood an image of Ilebe, also of ivory and gold, a work of Naucydes."

The exact position for the base of this sfcitue of Hera is shown in Mr. Tilton's plans
(cf. Plate XVI.). We are helped in forming- some conception of the general composi-
'
tion of this great stiitue by extant Argive coins though we must remember the evident ;

truth that small coins of a later period (these belong to imperial Rome) can hardly convey

any adequate idea of the artistic spirit or finish of such colossal statues by a master-hand.
However, these coins show us the seated Hera on her throne, and even represent the
pomegranate in her right hand, and the sceptre upheld by her left hand (Fig. 11). We
naturally come much closer to the artistic spirit
of the statue in such coins as do not attempt to
render the whole figure and throne, but merely
give the head. One
of these Argive coins," in

particular, has been recognized by all authorities

as being directly inspired by the gold and
ivory
"
statue of Polycleitus (Fig. 12).
Fig. 11 a, b. — Two Coins of Argos. TnK Furtwiingler
Hera of Polyclkitus. goes so far as to consider it a direct copy of the
sfcitue. If this be so (and I am inclined to

agree with him) we must always allow, especially in the rendermg of details and orna-
ments, for the necessary modifications to be made in reducing a head and neck from at
height to a flat relief half an inch in diameter.
least four to five feet in We are, then,
not surprised that the elaborate decoration of the crTe(f)duT} with Graces and Seasons,
should be reduced to a decoration of flowers and honeysuckle scrolls. To realize
how this reduction in ornament occurs, we need only compare with one another the
several coins of this series,* which present this same type in varying degrees of artistic

accuracy and excellence, to find how the o-T€(f)di>r] becomes smaller and
less significant, and reduces its ornament. But in view of the evidence

furnished by the coin as to the ornamentation of the a-Te(f)dvi] on the

gold and ivory statue, it may perhaps be advisable to compare a pas-

^
Siige in TertuUian with the description of Pausanias. If Tertullian
is referring to the Polycleitan Hera, he implies in his vine-wreath a
plant-ornamentation about the head. The band part of the crown
—
or even probably —
was decorated with such a scroll pat-
J'lG. 12. — Coin of
possibly Argos. The
tern ; while the Graces and Seasons (omitted from this coin) were HEAD of Poly-
fashioned in the round or in high relief, and projected as points to CLEITUS'S IIkRA.

this crown. The

corns which give the whole figure show such points.
The importance of this fact and its bearing upon the results of our excavations will

* »
See Iinlioof-Blumer .and Gardner, Numismatic Com- De Cor. Mil. 7. Biitticlier, Kunstmyth. II. 288,
mentary on Pausanias, p. 34, pi. i. 12, 13, 14, 15; Gard- and Brunn, Gesch. der Griech. KUnstler, I. p. 213, refer
ner, Types of Greek Coins, p. 137, and pi. viii. 13; Over- this passage to the Polycleitan Hera, though others doubt.
beck, Kunstmythologie, III. p. 41, and Miliiztafel ii.and iii.; Cf. Hitzig-Bliimner, op. cit. I. 2, p. 566 : these same
Head, Historia Nummorum, p. 367; Frazer, Pausanias, III. scholars (p. 567) quote several authorities in support of
p. 184, fig. 29; Hitzig-Bliimner, op. cit. i. 2, pi. xvi. No. 18. their view that tlie anthemia (Palmetten) ornament is in-
"
Imlioof-Bluiuer and Gardner, op. cit. Over- " In der
pi. i. 14 ; timately related to Graces and Seasons symbo- :

beck, op. cit. Miinztafel ii. 6; Hitzig-Blumuer, op. cit.

pi. lischen Bedeutung stimnien freilich beide uberein ; denn
xvi. 19. wie die Chariten und Horen BlUheii und Anmutli bedeu-
'
Meisterwerke, p. 413. ten, so geht auch das Anthemien-Ornament aiif vegeta-
*
Cf. the several types as given in Gardner, Types of bilischen Segeu."
Greek Coins, pi. viii.
 TITK UK\D OF POLYCLEITUSS HERA SS

become evident when we L-oin|Kii-e the ortminonUitiori on the crTn\>ain) of the fuiii with
the marble aima^ from the second temple, which once containeil thix Htatiw, and h«v>
eral pieces of which we discovered in our excuvutionK (nee Arfhit^ctun;, Fig. 53). For
it will readily lie seen that the scroll pattern witli is the name in both.
huneysitcklo
Nay, it is ])ossiMc that even a marked and iiidividnal' feature of our itimn ornament rM'uni
in the ornament on the a-T€<f)dvr) of the coin for in the left-hand up|H-r corner, iM'tweeo
;

the two honeysuckles, there are individual tnices of what I Indieve to be a bird, iierehed
on a smaller volute of the scroll pattiu-n, exactly in the place where such a bird ap|ieais
in our shna, formin<>- the most distinctive and churucteriHtic feature of thiM Ileraeum

marble-work (see Figures 12 and rt'.i).

It will readily be seen of what great imporbmce thiH obHervation of a th'tail iit in itM

bearing upon all the sculptures which we discovered in the Ileraeum. For if the m-uI|»-
turcd decoration of the temple and its stone-carving show such innneduit** dc|M'ndcrice

upon the sculpture in the temple-stiitue by Polycleitus, we have a str«»ng liit of evidence
from the works themselves that the sculj)tures which ornamented the temple itM'lf KtiHMl,
as regards their axithorship, in immediate relation to the temple-stiitue. Such evidence,
arising directly out of the works themselves, has, from the nature of the ca»e, never
before appeared, and it is manifest what light by analogy this may thn)W u|Nin the greait

(piestion of the relation

which Phidias held to the Parthenon sculptures nay, u|M)n tlie
—
whole question of the authorship of sculptured decorations in Greek temples.
This Argive coin is thus the most authentic illustration extiint of the ty|>e of Hera as
end)odied by Polycleitus in his gold and ivory stiitue. For many years attt'mpts have
been made to identify extiint marble heads with this great work of Greek sculpture.
The famous Juno Ludt)visi has had to cede her place to the Heni Farnese ; * nor couhl
the bust of Hera from the Egremont collection, now in the British Museum,' nuiintjiin
its claim. The beautiful marble head (Fkontispikce) discovered in our first year's
appeared and still appears to me to reflect the style of Polycleitus most
*
excavation

directly, and to have

been in so far influenced by the great stiitue. But I never meant
to maintiiin or imply that it aimed in any way at being a direct copy or repn>duction
of the gold and ivory stiitue in the temple. On the other hand, I must liiy stress ii|H>n
the fact that it was in studying the style of this and other heads from the Ileraeum
British Museum (hitherto known
scidptures that I was ;ible to single out a bust in the
as a head of Apollo, Bacchus, or Dionysus ") as reproducing the chief characteristics
of this style. This done, a confrontiition of the profile of this bust with the Argive
coins led to the identification of a marble reproduction of the Polycleitan Hera which

will, I believe, be universally iiccepted. This I hope to estiiblish in some other place.*
the side of the colossiil stiitue of Hera there once stood a gold and ivory statue of
By
Hebe. This statue, stiinding beside the seated goddess, is reproduced on ct«n8 of Argos

Thfiagh I do not think

*
One published in my Excava-
was See my p. II.
•
piece of this first Excavation*,
" " head i» that of Her«, it
lionsatthe Ileraionof Argos,\%92,y\.y\\. This .ii'ma will it (piite certain that this

he more fully dealt with by Mr. Tilton iu the chapter ou corresponds more to that divinity than to any other ; and,
Architecture (pp. 123 f.).
iu spite of what Furtwiingler says (Meitteneerkt. pp. 537
2
Lucy iM. Mitchell, History of Anc. Sculpture, pp. and 37« ff.), I hold the same a« regards the Famew hurt.
390 Murray,
ff. ; of Greek Sculpture, I. pp. 305
Hislori/
*
No. 140 in the Graeco-Roman Guide to tke BriliA
if. CoUignon. Histoire de la Sculpt, grecque, I. pp.
;
511 Afuseum (Newton) Museum Marbles, XI. pi. 5 ; EUia,
;

Gesch. d. Griech. 4th I. pp. 509- Toicnley Gallery, I. p. .122.

ff. Overbeck,
; Float., ed.,
511 Friederichs-Wolters, GypnabgiLise, Nos. 500, 501 ;
• Since this was written (in 1898), I hare establitbed
;

Baiimeister, Denk-mdler, p. 1352. this identification in the Jimmal of HelUmc Stwties, »ol.
» Archiiol. Zeit. XXVII. p. 32.
XXI. (1901), pp. 31 ff., pU. ii., iii.
24 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
of the Roman imperial times.' The passage relating to it in Pausanias is very obscure.
" It said that beside the image of Hera once stood an image
Mr. Frazer translates it : is

of Hebe, also of ivory and gold, a work of Nancy des." In view of the date and evi-
dence of the above-mentioned coins, it has been remarked that the expression of doubt
the authorship of Naucydes and not to the existence of the statue. I
(Xcyerai) refers to
might add that if it does not refer to the existence of the statue, it might apply to the
identification of the statue as Hebe — nay,
and artist together. Thusto identification

either Pausanias did not see the statue (which appears to conform to the usual reading
of the Greek) or he refers doubtfully to its being a work of Naucydes
;
or he doubts ;

whether it is a statue of Hebe or, finally, he doubts whether the statue beside Hera is
;

the Naucydean Hebe. This Naucydes is recognized as the son of Patrocles,^ nejihew and

probably pupil of the great Polycleitus. His brothers, also well-known sculjjtors, were
Daedalus and the younger Polycleitus. He may in his youth have been an assisfcmt,
besides being the pupil of Polycleitus, and hence, as is the case with the pupils and
assistants of Phidias, the ascription to him of part of the gold and ivory statues in the
Heraeum may have been open to doubt.
The mind evidently still in the temple when he proceeds to describe
of Pausanias is

more archaic images of Hera such as the one he mentions as being on a pillar. This
statue must not be confused with the earliest symbohcal pillar representing Hera men-
tioned by Clement of Alexandria." Of this earliest symbolical pillar we shall have
more to say deal with the sculpture ; for it is highly probable that we have
when we
discovered a portion of it in our excavations (see Fig. 15). The pillar may not have
stood within the second temple. The most ancient image seen by Pausanias in the
" made of the wood of the wild it was dedicated in Tiryns
temple was pear-tree by :

Pirasus, son of Argus, and when the Argives destroyed Tiryns they brought the image
to the Heraeum I saw it myself."
: The early terra-cottas, which we have found in
great numbers during our excavations, will perhaps throw some light on the nature of
the earliest image seen by Pausanias; and in the chapter on terra-cottas we shall again
refer to this wooden image.
"
Pausanias then notes " some other remarkable dedicatoryofferings in the temple,

such as an altar of silver with reliefs representing the marriage of Hebe and Heracles,
and a golden peacock adorned with " shining stones," dedicated by the Emperor Hadrian.
A peacock, this bird being sacred to Hera, is figured on the Argive coin with Hera and
Hebe referred to above. General Gordon (see p. 65), in his account of his excavations
at theHeraeum, mentions a part of a marble peacock which he excavated there. I no
longer believe that the bronze bird we found at the end of our first year, and Avhicli I
described as a peacock,* is
really a peacock. Pausanias further mentions "a golden
crown and purple robe, offerings of Nero," among the votive offerings in the temple.
The
Periegete then leaves the interior of the temple and, unfortunately for us, breaks
oft" his
description of the site upon which were at least nine buildings besides the second
temple. But we must be grateful that at least he did refer to " the foundations of the
'
Inilioof-Blumer and Gardner, op. cit. pi. i. 15 ; Hitzig- the work of eminent artist are in Overbeck, Schrift-
t)iis

Blilmner, op. cit. I. p. 567, where especial stress is laid quellen, etc.No. 995 to 1001, as well as Nos. 983, 932,
upon the unusual position of t€x>t7 Nau/cuSouj. 547. For the inscription on the extant base of the Olym-

pian victor Encles, see Die Inschriften v. Ohjmpia, No.

^
See Murray, Hiit. of Gr. Sc. II. p. 234 Collignon, ;

Hist, de Sculp, grecque ; E. Gardner, Gr. Sculpt. II. p. 139 ; Lowy, Inschr. Gr. Bildh. No. 86 and Frazer,
;
I. c.

' from the Phoronis.

338; Furtwangler, Masterpieces, p. 225 see also Frazer's
;
Strom. I. 24. 151,
note on Pausan. VI. 1. 3. The passages which refer to *
Excavations, etc. p. 5.
 THE EARLY IIISTOKV OF THE IIEKAEUM 25

former teini>le above this

[Becoiid] teinph', tojjother witli tin- few iither n>nuiintt of it
wliicli esciiped the flainoH." tiie extant P'or wan
CyeloiM-aii HiipiM.rtiiij; wall aL.ve the
it

Second Temple platform whieh put the i<lentifieation of tluM Hit«

Iwyond a doiilit, eH|M-
cially when in our excavations we fonnd the layers of charred wimmI and other n'liiaitiK,
clearly hearing ont the acconnt of its hnrnin},'. With the nn-ord of the acci(h>nt caiiml
hy the canilessm^ss of the prientesH Chrys4'iH, the chapter t-iuU, and I'anHiiniiiH disniiMNm
the Ileracunn. We shall often refer to the Old
Temple, and itM ntniainH will lie
described hy Mr. Tilton in the chapter on Archit«'ctnre. He will then* also treat of
the nnmerons other hnildinjrs of which Pansanias makes no mention.

THE EARLY HISTORY OF THE HKRAKUM

Wehave seen that ffeojrraphically and toponrniphically the Ileracum licai-s the chiH*««t
n'lation to the plain delined on the sonth and east
hy Tiryns and Midea, while it is letw
closely connected with Mycenae and the city of Arjr«)s. The ori^rinal eHtjihlishnient of
the earliest temple of Hera on the site which it
occnpies wonid thns come fnun TirjiiH
and Midea, neither from Mycenae nor from the city of Arjfos.' This (Minclnsion in
borne out by all the results of our excavation, the evidence of the archite«-turul
remains on the as well as of all the individual finds there made, and alwi
site, by the
traditions of the earliest history of the Arjrive Plain. In fact, a careful consideration of
-
all the material before us forces us to this conclusion.

The chronology which venture to give in the following pages does not aim at lu'ing
I

absolute, but only comparative. I follow the genealogical

system of Paiiwinias, iadieving
>
A<i will be evident from passa^s below, there are go<Nl summary of S<-liliemann'ii own inono|fniph« on Troja,
traces of a ])i'e-Tiryntliiaii occupation of the Herneiim Mycenae, and Tiryns. To these nnist l>e aildnl Diirp-
site. I have in the first instance been mainly concerned feld's more recent articles in the Athm. Afilth.viAn. III.
with showing that the llenienm is pre-Myccnaean and 1878), pp. and VIII (1882), pp. 241 ff. ; llclbig, Iku
1 IT.,

hears an earlier relation to Tiryns. I was unwillinj^ at Homerische K/ms ; Milchhoefer, Die An/iinge tier Kunrt.
the time to complicate the presentation of this view by More recent works of importance have been cnntribut<ti
the introduction of further hypotlieses. Hut there can by Diiminler, Aiken. Millh. XI. (188(5), pp. 1 ff., 44 ff. ;
hardly be any donbt that there was a pre-Tirynthian XII. (1887), pp. 1 ff.; XIII. (1888), pp. 27.1 ff. ; Percy
period of the Ileraeunl
—
in fact, it looks as if this (lardner. New Chapters in Greek Hittnrii ; Kmior'» Pau-
was the citadel of the earliest community in the Arrive sanias, vol. III. pp. 98 ff., containing an excellent criliral

country. I have since this was written published my summary of Mycenaean Antitpiities ; Kei.vh, Die .1/jtlr-
views on this subject in an article on '
The Karliest Hel- niiche Frage. Professor Ki<lgeway has raii>e<l a most Im-
lenic Art and Civilization, and the Argive lleraeum,' portant is.sue in What People pmduceil tli«
his article, '

'
American Journal of Archaeology, vol. IV. (1900), pp. 40 IT. Objects called Mycenaean ? {Journal nf Hellenic StuH.
Compare also an article in the North American Hevieic, XVI. [1890], pp. 79 ff.),and has long been engaged on a
vol. CLXXII. No. 532 (1901), pp. 431 ff., on com])rchpnsive work dealing with this cpiestinn, entitled
'
Kecent
Discoveries in Greece and the Mycenaean Age,' as well the Early Age of Greece, of which the first volume haa
as the Classical Review, Dec., 1900, pp. 473 ff., on 'The recently been published. I can say with coofldence

Argive Heraeum and Bacehylides (xi. 43-84).' that his studies must command most serions attention.
*
It would incumber this exposition too much were I In my own conclusions here given I !n>ve endravoml
to attempt to give the various views of all the authori- put from my mind n!i wider problems
c<ni.seientiously to
ties who have written on the Mycenaean and Pre-Myce- based upon a wider sphere of induction. Tlie very first
naean age. I must remain content with naming a few year of our excavation produced material which showed me
of the chief works to which I liave referred and which the that many accepted views would have to be reoonsidere*!.

reader will find most useful. Parrot and Chipiez' L'A rt Since then I have limite<l myself to allowing the actual
dans I'Antiijnild contains a m.asterly synthesis of all the facts revealed by our s|)ades to speak for theniselves, and

material. Mr. Tsountas's articles in the Ephemerin have have intriMlnced other spheres of study and inference only
been summarized in his own book, which has been trans- as they affect the VtoAy of evidence whieh I can actually

lated and reedited in Tsountas and Manatt's The Afi/ce- control. I venture to believe that our work will be the
naean Age. Schuchhardt's Schliemann's Au.tgrahungen has more useful in its l>earing u|>on wider qneatitma fnm

Individual referencM to other

passed through two editions and has been translated into being thus centralized.

English by Mrs. Eugenie Sellers-Strong. This book gives

a works will be made as the occasion ariaes.
26 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
him to have secured his accounts from the most trustworthy sources, at the Heraeum —
and at Argos. I am well aware that a vast amount of wholly imaginative matter has
been mingled with these myths, but I believe that a residuum of historical truth is
not only contained in the stories but is attainable by us. I am not here concerned with

any individual name or figure, not with Phoroneus, Proetus, etc. but what I do feel is ;

that the succession of Argive rulers, as handed down in the genealogy given by Pausjinias,
confirms the evidence we derive from other sources, —
that there was a continuous
" "
political in the Argive Plain long before the advent of the Atridae.
community
The first
important evidence as to the age of the Heraeum is to be derived from the

comparison of the walls of Mycenae with those of Tiryns. All authorities to my know-
ledge are agreed upon considering the circuit wall of Mycenae later than those of Tiryns
^ " The walls of
and Midea. To quote the words of Schuchhardt :
Tiryns give one
the impression of being older than even the oldest part of the circuit wall of Mycenae.

They consist of colossal blocks very Uttle hewn and show no

trace of having been
restored at a later time. The circuit wall of
Mycenae, on the other hand, was built origi-
nally of somewhat smaller stones, and has been subsequently strengthened and completed
at various times with carefully executed ashlar and polygonal masonry."
Now the Cyclopean supporting wall of the older Heraeum corresponds to the oldest

parts of the wall of Tiryns. The colossal unhewn blocks some of which are as much —
as thirteen and eighteen feet long, larger than any I have seen at Tiryns are piled up —
one upon the other, supported in places by smaller stones inserted between them, and
tax our imagination to suggest the methods applied by the early peoples in moving them
about. We
can well understand how in the minds of the Greek people the legends con-
cerning the Lycian Cyclopes shoidd have been grouped round such structures. Now, as
we shall see, according to tradition it was Proetus who brought these Lycian craftsmen to
build the walls of Tiryns, and to the same hands are to be ascribed the foundation Avails
of the temple of the Heraeum. On the other hand, as we shall see, tradition placed the
founding of Mycenae two generations later than Proetus, ascribing it to Perseus.
—
The remains which our excavations have laid bare confirm the earlier date of Tiryns
in a striking manner. The upper platform upon Avhich the Old Temple stood, facing to
the east, with the broad flattened space in front, overlooked the plain towards Tiryns
and Midea. Access to this front was gained either over the lower hills to the east,
from the northeast, or from the southeast, where the present path from Chonica leads
up to the temple. The entrance to the older sanctuary at this southeast corner passed
over the elevation upon which the Second Temple was subsequently built, either at the
east or more probably at the west end and it is here, on the slope of the Second
;

Temple, that we found, below

the remains of the steps that in later times of Argive

supremacy were built for the Second Temple, a large number of very early objects,
*
especially primitive terra-cottas.
The buildings below the original temple platform veer round more and more, as it were,
towards the west. Here they extend down towards the stream, not only because of the
Eleutherion which reference has been made above, but, as is clearly the case in
rites, to

bviilding VIII, which distinctly reminds one of a propylaeum, because we here a])proacli the
road leading from Mycenae. It is, moreover, on this site, about two hundred yards along
"
the road to Mycenae, that we discovered three beehive-shaped tombs, with " Mycenaean

objects that are certainly connected with the Heraeum. Thus in this second period of
'
Schliemann's! Auxgrnhungen. 2(1 erl., ]>.
110.
 TIIKKK I'KKIODS IN THE HISTORY OF THK HEUAKL'M 27

the juchitectuial history of tlie Hemeuin, ah maiiiftmtt^d

hy tho remaiiiH iN-forv iw, there
is an intliiiatioii
towards, an attraction to,Myceniie and while the Kant Hiiihlinf; (I V) and
;

many of the lMiildin<,'s at th«! extreme eastern ninr\t> uf tlie S«'fond

Teni|de |tLitfonn Ktill
point to a livinjr relation with the tliree Western
Tiryns, larjfe Huihlinjp* (VII, VIII,
and X) distinctly show the {riowinfr preponderance! of Mycenae. This is the Myoenamn
Period. Bnt at the risk of appearinj; fancifnl and exajfjjemtinjj the
ini|»ort of the mere
]»osition of snch l)nildin<,'s, wo wonld point ont West Bnihlinj; (VII) and the
that the
Lower Stoa (X), wliile
placed at the west or Mycemm end, show a ti-ndeniy towanls the
sonth or Arj^os side, as they t4) a |M'riod in whi< h the jmiwit of
nndouhtedly hehnig
Arf>()s asserted itself more and more.
the second jjlatform was cleared and fille«l in U) the level and the
When, however,
temple of Enpolemns was hnilt, ahont H. c. 420, the edifices of this jwriod, the temple
itself (V), the chambers and hnihlinjjs at the northeast of the second ternice
II), anil the (

Sonth Stoa (VI), with the elaborate terrace and steps below it, anil the others to the ejwt
of it, all chan<jfe their common orientjition, and the splendid entntnce to this
t4'nip|e, on
the sonth slope, distinctly faces the city of Arjjfos, which now reigns
supreme over tlio
land and has complete charge and patronaf^e over the Heraenm. In the to|M>^iphical

history of the sacred precinct itself, the location of the bnildinjrs thns indicates tliree
main periods, — the Tirynthian, the Mycenaejin, and that of the city of Arjjos.
The point which concerns ns most at present is the origin of the early temple, which
leads ns back to Tiryns and to Proetns.
which we have excavated has yielded monumenhd evidence pointing Ut an
But the site

by a temple of Hem than the erection of the

earlier date for the occupation of this site

Cyclopean walls. Objects which show the existence of inhabitjints possessing distinct
forms of civilized life have been found below these Cychipean walls. We have alsit
come upon a system of ruder and smaller walls, which point to a period anterior to the
building of the Cyclopean foundation wall for the walls in (piestion, built of rude
;

unhewn small stones, which probably formed the foundation for supenidded walls of sun-
dried brick or mud, correspond to the walls found by Schliemann at Ilissarlik in his First
and Second City. Now if the palace in the Second City of niss;irlik corresponds to the
Tirynthian Palace of Proetns," then the structures corresponding to the earlier His-
sarlik settlements must be earlier in date than the foundation walls built for Proetns at

Tiryns or the Heraenm. 1 am here referring to the slight remains of walls immeiliately
below the Cyclopean foundation wall on the rise above and to the east of Stoa II as well as
by us in excavating down to the bed-rock Indiind
to a series of such })rimitive walls foiuid
the South Stoa and between the West Buildhig and the Second Temple. These rude
walls from their primitive construction were readily destroyed, and we must consider
ourselves fortunate in having found so many clear traces of them. The mass of th«*se
below the Cyclojjean foundation wall were mentioned by me in my Aniistal Re|)ort for
1892-93." Since within these we found the most primitive form of c{M)king-)H>t,

1
Tliis Second City was formerly, with great assur- lik, be older. To use Diirpfeld's own words: "Tlic

anee, — evidently unwarranted scientifically in view of second stratum must 1m' older than this stratum with the

the complete reversal of the last opinions expressed by Mycenaean vases [Sixth City]
— how muchohlcrit is im-

Diirpfeld,
—
identified with the Homeric city. We
now possible to .say, but the interval cannot have
boon a short
" with "
hear that it is the sixth city which can certainty one, as between the two lie two other *tnita of poor
be identified with the Homeric Troy. H
this be the ca.se, settlements." Cf. Tsonntasi-MBnatt, np. ril.
p. .TW.

Twelfth Annual Report of the AMiericaii

- S.-hool at
then a fortiori must the palaces of Tiryns and perhaps
Mycenae, which correspond to the second city of His.sar- Athens, pp. 30, 31.
28 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
I then surmised that they might have been dwelling-houses for the priestesses o£ the
early temple. This may be so but they at all events appear to me now to antedate the
;

supporting wall o£ the Proetean temple. The rude lower walls o£ this class run with
fair continuity from east to west on the lower southern slope of the Second Temple plat-
form behind the South Stoa but what remains of them now on the west side of the
;

slope abutting on the supporting wall which separates the West Building
from the Second
Temple platform presents an unintelligible line, and certainly one which has no relation to
the later structures of the West Building or of the Second Temi)lo j)latform.' Outside
" "
of these walls were found the small Salaminian shaft-tombs (Fig. 13), and these tombs
were evidently put there after the walls had been erected. It appears to me that these

walls mark the peribolos of the earliest sanctuary when the Second Temple was not

thought of, when the site iipon which it was erected was uneven ground containing
merely an altar, and that the Cyclopean foundations were not yet built in the time of
Proetus. Mr. Tilton, moreover, succeeded in discovering some plan in the present indi-
cations.
At all highly probable that before the erection of the temple to which
events, it is

the Cyclopean supporting wall and polygonal platform belong (which Avould hardly have
been built on this site unless for a long time before it had been associated with the
cult of the goddess), there was some form of sanctuary on this spot.^
All these considerations lead us back to times long anterior to the date hitherto assigned
to the beginnings of Greek civilization that is, earlier than the Mycenaean period, gen-
;

erally grouped round the fifteenth century

b. c. We must, moreover, always bear in
mind that the Argive Heraeum is distinguished from Hissarlik-Troy, in that it is not
only a site in the heart of Greece proper, but is in a district associated with the earliest
records and traditions of the Hellenic people, nay, it was the spiritual centre of the
earliest Hellenes of whom we have knowledge.
of the temple belonging The remains
to the Cyclopean wall, which we are justified in associating with Proetus of Tiryns, thus
form a central point for the dating of the earhest period, with evidence of preceding
and succeeding occupation. Now the method of dating Greek temples by means of their
orientation, as applied by Dr. F. C. Penrose,' has provided us with definite dates for
these buildings ; and I have heard from the most competent astronomical authorities

that, as regards the astronomical side, his computations rest on a sound scientific basis.

In the case of our Heraeum such inference is much strengthened in that we have two

temples, one above the other, the date of the later one absolutely fixed in historical times,
and that these two temples show some divergence in the line of their orientation. Dr.
Penrose has concluded that the earlier Heraeum one of the two oldest temples in the
is

ancient Greek world, the other being the earliest temple of Athena on the Acropolis of
Athens, and he assigns to these two temples the date of b. c. 1830. I here give Dr.

Penrose's letter on this subject :

—
^ on
^
Since I wrote this I have conferred with Mr. Tilton, See my articles cited in note 1 p. 25.
our architect, wlio, working independently on the archi- " '
On the Orientation of Greek Temples and the
tectural remains, has come to the same conclusion as to Dates of their Foundation derived from Astronomical
the early date to he assigned to these walls. He has Considerations, being a Supplement to a Paper published
succeeded further in discovering indications in the vestiges in the Transactions of the Royal Society in 1893,' by

of these walls at the west end which point to what was F. C. Penrose, F. R. S., in Philosophical Transactions of

probably a tower marking the entrance to the second the Royal Society for 1897, London, 1898, vol. 190 (A),
terrace here. This will be made clearer in the introduc- p. 43.
tiou to the section on Architecture (pp. 108 if.).
 DR. PENROSE ON THE DATE OF THE OLD TEMPLE 29
»In answer to your qi.cHtious, the most ancient tfrnplen m
«lerive«l from the orwutation ara
(that IS, a<c..nlin- to th., I have u«sd iu the
ail.itiuiy .-oiiHtuntH calcuktion, which, Itowcver. »li»it
of certain aliow;iiu;e.s wiiicii 1 will refer to
ufterwartlM) :

The Anthaic Temple on the

Aero|M>liH )

The Ileraeuni of Argos (

1880
3. The Athena
Temple at Tegea 1/JgO
4. The leraeuui at Olympia
1
144/',
5. The Aselepieiim at
Kpidaiirim i;{70
6. The
Olympieum at Athens i. e. Deucalion's foundations
; . 1000
The later Argive Ileraeum is not connected in its orientotion with tlie same star m the Old
Temple. The arhitnuy constants, as I have called them— and
esiHM-ially one of them, minifly.
the depression of the sun below the horizon when the stor eouhl 1h5
r4M-ogniz«l, is a sul>j.-.-liv«*
matter which would allow of a little variation. In my sciiemc I do not allow of
variation of this constant — and by so
any eapricioiM

(loinjf I hold that I get a tolerably rigid ex-

"^
<^
l)ression for the relative dates of the foun-
dations; but there would be no great dis-
turbance of the principle if w(! allow a little
more depression of the sun than would be
^^-B^^
absolutely necessary for a clear visioned observer to sight the star in average fine weather.
"
By allowing an additional degree of solar dejjression in the case of your Ilei-aeuni l>efor« the
star's api)earance was to be announced, the 1830 would become 1910. This would U? arrangement
very easily managed iu practice, for instance, by allowing it to rise to the
heigiit of some mark
[see cut] before it was said to bo heliacal."

This, then,
—
B. c. 1910-1830, is the date which we — adopt for the PnM-t«in
Heraeum, and we have indications at the Heraeuni of h)nji^-coiitiniied liahitiition Mnw
this date. We are thus driven back to dates much carHer than tiiose liitlierto a>isunie<l
for the beginnings of Hellenic civiliaition. The only fixed date connected with the
Argive region which we find is that assigned, according to Acusilaus, to Phoroneus, i. e.
1020 years before the first Olympiad, which brings us close to the
year B. c. ISOO. For
the present it is enough to s;iy that this of Acusilaus seems to have \m'n
computation
made on some good grounds j but I should be inclined to place the jieriod marked by
Phoroneus much earlier.

But evidently it is necessary to weigh critically the ancient genealogies of the Arjfive
rulershanded down by tradition, preserved to us in greatest completeness by Pau.sanias ;

and our main contention, of the existence of a Pre-Mycenaean period of Greek civilizii-
tion, towards which all our evidence converges,
be strongly supiM)rted by such
will
It will be finally confirmed, I beheve,
critical
study. by the objects of earliest art and
craft which we have had the good fortune to discover on this site.
In tixking serious account of the local traditions of earliest Greek history handed
down in ancient literature, and in weighing and sifting them critically, we must feel a
general misgiving as to whether we are justified in attaching any weight to tliem for
the purposes of historical research. This doubt is caused by the intrusion of so nmiiy
myths and legends grouped round certjiin individual names which in themselves form a
rational and simple genealogical table. But these misgivings will be greatly aUaye<l
when we consider the parallel instances within our well-authenticated historical ken to
some of which my friend Professor Ridgeway has drawn my attention. It will then be

seen that,by what might almost be called a mythogenetic law, popidiir legends have an
30 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
inherent tendency to group round the most famous and historical figures. There can,
for instance, be no doubt that Charlemagne and Arthur and Vergil and Alexander the
Great are historical figures, with a continuous of sober historical records preceding
roll

their own lives and times and following u})on them. And yet there is a rich mine of
legend clustering about the name of Charlemagne, the Arthurian Court, about Alexander
the Great and Vergil, and, I might add, the Greek philosopher Pythagoras. These
legends were sometimes formed by slow growth centuries after the period in which the
central hero lived. Nay, we can, in our own day, immediately about us, study and realize
the process by which story and legend are formed and crystallized about one central
figure, when we but notice or recall how striking incidents or deeds, clever or epigram-
matic sayings, witty or comic remarks or actions, show a natural tendency to be fathered

upon persons whom we have known ourselves, and who were remarkable for any one of
the qualities or actions mentioned above. So the imaginative and wonder-loving mind
of the people spins its web of legend round the solid core of some prominent personality
in the actual tradition of its past ; and if not round a person, then round a striking

object or locality. As Belger has shown in discussing Mycenae,' this is especially the
case with graves and sepulchral monuments. And he has shown this process in a com-
paratively recent instance in the case of the tomb of a certain Count Gleichen. can We
furthermore hardly be charged with arguing in a circle if, in considering carefully and
giving due weight to the earliest Argive chronologies as preserved in the traditions
handed down especially by Pausanias, we lay stress upon the fact that the residuum of
fact which we thus obtain strengthened by all collateral evidence in extant literature
is

and in the ancient monuments at our disposal, and is supported by all the results of our
excavations at the Heraeum. When once we grasp and control the confused mass of
literary traditionsconcerning this earliest period of Greek history, and carefully sift the
crude stiitements, placing them side by side in an orderly manner, the logical sobriety,
the salient figures, and their organic relation to one another become manifest and con-

vincing.
As regards the earliest Argive genealogies, Pausanias is and will ever remain the chief
and safest guide. His account in the sixteenth and eighteenth chapters of the second
book was evidently derived from the best traditions exfcmt in the localities themselves in
his day —
and this at a time when the printing-press had not yet destroyed the per-
sistence and accuracy of individual as well as traditional memory. Moreover, the student
of Pausanias must realize that this very sphere of antiquarian research was the one in
which that author was most interested and showed considerable critical capacity. In
this very (sixteenth) chapter we are struck by the critical selection he makes of what
is on the face of it the soundest tradition, and then adds the popular variants. Take,
for instance, the careful manner in which he renders the doubtful record ascribed to
Acusilaus concerning an eponymous hero of Mycenae, —
Mycenaeus as a son of a simi-
larly fictitious Sparton and —
then rejects it.
" I cannot
accejit the account which they
attribute to Acusilaus, that Mycenaeus was a son of Sparton, and Sparton a son of
Phoroneus for the Lacedaemonians themselves do not admit it. The Lacedaemonians
;

certainly have in Amyclae a statue of a woman Spartii but it would surprise them even
;

to hear of Sparton, son of Phoroneus."

At sight we must be somewhat confused by the two different accounts of the
first

genealogy of Argive rulers, as given in the sixteenth and eighteenth chajjters of Pausa-
'
Die Mykenische Lokalsage, pp. 1 ff. Cf . also article " Heros," in Roscher's Le.xikon, and Rhode's Psyche, pp. 164 ff.
 THE ARGIVE GENEALOGIES IN PAU8ANIA8 81

nias. Asthere given they apiHxir U) be

entirely (liHconneeted, while tlealing with the
siime iffifion. But a more careful study will show that they Hupplenient one another.
We uiidcrstiUKl this best when we rciiliz*; what Pausiinias, the traveler and
antiquarian
ill tiu! time of did to collect this inforniation, and wluit MiurceH of
tiie Aiitoiiiiies,
really
iiit'oriiuition he had at his
disposid on the spot.
In his journey in the previous chaptei-s i'ausanias had come southwards from
Sit-yon,
and Neinea, to the northern opening of the Argive
Titiine, Pliliiis, plain UMirvNt t<i
Mycenae, just as the modern railway traveler a|)]iroacheH this district. Of the great
centres of early Greek civilinitioii in this
plain three were practically destn»ywl and
deserted, namely, Mycenae, Midea, and Tiryns. The centres whicli he found Hourishing
were the city of Argos and the Ileraeum. Of these two the city of Arg«« lui<l not
always possessed suineiiie and primary iiiiportjince in the history of the plain, <ir, aM we
shall realize more and more, it had not gained its prominent
position until a com|mra-
tively late period of this early history. The Ileraeum, (Ui the other hand, liad rebiiniHl
its essential and intrinsic importiince in an unhroken secpience from the earliest timen to
the year in which it was visited by Pausiinias. This intrinsic imp«)rtunce, moreover, was
knit uj) with the very function of keeping siicred and traditional records of the
juist, not

only by means of the list of

priestesses there deposited, which served as the chronological
foundation for the reckoning of the people, but also the function of preserving with
piety
and the memory of the heroized ancestors of tlie {leople
the honor of the great goddess
who founded her worship and were always intimately associated with it. At the chjse
of the fifteenth chapter, where he leaves the Corinthian and Sicyonian regions to enter
the Argive plain proper, he makes some preliminai-y renuxrks referring to the
worship of
Hera in this plain, and about the first figure in the genesvlogical series of Argive rulere,
Phoroneus. point he arrives at natnndly is Mycenae, of
Entering the plain, the first

which he gives a comparatively meagre description in the next chapter, after w'liich he
proceeds to the Heraeum and then continues his journey to Argos. It is thus at least

unlikely that he would have found in the deserted village of Mycenae living records of
early history, or, if he had, that he would have remained content with those that he
found there in view of the living traditions in the most competent hands among the
priestesses of the thriving sanctuary which he at once visits. From the Ileraeum he
again joins the main road, where he sees and describes the tomb and shrine of Perseus,
and then enters the city of Argos. Now it is in this chapter that he gives us the

genealogy of the rulers of the city of Argos.

The genealogy which Pausanias gives in the sixteenth chapter he received at the
Heraeum, while that of the eighteenth chapter he gathei-ed in the city of Argos. We
are not astonished, then, to find that the Argos tradition only begins with Megsipnthes,
the fourteenth link in the chain of Argive rulers preserved in the Heraeum tradition ;
while the Heraeum tradition leads us much farther back. The relative lateness, more-
over, of the foundation of this Argos dynasty, as compared with the history of the wh(de
Argive plain, confirmed by all other evidence. To gain a comjirehensive view of this
is

the following tiible of the two

chronology before entering into debiils, I will at once give
traditions and their relation to one another :
—
32 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
HERAEUM TRADITION AKGOS TRADITION
B. c. Plioroneus
 VARIANTS IN THK LKGKNDS 88

In the case of PljoroneuH, an well as of the Hiil)MM)iieiit Arjfive rulem meiitiurieit ulNive,
the (lilleront iiiitii'Mt iiuthois present viiiiantK aH t<> the exaet reliitioiiHhi|i whicii they hehl
to one another, maintain emphatically that Hnch variiition, ho far from
lint
|iroviii)r thu
I

fictitions natnre of these is evidence «if their real existence in rftiutUi

pnrely personalities,
iinti<piity.
It shows the vitjility
of ancient tradition, and iilnstrati's the livinj; nianiitr
in which it is handed on. Kor, and jrenealo^ieH were the pnn^ fi)rtueiit of
if sncll stories

some poetic or inia<^inative hrain, they would then l>e more likely Ut Hhow conipleti*
unanimity and lo<^ical consistency in the presentation of the individual lives as well mm of
the sequence the f^cnealoj^ical series. The variation hrin^s home to us and illuHtrati's the
in

a(;tual process hy means of which these tnulitions were

kept alive and han<le<l on in the
different localities. And it is in this natunil process, in the popuhir jjrowth of tradition,
that some deviation and confusion will aris<; as it is handed on in distinct hM-alitiex.
Thus we hear' that l*hor(»neus was tlu^ hrother of Aejfialeus, or IV^eus, and the huHlmnd
of Peitho. And we have still <>;reater confusion in that I'eitho is made the mother of
Aegialeus and Appia. The position held hy Niohe is also confusing. In A|HdliHloruH,'
Phoroneus is the husband of the nymph Laodice, and thus the father of Apisand NiolM*.
Still another authority'^ makes him the father of Pelas^us, lasus, and Ajfenor. and

attributes to him the subdivision of the Arjifive district amon^ his sons, which, we shall
see in the account of Pausjinias, tjikes place eleven ^enenitions later under AInih. The
confusion which thus arises is no doubt attributible to the inaccuracy of various liM-al

traditions, increased by the poetic remouldin<f when once the rhapsodist and the artist
puts bis f'ashionin<i^ hand to the rough material of popular tradition. In the cas«- of

Phoroneus, we know that this was the case, and that there existed an epic ]M>em called
Phoronis.*
It is a sij^uificant fact that the inheritance seems to have ])assed on from Phoroneus t<)

his grandson through the mother. According to Apollodorus (/. c), the next ruler was
the son of Phoroneus's daughter, by Zeus, here called Niobe. This second Argive ruler
is called Argus, a name which naturally is common within these genealogies, and is found,

also, at a later period, Argos. lie is nientione<l by most

in the tradition of the city of
"
of the authorities quoted above, as well as by Herodotus and the Scholiast to Kuripi-
des." He is readily confused with the other Argus Panoptes, the great grandson of tliiu
Argus, son of Agenor, whose story is so
fancifully interwoven into the legend of To.
According to the genealogy of Pausanias, Argus has two sons, Pii-isus and Phorlnis.
Pirasus is interesting to us inasmuch as it is to him that the very ancient woo<len image
which Pausjinias saw at the Heraeum is ascribed. Phorbas, who becomes the father of
^

the next ruler, Triopas, and the grandfather of lasus and great-gi-atidfather of lo, is con-

fusingly merged into the whole lo group of stories, as his own name and the name
Euboea all point (see above, p. 6) to legends grouping round the cow and the |tasture-lund
of the Heraeum. But this distinctly lies beyond our i)rovince. It is enon-^h to sjiy that
this name would lead us towards Rhodes, which archaeologically shows an intereHting
connection with the Argive district, as well as with Thessaly and Mes.sene. These
remarks apply also to Triopas, the son of Phorbas.
'
I
Schol. Eurip. Or. C32. Ktir. Phoen. 111(5.
'
i II. 1. 1. Pans. II. 17. 5. See also ]>assngcs in Orerbeck*!
ApoUod.
8 Hellaiiieus ap. Eustatli. p. 385, 38. Schrifiqiiellen, etc. 14^-146. We atUch »ome imporUnce
*
ScAo/. ApoU. Rhod. i. 1129 ; Clem. Alex. Strom. I. 25, to tlii.s tradition a,s repards the earliest images of Ilera,
380. Cf. Kiukel, Epic. Grace. Fragg. pp. 209-212. and shall refer to itwhen dealing with th«' terra-eotlas
p.
•>
Herod. VI. 8. from the Heraeum.
34 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
The sons of Triopas are lasus and Agenor. In the case of lasiis we agam have
traces of great confusion of tradition, inasmuch as he is
alternately called the son of
'

Triopas, the son of Phoroneus, and brother of Pelasgus and Agenor son of Argus
and Evadne or Peitho, etc.^ He is father of To. We
dare not enter here into the

problems grouping round To, in whose story we cannot go far wrong if we see either
an indication of the spread of the Argive people far into the distance, to Byziintium,
Ethiopia, and Egypt,
—
or at least some indication of intercourse between the Argive

people and those of these distant realms. Nor can we here decide the puzzling question
of lo's relation to the Hera cult in Argos and in Euboea, her identification with the cow,
or even her possible identification with Hera herself. We
can only point to the more sober
records concerning her, which identify her with the first priestess of Hera under the
name of Callithoe who headed the list of jjriestesses preserved at the Heraeum.^ It is
she who decorates the earliest image of Hera at the Heraeum in the form of a pillar

(klcjv) with ribbons and wreaths.*

Thus, leaving all the fanciful legends aside, we have
a personality intimately connected with the worship of Hera in the Argive district.
The line of rulers proceeds in the son of lo's uncle Agenor to Crotopus, her cousin,
who is succeeded by Sthenelas, a name which we meet with in a slightly different form
in the subsequent tradition of the city of Argos and which again appears in the Homeric

story associated with this district.

With Gelanor we come to a period which undoubtedly has indications of troubled
times and the passing of Argive sway into other hands, from Gelanor to Danaus. —
But Danaus in all traditions is of the blood of Argive kings, though he comes from
abroad. As
the tradition grouping round him points to a violent change in the ordinary
succession of previous rulers, it also confirms the previous existence of
generations of
indigenous rulers. This important figure, who undoubtedly comes in or returns from
from "
abroad, probably Egypt, illustrates the mythogenetic law," which we referred to
above, in concentrating upon himself a rich layer of myths. This is especially the case
with the Danaids, his daughters, who are ultimately Identified with the nymphs guarding
the wells by means of which an
early ruler increased the fertility of the dry Argive plain.
one of his daughters, Hypermnestra, that Lynceus, the only survivor among
It is with
the sons of Aegyptus, is wedded. Lynceus succeeds Danaus, either in the natural course
of events or by slaying him, and is in turn succeeded by his son Abas.
It is difficult to determine what is the relation of this Abas to the warlike tribe, the
Abantes, localized in Euboea. But the connection between Euboea and Argos is fully
indicated throughout all traditions. It is to Abas that his father
Lynceus gives the
shield of Danaus which strikes terror among his enemies,^ and it is owing to this relic
shown in the Heraeum that, tradition has it, bronze shields were given to the victors in
the games and that these games received the name of do-Trt? eV "Apyei.
As Danaus marked a change in the normal develo})ment of Argive rule, so another
new era opens at the death of Abas, who, according to the account given in Pausanias,
divides the Argive district between his two sons, Acrisius and Proetus. The district is
naturally divided by the Inachus, Acrisius taking the western half, and Proetus the eastern
half. But the brothers are from the very beginning " inimical to one another. Proetus

>
Eustath. p. 389, 39. Hygin. Fab. 170 and 273.
'^

2 ^
Schol. Eiirip. Phoen. 1151 (1123, etc.). According to Apollod. II. 2. 1. tliese twin brothers
' were at variance even before they were actually born.
Cf. Reseller, Lex. s. r.
* Phoronis {fr. 4) ap. Clem. Alex. Strom. I. 26, p. 418.
 THE ADVENT OF THE ATRIDAE S6

U) leuve the cuuutry, and KikIh u HheltcT with lubutuH uf

lius
Lyciu, whuMu duught4fr
Aiiteu ov Stheiiubuea he inurrieH. He then returiiH und huldM Iuh {>urtiuii uf tlte |iluiii.
He hiiiigH with him the Lyeiau uuihoiim who build for him hiu fortreiM and imlaoe at
Tiiyiis. These foreijjii aitiHJiiiH thiiH introdiiee a new form of architecture and forti-
fication among the connnunitieH civihzed by PhoroneuH. It in im|>ortiint t<i renuirk that

no .such act is attributed to Acrisius at Argon, and that we have no ground for Indii'ving
that up Argos had Huch fortificatiouH. It in two gt'neratiouH
to this time the city of
later that Perseus builds the walls of Mycenae and we are thuH nut OMtuniMlietl Ut find
;

that, while the Iliad speaks of Tiryns as TipvuOa Tii.\i.6t(rcrav and of My<'enae hh

ivKTifieuou nTokiedpou and eupuayma MvkiJut] and of Ilios's xXvrd T(i\€a or of tlie city
as evreix^ov, etc., there is no attribute of this kind att<iched to the term ArgoH in the
Homeric poems.' Acrisius is followed by his grandson, the son of his (kughter, Permmu.
In connection with this prominent ligun! of Perseus again legend and myth have l)een

freely developed.
But the account of his life and deeds points, on the one hand, to
foreign travel (Seriphus and Ethiopia) and, on the other hand, to Argos and ThosHaly.
The story of his accidentiilly killing his grandfather Acrisius at Lurisa in Thesiuily, ur
at Argos-Larisji (the early name for the city of Argos), points to an ethnical connection
between Thessaly and Argos. He then exchanges territories with the son of Proetus,
Megapenthes, or wrests the district from him. And we now find MegiUH-nthes eHtal>-
lished on the Lsirisa-Argos side, and Perseus on the other or Tirynthian side. The latter
now goes farther inland to the north end of the plain, and there founds the fortresn-city
of Mycenae." As with Acrisius and Proetus we had the foreshadowing of a political
division of the Argive district, which before had a unity of rule, so now we have a
distinct and clear dualism fixed by definite fortified cities. The tnidition concerning

Acrisius and Proetus seems to be based upon disunion. It leads to the building of tlie
of Mycenae ; and with Megjijienthes
Tirynthian fortress ; then follows the fortification
begins the real establishment of the city of Argos. For it is a noteworthy fact that the
o-enealogical table which Pausanias derives from the city of Argos does not l)egin witli
Acrisius or Abas but with Megapenthes.
It is not necessary for us to continue a detailed consideration of the succeeding nders

at Mycenae and the city of Argos as illustrated in the t^ible given above. It continues

from Megapenthes for at least seven generations, with the indications of internal dissen-
sions and changes, until, in the time of Cylarabes at Argos, Agjimemnon takes posses-
sion of Mycenae, and his son Orestes extends his rule over the city of Argos, over Arcadia
and into Lticonia.
of the Atridae thus marks another epoch, which, however, does not liear
The advent
such clear traces of foreign irruption. But it may be admissible to adduce even a poetic
tradition in so late an authority as Dictys Cretensis (I. 16) to show that tl»e Heraeum
For it is
sway during the period of the Atridae
maintained its at Mycenae.
religious
been chosen of the
reported to have
at the Heraeum that is leader exjiedi-
Agamemnon
tion against Troy.
The of the Argolid tjikes phvce when in the time of
great change in the leadership
Tisamenus the Dorians flood the coimtry.
In giving this genealogy of rulers in the city of Argos as it is linked to the earlier
series of indigenous rulers which we found preserved in the Heraeum tradition,
the link

'
1 See my note on '
Tlie Argive Heraeum and Bacchy- Pans. II. 16.

lides, xi. 45-84,' Classical Review, December, 1900.

36 GENEKAL INTKODUCTION
being in Megapenthes, I have not considered the house of Melampus, who, as Pausanias
tells us, was the ancestor of six kings in six generations down to Amphilochus, son of
" the native
Amphiaraus. I have not done this because, as Pausanias continues, dynasty
of the house of Anaxagoras outlasted the other two." Nor have I referred to that
splendid figure in the Homeric poems, Diomed, who is probably connected with the
house of Bias, inasmuch as the name Aegialeus occurs in the genealogy and Aegialea
was the wife of Diomed. I am not here concerned with an independent study of these

Argive genealogies. The main reasonwhy I have entered upon this topic at all is that
any account of the striking evidence which our excavations yield, as regards the earliest
monuments found, would be imperfect unless the literary traditions of these remote ages
were considered and studied in the light of these finds, and the indications which they
afford were used, to a certain extent, as guides in our threading of this labyrinth.
The main results which these early traditions thus yield us are, first, the confirmation
in a striking manner of the chronological sequence in the history of the Argive plain —
first
Tiryns, then Mycenae, and then Argos secondly, the confirmation of the evidence
;

presented by our excavations of a considerable period of comparatively civilized life at

the Heraeum, not only before the so-called Mycenaean period, but also before the building
of the Cyclopean temple ascribed to Proetus of Tiryns. The study of these genealogies,
moreover, confirms our belief that, though around many of these figures is grouped a
rich and variegated mass of legend, and though there be variants and divergencies in
the account of the succession among these rulers, the list, taken as a whole, distinctly

points to the existence of organized social communities in this district long before the
political
described by Homer.
life

With the death of Orestes and the reign of Temenus the hegemony in the Argive
plain is transferred from Mycenae to the city of Argos and here it remains ever after,;

until the whole district loses its prominent position in Greek history when the leadership
is transferred to Athens and Sparta.
We
can hardly doubt that the city of Argos obtained its real preeminence with the
conquest of the land by the Dorians. What became of Mycenae and Tiryns in this
period, it is difficult to determine exactly. On the one hand, we hear that all the inhab-
itants of the Argive district subdued by the Dorians, whose political centre was in the

city of Argos, were repressed into

a position corresponding very much to that of the
Lacedemonian helots and were called yvfjivrJTes
or yvixvyjawv.^ As contrasted with
the inhabitants of the city of Argos they became metics, or, as they were called from
the first of these subdued centres, Orneae, vepCoiKoi, 'OpveaTai." Mycenae certainly
appears after this time to have held a dependent relation to the city of Argos. On the
other hand, both Mycenae and Tiryns must have retained a considerable amount of inde-
this is evident from the fact that Mycenae sent eighty men to Thermojiylae,
pendence ;

and Mycenae and Tiryns together 400 men to Plataeae, while Argos sent none. At the
close of the sixth century B. c, moreover, we find that the slaves at Argos, the gymnesii,
after their successful revolt, settled at Tiryns and held this place against the Argives
for some time.^

During the whole of this Argive period the Heraeum, no doubt, retained its religious
importance over the weakened centres of Mycenae and Tiryns as well as over the Dorian
» » Herod. VI. 83.
Poll. III. 83.
" Herod. VIII. 73 ;
of. also Strab. VIII. 6. 11. 372 and
Paus. V. 23. 2.
 THE DOKIANS AND TMK IIERAEUM 87

city of Aij^os. But we must not forget that, with the rise to
power of TemeiiuH at
Aif^os and the pioinineiit position whicli that city hehl an the capital of the Dorian con-
"
federacy or amphictyony," new temples and new cults were estaldished on the western
hank of the Tnachus and in closer to the itself ; an<I that,
proximity tu
city moreover,
was indicated ai)ove (p. the new
national relijfion and divinities of the victoriouii
4),
invader were naturally pushed forward as much hh possible, Thiw a more or leM con-
scious attemi)t would ho made to give prominence to Huch a cult an that of
A|M)Uo
Pythaeus, who was the religious expression of the distinctly national Doriitn supremacy,
and whose temple on the Larisa of Argos was the local centre for the Dorian league of
cities (Cleonae, Plilius, Sicyon, Epidaurus, Troezen, and Aegina). cjin thus under- We
sfcvnd how under the Dorians there may have been a tendency to counteract the dominant
supremacy of the Heraeum. Perhaps it was this spirit of Dorian separatism which still
survived into the fifth century n. v. and caused the city of Argos to refrain from sluiring
the glory of Tlierniopyla(i and PlaUu^ie when Mycenae and Tiryns entered the lists.

Still, as was remarked above (pp. 4-6), the overpowering prestige of the Herueum, the
most ancient of the great centres of ancient Hellas, withsto«)d all these temporary attemptji
at repression, and it rebiined its sujn-eme sway and its high ])osition in the Greek religiotut
world so long as the Argive district itself remained a place of ini]M)rt{ince. With the
successors of Temenus, however, the Dorians could not retain for any great period the
preeminence which Argos had previously enjoyed. For after Me<lon, who succeeded
Cisus, as second after Temenus, the power of Argos began to wane. It is then, alniut
the ninth century B. c, that the great struggle with Spartji began for the posfiemion
of Cynuria,' and it is well known who ultimately carried off the victory and gained
undoubted preeminence in
Peloponnesus. The rulers
following Medon, ThestiuM,
Merops, Aristodamidas, Eratus, maintained Then followed one great
this struggle.

figure who again gave preeminence to Argos, namely, Phidon. Under this powerful
ruler, Argos revived its supremacy. He is, however, especially interesting to us for his
more peaceful deeds in the history of ancient civiliavtion ;
for to him is attributed, not

only the establishment of a standard of fixed weights and measures, but also the coin-
age of money. His activity probably belongs to the second half of the eighth century
B. c, though according to some it may have extended into the seventh century. We
shall see of what interest he with the results of our excavations, when
is in connection

we come to give a simimary account of the metal work there found.

A few words may suffice to indicate the subsequent history of the Heraeum in strictly
historical times. After Phidon the power of Argos declines steadily during her struggle
with Spartii. The crushing
victory which Cleomenes of S[)art{i gained over the Argives
about B. c. 520 is immediately connected with the Heraeum. For, as we are told by
Plutarch," the Spartan had reduced the plain he mockingly asked for the keys of
when
the temple that he might sjicrifice to Hera. But the doors remained locked, and the
heights were guarded by the enemy. So he had to remain content >vith sjicrificing
*
below the temple. Herodotus makes him justify himself to his accusers after his
return to Sparta by referring to an oracle and the miraculous phenomena on the image
of Hera in whose sanctuary he had sacrificed.*
If lost its
Argos preeminence after the age of Phidon, it on the other hand
political

* Pausanias
1
Paus. II. 19. 2. (II. 20) gives other reasons why he did
"
Plutarch, Cleom. 26. not actually take the city.
• Herod. VI. 76, 82.
38 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
always retained its high position among the communities of Greece as a centre of the

highest culture, its

preeminence in music and in art. In the first half of the fifth

century B. was the home of the most famous school of sculpture, for it is to the
c. it

sculptor Ageladas at Argos that the three most prominent artists of that age are reported
to have gone to learn their craft, namely, Myron, Phidias, and Polycleitus. Under
Polycleitus the fame of Argive sculptors rivaled that of Athens, and stood alone in its

supremacy after the death of Phidias. These traditions of art maintained themselves
through many generations of artists after Polycleitus. And when in 423 b. c. the old
temple was burned and the new temple erected by Eupolemus was adorned with the
sculptures of Polycleitus, the Heraeum received an importance and a splendor which,
to some extent, counterbalanced the loss of preeminence which, as the religious centre,
"
it had held in the centuries when the term " Argos stood for the most representative
part, nay for the whole, of the Hellenic world. With the growth and preponderance of
other political centres in the subsequent history of Greece and the rising preeminence,
not only of the other religious centres themselves, but also of the religious importance
and weight of other divinities —
a process which strikingly follows in the wake of jiolitical

changes in the history of Greece —

the Heraeum did not retain the highest position in
the ancient religious world. It is after the downfall of Greek independence that, under
the Romans, the Argolid again receives comparative political importance, and by accounts
of the gifts of Hadrian and Nero,^ and by the vestiges of Roman buildings which our
excavations have laid bare, we have evidence of this late revival.
Wecannot follow the history of the Heraeum through the Byzantine, Mediaeval,
Frankish, Venetian, and Turkish times. If, however, we can picture in our imagination
the ten or more splendid buildings erected on its lofty site, gleaming with their white
marble over the distant plain, we can well understand how these late " Vandals," whether
Christians or Moslems, were attracted by it, and how it had to pay the penalty of its pre-
eminence and beauty by becoming the quarry from which they drew the material for the
erection of their churches, fortifications, and dwellings in the modern Nauplia and Argos
and in the villages of the plain.

THE EVIDENCE OF THE FINDS AS TO THE AGE OF THE HERAEUM.

The records of ancient traditions which we have just examined thus confirm the evi-

dence furnished by the general topography of the sanctuary as well as by the special
topography of the site as revealed in the relation of extant buildings to one another and
their relative changes. The general conclusions to which these sources of evidence point
are further strengthened when we examine the finds of individual objects made on the
site during our excavations. In the examination to which I wish to subject these finds
in this place I am far from aiming at any complete account of these various objects in

themselves, nor do I propose in any way to give a complete list of what has thus been
found. These will be separately dealt with by myself and the various collaborators at
our excavations. But in this place I am considering these finds in their totality, in the
relation which the several groups of objects bear to one another, and in the ultimate
light which they can thus shed upon the history of the Heraeum as a whole, and hence
upon the relation which the sanctuary and what it contained held to the general history
of Greek civiUzation and art.
1
Paus. II. 17.
 PAUCITY OF OIUECTS OF THK CLASSICAL PERIOD 80

When we consider the of our fincL* in individiuil

totiility ohjet-tH, one Htrikinfr fact at
once impresses itself
upon us from the very outset
—
a fact which I nientione<l at once
in the report of the first year's di{,'f,nnjj jis well aH in
BuliMnpient yeant,' namely, the
—
of datin<r from tlit! cIuHsical and later
pimcity ohjcct.s priodH aH com|uired with the vant
niiiiil)cr of primitive and pn^cliissical Of marhic sculptureH we have, of counM*,
ohjecbs.
the larf;est number dating from the construction of the Second
Temple, alxiut 420 ». <•. ;

and the diwippearance of other marble works, such as inscriptions, jis well att of
LirgiT
l)r()nzc ti<>urcH, will be
readily accounted for when we come to consider thette oliJM-tit.
"
IJut the paucity of works from the " classical and later periods luHiomes more strikinj;
with rc<;iU(l to vases, terra-cottiis, small bronzes, euffraved stones, etc. Here we should
certjiinly have been justified in expecting to find objects counting at lea«t by hundre<lH
when compared with the mass of pre-classical objects, which are nundiered by tliousantls.
Yet, as we shall see, we have but few specimens of these objects,
— in fact they are
counted by units.
To account for this striking phenomenon I woidd make the f«dlowing suggiwtions :
—
1. The position of the
sanctiuiry itself on the hill-sloi)es, in a district where the <M-ca-
sional rains sweep down with sudden violence and wash all before them, would naturally
cause all smaller objects on the immediate .surface to be washed down tlu'
slo|»es and to
spread far afield over the plain. And this would be the case especiidly after the masonry
and stones, massed on the sui-face, which would have arrested the downward flow of
portable objects, had been carried away as building material by the later hordes that
passed over the Argive plain. The j)eculiar sitiuition of the Heraeum would thus favor
the dispersion of the later objects as compared with objects originally on a level site.
But even on such level sites the same conditions have been found to prevail, and have,
for instance, been noticed by the German excavatora at Olympia.'- In speaking of the
of smaller there "
large proportion pre-classical objects found, Furtwiingler sjiys By :

far the greater portion of our bronze finds are votive offerings or fragments of these
of the early period which had already found their place below the earth before the
classical epoch. That it was just the lowest layers which were richest in bronzes is to
be explained by the fact that the simple, and partly rude, votive offerings of the oldest
times had subsequently made room for others, and had come under the protecting cover
of the earth at an early period while, on the other hand, the votive offerings of the
;

classical period Mere highly valued and carried off or cast in the melting jwt in later

ages by people who prized them, at least for their metallic value."
We must remember, moreover, that the chief places in which we found these smaller
objects were all far below the level of the stylobate, i. e. below the actual necessary
foundations of the Second Temple.
Though this fact undoubtedly accounts for a good deal, we must still f««fl astonished
that on various points of the site we did not come upon a gi-eater number of objects
belonging to the classical and subsequent periods.
2. To account for this we must
consider also the possibility that in classical times,
with the rise of the city of Argos and its political supremacy over the district, as well
as with the numerous other sanctuaries there built, the Ileraeum may have lost the jmisi-
tion of itnique importance which it had previously occupied, and may thus not have
attracted the same number of pious donors as was previously the case.

Olympia (Archilectur, Diirpfeld), vol. II., and espe-

1 ^
See Reports, 1892-95.
cially Die Bronzen (Furtwaiigler), vol. IV. pp. 1
IT.
40
•

GENERAL INTRODUCTION
3. Finally, we must not
overlook a very important point which applies not only to the
Heraeum, but to the whole of Peloponnesus and of Greece. If the later hordes carried
olf the metal
they found, as well as objects of intrinsic value, we cannot believe that they
would have transported or annihilated ceramic works, both vases and terra-cottas. Now
it iswith regard to these that the puzzling jjhenomenon which we are endeavoring to
account for most clearly presents itself to us. Is it not possible, and even probable,
that the early style of working cheap objects, manufactured by inferior artisans and
sold by small hucksters at the gates of the temple-precinct, continued and fixed to some
extent the ruder ancient style of workmanshij) handed down from the earliest ages ?
This makes it all the more incumbent upon us to bear in mind, that, though such
objects probably continued to be made in later times, they even then illustrate the earlier
and cruder phases of art and craft which they continue. Some can be proved to be of
earliest date, some may be of a later origin ;
but the style of both is the same, and the
later are merely a continuation of the earlier. But when, for instance, we find on this
sitecomparatively so few vases, both black-figured and red-figured, of the ordinary Greek
type, while we find later developments of the Argive (or so-called Pro to-Corinthian) and
Corinthian styles which mark the supreme finish of later dates may we not then conclude
—
that these typical black and red figured vases were never manufactured in the Argive
^
district ? With
the exception of Corinth they were perhaps never made in Peloponnesus,
and found the real centre for their industrial production at Athens, Eretria, Corinth,
and in Apulia, Campania, Etruria, and other Graeco-Roman centres.
Perhaps all these three causes together may have had their influence
in affecting the

general proportion of the objects we have found. Yet, as I have said before, by far the
greater number of these objects were found in layers which obviously antedate the build-
ing of the Second Temple
—
nay, the fifth century B. c. Still it would be rash to
say
that the actual provenience {Fundstelle) was, in the case of most of these objects, a safe

guide to their chronology within the broad outer limit I have just given. For we must
consider (1) the rough, uneven, and sloping ground occupied by these various buildings
:
;

(2) the fact that by far the greater portion of these objects were found in the ground

surrounding the Second Temple platform, which ground was evidently made even and
smooth, strengthened by supporting walls, for the preparation of the building ; and the
hollows and sides of the terrace were filled with what builders call " dry rubbish," prob-

ably taken from the site and destroyed temple above and packed with
of the burnt

objects which had accumulated during centuries and (3) that the more rugged second
;

platform before the building of that temple served for some sacred function in the ear-
liest times, and most probably contained a
great altjir, and that thus it would accumulate
such objects round it in the " black layers," which we found here like those found by the
excavators of Olympia round the altars there. When we consider these facts, we have
even less ground for using the provenience as a definite means of fixing the date than
the German excavators had at Olympia. But even there Furtwiingler has conscien- '"

remarked " the characteristics of the layers as defined by us

tiously Though
:
general
were easily recognizable throughout, they are still individually and sharply defined at but
few points to allow of more definite chronological distinctions. Generally these layers
gradually run into one another, and often their regular succession is disturbed. This

1
Herod. V. 88 amply accounts for tliis. The A'rgives
'
The Argive Exclusion of Attic Pottery,' Classical Re-
instituted an embargo on Attic pottery. Cf. Hoppin, view, 1898, p. 86.
2
i. c.
 CHRONOLOGY AS INDICATED BY TIIK FINDS 41

toiikl hardly be otherwise with the ffnidual eonHtruction of ami Hiiialler huildin^^N
lar};er
and bases, of aqueducts and, at List, even of Christijin jrnives. For tht-Ho ull nectmHi-
tilted an ui)heaval of the lower layers. It could thus
hupiM'u at any time that older
objects were transportcMl from the lowca- to the hiffher Liyers, also that later ol»jt>ctii found
their way to greater depths. The individual occurrence of objects in this or that
Liyer
can theref(ne only be used with <rreatcaution for chronolojrical conilusions." Furt-
wiingler finds such conclu-
sions adnii.ssible only when
there is a rcf^ular recurrence
of objects in a definite layer.

Finally he points to a diffi-

culty which a fortiori ap-
plies to
the conditions of our
" For
excavation :
only in

comparatively few instiinces,"

he " have we accurate
sjiys,
record of observations in in-

dividual finds of this kind.

In order to carry this out

systematically at every point

in an excavation of such ex-
Fig. 13. — Eakly Shaft-ti... ... \ ^-^^ <i|. I>('LI.-<.'«>M>RKI>
tent, it would have recjuired " Mycknakan "
Stylk.
a special stiifl:', specially
trained for this purpose, and a slow and very careful peelinjr off of single kyers. U II for-

tunately the conditions of our excavations did not admit of such care."
With these limit«itions we can, however, point to cerfciin facts which may be dainu-d
as chronological landmarks beyond the broad distinctions of the earlier and later temples
and buildings.
1. of the earlier objects discovered on the upper terrace were found not only
Many
below the burnt layer which marked the destruction of the early temple, but below the
portion of the extant wall of this temple which was visible when the temple was com-
plete. The small piece of stylobate, which, fortunately for us, still remains standing on
the Old Temple platform, is regularly and smoothly cut half way down ; but below this
point remains rough. It is manifest that the rough portion was not meant to be seen
it

when the temple was complete. We

are thus justified in claiming for the <»bjects found
below this point a period antedating the fii-st temple. Objects were also found below
the huge Cyclopean stones of the supporting wall.
2. The rude smaller and earlier walls, referred to above as being on the s«Hith slope of

the Second Temple platform, evidently belonged to a period when this ]>latform was
in all probability used as an altar. Portions of these walls were built on the bed-rock ;
and the objects found on this bed-rock level most probably belonged to the earliest |)eriod

of their construction.
3. The tomb
(Fig. 13) found immediately to the south of these walls
small borizontjil
contained quaint vases decorated with linear ornaments in dull {niattjarbif/e) colors (see
below, Fig. 22); while the rock-cut beehive tombs (Fig. 14) found by us in the vicinity
'
of the Mycenaean Road contained Mycenaean vases of Furtwiingler-Loeschcke's tliird
or fourth periods.
1
These will be described by Dr. Hoppin in the section on Vmm.
42 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
implements which point to the Neolithic period, copper and bronze
4. Besides stone
were found in every part of the excavation. Iron was found in greatest profusion at
the northeast corner of the Second Temple phitform, as well as at the Southwest Stoa.
We have thus traces of the Neolithic, the Bronze, and the Iron Ages on this site.

With these facts before us we must begin a general survey of the individual objects

found, in view of the light which they may throw upon the general historical questions
before us.

TERRA-COTTA IMAGES.

In dealing with the summary evidence of the terra-cottas we must premise a few words
on plastic art in general. Besides the sculptures of the Second Temple we found a few
isolated fragments of archaic or transitional sculpture in stone, but no actual stone
sculptures of the earlier dates. Though there is one exception in carved stone-work
to be found in the block which was subsequently used in one of the walls to the north
of the Second Temple upon which the early waved pattern has been carved, there is no
instance of such early sculpture in stone. From the paucity of even primitive terra-
cotta images on the Old Temple platform
we may naturally conclude that the begin-
nings of worship on this site were in
an aniconic form. The first step to the
creation of an image was the erection of
the pillars or Mones which Pausanias stiU
saw therein his time, and of the existence
of which in other centres of Greek wor-

ship we have ample evidence.^

Now, as I ventured to surmise at the
time of its discovery,^ it is highly proba-
ble that in the lower fragments of a large
"
limestone " pillar we have preserved to
us the very kion which Pausanias saw,
and which symbolizes the first
image to
Hera on this ancient site (see Fig. 15).
The stone in question is carved into a
Fig. 14. - •
Tomb near the Hkrakum, on
Bkkiiivk pillar fcipering towards the tojj
in the
THE KOAD TO MyCENAE. rudest manner, evidently with primitive

tools, the marks of which can still be pei*-

ceived. At the broader " foot" there
is a
projection forward which serves as a plinth
to keep the pillar in an upright position, the projection being merely in front and not
behind. It thus corresponds to the lower portion of the rudest images in stone and

clay of which we have cognizance. The edges at either angle in front are leveled off

1
Pausanias (II. 9. 0) mentions one representing Ar- form of two pillars (Overbeck, I. c. I. p. 5). So also
temis Patroa at Sicyon. He also saw thirty of these at Zens is represented as a square pillar on a vase (Gerhard,
Pharae in Achaia, each having the name of a god (VII. Akadem. Ahhandl. p. 59, Nos. 2, 3, 4, 7 ;
cf.
CoUignon,
22. 4). Coins and vases give us later renderings of these HU. Sculpt. Gr. p. 103).
So an Apollo ou a coin of Ambracia ^
early objects. See Report, 1892, and my Excavations of the Ameri-
(Overbeck, Griech. Kunstmyth. V. pp. 1-5, Miinztafel i. can School at the Heraion, etc. p. 19.

Nos. 1-7). A coin of Ceos has Hera and Zeus in the

 pre-mycp:nakan tkkka cotta imaoks 48

HO US to make it Tliis pilkr could have no

hexaf^onal. Herve<l un-liiteetiiml |mrp<NW of
which we know, and, standinj^ upiijrht uh docH, witli all the nuirkn of the nioHt primi-
it

tive worknianshij), we
are juHtified in helievinjf that hucIi an
ohjwt (»f no intrinHie value,
which Hiiivived to the Keeond century of our era, mijfht he and in to um now.
preMerveil
Of primitive idols in stone and marhle chips, such as were found at Iliwiurlik, PunM,
Naxos, Amorgos, etc., we have no specimens
here at the Heraeum. On the other hand,
we have the richest collection ever found
of tcrra-cottji idols, presenting a new and
iiiihrokcn series from the very earliest t<»
the ckissical times, and though these terra-
cottiis will receive more detiiiled treatment
in a special chapter hy Dr. Chase and myself,
we must now consider tiiem in theirgenend
connection, and their hearing upon the
main point hefore us.
I may s;iy at once that we find
types of
" "
Mycenaean figurines at the Heraeum,
hut we also find a nuuh larger nund)er of

types distinctly earlier in an unhroken Fio. 15. •

Kaici . I i

series, among which we can distinguish at From the lleraeuiu.

least two categories.

The first and earliest type was prohahly developed out of the symholic klon (Fig. 1(>).
The primitive coroplast has merely tjiken small lumps of clay, and has fashioned them
into a mere suggestion of a human form hy indicating projections for the arms. The
lower portion of the hody remains in rude, uneven roundness, and for tiie head he has

merely allowed the upper portion to be squeezed into an ahnost conical sha])e. There is
no further articulation, and no distinction of sex. But this primitive coroplast is not ii«
yet tied down to any fixed conventionalized type, and so there is a gradiuil development
and progress in his naturalism within the narrow range of his artistic power (Fig. 17).

Gradually the arms become more extended, the clay is pinched more finnly,
accentimting the waist still further, until, at last, the workman gives
another pinch between his two fingers to the portion which he luis left
for the head, and proceeds to add two minute globules of clay on either
side of this protuberance of the head to indicate the eyes. Fn)m this

moment he proceeds to elaborate this bird-like face, adding a round

circle of clay to the top, which is meant to indicate either the hair, or
more probably, in this case, the polos or early diadem of the goddess
Hera. Without indicating the sex of the figurine by means of modeling,
he does so by the indication of dress and to the bird-like hejid is added
;

a series of ornate decorations running round the neck and breast from
Fig. 10. — Primi- shoulder to shoulder, which soon becomes one of the most striking
TIVK Tkuba-cot-
TA FiGUKINE. features in these Heraeum terra-cottiis. In the special chapter on terra-
From the Heraeum. cotf^s, we shall deal with the question whether these ornaments are
necklaces with brooches at the shoulders, or scarves, or even wreaths
of flowers, or, finally, indicate an elaborate folding and ornamenbition to the top of
the low-necked dress. We have summarized in a few words what really represents a
most varied series, illustrative of a very long and continuous development.
44
•

GENERAL INTRODUCTION
A reached when these figures that have been represented as standing erect
new stage is

are represented as seated (Fig. 18). This is done in a quaint manner, in that the flat
lower portion of the figure is bent forward, thus forming a step-hke projection, and then
two thin, tusk-hke pieces of clay are stuck on behind, like the legs of a chair, Avhich
made it
possible for the figurine to be set down in this quasi-

seated posture. In technique and detail work, this second class

is also much further advanced. Besides the elaborate ornamen-
tation round the shoulders, the arms are in many cases actu-
ally modeled,
and the waist is indicated with greater naturalism.
A few more ambitious coroplasts have attempted to model the
whole chair or throne, and actually to place one of these figures
upon it. When we recall the fact that the erection of a seated
image in wood is attributed to Pirasus,' the son of Argus, and
that Pausanias saw this early image made of pear-tree at the
Heraeum, whither it had been brought from Tiryns, and that,
further, this sacred image was seated, we may attribute the —
innovation in our terra-cottas which, from this point, belong

chiefly to the seated type, to the influence of such an image

endowed with great sanctity. But the idols of this class do not
rise above the bird-shaped
head and, in spite of the
;

prominent influence of some — Early

Fig. 17. Fkmale
such seated examples, even
FlGURK, SHOWING DkVKI.-
upon the standing types of OPMENT OF DrAPEUY.
this period, there is no From the Heraeum.
hard and fast conventional-
ized type to be found. I mean by this, that with
allthe quaint and crude artistic imperfections of
the primitive coroplast's work, there is a free and
naturalistic tendency, which leads him to produce
varieties, with marked differences in the extent to
which he indicates articulation and individual details
among these types.
of these
important to note that specimens
It is

two earliest types were found by Schliemann at

Tiryns,"but that to my knowledge few have been

found at Mycenae.^ We thus call this second cate-
of earliest tech-
gory, marked by the seated figure
nique, Tirynthian-Argive.
The next, or third category with which we have
— Early Skated Figure. to deal, the
Mycenaean type (Fig. 19), found is
Fig. 18.
and
chiefly at Mycenae and Mycenaean
From the Heraeum. centres ;

has been found also at Tiryns and the Heraeum.

As in the graves of Mycenae, so in the rock-cut beehive tombs with Mycenaean pottery,

See above, p. 24.

''
Since I wrote this, Dr. Chase has iiifoiined me that
"
2 77-93 159 in one " exceptional grave at Mycenae, Tsountas has
Tiryns, pp. 150 ff., figs. ; p. 359, fig. ;

and Perrot-Chipiez, vol. VI. p. 750.

found isolated specimens of such terra-cottas.
 MYCENAEAN TERRACOTTA IMA(iES 46

disco veiedby us in close proximity to the Heraeum, thcHe early imagen are found with
the most heautiful specimens of Mycenaean ware in pottery m
well iw other nuiteriiiU.
At might appear that these thoroughly conventional figurincH an? curlier
first sijrht it

than some of those we have just described.

They conwHt, in form, generally of a round
elongated foot, like that of a cup, a flattened, more or less circuLir or Kcmicir«-ubr l»ody
above it, again reminding us of a Mycenaean cup, and an up|H'r portion whi«-li genenilly

curves outward and leaves the top like the lip or rim of a vase. Thin general outline, in

stereotyiMjd manner, and w adhered

defciiled variation, is kei)t in a fixed and
spite of all
to as a convention by the modeler in so manifest a way, that he clearly telU iix he
does not intend to follow nature, though he is well able U> do ho. Thus in their liare
outline they are further removed from naturalism than many HptrcinuMiH of the primitive

type we have just examined. On the other hand, the fine clay of which they are nmde,
the certiiinty of touch and neatness with which they are modeled in this conventionali7.cd
form, and, above all, the modeling and painted decoration on any iwirtions which the
artist chose thus to decorate, show a degree of artistic skill and

a suppressed power of naturalism which is never to be met with

in the works of the previoiLs class, and is not always found in

some of the succeeding classes. Within the circumference of

this rounded, shield-shaped, flattened surface which represents
the torso, the female breasts and the arms hidden luider the

drapery (compare Fig. 19) are indicated with great delicacy and
skill, and are certainly out of keeping with the stiff convention

of the outline form. Moreover, the painted «)rnamentiition

shows a power of free-hand brush-work, a fluency and variety of
Une, which are the reverse of conventional, and which, together
with the glazed color used, are to be found only in vases of the

Mycenaean order.
We are here brought face to face with a most curious pheno-
menon : whereas the chief distinctive characteristic of Mycenaean
art in other spheres is its naturalism (especially when contrasted
"
with the " Geometric style which succeeds it), we have
the
most pronounced instance of stereot3r])ed conventionalism in the
Fio. 19. —MYCKXA »: AM
form of these figures. But this archaeological paradox is most
TyPK ok TKRRACJtTTA.
readdy accounted for by the explanation which the facts invari- From a Tomb iic-ur tlie lle-

attending their di.scovery necessarUy force upon us. These raeiim.

ably
figurines are, we may say, almost always found together with
and their painted decoration betrays the hand of the maker of these
Mycenaean vases ;

" vase-lik*." are

vases. Their shape, moreover, is constructively and intrinsically They
distinctly ceramic figurines, and not coroplastic figurines.
Now was the Mycenaean it

potter who produced the greatest

innovations and marks the greatest advance in i-enimic

art,
— we may s<iy
for all times. But besides his chief char.icteristic of naturalistic
into ceramic painting, there is one thing
painting and his introduction of glazed color
which appears to me almost greater and more important, —
he was the first really to
establish constructive and final ceramic forms and shapes for the ves.sels that were to

receive, refciin, and preserve fluids. And it is this central tectonic attitude of mind of
the ceramist which has influenced him in fashioning these Mycenaean figurines, and
in

giving them the stereotyped form

to which he adheres. We have this interesting phe-
46 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
nomenon in the early
history of clay-work the primitive clay-worker is before all a
:

coroplast, and actually models his vessel with his hand. He is thus sometimes misguided
into giving eccentric animal or human shapes to some of his early vessels.' The Myce-
naean clay-worker is before all a ceramist, and thus introduces ceramic conventionalism
into his terra-cotta figurines.
It is curious to note how the vase-rimmed head is even introduced into a most complex
terra-cotta of this Mycenaean class, in which a female figure is
represented as holding an
infant in her arms.^
This third Mycenaean class was not powerful enough to drive the
previous classes out
of the field, for these show a continuous development.
"
It is to Dr. Chase that I owe the identification of a " class of figurines,
Dipylon
recognized by him as such chiefly by the colored ornamentation on the dresses which
indicate the Dipylon style (Fig. 20). These types, while presenting the same marked con-
trasts to those of the
Mycenaean order as
the previous classes, and showing a general
relation to the more primitive figurines, are
Imore advanced in the treatment of the head,
in which they do not, however, attain the
distinct naturalism of the succeeding class.
The most marked fact to be noticed in this

category the extreme paucity of the spe-

is

cimens of human figures, there is com- —

paratively a greater abundance of animal
terra-cotfcis of this class. This fact, it
appears to me, can be explained by one of
two causes either the human figure was
:

not frequently represented by the "artists"

of the Dipylon period, or the jieojjle to
whom they belonged did not dwell for a
long period in the Argive district, nor exer-
cise great influence upon the artistic life of
the place.
When we how
imperfect and
realize
" "
wooden, how completely decorative and
conventionalized is the treatment of human

figures on the Dipylon vases, we must at

the same time realize that this purely con-
ventional and decorative treatment does not

Fig. 20. — Figukk of thk " Dipylon " class.

lend itself to the spirit of art production in
From the llei-aeura. plastic works,
—
either in terra-cotta or
stone. The statue and statuette as such,
which a naturalistic as opposed to a decorative
arise out of
impulse, are not likely to be
developed by such workers. In bronze, we might more readily find them, because the
maker of bronze vessels and implements of peace and war would use the same
technique
1
See Schlieinaim's pp. 340-345 375, 377, etc. VI. and CoUignon, Hist. d.
llios, ; ; op. cil.
p. 743, I.
Sculpt. Gr. I.
Rayet-Collignon, Hist. d. I. Ceram. Gr. pp. 1 and 7. p. 62.
=
'E<pii,tiipU, 1888, pi. ix. fig. 16 ;
cf. also
Perrot-Chipiez,
 TEURA-COTTA FKiUUINES 4T

of beating' the inetiil, unci nii^lit make such %urt'H as (irnunieiitM or a|ii)enc]a)(eM tu the

implements.
When, however, we consider accordinfr to what I he»r from Mr. De C«u, tliat there
were also eoiiiparatively few Hpecimens (tf bron/x'H in the Di|iyl(»n (i. e. the " Attic
Geometric ") style, and that, uh I hear from Dr. Iloppin, even the ViU4eH of this Ktyh* an*
of small niunher compared to tiiom* of the otiier clasMfs, we are temptiHl t«i conclude
that the people who represented this t^'chni(iiie did not dwell ho lonjf on thiM nit**, and
were either assimihited rapidly, or were not adapted to lejive a laxtinfr Htanip u|miii art

pioduction.
Tiie iifth stiige is reached in that a marked advance is nuule atnont; the seated uhtU:

namely, the bird face is supei*-

seded by the human face (Fig.
21). To the profuse and
elaborate decorations round
neck, breast, and shoulders of
the second type, we here have
added most elaborate head-
dresses, in which I can see not

only varieties of the polott,

but also floral ornamentations
which probably refer to the
Antheia side of the Hera cult,
and for which flowers from the
river Asterion were woven
into wreaths. How long this
human shape Heraeum fig-
of
urines continued we cannot
determine. We are, however,
actually at the gates of re-

corded history when we learn

'

that the Argive type of the

human-shaped Hera was cai--

ried to Samos by Procles, the
son of Pityreus, when the lat-
Fig. 21. — Figurk
(with of advanckd Argivk styi-k iiima.n k.u-k).
ter was expelled by the Dori- From the Heracuin.
ans from Epidaurus. This
would bring us to about the year 1000 B. c. This human-shaped image sujHjrseiletl the
sanis, or board-shaped idol, which was previously woi-shiped at &imos."
The next (sixth) class, though not numerous, shows in subject, techniijne, and style
the infusion of oriental influence.
After this sixth category, us to the archaic Greek tyiw of fij^urine
oiu- terra-cott<is lead

clsiss «)f the Artemis found at

corresponding to the erect hre(as-s\ia\ied statues of the
Delos.*
An eighth class is distinguished from this as marking the advanced archaism of the
close of the sixth and the beginning of the fifth centuries B. c. until, finally, we have ;

»
'
Pans. VII. 4. 4 ;
Menodutiis of Samos ap. Allien. Clement Alex. Protrept. IV. 18, p. 184.
XV. 672a.
48 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
a few fine specimens of heads forming a ninth class, and illustrating good Greek art of
the fifth century B. c.
Before drawing the conclusions to which this survey of our terra-cottas leads us, I must
point to the interesting collateral evidence furnished by the earliest types of bronzes
found at Olympia and thorough a manner by Professor FurtwJingler. We
classified in so

cannot but regret that the terra-cotta figurines, of which he tells us large numbers were
found in the lowest layers round the Heraevim at Olympia,^ did not receive the same
thorough treatment at his hands, and are not represented in a sufficient number of

specimens in the plates which illustrate the Gennan publication. On plates xviii. and
xix. of the Olympia Bronzes he has presented a most instructive series of bronze animals
from the earliest primitive class to the fixed type of Geometrical style, the so-called

Dipylon horse."
The and rudest primitive bronzes representing animals are made out of thin,
earliest

flat sheets of bronze, and have, like our earliest terra-cottas representing human figures,

only the vaguest suggestion of natural forms. The thin sheets of metal are cut to indi-
cate legs and head, and are then twisted in various directions. The style of this rudest
" "
class is called by Furtwangler the sheet-style (Blechstyl). Then follows a very
numerous class which evidently has been influenced by the process applied in fashion-
" Terra-
ing such primitive figurines in terra-cotta, to which he gives the name the
^
cottensfyl." More and more within this long series, presenting a most interesting
evolution, the early bronze-worker trying to develop a style suited tectonically to his
is

manipulation of bronze in beating and casting, until, at last, he arrives at a fixed settled
shape of horse from this technical point of view which, irrespective of naturalism or the
exact imitation of what he saw in nature before him, satisfies his artistic instinct and
becomes a fixed type for the small bronze horse. This stereotyping of bronze technique
in this direction checks development and free effort in the tendency towards naturahsm

which noticeable in the earlier primitive ware ; and apparently for many generations
is

after this establishment of the Dipylon horse, that form holds the ground and jjractically
ends the series as far as these early layers of discoveries at Olympia are concerned.*
Somewhere within this series is to be placed a comparatively small number of animal
representations," into which the goat seems for the first time to have been introduced,
which are strikingly contrasted with the main continuous series in that they possess
I would suggest that these are the "
advanced naturalism. strictly Mycenaean" types
which apparently were found in the vicinity of the Pelopeum wall.
Now the excavators of Olympia tell us that the terra-cottas come from the very earliest
in the earth is concerned, correspond to the very
layers, and, as far as their position
earliest bronze figures found there. These terra-cotta human figures, to judge from the
specimens which are published," mark a later stage than our earliest figurines. They
are much more advanced in articulation and the sex is
clearly indicated. All these terra-
"
cottas and bronzes were found in the " black layers surrounding the earliest altar to the
south of the wall at Olympia, towards the wall of the Pelopeum. The lowest of
Heraeum
these layers, and partly the second as well, are earlier than the building of the Heraeum
of Olympia." The earliest layer runs beneath the foundation walls of that temple.
1 *
See Olympia, IV., Bronzen, pi. xvii. Nos. 279, 280, Pis. xiii., xiv.
^ and Nos. 178-196.
281, 283, 284, iu which a few specimens of terra-cottas Pis. xi. xii.
«
are given. PI. xvii. Nos. 279, 280, 281, 283, 284.
2 '
Op. cit. pis. x., xi., xii., xiii., xiv., xv., and xvi. Furtwangler, Olympia, IV., Bronzen, p. 2.
" to about Nos.
Op. cit. pi. X. Nos. 106-133, pi. xi.

177 or 178.
 THE VASES 49

Now the Ilenieiuii of Olympia, whi(;h is the ohlcHt

temple there, ami, by these findii
beneath it, [)oiiits to a woi-Hhip of Hera on this site before the wonihip of Zeiw wan
there introduced, —
Heraeuni of Olympia, we are told,' was built
this
by ScilluntiaiiH
ei}?ht years after Oxylus had biken possession of Elis, which would lead us biu-k U» the
Dorian invasion (between B. c. IKK) and KKK)) for the bnildinj; of the t4?mple. The
wooden pillai-s by hiter stone ones luis l)een carefully
reniarkal)le replacing of the old
noted by Diirpfeld." Dr. Penrose assijjns this temple to the year 1445. The date
given by Pausimias may refer to the erection of the stone ]nlkrH in the early temple,
wliich retained its original orientation and was built there by Pre-Dorian |>eople.
lie this as it
may, we know
that, long before the foundations of this Olympian temple
were erected, the remains of the albir and the accunndation of primitive votive ofFerings
in the black layers surrounding it pouit to many generations of Hera cult on this
very
spot. The terra-cottiis found in these early hiyers are much biter in style than Ckuw I.
and II. of our Ileraeum terra-cottjis. Thus the bronzes and term-cottm of Olympia
confirm the early date which we assign to our Pre-Mycenaejin terni-<'ott;is from the
Argive Heraeum.
VASES.

The finds of early ceramic ware at the Heraeum are so numerous and complete, and
have such important bearings upon the earliest art of Greece, that, in dealing with them
here, we cannot confine ourselves to their consideration merely in the light of the strik-

ing illustration they offer to the main point which we have hitherto considered in the
history of theHeraeum. For their bearing upon the early history of ceramic art in
Greece such that I venture to maintiiin they will lead to a new classification of this
is

important branch of archaeological evidence, or at least to a thorough reconsidenition

of the classification hitherto accepted. Nay, beyond this I believe that these finds furnish
most invaluable material for the study of the origin and development of art in genenil.
But while most importiint, so that we can hardly resist drawing
this latter aspect is

conclusions wliich the objects presented by our spades have revealed to us, we feel that
the introduction of so wide and fai--reaching a topic would lead us too far and would be
out of proportion to the main scheme of this publication. We must therefore reser^'e
the treatment of this aspect of our finds for some future occasion. On the other hand,
it would be impossible for us to utilize our collective material of vases for the informa-
tion they give as to the earliest histoiy of the Heraeum without considering the new

bglit which these finds throw upon the whole classification

of early Greek pottery.'
At the close of our first year's digging (in 1892) one fact of fundamental importance
impressed itself upon me. And though I ventured to give partial pulilication to these
views at the successive public meetings of the American School at Athens, 1 did not feel

justified in fixing
them in print until the huge number of specimens which we had trans-
ported to Athens had been cleaned, and to some degree classified by the intelligent
industry of my colleague, Dr. Hoppin.^ After careful observation of the material thus
before us and the mature application of inductive principles, I now feel confirmed in the

1
Paus. "V. 16. 1. a new departure in such inquiry. I am bappy to And

' that these results in the main confimi the conclusions to

Olympia, II. (Architecture), p. 35.
'
Since this was sent to the printer, among other impor- which the Heraeum discoveries led me.
*
tant discoveries and publications, the striking discoveries The detailed classification of all the rich finds in

of Messrs. Evans and Hogarth in Crete and the publica- vases will be given by him in the special chapter deTutad

tion of Professor Ridgeway's Early Age of Greece mark to these works.

50 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
impression which the excavations themselves forced
first

upon me, and feel justified in submitting them to the

judgment of archaeologists.
" Proto-
The preponderance on this site of so-called
"
Corinthian ware attracted our attention at the very be-
y-inninp" of the excavations. And when further the fact
forced upon our notice that in the distinctive chai^
itself

acteristics of thisware there was a continuity, not only in

its development from the earliest primitive to the latest

vases, but also from the most inferior and cheapest hand-
made vessel — probably sold for the smallest coin in the
booths of the local potter before the walls of the sanctuary, Fig. 22. — Mycknaean Vase, with
together with the cheap and rude idols
—
to the most per-
From
DULL UNGLAZED COLOR.
and Loeschcke,
Fiirtwiingler
fect specimen of delicate ceramic work, I then felt that we No. 175.
Mykenische Vasen, pi. xxiv.

here had to deal with local manufacture peculiar to the

Heraeum or the Argive plain, to which I propose to give the name of Argive-Linear.
But if this be true, then the current and established classification of all the early Greek
pottery will have to be reconsidered,
and the modifications thus caused in
thisimportant class of archaeological
evidence will tend to modify our views
with regard to the early history of the
Greek people.
The current view most widely ac-

cepted by archaeologists for the his-

torical classification of early Greek

pottery is
chiefly based upon the funda-
mental work done by Furtwangler and
Loeschcke ' on Mycenaean vases. In a
brief form this classification is marked
by the following subdivisions."
Primitive ware, for which we prac-

tically rely upon the finds of Hissar-

lik, consists chiefly of rough hand-

made pottery, either of the simplest
rounded bowl shape, with holes for
suspension by means of a cord instead
of handles, or eccentric human and
animal forms, which I would call the
Fig. 23. — Mycenaean Vase (erom Ialysus), naturalistic, of early pottery.
corojilastic 2:iliase
WITH lustrous Glaze.
The decorations upon these are chiefly
From Furtwiiugler and Loeschcke, Mykenische Vasen, pi. v.
No. 281. those modeled or incised. This cate-
gory receives scant treatment at the
hands of most writers on Greek ceramics, and is
practically left as an unknown quantity,
'
'
Furtwangler and Loeschcke, Mykenische Vasen and Klassischen Alterthums, article '
Vasenknnde ; Rayet et

Mykenische Thongefdsse. CoUignon, Hist. d. Ceramique Grecque

I.
; Dumont et
^
a. Von Rohden in Baumeister's Denkmiiler des Chaplain, Les Ceram. d. I. Grece Propre.
 CLASSIFICATION OF KAULY VASES 61

prof(!(linp^ tho second class with whicli t\w Greek as well aH

H|M'<ificiiIIy anti(|uities,
tnulitioiiiil liistoiy, have l)eeii
supposed to hejrin,
— namely,
Myeenaean ware, Tim
broad and diveisitied class includes a form of vase, deeonited in color, which,
very early
especially in the types of Thera (Santorini), forms a transition from the
primitive to tlie
Mycenaean. As a matter of fact the Santorini vases cannot he
distinffnisluHl in their
essential qualities from the earliest specimens included amouff the Mycenaean vaws.
First, there are vases with dull, ungla/ed color Fr«»m thew nidimentjiry
(Fijj. 22).

beginnin«;s the Mycenaean vases rise throuj^h many categories, minutely distinfruisheil
by Furtwiingler and others, to averyhij^h form of ceramic i>erfection. This is eM|HH-uilly
the case when the new
feature of <^lazed or lustrous color is added (V'lfr.^'.i), whicli

gives such variety to their painted decorations and foreshadows the most beautiful vjwes
of the later historical Greek periods. These vases f<uni<l at and on Mycenae Myeenaean
sites in company with beautiful work in gold and other materials have hitherto been
connected with the Homeric; descriptions of the
surroundings in which the Atridae and their
fellow heroes lived at Mycenae and elsewhere.
The third category (Fig. 24) differs es.sentially
from the Mycenaean class ; and though it
maintiiins, as regards the actual performance
of the potter's skill, a very high stiinchird, the

peculiar taste in the forms adopted by him, as

well as the peculiar system of painted orna-

mentation, mark a distinct change or break

from the previous traditions which appear to
vanish when this third class comes into the
field. And as regards artistic feeling this
third class distinctly shows a retrograde move-
ment of a more inartistic people. This period
has been identified with the inroad of the
Dorians which swept away the Achaean civili-

zation preceding it. From

the peculiar style Fig. 24. — Mycknakan Vask, with m-htrous
(il.A/.K, C()NVKNTIONAI_
of ornamentiition on these vases they are known
From Furtwiingler aud Loesclii-ke, Mykenische Vasen,
as
" as some of the most strik-
Geometric," or, p. 'J9, fig. 17.
were first found about the Dipy-
ing examples
"
lon gate of Athens, as " Dipylon ware (Fig. 25). Next follows a fourth class of gen-
erally smaller vases of peculiar shape and refined workmanship,
with neat linear orna-
mentiition (Fig. 2G), into which subsequently friezes of certain animals are introduced

(Fig. 27), the so-called Proto-Corinthian ware, for which Dr.

IIop{)in has \\h\i good rea-
son proposed the name " '
This gradually becomes more elaborate and redun-
Argive."
dant in its decoration, until it natiu-ally leads over to a chwis intimately relatetl to it,
It is at this point that oriental influences are
namely, the fifth class, or Corinthian ware.
manifest in the wealth, as well as in the specific detjiils, of ornamentation. liut in time

these foreign characteristics are eliminated in this Corinthian ware, and the final emanci-

pation from archaic conventionalism as well as

from alien influences is gradually worked
out in the establishment of the typical Greek style of historical
times. This is done

chieHy at Athens in the earlier black-figured and

then in the beautiful red-figured ware
'
See Am. ./our. Arch. liMHI. p. 445.
62 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
of the classical period (7 and 8). In this rapid survey, I have of course omitted the
minor intermediary subdivisions localized in the Greek islands and elsewhere.
What we are here chiefly concerned with is the relation which the Mycenaean vases
and the style they represent hold to those forms with which in time and space they come
into immediate contact. The chief
and most striking characteristic of
Mycenaean ware, besides the great
advance that is made in the refine-
ment and elaboration of the clay
itself, and the characteristic variety
of beautiful shapes which ai-e given
to the vases as such, is to be found
in the distinct artistic quality of the

painted decoration, which quality cor-

responds to that of the designs in
precious metal, in cut stones, gems,
and other materials. This charac-
teristic is the free naturalism both in
the feeling for line as well as in the
forms, and in the life which these
lines and colors render. And this

freedom of naturalistic draAving is

directly opposed, and marks an anti-

thesis, tothe geometrical or more

mechanical feeling of ornamentation ;

and thus the decorations on the typi-

calMycenaean vase can be appreciated
in their characteristic qualities by

contrasting them with those of the

Geometric vase by which they are
succeeded, and by the mechanical

Fig. 25. — Dipylon Vase. feeling of primitive decoration in the

From Mon. IX. vases which precede them. The
d. Inst. pi. 39.

Mycenaean principle would thus be

naturalistic as opposed to decorative and linear, and freehand in drawing as opposed to
the more conventional decorative feeling and mechanical drawing of the geometric order.
While admitting, nay, confirming this distinctive attribute of Mycenaean vase-decora-
earliest groups included
tion, I on the one hand maintain that it does not apply to the
in this subdivision, namely, the dull-colored vases, nor to a great number of later dis-

tinctly Mycenaean vases, especially

small vases ; and on the other hand, I would insist
the fact that at no time Avas a certain geometrical element entirely excluded from
upon
the ornamentation of the Mycenaean vases. I may at once say now, what will receive
vases
fuller confirmation as proceed, that, though, in the latest forms of Mycenaean
we
their
showing signs of degeneracy, the groAvth of conventionalism prepares the Avay for
and shows transitional between the I main-
supersedence by the Dipylon vases, stages tAvo,

tain that also at the other end of the Mycenaean scale, at its earliest beginnings, Ave have
a preponderance of geometric feeling.
 DIPYLON VASES 68
Tilt' <>ieatest eonfuHion has been caused "
hy the
'
iiiiHiioiiu>r GwuiM-trit," t4»
apjiluftl
tlie so-called Dipylon vases. As we shalf see, the {geometric
feeling of urimiiientutiun
prevails in the earliest times, and is never lost in
any
period within the liistory of all these early vases.
The ciiaraeteristie dill'erenee in the application of
this principle in the so-called Dipylon vasts is not
so much
the linear, meaningless decoration, as
in

contrasted with the renderinjj^ of life and nature, hh

in the redun(hincy of "geometrical ornament over

the whole vase, which is thus subdivided

hy these
" "
designs into compartments that hold a mathemat-
ical relation to one another ; and in the fact that

these crowded elements of decoration are repeated,

if not always with identity, at least with the jjreatest

similarity of character. It has thus been

justly re-
marked that this style of ornamentation on painted
vases seems to have been borrowed from some other
form of manufacture in which the design, owing to
the mechanical system of its production, necessiirily FlO. '20. — AwilVK (I'KOTO-C'OKINTIIIAM)
leads to this redundancy, and to this repetition. This
Va8k, Linkak HTVLK.
is to be found
chiefly in the art of weaving ])atterns From the lleraeuni.

or of basket-work, and
highly probable that
it is

these crafts had their influence upon the decorative feeling of the
Dipylon vase-paint«'r.
The importiuit point upon which I wish to insist is that the geometric feeling -m
expressed in regular and symmetrical lines, whether straight or curved, irresjMJctive of any
imit^ition of objects innature or of any meaning beyond the direct appeal to the aesthetic
sense of vision as such, was always present as a prominent element in the decoration of

Mycenaean vases, and that at the earlier stages it was i)redominant, iiecause these earlier

stiiges were the direct and natural development of the sjime ])rincii)le in primitive art.
Among the various groups into which Mycenaean vases have been divided,
there is not one in which we could not find vases the decoration of which
consists solely of linear or geometrical ornaments. This is
especiiilly the
case with the Mycenaean vases of smaller
size, generally
— in fact, it is

only in the larger and finer specimens that the more elaborate, natunil-
istic ornament is introduced. And where this naturalistic ornament is
present, we must not forget that it is set off by a series of lines drawn
round the vase, the most import<int part of general ornament, which its

Fig. 27. — Akgivk is SO mucli like the Argive-Linejir, hitherto called Proto-Corinthian deco-

i-j^tion, that when we merely find fragments of Mycenaean vases cont;iin-

(I'lioTo-CoRiNiiii-
'

lyyjy ing these linear ornaments, it Ls

extremely difficult, if not imiM)ssible, to
From tlie Hciiieiiin. decide whether they belong to a vase of the naturalistic Mycenaean class
or to the Argive-Linear class. This is still more difficult, if not imiM)s-
sible, in the case of small vases, where we merely have a shape that has been assigned
tothem as distinctly Mycenaean, but which does not seem to me to justify us in chissing

them as Mycenaean instead of our advanced Argive-Linear (Proto-Corinthian).

'
I sincerely hope that the term "Dipylon," which
"
Mycenaean," will be henceforth used instead of " Geo-
iu its connotation of locality corresponds to the term metric."
54 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
But it
may be urged that these smaller Mycenaean vases containing linear ornaments
like that o£ the
Argive-Linear classbelong to a late and degenerate period, when Myce-
naean naturalism was dying out, and having passed into the stsige of growing conven-
tionalization, left the field open to pure geometric design. To this I answer that the
pure linear geometric feeling present, and runs side by side with the most complete
is

naturalism on the best specimens of aU classes of Mycenaean vases, that, as we shall see,
the earliest dull-colored class is purely linear, and that insfcmces of undoubtedly Myce-
naean ware can be found in which linear ornamenfcition is demonstrably earher than
naturalistic ornamentation found on the same site. I will here cive a most striking and
conclusive instance of such evidence furnished by the actual conditions of excavations.
Tsountas^ discovered a most important tomb at Mycenae, in which, besides numerous
other objects of distinctly Mycenaean ware, were vases
that are decidedly not of the latest period of Mycenaean

vase-painting. The end of the dromos, at the entrance

to the tomb proper, was blocked up, as is frequently the
case, by stones, among which was made the happy dis-
covery of a stone bearing a painted procession of warriors
(Fig. 28) corresponding to those that were already known
from Mycenaean vase-paintings. But this discovery is
still more
important from the fact that below the stucco
which had been applied to the surface of the stone to
prepare for the painter, in the upper portion, where
it

this is chipped away, are the remains of earlier carved

decoration, and this decoration,
corresponcUng to that of
several Argive-Linear plates and vases which we have

found, consists of simple straight Unes connected with

circles,
— a purely hnear and geometrical ornamenbition.
Now there can be no doubt that the painted stone, which
was thus used with other materials at hand to stop up the
entrance to the tomb, and so must have been lying about
useless for some time (there is no sign of its having
formed an integral part of the decoration of the tomb),
must have been considerably earlier than the objects in
Fig. 28. —
Mycenaean Tombstone the tomb itself. The structure which it embellished had
with carved and painted deco-
long gone out of use. But when embelhshed
this stone,
RATION.
From 1896. by geometrical ornaments, was covered with stucco upon
Tsountas, 'E<priii. Apx.
which figures were painted, it had again completely lost
its make it thus available as raw material for the painter. This again
original use to
implies a considerable interval. Evidently, therefore, the linear ornament on the stone
antedates the Mycenaean painting upon it, and by a still greater period the Mycenaean
vases in the tomb.^
So far from linear ornament marking a later degeneration of the Mycenaean style, I
maintain that that class of ware which has hitherto been considered the earliest stage of

'
'E^ij^€p($, 1896, pp. 1 ff. pis. i., ii. VI., V.) are either completely geometrical in the case
^ I would
also draw attention to the fact that the of the architectural carvings, or are subdivided by geo-
stone carvings found at Mycenae (Schliemann, Mycenae ; metrical decorations, as in the case of the rudely carved
Tsountas-JIanatt, pp. 91, 119, 120, etc. Perrot-Chipiez,
; tombstones with human and animal figures.
 LINEAR OKNAMENT 65
that style, iiaincly, the clasH with diilltjohiml
paiiitiiifTH, hIiowh throiijrh.mt notliin^r hut
this linear system ; while the of haiid-made ware, the ru<ler nuiteriiil, anW the
prevalence
iM((>iui)leteness in the development of cemmie forniH in thewj uit t4) vaneH, iirjje eluiiuify
them in the Pre-Myeenaean rather than in
the distinctly Mycenaean class.

system of linear decoration is con-

If this

tinuous with the Mycenaeiin period and can

in its purity he traced also in vases that be-
l()n<>- to the Dipyh)n period, so that
it
always
willhe diflicult to distin<;uish some
speci-
mens of so-called Proto-Corinthian ware from
vases that may be ascribed to both these
other categories, the Ileraeiun finds,
espe-
cially in small vases, show that this system
presents an unbroken development from the
earliest primitive forms to the latest
speci-
mens of perfect ceramic craft. In drawinjij
attention to this development as illustrated

by our finds, I will exclude the consideration

of the eccentrically shaped primitive vases.

For, as has been sjiid above, the impulse

which led to the creation of these vases comes
from the corophist rather than from the
ceramist. To introduce them into this ques- ^.o. 29. - Examh.ks ok ,n.-.8k.. L..nkak ()k.na«»:.nt.
tion at this stage would only confuse matters. From the Hpraeom.
The earliest ornamentiition of our jirimitive pottery, as in the primitive ware all over
the world,' consists not of painted decoration but of incised lines, scnitched,
pivsst'd, or
cut with rude instruments and with uncertjiin hand, upon the of the hand-made
clay ymt,
generally in softer sfcige.
its I here give a few specimens (Fig. 29) of this ornamentation
ill what were meant to be
straight parallel lines or zigziig or waved ornaments.^ This
rude and uncerfciin decoration corresponds to the work of the potter who did not use the
wheel. We find the same kind of pottery and ornament on all the earliest sites of the
ancient world.^ Linear decoration in the same stage of incipient development is found
also in other early crafts, such as in what
might be called gem-engraving, of which our
'
Cf. Fliiiders-Petrie, Egyptian Decorative Art, pp. 9 ff. of purely geometrical design on the rude objects in pre-
^
See, for instance, for the pottery found in the lowest historic lake dwellings in the valley of the Po, such as
stratum at Ilissarlik (Troy), Schlieinann, Ilios, pp. 216, those published by Strtibcl and Pigurini (in the Bullet.
217, 295, 354, 359, etc. ; also, p. 563, and Nos. 1817- di paieontol. Italian. I., II., III., especially IV. pi. 1, 1).
2000. Cf. also Ilelbig, Italiker in drr Poeheiu. The remote an-
' Tlie early graves excavated
by DUmmler at Amor- tiquity of such forms of ceramic decor.ttion can be appre-
" when we study
gos, Atken. Milth. XI. pp. 15 ff., whether pre-Hel- ciated the potter)- found in Kgypt, such
"
Icuic or not, certainly show a preponderance of the as that of which Messrs. Kliuders-Petrie and Quibcll tell
geometrical ornamentation in the pottery, where we have us that it cannot be later than the 12th dynasty, which

not the " coroplastic " eccentricity of the primitive cera- brings us to the second half of the third millennium B. c.
mist. Compare also the decorated ware found in tombs See Petrie and Quibell, Nagada and liaUas, and the
of the Neolithic and Bronze periods in Sicily by Orsi other interesting Egyptian discoveries of this able exc«T»-
(Qiiattro Anni de Esplorazioni Siaite nella Provincia di tor, which bring us, in the case of Tell-el-Amama, face to
Siracusa, 1890-93), as well as the painted vases published face with Mycenaean Analogies might be foimd
pottery.
in that volume, which show in every centre of prehistoric, nay savage, art all over the
striking analogies to our
own finds. It is also interesting to study the ornaments world ; but I most postpone studying this wider aspect.
56 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
earliesttype merely shows a rounded stone with linear sci-atchings upon it.' In early
bronze work we see the same general system only here the earliest form of decoration
;

is produced not so much by scratching or incising as by beating out small bosses."

and feeling for symmetry grew and were aided especially by the intro-
Artistic skill
duction of the potter's wheel. For the mechanical process now came in to aid the
potter in producing the exactness and regularity which are essential to linear and geo-
metric decoration. And thus the fragments which I have placed below these earliest
linear scratchings show the development to which they lead after the potter's wheel is
used. For the incising instrument need then be merely held firmly while the clay
revolves, and the parallel lines are accurately produced without further effort. The
higher standard of decorative workmanship which is thus attained drives the decorating
potter to devise means of producing the same exactness in other linear and geometrical
forms, whether it be a combination of zigziig lines, waved patterns, circles, or a succes-
sion of impressed dots, or even masses of clay appUed to the body in straight or wavy
lines in relief.

When introduced and painted ornamentation is applied to vases,

color is we have the
same development as the one I have just noted with reference to incisions. The earliest
dull-colored ornaments are, as I have said, linear, and belong to hand-made vases ;
the

geometric design is thus not exact, regular, and symmetrical. With the introduction
of the wheel, not only does the form of the vase become more precise and symmetrical
in shape, but the painted decoration follows the same lines. I have here chosen from

among our finds a series (Fig. 30) of the simjilest and earliest forms of vases of which
similar specimens have been found in the earliest strata at Hissarlik, and we may say on
all ancient the simple small shell-like round bowl, with a hole added for
sites. It is

suspension in the earliest specimens. The four specimens here placed in the uppermost
line are hand-made, the otiiers mark the introduction of the wheel. The one placed
first at the left-hand corner is ornamented in the most
elementaiy way by means of
incision. Two lines are scratched in the inside of the bowl crossing each other in the
middle in the simjjlest shape of a cross. Besides this, small notches are pressed into the
rim. The next marks the step to painted ornamentation, and in this we have one simple
line painted across the inside of the bowl ;
the same in the next ;
while the fourth has
four such lines crossing one another. But these lines are drawn in a rude, uncertain
manner —
freehand. The specimens below them have the same linear ornamentation.
But the potter has wisely desisted from drawing straight lines across, and has given a
much more effective and constructive ornamentation of straight lines round the inside of
the bowl, thus presenting concentric circles. This was easier for him, because they were
drawn by simply holding the brush in the inside while the bowl was turned. The rough
notching on the rim of the first rude specimen is reproduced on two fragments of the
second line by regularly painted dots of color round the rim. And these elements
remain continuous. Now the specimens on the third line would at present be classed
as Mycenaean, and they certiiinly belong to that period chronologically the rounded ;

'
Mr. R. Norton will give a full and systematic corated by small repousse dots meant to be in regular
account of tlie
engraved stones
interesting series of early order, but really in wavy and uncertain lines, such as
discovered in our excavations, as well as of the earlier Nos. 302-306, 303, and then proceed gradually to Nos.
bone and ivory implements. 307, 309, 308.These show a similar process of technical
^
A most interesting series might also be made if we development such as I am here endeavoring to demon-
were to take the specimens of sheet bronze found at strate in our pottery.

Olympia (^Bronzen, pi. xviii.), beginning witli those de-

 "PKOTO COUINTJIIAN" WAKE 67

fragments ainonf? them are identical with th.^ linear ornamenfaition on nioxt
My«-..namn
vases. The sixicimens on the h)west Hne are also
(listinctly what i« «aiK-<i ProU^^Jorin-
thian. But there can he no douht tiiat these Iwt two lines
Moiifr U> the sunie K)-st«.|ii
of onianu^ntiition and are a continuous
deveh)i)ment out of the system in rudely upplitHl
the Hat cups at tlie top.
In all the nioie fully
developed specimens of the form I have just enumenitiHl, jrlaw«|
color has superseded the earlier dull-(!<dored decoi-ation. The lierit^ige handed on l»v the
vasti-painter from the early didl-colored style is the art «.f freehand drawinjr which the
Mycenaean vase-painter adoi)ts and develops still further in his natundistic frewh.m
when his imitative instinct directs his
eye to nature, an<l tiie
jfi-eiiter luxury of the life
surroundin<>- him leads to more
richly deco-
rated vases. But the other element in these
(lull-colored vase-paintin<>s, the
jreometrical
element, survives, and, followinj;- the more
exact method sugj^ested hy the
improved
ceramic process in the use of the wheel,
surroiuids the part hetween the foot and
the belly of the vase and that hetween the

helly and the shoulder with a perfected sys-

tem of linear ornaments.
In the smaller vases this latter
process of
linear ornamentation prevails, and asserts
itself through the Mycenaean and the Dipy-
lon periods down
to the latest development
of Argive-Linear ware, the so-called Proto-
Corinthian vases.
These final specimens of the development
of the Argive-Linear vase are always small,
and correspond in their essential form and
decoration to the earlier sjieciniens of small
vases which run through the preceding j)e-
Fio. 30. kxami'i.ks ok paintkd linkak
riods as just enumerated. But these earlier Orsamknt.
small vases diifer from these later ones in Froui the Ileraeum.

that they generally have the manifest char-

acteristic of cheapness stamped upon them, as wares of inferior value and luunhler uses.
We are thus not astonished to find that the simpler and ruder techniijiu's survive in
them. For it must never he forgotten that the humbler forms of indigenous art ret;iin,
even in the latest periods, the technique and general characteristics of the eiirlier art,
and this is true not only in ancient Greece, hut in all times and countries.'
Now the advanced Argive-Linear, the so-called Proto-Corinthian wai"e, shows the most
complete mastery over the potter's technique, and the greatest certainty in the use of the
brush on the jmrt of the decorator. Since the maker of the wirlier small sjHX'inu'us «>f
Argive-Linear ware was probably incapable of giving to his cheajMjr small vases the fine
brush-work required for further ornamenfcition which the skilled vase-painter «»f the
Mycenaean peri(»d ])ut into the more costly large vases,
—
this earlier ex|M>iu>nt of Argive-

Linear technicpie had to remain content with mere linejir decoration. More eLihorate
'
Compare, for instance, cheap clay figures suck as uiny be seen iu poor shops at Florence, or the art of the baker.
 58
•

GENERAL INTRODUCTION
forms of decorative work are thus absent from the earher Argive- Linear ware. But in
the advanced period this is no longer the case and, by successive stages, we at last ;

arrive at thosemost perfect specimens of ceramic art and decoration, unsurpassed by the
" Proto-Corinthian "
best work in any period, which culminate in the miniature Lecythos
presented by Mr. Maemillan to the British Museum,^ and, next in order, the similar speci-
men in the Berlin Museum.'^ In these vases (of. Fig. 26), and in many of the same
order preceding them by many years in time, small vases are distinctly considered worthy
of the highest ceramic and decorative elaboration.
venture to suggest the following explanation for this change in the character
I

of such small vases. The elaborateness of the vase follows the use to which it is i)ut.
The simpler and humbler this use is, the less elaborate is its artistic form and decoration.
I believe that much error would be avoided by archaeologists dealing with vases if this

general truth were borne in mind. sepulchral vase, a prize vase, a gift between lovers, A
would naturally invite the maker to more beautiful and luxurious decoration than when
the object is a rough cooking utensil or the gift of a poor person, who buys, for the
smallest coin from the huckster outside the sanctuary walls, the object which she will
offer to the divinity.^ Now, until the end of the Dipylon period these small vases had
generally served these humbler purposes they were the cheaper votive offerings. From
—
this time on they become more expensive ware, probably because they are turned to more

costly uses. They now become the receptacles for the precious unguents and perfumes
which more luxurious forms of life introduce. These luxurious forms of life were hardly
natural and indigenous to the male portion of the Doric population at Argos.
If we examine the large mass of specimens of advanced Argive-Linear or Proto-Corin-
thian ware found at the Heraeum, we shall see that as they advance in perfection and
elaboration they tend to become, in the style of their decoration, more and more
oriental in character, and it is in these later stages that they naturally lead over to the

orientalizing style of early Corinthian vases. The name Proto-Corinthian has thus
some intrinsic justification when applied to this limited category of the Argive-Linear
ware. Now I consider it highly probable that the more luxurious habits introduced into

the Doric communities at the time when these small local vases were developed in their

peculiar later style were introduced from the East.

These were chiefly commercial arti-
cles, not meant for the male portion of the community, but for the women. The vases
which came to be used to hold these oriental unguents and perfumes became articles de
toilette. Butthese articles are costly and luxurious, and the vase containing precious
material is
worthy of most careful treatment at the hands of the ceramist. occasion- We
1
Cecil Smith, Journ. Hellen. Stud. XI. (1890), pp. 167 voiaav 4iroi€ifiiir9a. ras airfi(/?)(ras

ff. pis. i., ii. 4ir' VT^ias av ^ a"a^ Tetuas.

X^'P^i^
2
Berliner Vasensanimlung, No. 330. — «'" ^H^v^ ^br Trlyaxa, KoKKd\n, a-rnnov
^
III illustration of the sliding: scale of the value of '^''^ 'l'"7'f")5-
^^^ .„ „„
^
,„ .
,. , . , , , Herodas, IV. 12-20.
votive oiierings accoraiiig to the means of the aonor, and
of the inferiority of terra-cotta idols and jiinaces, made Non ego tiire modo aut picta tua templa tabella ornabo, aut
puns .serta feram manibus
by inferior craftsmen, as compared with superior works
;

Corniffor haut aries liumilis, sod maxima tanriis victima sacra-

of art, Mr. Walter Ileadlam has furnished me with the
J. ,1 .

tollowuiff mterestinff I
.

o passages
o
, ,.
:
— tos tinffuet honore foeos.
,r ., , x- t^ » t. , t ^*- • -

Vergil, aa \ enerem, iSa-Qhren^ J^oetae Latint Minores,

rcoXcKTOpos Tou5', ouTiv^ oIkitj^ Toix<*iv II p 17().

K4)puKa 0VW, ranihoptra^' Bf^attrBe-

ou yap Ti iroW^v ol'S' '4toi(xov avrXiv^ep, wffirep hv tt tis ^fi^iav rov rh ttjs 'A^Tji'a? tSoy tpyaad/^evov
cTTf! Tctx' ^^ $ovi/ ^ vivqfjLfvqv KaX(:7v KopoirKaQov, 7.fv^iv koX Tlappdcnov t7}v avr^p
xo^pov To\pL''"q 1)

TToW^s <popivT]s KovK o.AfKTop' X7]Tpa ^X^^^ (puiTj T^X^V^ T<*'s TO TTifaKLa ypa(pov(Tii^.
* DfMeri onlv ; it cannot serve for the meal itself (^pw^ia). Isocrat.es, Or. XV. 2.
 CONTINUITY OF THE AUGIVE-LINKAK 59

ally found specimens of this ware of which the cbiy wa8 ho hi};hly levigated and lieauti-
fully worked that, thin as paper, it crumbled in our hands, and could not Imj |)re«?r\'wl.
We must therefore not be astonished to find that orientalizinff ten<h'nci<«H and de<-ora-
tions are frnidually introducinl into these vases, as we must reniendxT that mime of tlie
most characteristic forms —
the aryballos, the alabastron, the pyxis, certiiin forms of the
.small oinochoe —
existed lonjf before their appearance in GnnK-e in };ktss, ^rkiy^Ml and

unglazed pottery of Egyptian and Phoenician origin. These foreign forms, no doubt,
also had their influence on the development of the shai>es in the local Argive ware of
these periods.
This oricnfcilizing phase maiks the last stage in the development of the Argive-Linwir
pottery, which we can trace from the earliest beginnings through tlie linear and dull-
colored painted ware, redlining its
vitality especially in the snmller
vases, during
the Mycenaean and Dipylon periods, but manifestly also influencing the decoration
of the larger vases in these times ; and then, when these two great and distinct iieritMlH
have passed and their influence has spent itself, the Argive-Linear fonn still sur^'ivj»s in
what has hitherto been called Proto-Corinthian ware, and leads organically, in itH orien-
tiilizing phase, when it has run its course of many centuries, to the Corinthiiin ware.

Though I
upon urging the continuity of Argive-Linear pottery through all age«
insist

in the history of the Ileraeum, I do not mean to imply that we cannot distinguish here
and elsewhere a fixed and clearly defined class called Mycenaean, which in the ini]M»rtant
introduction of glazed color, in the evolution of beautiful cemmic shapes, and in it« artistic

individuality of decoration, stjvnds out clearly in general historical development. The

more we recognize the continuity of the Argive-Linear ware, the more does the Mycenaeam

period stand out in bold relief as a striking though natural development of some of the
elements pre-formed in the more primitive dull-colored ware. So, too, the so-called

Dipylon ware is equally characteristic and distinct, though it also exists at the Heraeum
side by side with the Argive-Linear ware. The Dipylon ware really marks a niore dis-
tinct change decorative characteristics (in spite of the word "geometrical ") than
in its

does the Mycenaean ware. For its element of redundant geometrical decoration points,
as has been said above, to the introduction of new principles borrowed from some other
technique, whereas the Mycenaean, in spite of the marked advance which it represents, is
still essentially a development of the principles which underlie the dull-colored primitive
decoration.
This ceramic evidence seems to show that we have a continuous indigenous element
represented by the Argive-Linear ware,
and that the Mycenaean, as well as the Dipylon,
periods are laid over, though they
cannot extii-jiate or hide from our view this con-
tinuous indigenous layer. and
They may, did, mark an importiint pditical or
probably
ethnical change and modification within the Argive district, be it through conquest from

without, violent change of dynasty, or peaceful change through marriage

and heredity
within, the grafting of a new dominant class upon
the older population, or, finally,
intercommunication of peoples or exchange or
peaceful commercial
influences through
ofgoods. It is
beyond the purpose of our work to enter into the problems
importation
of ethnoloo-y, or to draw the historical conclusions from the archaeological material
before us but we must classify and arrange scientifically the material which good for-
;

tune has placed in our hands.

One importcint conclusion, bearing immediately upon the history of the Heraeum, we
are bound to draw from the evidence of ceramic ware which has forced us to insist upon
60 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
a new
classification of early Greek pottery. This conclusion is the same as that impressed

upon us by the Heraeum terra-cottas in confirmation o£ all the other evidence which

we have hitherto examined :

—
that, long before the Mycenaean period, the potter's craft
the Heraeum, and furnishes evidence
passed through many stages of development at
of a continuous worship on this site for many generations preceding the Mycenaean age,
and that this continuity speaks for the unbroken continuance of an early population,
subject to changes in its social
and political life —
but always there.
I must draAV attention finally to the complete parallelism furnished by our finds

between the series of terra-cottas and the successive phases in the history of the early
vases found at the Heraeum. In the vases we have the earliest specimens of primitive

Argive-Linear ware with incised ornaments which correspond to our primitive class of
Argive terra-cottas. The early Argive-Linear with painted ornamentation and the dull-
colored paintings correspond to what I should call terra-cottas of the Tirynthian-Heraeum
class. We
then have the middle Argive-Linear surviving during the Mycenaean and

Dipylon period, corresponding to the terra-cottas which we call Mycenaean-Argive and

Geometric-Argive. The advanced Heraeum type of terra-cotfcis with the human shape
woidd correspond to the advanced Argive-Linear (pro to-Corinthian) period, in which cer-
tain specimens of terra-cottas shoAV the same technique as in the vases, and form a
transition to the following class of archaic terra-cottas. But before we arrive at the
archaic terra-cottas, we must introduce here a series of terra-cottas that are distinctly

oriental in character, and that would correspond to the orientalizing Argive-Linear period

in the vases. We then come, in vases as well as in terra-cottas, to the clearly historical

periods in which through the Corinthian and the early black-figured vases, we are
led to the best classical red-figured ware. Of this latter we have a few isolated speci-
mens at the Heraeum, as we also have through the archaic and advanced archaic terra-
cottas a few isolated specimens of images belonging to the best classical period. The
following table will illustrate the parallelism.

Dates B. C.
 THE BKONZKS 61

BKONZKS.

The bronze unci nieUil ware found at tlie Heraeuin will receive exIuitiHtive treatment
at tln' lijinds of Mr. De Con. But in connection with the ifenenil of the IlenuMini
hintxiry
and with the light which our individual lindH throw upon it, I niUMt here |M»int to one
most intcr(!stin<;- feature of our discovericH whi(;h inipresHed itself
u|Nni nic from the
very earliest sfciges of our excavation. One of the singular facts in tlie relative iiuiuImt
of objects found is that, with the exception of a few isolited cases in which coins
Hp|M!ure4l
near th(! surface in our excavation, no coins what<!ver canu; to in anv of the stnit^i light
in wliichthousands of other objects were found. The natural inference is that in the
times to which these finds belong there was no couiage at Argos. This fact is more-
over borne out by the general history of coinage in Greece. And (jis we are able Ut
furnislia most striking and fortunate illustration of tins fact) it is to IMiiihtn <»f ArgoH
that the introduction of coinage at Aegina and of a systtMU of weights and measiirim are
I cannot at this time enter into the vexed
ascribed. question of the exiM;t (Lite when
Piiidon of Argos lived.' Although we found no coins in the lower layers, we did,
on the other hand, find innumerable objects in metal, especially bronze, among which a
certiiin simple kind of bronze pin,
developed out of the ordinary nail shape into more
ornamentjil and elaborate forms, constiintly recurred in all the earlier layers. " Alio
kumhl!" (another nail) was the constiint call of our excavators when another one of
these nail-like pins was found. Besides these we were contin willy coming upon pieces
of thinner or thicker bronze wire or rods, which in many cases had knobs at intervals,
as if to be used for handles. The thought at once came to us that these were spits. In
the sjime way we came upon and pieces of wire twisted into
iron rods in other layers,
decorative shapes (for instjince, the Pretzel shape, CS2^ ). Finally, in the northeast end
of the Second Temple platform we were much astonished to find two huge objects of
iron (Fig. 31). The one was greeted by our workmen with the call of " a cannon," for
it
certainly was of the dimensions and weight of a field-gun. The other, slightly snuiUer,
was a mass of iron, a square bar flattened out into a lauce-shai>ed curve, of which
solid
the point has been flattened down. The cannon-shaped iron mass was f«)und to consist
of innumerable rounded bars of metiil coming to a point and held together at either end

by an iron coil tightly twisted round them, so that they all j)resented one mass. If it
had belonged to Roman times, one would have called it a huge iron rendering of the
lictor's stiiffs.

Nowwhen, even in the first year, this vast number of bronze spits and pins were found,
the thought at once presented itself that these objects were used for their money value
in metiil for it is quite impossible to believe that the men and women were consfcintly
;

shedding the pins which held their garments together on this site, in a nunner to pro-
duce such a mass of bronze objects as compared with the number of other finds. Nay,
I felt convinced that not only these but also the innumerable bronze rings of various

sizes and thicknesses —

though they may have had some ritual meaning as offerings to
Hera from affianced couples —
were dedicated and preserved here as objects of metallic
value,
—
and that in the daily life of the people these were used in lieu of ordinary coin.
We only need study the primitive currency of other early peoples and of savages - to
pp. .">79-625
Biisolt, Griech. Gesch. I.
'
Ilolm (Griech. Gesch. I. p. 20;".) gives n. c. 770, also Ridgewmy'
;

Stais (UpaKTiKi, 1895, p. 236) 745 ;

while Beloch (Griech. Origin of Currency and Weight Stamiard, pp. 210 IT.
Compare Ridcgway, op. cit. cap. i. Sir John Kirk
-
Gesch. I.
p. 280) puts him into the sixth century. See
 62 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
see how such metal objects, wh-e rings and pins and
were everywhere used for spits,

money. When, finally, the two huge iron objects (Fig. 31), which could not conceivably
have served any actual use, were found, the account which ancient authors give of the
'
dedication of the spits (6/8eXio-/<oi) at this very Heraeum of Argos, when first Phidon
struck money at Aegina, seemed the only explanation of the facts of our finds, which
thus, on their side, furnish us with a most striking archaeological confirmation of the
stcitements of ancient historical writers.
The evidence ofthe several departments of individual finds, each dealt with
all
by my
competent collaborators, tends to confirm my main thesis concerning the earliest history
of the Heraeum, and to bear out the chronological classification forced
upon me the by
general and special topography of the Heraeum, the architectural evidence of the remains,
the local traditions of the district, and by a careful
study of the terra-cottas and vases.
Mr. De Cou, who for more than four years has devoted himself to the cleaning and
most painstaking study of the bronze objects for purposes of final classification, sends
me the following brief abstract of the general chronological
grouping of the bronzes
which he has been led to adopt from his prolonged study of the
objects themselves. It will
be seen that his classification, arrived at quite
independently from those of the other
objects, strictly corresponds in the main to these. His caution regarding the bronzes of
the primitive period is but natural, as we should expect but few objects of this material
at this early stage of civilization. It is also interesting to note that, as in the case of
"
our terra-cottas, the bronzes belonging to the " Geometric
style are comparatively few
in number.
The bronzes from the Argive Heraeum he has classified as follows :
—
" The
objects described in the catalogue are arranged (1) according to what they are or repre- :

sent (2) according to their style

e. g. all the horses or all the birds are
; ;
kept together, but are
arranged in classes and catalogue reference according to their style.
"Evidence for date and style is not furnished by the conditions of the site, except for the ter-
minus ante quern 423 B. C. —
nor do any of the bronzes appear of themselves to be subsequent to
that date. For details one must depend mainly on the excavations of graves in Argolis, Attica,
the Cyclades, etc.
" There
is no evidence that
any of the bronzes from the Heraeum are of other than native manu-
facture. In the case, however, of the nude female figure with lotus head-dress, reflex Khodian
influence may be suspected.
" The
objects may be assigned to a Primitive, a Mycenaean, a Geometric, and an Archaic style
and period in rough chronological sequence.
Objects whicli suggest the so-called Oriental style
are included with the Archaic.
" Primitive.
There are no bronze objects from the Heraeum which necessarily must be put here,
but probable that some of the wire, nails, and chisels, some of the plain rings, and a portion
it is

of the single head straight pins (No. 52, etc.) should be

put in this period. The same is, perhaps,
true of a small suspension vase somewhat
resembling the Aegean type with standard and supension
holes at the side. Other objects which possibly may be of this period are an oblong plain bead
(No. 1547), some of the plain shallow saucers, certain headless corrugated straight pins (e. g. No.
116), and the plain open bracelet (No. 970).
"
Mycenaean. 1. Shaft-grave period. The Acropolis graves of Mycenae have the following

lias also informed me of a similar phenomenon in Zanzi- iav 'kpyiios v6/Aia^fia fxmliev iv Alytpri- xal Sobs rh viixurfia /caj

bar, where the natives use metal arrow-heads as coin; oraAo/Sii' tous 6$e\i<rKovs aveBriKf fv'Apyei'Hpr- «Vfi5t) 8e
T-ij

but have huge, useless and thin arrow-heads over two feet Tore ol 60f\i<TKoi ttji/ x^V" ^Tf^-hpow, rovrfart T^^' SpiKa, ^/ueis,
high, as representing larger sums. Kaltrtp /j.^ vr\,)povi'Tos riiv Spixa tqis «J o^6Kois Spox/^V avr^v
*
Etymol. Magn. S. v. iPf\l<TKOS : . . -ravTav 5e irpwros *6i'- Xiyafxtv -napa. -rh Spci^aaOal.
 CLASSIFICATION OF THE BRONZES 08

ohjetts wliicli are represeeited in kind at tiie Ileraeiiin Hound ami (iiainon<l-Hlia|ie(I wire, both in
:

straij^ht pieces and coils, nailH, Hpikes and ehiHel«, largo plain dinks with e«lge folded under (cf. No.
1713), and tiie wiHlilione type of howl-IiandlcH. 2. Of tiie later pcriml repniteutiMi liy the grmVM
of the lower city and other Mycenaean siteH, o. jj. Tiryns (in part),
Vapiiio, Menidlii, Salauiin, etc.,
the Ileraeum finds are more numerous, and comprise naiU with thick Hat heatU,
plain and orna-
mented rings, cylix or bowl handles of wishi)one tyyni, a small pitcher, Hhallow saucers with and
without handles, disks, etc. Many of tiie straight pins with licad and corrugated head*, ait well
as those with spool-heads and inserted bronze or iron pin-siiaftM (No«. 352-382), and alniut

fifty (ibidao (Nos. 808-857), together with the open Hcrew-threa<l bracelet with ends
comigatMl
(No. 972), belong here. It is also probable that tiie
simplest form of ball spit is to b« put here.
^'Geometric. To this style belong the horses, except Nos. 14-17 (early natundistio and traniii-

>.' ^9R•.,

t^-

1
Fig. 31. — Ikon Bars kxc.wated at thk Uekakum.

tional) and No. 18 (archaic), the birds, the deer (Nos. 19, 20), the fragments of large tri|KMls, the
straiglit pins (Nos. 722-807), the fibulae (Nos. 858-881), the ornamental bands (Nos. 1748, 1749),
and probably most of the engraved and punched coatings and the engraved spits. Under the influ-
ence of this style stand further the cow's head (No. 23), and the bird's tail (No. 49).
" Archaic. 1. Later and reflex
Mycenaean (so-called Oriental) influence cow's head (No. 25),
:

lion (No. 29), fibulae (Nos. 883-918). 2. More independent and develojied archaism fragments:

of statues (locks of hair), statuettes, horse (No. 18), cows (Nos. 2G, 27), mouse (No. 30, frag. No.

31), bird's head (No. 50), mirrors, saucers, sphinx amphora, fragment of rim with lotus and
palmettos, low tripod stand, hand strainer, handle with engraved horses' heads, fragment of chariot
antyx, imitation harness straps, ring-fibulae (Nos. 919-945), lion fibula (No. 946), cut figures
(e. g. dolphin, head and neck of bird). A
considerable number of the straight pins also belong
here.
" The Geometric
style, while interposed between the Mycenaean and Archaic styles,
is
represented
a smaller number of than and has left but few traces of its ijifluence on the
by objects either,
later style. As a result of the slight impression made by the Geometric style on the Mycenaean,
the latter, through its later stages, passes either directly or with slight modification into the early
Archaic. Between the two there is, as may be seen, for example, from the various tyj^es of straight
pins, ho change in technique, the difference lying mainly in the introduction of some
essential
elements of ornamentation derived from the Geometric style and some subjects like the griffin
derived from the Orient. An Oriental style does not exist among the bronzes from the
Heraeuni."
64 GENERAL INTRODUCTION

ENGRAVED STONES.

Mr. Richard Norton has had charge of the engraved stones from our excavations,
and will give a separate account of these. But I may say at this place that his classifi-
cation fully hears out the general conclusions concerning the Heraeum antiquities to
which I have been led by the study of the other finds on our site.

EGYPTIAN OBJECTS.

In the important chronological conclusions to which we have been led by the study of
the antiquities found at the Heraeum, the Egyptian objects were left unnoticed, because
I did not feel qualified to judge of them. But it appeared to me when the excavations
were completed that these could throw no light upon the earliest history of that site. No
Egyptian object was found below the black layer of the Old Temple, and, as far as I
could ascertain from the actual finds, none came from the lowest layers near the bed-
rock on any of the other sites. Those that were found would thus most probably be
" "
related to the later orientalizing period, as we noted it in terra-cottas, vases, etc.

Mr. A. M. Lythgoe has undertaken the publication of these objects and will further
make a comparative study of those found at the Heraeum with those discovered at Eleusis
and Aegina. Meanwhile he assures me " that there is no object earlier than the begin-

ning of the so-called Late New Empire

—
in fact, probably not earlier than the reign of

Amasis, Twenty-sixth Dynasty. That dating would include also the scarabs bearing the
cartouche of Ramen-cheper."

HISTORY OF PREVIOUS EXCAVATIONS.

The site of the Heraeum remained unknown for many centuries. Its discovery and
in our age by Colonel (later
final identification by means of excavation were achieved
General) Gordon of Cairness in the year 1831. The first notice of this discovery was

published by William Mure in 1842.' He gives the following account of the discovery
and of the site :
—
" It was not until arrival at Athens that I learned that the site of the Heraeum, or temple
my
of the most important sanctuary of ancient Greece, after those of Olympia
Juno Argive, perhaps
and Delphi, and hence so long, so anxiously, and so vainly sought for by travelers, had been dis-
covered by General Gordon, several years before.'^ . The form of this eminence, of which the
. .

accompanying sketch (Fig. 32), without any pretensions to geometrical accuracy, will give a fair
the mountain and its
general idea, is nearly that of an isosceles triangle with its apex pointing to
base to the plain. The surface is divided into three esplanades, or terraces, rising in gradation one
above another, from the lower to the upper extremity. The central one of the three [our Old Tem-
still in good preservation, to a considerable
ple] is supported by a massive Cyclopean substructure,
height, and a conspicuous object from some distance. It was this wall, accordingly, which first
attracted the general's
o"-
attention. On the lowest of the three terraces he made an excavation.

1
Journal of a Tour in Greece and the Ionian Islands, to his table, during the period of my stay, assured me

London, 1842, pp. 177 ff. He made his journey in 1838. both agreeable society and excellent fare during my re-
^
This General Gordon he mentions in an earlier pas- turn from my daily rambles. The general, in addition
"
sage (p. 162) :
Argos was at this time the headquarters to his extensive knowledge of the country and people, is
of my countryman, General Gordon, who commanded in an accomplished antiquary and his long residence in
;

chief in the Peloponnesus. His arrival from Athens had this district had rendered him more especially familiar

preceded mine by several days, and a general invitation with its objects of interest."
 GKNEUAL (iOKIK)N'S EXCAVATIONS 66
wliicli fully coiifirined his jjiovions
suspicion that this was the site of tho IIiTapum. Betkleti many
fragments of ornamental masonry, both in stone and ni.irtilc, he disintcrrMl variou* piaoM of souIik
ture. Among these was tlie tail of a jMjaeock in wliitc niarlilc, jwHsihly a fragment of that which
Pausanias dewirihes as dedicated hy Hadrian to the go<ldes»,' witli wreral Mnall votive
imnf^et,
some of tliom hearing distinct allusions to her Itesides T««es, and other arti«?lM
worship lainpa,
;

in bronze and terra-cotta. Among fragments of columns are none which couhl be considered
worthy of having Ixdonged to the porticos of so noble
an edifice. The greater part of the edifice, it may be
presumed, has been removed during the later ages,
for the construction of modern ('difices, sacred or
profane. Around
the juouths of wells on the ])lain
below, and on the sites of several ruins of liyzantine
or Turkish jwriods, are strewed massive drums of c(d-
umns of the Doric order, with fragments of a similar
description. The lower terrace has also its substruc-
tions of regular Hellenic masonry,''* forming a breast-
work to the base of the triangle towards the jjlain.
The excavation was conducted at the general's own
cost, and upon a limited scale ; but, to judge by its
success, were it to be followed up on a more extended
plan, it could not fail to be productive of valuable
results.
"The length of the surface of the hill may be
about two hundred and fifty yards ;
its present breadth
about half its length. It is protected on its flanks

by steej) ])recii)ices beneath which is the bed of a

small torrent descending from the mountain behind,
as indicated by Pausanias," etc.

In communicating this discovery of General

Gordon's to Colonel Leake, Mr. Finlay says ' :
Fio. 32. — CoLONKi, Mckk'h Pi.as or thk .Sitk

" It is a few hundred OF THE HkRAKI'M.

yards nearer the hills than A Tour
of From his Journal in Greece, vol. I.
where you passed, but two ravines isolate the
p. 179.
site, and prevent it from being reached by riding
close along the slope of the hills." On November 21, 1831, Finlay further writes to
Leake :
—
"
While at Nauplia I visited the Ileraeum, and spent the whole day there and I had the goo«l ;

fortune to discover a curious subterraneous passage,'' which esca]ied the attention even of Pro-
fessor Thiersch of Munich, who had visited the site several times. A projection of Mount Kulmea
lengthens the road from Mycenae to these ruins, and obliges a horseman to keep so far down in
the plains, that a small knoll hides the place from those who pass near it, while it remains visible
at a distance, and can be seen both from Argos and Nauplia.^ The eminence on which the ruins
are situated is an
irregular triangular platform having a precipitous apex towards Mount Euboea,
and inaccessible though not very elevated. The base of the triangle is towards Argos, and is sap-

'
This is a mistake, as Hadrian's gift was "a. pe.acock * broad cavernous passage or the
This is cither a
"
of gold and shining stones (Pans. III. 17. G). Still tho slope liehind the buildings, to the northwest of the Old
allusion to Herji remains, as there were also sacred pea- Temple, or a passage near the river to the soiithwest of
"
cocks in the sanctuary of Hera at Samos, etc. Cf. Fra- the site beside the " manhole
immediately which passage
zer's Pausanias, Vol. III. pp. 185 ff. we excavated in the first year. 1 do not think this one is
^
Gordon must therefore, in liis excavations, have got meant.
' " From the Larissa of Argoa
down to the foundation walls of the Second Temple. I.«ake's footnote : it

^
Leake's Pdopnnnenincn [supplement to bis Travels bears N. 27 E. from Palamidhi, N. 10 W."
in the Morea'J, published in 1846, pp. 258 ff.
66 GENERAL INTRODUCTION

SITE OFTHZ HER^U

near

by James RobCTtSQn Esij:

on the SUtff of
Major General Cordon
Cpjtntumdir of the Oreek Torc*J_
in Tcloponnr^us- 1S3S

Fig. 33. — General Gordon's Plan of the Site of the lisuAEUM.

From Leake's Peloponnesiaca, 1846.

of the peak, is an upper terrace and a

ported by a terrace in masonry, above which, at the base
quadrangular platform. The walls of the lower terrace are generally of an inferior kind of regular
masonry; but an angle towards Nauplia [probably XI on the Plan (Fig. 2), and the wall to the
east of this] is of fine workmanship, and differs from all the remaining walls, in consisting of two

layers of large blocks, succeeded by a narrower course.

The whole of this wall is pierced with
square holes, like those made for beams, very numerous, and extending over the whole surface.
Below found part of the shaft of a Doric column, eleven feet six inches in circum-
this terrace I

ference, with twenty flutings. This column was of limestone, and covered with cement. The wall
of the upper terrace consists of blocks, heaped rudely together in a very rough Cyclopean style ;

three layers of stone generally remain. One stone of a triangular form was twelve feet in the
sides, and four to five feet thick another eighteen feet long and six feet thick the breadth was
; ;

concealed by the earth. Below this terrace is another piece of a column, which seems not to have
belonged to the same edifice of which that before mentioned formed a part, being of a harder

limestone, worked, unfluted, and 4 feet 1 inch in diameter at the only end I could mea-
roughly
sure.^ There are considerable quantities of pottery scattered about."
'
From tho OH Temple.
 RANGAB^'S EXCAVATIONS 67

After his scurcli of th« waterodiifHeH mid Iiih

(k'Hc-iiltiiij;' (IiHcovery of tli«* H(|tif<liu-t at
tli(! of the
I);uk (Jld Temple, Fiiilay cikIh hiH It*tt4!r. Hut I^^tke iiieiitioiiH a mfoiid
comiminication from Fiiday in the Hpriii^ of 1830 aft<!r he had KjMJiit a few
ilayM at
Argos with Geiieml Gordon, who undertook a Huiall excavation at tlie ruin*.' lie
also mentions the peacock, the terra-cottii aiiteKx, " a lion of hronzo ahout hix inchttM
well preserved, some other hronzes much corroded, and s«ime t«rra-cottji
lon<5', very rude."
Soon afterwards Fiiday sent Leake a plan of the site, which Fx'ake publiHhed in hiM
volume, and which is here reproduced (Fig. 33). It in of eH|)eciiil intt'ruKt Ut vunu nliuW'
'm*r the extent of Gordon's excavations on the Second
Temple ])kitfonn.
In the year 1S;')3 the late archaeoloj^fist, poet, and stjttcsman, A. Uizo ILtn^rsilM*, nuuie
a f^rcat elfort to collect money from all quarters of the civilized world for the pur|H(M! of

excavating Olympia. His attempt was not Huccessful, for the whole sum niixeil fell nliort
of $200 (£39, 7s.), and it was evidently (juite impossihle to undert^ike with this sum an
excavation which, from the manifest indications un the surface, would neoeHmirilv assume

Fig. 34. — Rangab^'s Plan of the Sitk of the Hkraeum.

From his Ausgrabung beim Tempel rier Hera unweit Argos, 1855.

Thus Rangabe, who joined by the Gennan

huo-e dimensions. Avas s<-holar Bursian,

much smaller site, but one which seemed second

^
decided to begin at what was evidently a
in importance only to Olympia,
—
namely, the Argive Heraeuni.
Thi'se excavations

were thus begun in 18.54. As was to be expected from the restricted means at the di.H-
poscil
of these excavators, the work could not be carried very far, and, as is evident
from Rangabe's plan here reproduced (Fig. M), as well as from the account given by
both Rangabe and Bursian,^ was superficial. In fact, their work of excavation con-
-

sisted in digging trenches along the northern side of the Second Temple foiuidations,
'
Gordon's excavation must therefore have been made
'
A. Rizo Ranffalx?, Ausgrahung beim Tempei der Hera
site in 1831. unweit Argon, Hallo, 1855.
in 1836, liis discovery of the
" BuiUiini dell. Inst, di
Corretp. Arch. 1864, pp. xi-zrii.
68 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
round the east and, for a short distance, along the eastern portion of the south
side,
foundation wall (Fig. 35). In our own excavation we could trace the work done hy

Rangabe and Bursian, but found that their trenches were not carried
beyond a few feet
in depth. In spite of the slightness of the work, a considerable number of interesting
marble fragments from the Second Temple were discovered, one head and torso which
we reproduce in dealing with the sculptures of the temple.
shall We should not be
expecting in
in those infant days of excavating a projjer appreciation of all the
justified
minor finds and fragments, their careful preservation and classification. There is thus no
record in the accounts given by Bursian and Rangabe of the numerous objects of minor
art which they found. The individual objects coming from this excavation were deposited
in a house at Argos, where, a few years later, in 1857, they were seen by the Cambridge
scholar W.
G. Clark,^ who expressed his disappointment at the results (see below, p. 70).
Rangabe's excavations, we have seen, only consisted of a shallow trench along the
outside of the foundation wall of the Second Temple ; and as soon as he came to the
level of this (about a foot from the surface), he went to no further depth. He thus mis-
took the top of this foundation wall for the pavement of the temple,^ and carried his
work no further into the interior of the temple.^ But even
on the surface of this wall he went to no further depth, and
t thus was led to believe that the " pavement
"
ended where
the upper layers of the foundation had been removed. It is
•k to this fact that on
his plan he reaches only one half of
owing
H g
the southern wall ;
while at this point we found it contained
*.r>or^ two layers of stone beneath, and followed it down at the
southwest corner to a depth of twelve feet. He thus also
shows nothing of the west side of the foundation wall, and
F
has to make a guess as to its position.* We thus find his

p; work Second Temple to have consisted only in digging

at the
a trench to a depth of not more than two to three feet, and a

Fig. 35. — Bursian's Plan. width of not more than five feet, from the north side, round
the east, and half way down the south side. The blocks of

poros stone (M and K on his map) projecting from the northeast corner of the temple
he conceived to have been pavements of altars {Fusshoden von Alt'dren) and parts of
the temple, and makes a conjecture that the larger of the two (K) held the silver altar
mentioned by Pausanias.
this work at the Second Temple the excavations of Rangabe were hardly carried,
Beyond
though trenches were dug at various points, without leading him to believe that traces of
other buildings existed. They were merely undertaken for completeness' sake, at least to
make sure that nothing was to be found there.'' must deeply regret that we do not We
hear more about the trench dug at the southeast corner of the platform and below it (out-
1
His account is given in his Peloponnesus, pp. 83 fE., naue Form des Tempels war als audi zu wissen, ob die

published in London, 1858. vierte [western] Seite uicht, aus irgend einem nnbekann-
2 ten Grunde, weit entfernt von den zwei langen lag."
Ausgrabwig, etc. p. 13, "Dieser Streif scheint der
" Die
Fussboden des Peristyls zu Ausgrabung wiire nicht
•'
sein." Op. cit. pp. 19, 20,
" Tem-
Von voUstiindig, wenn ausser der eigentlichen Teiiipelstiitte,
^
Op. oil. p. 14, der inneren Flache des
" "
pels ist nichts mehr vorhanden ; p. 18, Ueber die in- auf der diese Resultate gewonnen wurden, man nicht
nere Einriehtung nnd den inneren Schmuck des Tempels auch andere von den umliegenden Stiitten untersucht hiitte,
sind alle Vermuthungen schwer." um wenigstens zur Gewissheit zu gelangen dass dort
* " Es ist aber unter den vorhandenen nichts zu erbeuten sei."
Op. cit. p. 14,
Verhaltnissen ebenso schwierig zu sagen, welche die ge-
 RANGAB^/S DISCOVERIES 69

side the su])i)<)rtiiig wall), where he neeniH to have Htruck one of the earliest layera. For
here they "
spot ch)He to the entraiiee, where there were a few iitolat«d
c;iine upon ji

graves. They appeared to have heen made of porous stone, ho that the nde« of thejie shaft-
t<)nd)s (;riunl)led away on the
spot, and were diswilved into a yellowish earth, in whi<-h
were found several vases, most of them undecorated, of common and worknumship
'
form." Manifestly these (in (continuation of the rejrion outside the earliest peribolut-
wall) were Hinall, riuh shaft-tonihs of tiie Salaminian order, such as we found at tlie
"
soutli slope, and in wliicli were tl»e early vases with " duIl-f(dored ornament. Here, or
near it, he came also upon the early vases, figurines, hronze pins (Niigel), etc., which
made up our black layer.
'
'
All in all, Rangah ai)pcars to have found .'>.')2 separate Bursian tells us of
objects.
"
550 architectural and glyptic (jbjects." But he is evidently inaccurate, as Rangabi^
"
gives a classified list of the various objects found, adding numerous vase-fragments,
pieces of iron, and of bronze."
The most important objects found were no doubt the fragments of marble sculpture, of
which (evidently counting even the smallest chij)) he counts 375. Among these are 114
fragments of legs and feet and IGO fragments of drajwry. Not all of these have l)een
preserved. The only complete piece he refers to is the female metope head here emb«Mlied
" None of
among ours (Plate XXXII.). them," he says,' "is complete, and as they are
of different dimensions, some life-size, some colossal, and others, again, and these form
tlie greater number, under life-size, it is
impossible to determine whether, or if so, which
belong to single statues (perhaps to those of the priestesses), and which to pedimental
figures or other ornaments of the temple." They were chieHy found at the pronaos
and the northern side, where he excavated.*
The evidence of our own excavations and, in the light of these, the account which
Rangabe and Bursian themselves give show that their excavation does not deserve this
name in the full and modern acceptation of that term. I do not say this in a spirit which
ignores the high-minded enthusiasm of these scholars, who Uibored under the great diffi-
cidties of such restricted means at that imperfect stjige of the
" art " of
excavating. But
it is for truth's sake
necessary to ssiy
that the work of 1854 consisted in mere scratching
of the surface and digging of a few trial trenches. The fact of their being hitherto

quoted as
" excavations of the Heraeum " many, ourselves included, to assume that
led

nothing more was to be found and it ;

was only when we were brought face to face with
the actual site, and were impressed with the promise of the soil as it ap|)eared on the sur-
face and the few indications of walls, that Mr. Brownson and I agreed in 1891 as to the

desirability
— nay,
necessity
—
of completing the work of Rjingab^.
I should, in fine, like to quote the remarks of a Cambridge scholar, G. Clark, W
whose work was published in 1858,^ but who visited the site in 1854 while RiingjiW
was excavating, and I shall give the passjige relatuig to the Heraeum mori' fully, as his

remarks in general, and especially those on " Prosymua," seem to me so cogent and

interesting.
'
cit.
" Einer von diesen Graben ftthrte zu *
BuUetini dell. Intt. di Conttp. Arck. Rome, 1854,
Op. p. 20,
" Tutti
eiiier Stelle hart am Ein<jang, wo einige isolirte Griiber p. xvi, qnesti oggetti con tutti i rimRsngli archi-
waren. Sie scheinen aus poriisera Stein bestanden zu tettonici e glittici (essendo questi ultiuii 550, .
etc.)."
. .

^
haben, so dass ihre Seiten auf der Stelle verfault, sich in Ausgrahung, etc., p. 23.
*
eine gelbliche Erde aufgeliist haben, worin sich einige Op. cit. pp. 18 and 19.
Peloponnesus, London, 1858, pp. 83
'
Vasen, die meisten unverziert, von gewohnlicher Arbeit ff.

uud Form vorgefiuiden haben."

70 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
" fortress as well as a city. The position combining natural strength
The ancient Heraeum was a
with a copious water-supply so far resembles that of Mycenae, but differs from it inasmuch as it
stands out on a projecting spur, instead of nestling in a recess of the mountain chain. . . .

" Recent excavations — progress when we were there

still in —
have laid bare i)arts of the foun-
dations of the temple, so as to leave no doubt as to its exact site, but bringing nothing to light by
which the dimensions could be estimated with anything like certainty. The complete disap])ear-
ance of the building at so great a distance from any town seems to prove tliat its materials were
convertible into lime. If it had been built of marble, Pausanias would probably have said so ;

moreover, in another place (VIII. 41) he says that no temple in the Peloponnese, except that of
Tegea, surpassed in beauty of material that at Bassae, which we know from its I'emains to have
been built of limestone. The Ileraeum was therefore, in all probability, of limestone too, always
excepting the decorative sculpture in the frieze and pediments. Immediately in front were a flight
of steps, and perhaps propylaea, fronting the road to Argos, and from which a path led to the

right to a lower terrace, intended probably for the abode of the servants of the temple. . Imme- . .

diately above the site of the temple just described is a polygonal wall supporting the highest ter-

race of all ;
on which, no doubt, the more ancient temple stood, though not a vestige now remains.
Some religious scruple seems to have prevented the Argives from meddling with the relics of the
first temple. It was originally built on the lonely hill, perhajis as a common holy place for all
the inhabitants of the Argive plain, and a peculiar sanctity attached to it on account of its imme-
morial antiquity The Argives, and probably the other communities, so long as they retained their
independence, dated the public acts according to the year of the priestess of Hera. Thucydides,
evidently expecting that his work would be known and read in the Peloponnese, gives the date of
the commencement of the war, according to the Argive calendar, " when Ghryseis was in the

forty-eighth year of the priesthood" (Thuc. II. 2). The accident to the temple occurred eigiit
years and a half afterwards (IV. 133).
" Tiie excavations undertaken
by the government had been much talked of, and their results
vaunted even in the English papers. We were very much disappointed with what we saw collected
at Argos. Some shelves in a room contained the whole
little —
a few small fragments. There was
one beautiful female head with the hair in a band gathered in a knot behind, and also some feet and
liands of marble. There was a fragment of a frieze with the honeysuckle ornament painted pale
yellow on a black ground, with red in the centre. There was a lion's head with open mouth, which
must have been a gargoyle, and a piece of moulding of which the ornament represented ii buckle
and tongue. I do not know the architectural name [egg and dart]. . . .

" All the district

comprehended under these three names was probably destined for the support
of the temple and its ministers. ... I find, from another passage in the same writer (Pans. II.
37. 1), that Prosymna was one of the titles under which Demeter was worshiped by the Argives.
I conclude, therefore, that it was some provincial name for arable land, as the lowest part of the
mountain is. There is perhaps no trade or art, besides agriculture, which so abounds in local and
provincial terms not generally understood. Farmers and laborers travel less out of their own
neighborhood and their own class than any other people."

From 1854 1892 no attempts were made to explore this important site. During
to
these thirty-eight years, time had done its work, and liad obliterated all traces of pre-
vious excavations. No doubt the inhabitants of the neighboring villages had continued
the practice of previous centuries (a practice we found it difficult to prevent even during
our excavations) of carrying off portable stones for building material.

EXCAVATIONS BY THE AMERICAN SCHOOL AT ATHENS.

In 1891 I wrote to the Managing Committee of the School of Athens as follows :

—
"
I have succeeded in obtaining from the Greek government a concession (which will have to l)e

confirmed by the Chamber) of the right to excavate for seven years on two sites to be chosen by
 AMKUICAN EXCAVATIONS JJE(iUN 7t

Fio. 30. — TiiK Second Templk I'latform iikfork Kxcavatios.

me out of five which I suggested.

lu order to decide upon this choice, I left Athens on
April 1,
accompiuiied by Mr. Brownson, and examined tlie site of the Ilcraenm of Argos and
Argos itself,
Tegea, Sparta, Messene, and Elis. I was told of difficulties which might arise in the expropria-
tion of private i)roperty at Sparta, but I liave convinced myself on the
sjiot that these will not be
serious while, on the other hand, from the nature of the soil, as well as from the indications of
;

what has already been found tiiere, I am bound to consider Sjjarta one of the most ho|H-fiil sites in
Greece. With
regard to the other sites, the difficulty lies in choosing between Messene and ?^lis.
Elis is a priori the most promising, but Messene seems from the configuration of the soil to l»

preferable. Near the village of Mavromati, within the city walls, it ap])ears that the ancient
Agora is well covered with a thick layer of soil washed down by the stream from the liill of
Ithome. Elis also looks well, but bears traces of frequent devastation. On the whole 1 find
it difficult to decide between these two sites, one of which,
certainly, we should choose. If I
should ultimately succeed in gaining the concession, I propose to begin early next sea-son to dig
at Eretria and at the Heraeum of Argos, where the excavations of liursian and Kangiib*', many

years ago, certainly require completion. Later in the season, Sparta should be tried, and either
Messene or Elis." ^

In 1892, after the work was fairly begun at the Heraeum, T began exj»lorative exca-
vations at Sparta, assisted by Mr. Meatier, the results of which have since been |)ul>-
lished."

When we began our work

Heraeum, the site was clearly niarke<l by the Cyclopean
at the

supporting wall of the Older Temple, some traces of the supporting wall of the second
platform at the east and southeast ends, and some traces of the wall at the southern
» Am. Journ. Arch. VIII. (1893), pp. 410-»'.>«
'
See Tenth Annual Report of the Mtinagini) Committee ; cf.

of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 1890- Eleventh Annual Report of the Managing Committee, tie.

91, pp. 29 ft.

(Director's Report). (Director's Report), p. 31.
72 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
end of the Lower Stoa. The rude square turret-shaped wall at the southeast end of
the second platform was so clearly manifest that, after digging in the interior of this

square tower, I at once erected a Phylakeion (XI on the Plan) over this to contain our
tools and give some shelter against the sun during our midday recess. This was the

only spot where I could predict that no further excavations would be needed. From the
report to the committee quoted above, it will be seen that I did not expect to find so
"
large a site and so many buildings. The fact that previous " excavations had been
conducted, and the reference of Pausanias to only one building, the Second Temple, and
to the burnt ruins of another, the older temple, naturally led me to sup])ose that we
had only to clear away the surface of the temple, to explore the Old Temple platform,
and to make out the meaning of the isolated walls to the southwest, in order to com-
site and to supplement the imperfect work done in previous
plete our excavation of the
years.
Instead of this we have found nine separate buildings, each of considerable dimensions

Fig. 37. — Sitk of the Old Tkmplb Platform before Excavation.

and importance, and remains of several other structures and walls. Moreover, the work
done at the two temples could only be termed " scratching " the surface, and the system
of going to the lowest depths, to bed-rock, on these sites has been proved
by our finds
to be one of the first principles of excavation.
When we began our work, in 1892, there were no indications of ancient remains
beyond those mentioned above. The Second Temple platform (Fig. 36) was nothing
but a rough, stony, ploughed field, and the upper terrace as well as all the other parts
of the sanctuary presented the same aspect (Fig. 37).
I have given a fuller account of our first year's work in a separate Dr.
publication.'
Brownson has also written special papers on the results of that year's digging in the
American Journal of Archaeology (Vol. VIII. [1893], pp. 205 ff.). Mr. Fox's excellent
plans of the excavations in that year will be found in the Twelfth Amiual Report of
the School. These papers and works have been reprinted in the Pajyers of the Aineri-
can School at Athem^, Vol. VI. But in attempting to give a short history of the excava-
tions themselves during our foiu- successive campaigns, I will here quote from
my Reports
to the Committee of the American School, written towards the close of the excavations
in 1892, and of each succeeding year.
'
Excavations of the American School at the Heraion of Argos, 1892.
 AMERICAN EXCAVATIONS IN 1892 78

CAMPAIGN OF 1892.

" On
February 13 I starteil for Argos, accompanied by Mr. BrownHon and Mr. Fox. Ihffore we
began work we were joined by Mr. Do (Jon and Dr. Newhall.
active On March 4 I'ntfeHNor
Poland also joined us, and took charge of the work for a week, during which time I accoui|>anied
Mr. Washington to Phlius, and then returned to AtlicuH. To tlio hearty cooi>eration of all theM
gentlemen the success of our work is largely due.
" We
began our work at the lleraeum in an explorative manner, to text the nature of the several
sites there grouped. At first we employed men and three carts, and ro«e to one hun-
sixty-three
died and eifrjity men and twenty-six carts. were We
exceptionally favored by good weather; iu
the first month we lost only one half-day from bad weather. Our chief energies were concentrate*!
on the Second Temple (Fig. 38) but we dug trenches also on the site of the earlier
;
tcnipio, whi'n-

iiu. jS. — The Second Temple at Tin OK the Season of 185W.

we came upon its

pavement, consisting of flat polygonal stones, and also upon a continuous layer
of charred wood, — an interesting confirmation of the record of the burning of the temple. We
found ruins of what may prove to be early Greek baths, and of a stoa. At a depth of between ten
and fifteen feet, on the slope at the west end of the Second Temple, we canie upon a curious layer
of black earth, in which we found a great number of archaic bronze objects, amlx,-.' beads, some
of early vases, bone needles, stone seals,
gold and silver rings, terra-cotta ornaments, fragments
etc. terra-cotta plaques are almost unique in character, while the vases make a valuable a<ldi-
The
tion toour knowledge of early ornamental ceramic art.
" W^e were fortunate
enough to find a large number of the marble sculptured ornaments of tlie
Second Temple in a more or less fragmentary condition. We were still more fortunate in dis-
. . .

covering two well-preserved heads, about

two thirds life-size, which belonged to the metopes, and
also a well-preserved male torso from one of the metopes. Finally, immediately in front of the
west end of the we had the great fortune of finding the marble head of Hera, of which
temple,
who have seen as
you have already heard. This head, of
at least life-size, is recognized by all it

the best preserved specimen of a female head from the fifth century b. c." . . .
74 genp:ral introduction

CAMPAIGN OF 1893.

"In our second campaign, in 1893,1 was assisted byMessi-s. Lythgoe, Meader, and Norton, wlio
took part in the excavation from the beginning to the end, and had each charge of definite por-
tions of the site as responsible overseers and directors of the workmen under their command.
These gentlemen, with Dr. Washington, remained on the site, and continued the excavations for
several days after I was forced to leave, and during these days some of the most interesting objects
of sculpture were found. ...
" We pitched our camp on Temple on March 30, the Greek
the rocky elevation above the Older

government having kindly lent us three

good from their army stores. The experiment of
tents

camping on the site itself has proved a great success, and one which it would be well to
adoi)t in
the future. We at once engaged workmen, and were enabled to start the next day with 112 men
and 23 carts. On April 1, we had 130 men and 30 carts on April 3, 200 men and 38 carts. Our
;

force at last reached the number of 240 men. We begau to excavate on the upper plateau, the site
of the Older Temple. . . . We
cleared off all the top soil down to the early substructure, about 45
metres in length by 35 metres in breadth. The burnt layer alluded to in my report of last year
again appeared on various portions of this site, together with masses of poi-os stone, which had evi-
dently been split into smaller pieces by the heat of a great conflagration. We
were fortunate enough
to find still standing on this terrace a portion of the early wall, about 14.30 metres in length by a
littleover a metre in width, which certainly must have belonged to this interesting structure, per-
haps the earliest temple of Hellas. The presence of this piece of wall may prove of exceptional
importance, inasmuch as its lower portion was evidently not visible at the time the temple was
comjjleted, and the objects found below this line would thus antedate the erection of the temple.
Two other stones appear to be in situ. But it is imj)ossible at this moment to hazard even a sug-
gestion with regard to the construction of the early temple. At all events, we have cleared this
important site, and it is now in a state to be carefully studied for the light it may throw upon the
earliest history of civilization in Greece. The yield in objects of early ceramic art, some bronzes
and peculiar rude engraved and of extreme importance and interest. I have
stones, was very rich,
little doubt that these finds alone are of weight to justify the energy and money exjiended
sufficient

upon the undertaking, as they are sure to throw most valuable light on the history of the earliest
art in Greece. We dug two broad trenches outside the Cyclopean wall to the east and west of the

plateau, in order to make sure whether there were any objects of interest which had fallen over
the supporting walls.
" When the work on the
platform of the Old Temple was completed, we made the slope from
the upper terrace down to the terrace of the Second Temple the centre of our exertions (Fig. 39).
It was exceedingly difficult to excavate on this site, because the existence of buildings at the imme-
diate foot of the slope had already been proved by our discovery last year of the outer line of the
Stoa (II). We
had therefore to work with great care from above, immediately below the Cyclo-
pean wall of the upper terrace, and had to construct a steep road leading from the point marked
T to the top of the slope, dumping our earth either at the southeast dump or at the southwest

dump. When we had dug several feet below the Cyclopean wall, we at once came upon very rich
layers of early pottery of all descriptions, and soon found various vestiges of buildings. These
were erected on the height above the buildings corresponding to the North Stoa, and immediately
below the Cyclopean wall. They consisted of portions of walls built of loose unhewn stones ])laced
together without mortar or clamps, and evidently formed the smaller, perhaps domestic, counterpart
to the structures known The objects found in some of these make it not
as Cyclopean walls.

improbable that they may have been the houses in which dwelt the priestesses or attendants of the
earlier temple, though upon any hypothesis at this moment with any claim to
I should not venture

your serious consideration. There are also traces of a rough jiavement sloping downwards from
about the middle of the Cyclopean wall (below it) to the west, and behind the back wall of Stoa II.
This may have been an early road leading up to these dwellings. With due care to preserve the
remains of these early buildings, we dug down to the bed-rock on this slope and then came ;

the task of clearing the whole series of buildings on a line with the Stoa. The length of these
 THE EXCAVATIONS IN 1898 76

Htiuctmos is iilioiit 100 metres, with an average depth or width (including tlie ba«k wnlU) of iilioiit

10 metres.
"Of Stoa II. merely tiio outer stylobat*; liod been diHcovered laat year. Ik-hind thin, tht* inner
coloniiatle iiieasiue.s H.(\h and Ih hiw-ited by a wall of over one metre in width, whieh !•
iiietieH,
built against the slope. There were at lea»t nineteen piilarn running along the centre of thin nUim.
Somo of the pillars were found in sUii, There in also an intitreitting Hysttfin of dniini and water-
works attaelicd to this building, with some eurious utructureH witliin it, which, however, aro
pr«d»-
ably of a later date. Ihit 1 do not think that this can be assuined of a curiuiin HtriKinn- towiinN
the northeast corner of the
east end of the Stoa as ex-
cavated last year ; it is a
depressed flat eemented sur-
face, 3.80 metres in length by
throe metres wide, rt'ininding
us of the Batli of Tiryiis, and

probably serving the same

purpose. The Stoa (II)
runs, from a few metres to
the east of the east end dis-

covered last year, for 55.52

metres to the west, ending
about on a line with the east
end of the Second Temple.
A more intricate building was i'lG. 39. — Work on thk. Si.oit. iiktwkkn tiik ()i,i> Tkmi-lk akd th«
discovered to the cast of the SKCONI) TkMI'LK, I.N TIIK Skcond Skaiuj.n.

Stoa, extending farther east

than the eastern limit of the Cyclopean wall of the upper terrace (III). The original structuri',
of which much is still standing, was evidently rebuilt at a later period and the stone iirs<>riljed ;

with AIFONVilO (i. e. Aifomcnou, containing, as you see, a diganinia) was evidently iniinured at
a later period. . . .

" Besides a rich find in

pottery, terra-cotta, bronzes, and smaller objects (among whieh I must
mention a later clay lamp containing the figure of the Polycleitan Doryphorus), this building
yielded a beautiful torso of a draped female figure, probably from the nieto])cs of the temple, three
finemarble heads, and many other fragments.
"
Together with this work at the northeast portion of the second platform, extensive excavations
were carried on at the southeast corner. The ground to the east and north of the J*hijlahi»ii (XI)
was leveled while to the outside of the eastern terrace wall the trench was continued, and inter-
;

esting walls or steps were laid bare as far as the dumj). Both these points yielded a very rich
harvest of ceramic and bronze works, engraved gems, and glass scarabs. . . .

" South of the foundation walls of the Second

Temple, the whole ground was cut away at the
deep cutting at the southwest angle of the temple. Below and slightly to the
level of last year's
west of the house (F) a deep and wide trench was cut. In all these cases we came i'.|x>m layers that
antedated the construction of the Second Temple, as was shown by the archaic objects found.
"I also tested the ground at the foot of the hill to the south and southwest of the steps (I),
and was pleased to find that we soon came upon native rock. It was thus {mssibie to dig upwards
from below and to avoid a distant transportation of the earth. ^\'e had merely to dig uj) the earth
until we had reached virgin soil, and to shovel it back upon the lower rock-l)e»l. In this man-
ner we cleared the slope up to the steps (I) which were found last year.
"
Perhaps the most interesting portion of this year's work will prove to be the excavations at
the southwest platform below the Second Temple. I began by cutting a trench at the southwest

corner of the old retaining wall, running from west to east. I soon came upon a wall of beautiful

Greek masonry (Fig. 40), of which four courses of well-cut blocks were still standing. \Vc car-
ried this trench on as far as the continuation of the retaining wall at the east of last year's deep
76 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
cutting. We
then worked northwards. Messrs. Washington and Norton continued the work
after my departure, with the result that two sides (and the interior inclosed within them) of a very

interesting building have been unearthed,

with walls, and column-bases in situ, the whole pre-
a
senting very interesting ground plan. This building we call the West Building (Fig. 41). Below
the south wall of this building we also excavated as far as the most western of the broad cuttings
on the south slope below the temple marked N on
last year's map. Immediately in front of this
wall (south wall of West Building) large portions of the entablature of a Doric building were found,

upon which were distinct traces of color,

—
reds, blues, greens, etc. After departure other my
polychrome pieces were found.
" Besides a number of fragments of marble sculptures,
interesting smaller objects from this site,
evidently coming from the Second Temple and forming parts of the metopes, and I believe also of
the pediments, were found. I must also add that among the heads discovered, one head (probably
from a metope) is in excellent preservation, and very nearly equals in beauty the head of Hera
found last year while the torso of a draped female figure from the metopes forms a fitting counter-
;

part to the torso of the nude warrior of last year's metope."

. . .

CAMPAIGN OF 1894.

" The third

campaign was begun on March 21, 1894. The regular staff consisted, besides my-
self, of Dr. Washington and Mr. Norton, and of Messrs. Hoppin and Alden, students of the
School. All the members and students of the School were invited to stay for a few days in the
camp, in order to study and gain experience
in excavations as such. Of this invitation,
Messrs. Parsons, Fallis, and Hill availed them-
selves while the other students, though they
;

were prevented from staying with us owing

to their travels with Dr. Dorpfeld, saw the
excavations on the occasion of the visit which
Dr. Dorpfeld and his party paid us. My
colleague. Professor Richardson, paid us two
visits, during one of which he remained with
us over a week. Professor White was also
our guest, though I am afraid he will not
(consider itan hospitable camp in which we
allowed the storm to carry away his tent in
the middle of the night. We had many other
visitors of all nationalities. Among our Amer-
ican visitors, ladies and gentlemen, I must

single out Mr. Edward Robinson, of the Bos-

ton Museum and Mr. Thayer,
of Fine Arts ;

of Boston, who, on the spot, contributed one

hundred dollars to the fund of excavation.
Dr. Dorpfeld made the Heraeum a point for
one of his instructive lectures during his
Peloponnesian tour. With him were a num-
ber of distinguished scholars, among them
Professors Loeschcke, Wecklein, and Frjinkel.
Dr. Dorpfeld and Professor Loeschcke joined
Professor White in staying in our camp the
Fig. 40. — Piece of Wall from West Building,
first appearance. night of their visit. We also had a visit

from Mr. Kabbadias, the Ephor-General of

Antiquities, who was our guest

for a day and night. The British Minister, Mr. Egerton, also
. . .

paid us a visit. The School must also feel honored by a second instance of the interest which
 THE EXCAVATIONS IN 1894 77

the Royal Family of Greece has shown in our work. The King and Queen, the Crown Prines
and Ciowu Princess, and Princess Mary, with their suite, made our excavations the object of ft
special journey. It was the first time tlioy had visited an excavation from Athens.
away Thay
remained with us over and manifested the keenest interest in the progress of tlie work.
five hours,
" Our
camp was pitched on the same site as last year, the government pnividing us with fire
tents, while I had ordered a sixth from England, provided with a double fly, which experience had
shown me was absolutely necessary as a refuge against the sun in the heat of the day. This t^nt,
togetlicr witli tlic tools and instruments we have accumulated, will form a useful addition to the
School's apparatus for exploration and excavation in future years.
" Our
i)arty arrived at Argos on March 21, and we were able to Ijcgin work with one hundred
and eigiity-five men and twenty-six carts on March 22. The following day we worked with two
hundred and fifty men and thirty carts, below which number wo did not fall, increasing our cur|M
to two hundred and seventy men.
" The first task we had set ourselves was to
complete the clearing of the whole east side of the
second platform (Fig. 41). We thus had to cut away the hillside to the east of the l)uiidings we
had found last year, which are now called the East Chamlwrs, in which was the inscription AlFO.
NViilO. We carried this cutting about twenty feet in depth to a length of ninety feet, to the old wall
marked T in the map. This was very difficult digging, inasumch as there were huge blocks,
imbedded at every stage, which had fallen from above, while below we came upon compIicate<I
early walls of different periods, which hatl to be spared and carefully cleare<l. The nature and
pur})ose of these will require careful study. Backing the slope, and acting as a 8up]K)rting wall
to the upper terrace, below and to the east of the great Cyclopean wall of the upper terrace,
another Cyclopean wall runs for about eight feet, when it ends abruptly, lines of sloping rubbish
clearlyshowing in the cutting how the earth had drifted over this end for ages.
" Below and underneath this there were masses of
partly Cyclopean wall, large jjottcry, iron, bronze,
'

and smaller objects, the majority belonging to the '

Dipylon and Mycenaean ])erio<Is. Farther
to the south there were deposits of rubbish which evidently dated from a periotl of destruction in
later years, as we here also found a marble head of the Roman period. Here it was that we found
also, in beautiful preservation, an interesting specimen of Greek sculpture, a head of an ephebus
from the metopes of the Second Tem])le. The head is in excellent preservation, even the tip of the
nose being intact. This head bears beyond a doubt, in my mind, the characteristics of Polycleitan
art as hitherto known to us. There same square and massive projwrtion of the head as a
is the
whole, the heavy treatment of the jaws and chin, that we find in the head of the Naples Dory-
phorus,
—
in fact, it seems to me to be a reproduction of the type of the Doryphorus in the style
of these metopes. Moreover, it will interest you to hear that, in spite of some mutual divergences,
this head has, in common with all the others which we have found on this site, some j)ecidiaritic8 of

treatment, such as the slightly opened mouth and peculiar protrusion and curving of the under lip.
I do not wish to convey the idea that I claim this or any of the other heads as work by the hand
of Polycleitus, but I maintain that they bear out in their general character and in details of work
the natural expectation that the sculptures which decorated the second Ileraeum of Argos would
be related to the art of the sculptor Polycleitus, who created the temple-statue of Hera in this
sanctuary, as Phidias created the Athena in the Parthenon, and who, like the great Attic sctdptor,
was the inspiring head of a thriving school of sculpture in his own locality.
"
Among the many objects found here, I must mention the large number of objects in iron.
In fact, throughout our excavations we have often found iron together with bronze and even stone
implements. A strange object was a large mass of iron about five feet long and a foot in diameter,
which proved to be a mass of iron spears bound together with bands of iron at both ends. «e
found at the same another large, solid, rectangular bar of iron, flattened out about a foot
place
from one end, which is
quite inexplicable.
" the easternmost angle of the terrace of the Second Temple, above the retaining wall W, to
At
the north of the dump S, another building was discovered, which we have named the E^st Build.

ing (to distinguish it from the East Chambers). This building, supi>orte<l by stmng walls on
south and east, built against the hill-slope, has on the north side a wall of poros strengtliened
78 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
by a limestone wall. The bases of three rows of five columns are extant in the interior, while
at the west front (facing the temple) it had a portico. In this building numerous objects in
gold, silver, bronze, and terra-cotta were found, as well as a scarab with a cartouche, probably of
Thothmes III.
" We also cleared all the earth remaining to the east of the temple, and to the west of the
away
dump S, without finding much there.
" We then turned to the west and south slopes of the terrace, — the main points of this year's
excavations (Fig. 42).
" The
larger portion of the West Building, which lies below the west end of the Second Temple,
about twenty-five to thirty feet below the top of the foundation walls of the temple, was excavated
last year. We
now cleared the north end, where the s])ace for the building has been cut out of
the rock which rises at the north end. We
here found three cliambers which communicate with
the colonnade and central court. The whole is a very interesting building, the purpose of wliich
(whetlier gymnasium, treasury, or combination of buildings) I do not venture to decide at present.
It is a building about one hundred feet (33 metres) by ninety -tiiree (30
metres), eonsistino- of a
colonnade surrounding an open court in the centre, while to the north it is flanked by the three

Fig. 41. — Loknf.r of the Second PLAxyouM, with front of East Building in kight Fokkguound.

chambers running from east to west. It appears to be older than the Second Temple, not later
than the half of the fifth century B. c.
first Here, as in the Upper Stoa, there are drums of col-
umns in situ, besides the pillar bases, and in some places several layers of the stone walls. In
this building there were numerous
fragments of the architectural decorations, as well as frag-
ments of sculpture and smaller objects.
" We also cleared the to the north of this building to the bed-rook, and at the western
ground
point, to the south of the dump S, we again came upon ruins of interesting buildings. Above the
old supporting walls is the building which we call the Northwest It was difficult digging,
Building.
since here too we found intricate walls, and it required Mr. Hop])in's best attention to carry on
the work which was placed in his charge. However, the plan was finally worked out with clear-
ness, and shows a long building (31 metres long by 11.40 wide) of early structure. In digging
here we turned up some fragments which had fallen down from the Second Temple the face of a
:

colossal female head, bronze and terra-cotta cows' heads,

objects in gold and silver (among them
a silver ring studded with gold and inscribed), etc. This building may be connected with the
traces of the building in the field below, which in the first year we thought might be Roman.
 TIIK EXCAVATIONS IN 1894 79
" On
the south h\o\w below tlie Second Temple, we began on the MUne
yst4!iii we had |traviuu»ly
adopted, working at the bottom of the hill below, and to the eaJit and w««t of the »ta\m (I). I>*iiul-

ing bed-iocU, we had merely to turn over the earth an we advauee«l upwartU, and ultimately we
were enabled to turn the whole of the part to the Houth of the Htepii (^i; into a large dump for all
the maHs of earth we had to cut away between the Seeond Temple and tbeae iit«|M. found a We
thick wall riiniiiiig from east to west at a depth of over (ift4M-n fwtt Udow hint year'* Hurfiu-v on the
south of the Hucond plateau, and upon this al>utted the beautifid limeMt4>ne wall which we fouml

proj(;ctiug soutiiward last year from the Boutheast eornor of the WeHt Ituildiiig. TIum limeitUmu
wall must iiave formed part of the west front of the great building which we are now on excavating
the south slope. About ninety feet of this building, with pillar biiiM!M, u|>on Nome of which drunm
are t« .s«<«, luive already been laid bare; and we shall have to continue U> carry away the great
uuiss of earth which covers this building ah)ng the whole Mouth slope. I have no doubt timt it will

prove to have been a very important and imposing structure. In the mass <jf earth which covcnt
it, we have from the Second Temple large drums from the columns
fouiul fragments of nuvsoury :

as well as complete Doric capitals, also two toi-sos of sculptiu-e, and many fragmcntA Wlonging Ut
the metopes of the Secoiul Temple. At the same time, an<)ther large gang of worknu-n was cngageil
in cutting away the soutii slojie towards the east, in the region below the hon8<! (F), and we are tlum

working from both sides to clear away the accumulated earth, while wo arc making a continuomi
terrace of the dump below tlio stairs (I). When the excavations are completed, there will thufi Ix' a
continuous series of interesting buildings running from the foot of the hill upwards, tier u|Mm tier,
to the terrace of the first temple on the summit. With the completion of this part of «)ur work, an
well as with the thorough investigation of the regions about the I^ower Stoa (CC, J, K, and L),
whicli are bounded by the river, the whole site will have been tiioroughly investigated. I must alao

remark tliat beiiind the poron supporting wall, running from north to south at the east of the West
'

Building, we have found rich layers of early antiquities corresponding to the 'black layer we
found in the first yeai". In fact, it appears to me that this layer is continuous with the one found
in the first year, the objects being arrested by the retaining wall. Considering the variety and
number of objects found here, it would be impossible for me to give any adequate idea of the rich-
ness of our find. They comprise every material, from a beautiful large solid gold pin to objects
in lead, iron,bone, ivory, and clay, and touch upon every field, —
epigraphy as well as art, mytho-
logy, and antiquities. We
have brought to Athens over eighty baskets full of objects of this kind,
together with larger fragments of marble sculpture, cornices in stone and terra-<!otta. A curious
and interesting discovery was made to the nortb of the b.ack wall of the building on the south
slope, at some depth below what was the original ancient surface. There were found some early
graves of the Mycenaean period, such as have been recently found at Sidamis. One of these w:i«
well preserved, —
a small shaft-tomb containing the bones of the deceased, and several vases in
perfect preservation, of the earliest Mycenaean ty])e. They evidently belong to a i»cri(Ml when tlie
temenus of the early temple of Hera was limited by the upi)er terrace, and the region of these
graves must have been quite outside the ])er if)olufi wall.
" The climax of our
good fortune was reached when, a few days before the close of this cam-
paign, we found, what for several years we had been seeking in vain namely, the licehivc tomlis
;

Mycenaean period. The first is about three hundred yards to the northwest
of the of the temple,

beyond the Eleutherion the second, only about sixty yards to the northwest of tl>v Kleutherion.

They are both of the beehive

;

shape, cut into the rock, without interior ma.soury,

the approach—
the narrow dromon which leads into the underground door, which after the burial was
being by
blocked means of large stones. Tlie interior is circular, the diameter In-ing alwut •2.4t; metres,
by
the height being 3.38 metres. The first of these tond)s, discovered on April 20, was the repository
for at least three corpses, and may have contained more. The dead were certainly not laid out in
the tond), as the bones were found massed together without any anatomical relation to one another.
The finds in the first tomb were exceedingly rich. It contained forty-nine vases, nearly all in per-
fect preservation, three terra-cotta figurines of the earliest tyjie, one chair with interesting Myce-
'

naean ornaments, one engraved stone of the Island type, four steatite whorls, one ivory ntHnlle,
'

and a number of beads. The seeond tomb contained a large number of beads and whorls, but only
80 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
one complete vase and a number of fragments. These finds appear to me of exceeding interest
and importance with regard to early Mycenaean pottery and the interest of the discovery may be
;

increased by the fact that the sun shone into the opening which had been broken into the top of the
rock, so that able to take photographs of the vases and bones in situ.
we were . . .

" The last

campaign was begun on March 22, 1895. As I was kept at Rome on my way here
by an attack of influenza, I telegraphed to Mr. Hoppin to begin work according to the plan we
had arranged before he left for Greece. Accordingly, on March 22, Mr. Hoppin began to exca-
vate the south slope below the Second Temple at the point at which we had left it last season, and
thus had charge of the work for several days before I arrived. During these days Mr. Hoppin
was not only able to make most valuable discoveries, such as the two best preserved metope heads,
but he pushed on the clearing of the South Stoa for many feet, having to clear away about twenty
feet of superimposed earth for the whole length and width of the stoa. He has since proved a
most efficient aid to me, and with his two years' experience in excavation, as well as his archaeolo-
I am
gical studies in German universities, he is likely to become a well-equipped archaeologist.
much gratified to hear from him that he intends to spend the winter and spring of the two coming
years at Athens to arrange and elaborate our finds from the Heraeum. In this task he will be

Fig. 42. — The Roman Building, with Southwest Stoa on the left, and Fohtion of Wkst Building
IN THE Foreground.

aided by Mr. Heermance from Yale University, who joined Mr. Hoppin at the beginning of our
work this year,and was with us for several weeks, until he went with Dr. Dorpfeld's party on the
Peloponnesian tour. I venture to predict that he also will be of the greatest help in arranging and
working out our finds, while he himself will gain much experience and valuable information in
performing this task. Mr. Rogers, of Columbia College, New York, has been with us for several
weeks now, and is taking charge of all the work on the west side. He will remain till the cam-
paign is ended, and will undoubtedly be of great assistance to us. . . .

" I owe the Committee a

great debt of gratitude for the wisdom with which they have selected an
architect to assist us in our work here, and to prepare plans and drawings of the excavations. Mr.
Tilton has taken up his work with such energy and intelligence that we may hope for an adequate,
 THE EXCAVATIONS IN 1896 81

perhaps a brilliant, presentation of the architectural side of our publication. Mr. Tilum puriMWM
to remain here for a week after the excavatiouH are closed, to the
Muiwrviae cleaniug of the build-
ings, with about ten workmen. Mr. Rogers has ijromised to join him
during this period. In Uie
course of the summer Mr. Tilton intends to meet me in in order that we diacuiut and
England, iiuiy
decide upon tlie general plan, as well as the details, of the architectural
pttblicution.
" The work we have this
year done on the south slope (below the Second Tcinplo) appears to me,
as I see it now, astonishing with regard to the amount of earth that has been rcniove<l. This
would not have been ])ossib].", 1i;m1 w(( not at the 1><-r;„„i„g of last season found be<l-rock at the

Fig. 43. — First Trench dug at South Stoa.

bottom of the little valley and for some

way up, so that we could place a continuous dump half way
up the hill on the south slope. Our carts had thus to travel but a short distance before our eyes,
and we could make a continuous dump below the line of building found on the south 8lo])e.
" At we had found the beginning of a building, one side of which
the close of the last season
abutted on the southeast corner of what we have hitherto called the West Building, and which ran
from east to west along the south slope about forty feet below the top of the foundation wall of
the Second Temple, and parallel to it. We
had also cut in for about ten feet l)ehind the su])]x>rt-
ing wall east of the West Building, which separates this building from the Second Temple above it.
We now continued to clear out this South Stoa (Fig. 43). It was difficult digging, as there was
an average of twenty feet of earth to be removed for its whole length, and large stones, drums of
columns, capitals, and blocks had fallen from the terrace above, all of which had to be removed
to the nearest point where they would not block the way for excavation, and carefully (leposited
there. As I am now
writing the building is quite clear (Fig. 44). It is a beautiful stoa, imposing
in its vast length, with walls of most perfect Greek masonry, of which four and even five layers are

standing all around. Within there are nine Doric pillars. All the pillar bases are in situ ; three
have the lower drum, while one has two drums, — the remaining four, together with the capital in

good preservation, having fallen immediately in front of this. At the back wall (north) there are
well-worked pilasters, one to each alternate pillar. The stoa is about forty-five metres long by about
thirteen metres wide. It faces towards the south (i. e. towards Argos), and is approached by a
continuous flight of steps. The temple above it must have fallen iu before this stoa was destroyed.
82 GENERAL INTRODUCTION

Fig. 4i. — South Stoa, after Excavation.

since, especially in the western half, we found huge drums of the columu from the temple which had
crashed through the roof, with geison blocks, and, fortunately for us, also metopes and sinia. The
flooring was thus in parts littered with fragments of marble from roof tiles and met023es. Among
these were several pieces of sculptured metopes, and of the sima, fragments of arms, legs, torsos of
bodies, etc., all from the high relief of the metopes, and two well-preserved heads (one cpiite
perfect), with portions of three others. This stoa is perhaps the best preserved of all the buildings
which we have found, and is
certainly one of the most imposing I know in Greece.
" We also cut into the slope to the west of this stoa, but were soon convinced that no ancient

building stood here we found, however, the traces of a huge staircase which covered the whole
;

slope on this side leading up to the great platform of the temple. There was thus on the south
side of the temples facing Argos a magnificent approach to the sanctuary and it is interesting to
;

note that the line of buildings and the access to them belonging to this period face to the south
and east, while the earlier buildings are massed on the west side. This corresponds to the change
from the Mycenaean to the Argive supremacy.
" At
the close of the last season, we had cut off the slope evenly behind the back wall of that

portion of the stoa which was then discovered. It was a huge cutting. Upon arriving this spring,
I found that the rain had washed away some of the earth from the side of the cutting, and here

appeared a portion of a coliinin-drum from the Second Temple. How this had fallen there it is
difficult to explain. Reluctantly (for I knew there could be no building there), I felt bound to dig
here again. Wethus had to cut away further ten feet of earth to a depth of over twenty feet
and for a length of forty-five metres. All this earth was filling for the foundations of the upjjer
temple, and contained a great mass of pre-archaic Greek objects, such as we had found in jjre-
vious years in this same filling. We
also dug down to bed-rock for the whole length inside (to
the east) of the supporting wall before the West Building (Fig. 45).
" Some
interesting results appeared from this work. We
were much astonished last year when
Dr. Washington found in the corner behind this supporting wall and the back of the South Stoa
wall Mycenaean graves such as have been found at Salamis. I could only explain this to myself
by the supposition that this site was outside the earliest peribolus. We
now found such early
 THE EXCAVATIONS IX 1896 8S

walls of the Mycenaean period here, together with some Hueli grave*, and a great number of raiM
and small objects outside these early walls. Such walls also a|>]N.>ared on the whole watt alope,
north and northeust of tlio West Building, where Mr. Kogi-rs lioil charge of the work, an«l where
wo have cleared the whole site down to bed-rock. We can now say with confidence that nothing
remains unexcavated toithin the ancient peribolxm.
" We have now attacked also the fields to
the west and southwest, outi>iile. the jifrilHJua walls,
where in exploring during the first season we hatl traee<l a large stoa and conjectured that there
was a Roman temple. This conjecture was a happy one in so far as in the field IkjIow, immedi-
ately to the west of the temple and bordered by the stream (Eleuthcrion) on it* outer (northern
and western) sides, we have found buildings of the Koinan perio«l, —
an extensive and coniplex
system of Roman baths. Tliis is interesting also in its bearing uiM>n the whole nature and func-
tion of the sanctuary.
" The other large field I shall excavate as far as possible, and sluill especially do my bett to
enable our architect to make plans of the l)uildings.
" Afew words about our finds. In this re8j)ect we have been as lucky as ever. I liavc already

Fig. 45.— Wkst Builwno (VU), after Kxcavation.

referred to the metope fragments and to the heads. These latter correspond to those we had
are worked in a vigorous manner, and are still
already found and belong to the metopes. They
of such careful execution that I believe even those of the Parthenon can hardly rival them in this

respect. One head of a youth with a helmet is in perfect preservation, even the tip of the nose
shall now have a large number of fragments at Athens, and we may hope
We
remaining intact.
to be able to piece some together. At all events the sculptures coming from this temide Imilt by
the Argive Eupolemus, with Polycleitus as the sculptor of the temple-statue, are among the most
art of the fifth century b. C.
important specimens of the great
84 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
" From the filling to Second Temple we have about seventy-six baskets full of vases, terra-
tlie

cottas, bronzes, Though a great part of these came from the dry rubbish used to fill up the
etc.

platform, I am more and more convinced that in the earlier periods there was some sacred build-
ing or great altar on the site of this temple. The early Mycenaean walls along the slopes belong
to these, as well as most of the finds which were votive offerings. We have again found here a
number of Egy])tian objects, including several scarabs. I hope that a French Egyptologist, now
our Egyptian finds. Of
sojourning at the French School, will be able to throw some light upon
smaller objects, gems, and terra-eottas, this year has given a very large harvest.
" We
have found several inscriptions, —
some of the Roman period but the most important
;

find, of the whole excavation, is a bronze ])laque about eight inches square
epigraphical perhaps,
with eleven lines of boustrophedon inscription in the earliest Argive characters.
"
Owing to the generosity of Mrs. J. W. Clark and of Mr. Hoppin, whose contributions (#1200)
have greatly increased the suras which I have received from the Institute (#500) and from the
School (1250), as well as that in hand from last year (about fG50), we have been well supjilied
with means this year. I hope to have a considerable surplus. Since Mr. Hoppin has authorized
me to use what remains of his and Mrs. Clark's contribution for the preparation of illustrations of
our work, I have the jjhotographer Merlin here now, who is taking views of the buildings and the
sites, and I shall proceed to make arrangements with Mr. Tilton for the most adequate form of

publication.
" It is rash tomake promises. More than thirteen years passed before the Germans published
the results of their excavations at Olympia the vase fragments from the Acropolis, which have
;

been in their hands for at least five years, are not yet published, and they tell me that their main
difficulty now is to provide proper means of reproduction and publication.
I shall do my best,
and Mr. Tilton promises to use energies to assist me to put into the printer's hands the first
all his

volume, containing the introduction, the architecture, and possibly the sculpture, by the autumn of
1896.
" next spring, after Mr. Hoppin and Mr. Ileermance have worked at our finds during the
By
winter, I may be able to make more definite proposals with regard to the other volume or vol-
umes."
 NOTE A (See page 11).

In this case, as in so many others wlien problems of ancient archaeology anti

hiittory are c<in-
cernetl, it is
important to consider the jwrsonal e(iuation of tlie authorsand the conditions and cir-
cumstanccs under which they wrote, before using or (jnoting jiassages fnjin them, as hiHtorical or
critical evidence. In this special case it is well to bear in mind that, of the two travelem, I'au*
sanias has a bias in the direction of folk-lore and niyth(>gra])hy, |>ervading and sometimes over-

powering his antiquarian or archaeological interests while Strain) is a geographer with a stronger
;

historical bias, possessed of more sober and critical insight and a pronounced a|ipreciation of
literary tradition, the Homeric poems being to him the centre of literary im]N)rtance. While we
may often deplore the inaccuracy and credulity of Pausanias, or at least the inadequacy of liiM
description of objects which to us are of supreme interest; while we are often impatient and irri-
tated with hiiu for his diffuse excursions into the regions of unprofitable hearsay, when ho omitH
the mention or to describe most important facts and monuments, we must recognize tliat these

very faults make him a most useful source of information to the student of folk-lore and myth<»-

logy, and even to the historian who has to consider the local traditions and the earliest sources of
information.
Strabo, on the other hand, clings to the historical facts before him, and probably draws much of
iiis information from such writers as Ephorus and when he goes beyond these he turns to literature,
;

— the literature which he had before him, — and ignores folk-lore and tradition. To him Homer
is Trotr/rrys, but
not only the poet, o also the central repository of the earliest lore and the only soiinre
from which trustworthy information concerning the earliest history of the Hellenic land and
Hellenic traditions can be had. Tlius in common with writers of his own age, anil with most
scholars of our times, he becomes in matters archaeological and historical a Homer wor-
own
shiper. But we are now in a position to assert that, as regards the earliest history of Greek life

and Greek religion. Homer himself becomes the more useful and instructive the more we supple-
ment the Homeric poems by the records of local and popular traditions in wortl and stone. These
are scattered through the authors and exhumed from the earth, they jwint to still earlier periiNls,
and show the constitution of the material which the genius of the great epic poets has put into
such splendid and monumental artistic oixler.
Thus it is that Strabo, who is fully informed with regard to the Mycenaean and Argive i>eriods
in the early history of the Heraeum and of the whole plain and country, is practically ignorant of
or ignores the Tirynthian period. There are two main causes for this omission on his part
was thus natu-
(1) When he wrote about this district the city of Argos had a great history, and
rally the centre on which he stood in order to focus and to observe the historical region which he
attempted to explore critically. Mycenae was in time and space nearest to Argos, and he could
follow more readily its destruction by the latter, and its previous hegemony. This k-<l him as far
back as the Homeric period, and here he stopped. Tii-yns and Midea, on the other hand, were
deserted ^
in his time, and seemed at best only to have been " fortresses,"
apparently as opjiosed
^

to cities. He
herein forgot that the early cities forti-ess or citadel, Ijuilt
consisted both of such a
of more durable material, and of the town itself, built of perishable material, spreading round the
foot of the citadel, such as the Hissarlik-Troy, the early Mycenae itself, and probably the early

city of Argos.
in Strabo's consideration of the historical
(2) Tlie second cause for the omission of Tiryns
Heraeum the fact that he restricte<l himself to Homeric
phases of the Argive plain and the
lies in

evidence, and that, in his admirable attempt at a careful examination of the passages in Homer, he
" oir Ttpmei ipixfir-nplf xp^t'^'*^ *«n'^
1
Strab. VIII. 6. 11. 373 C (pvi^os 8' iarl Kiuidyii rf /ikr

MiJt'o.
[Tiryiis] Kol ^ TrKtiaiov
86 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
is misled by the ambiguous use of the term "Argos." He
what has been felt often in
himself felt,

the writing of this very book, that it is important and difficult to make
clear whether one is using
" "
the terra Argos to mean the district or country or the city. He labored nnder this difficulty
himself at the outset of his description in the fifth chapter of the fifth book, and he carefully

weighs Homer's use of the term to show that it was used, not only
for the district, but also for

the Peloponnesus, —
nay, the whole of Ilellas.^ But he at once lapses into this error which he
" And
tries to avoid when, further on,^ he says I think that
: the reputation of this city brought
it about that both Pelasgians and Danaans, as well as the Argives themselves, were named after it.

And for that, the Greeks as well." And a few lines below he quotes those passages from Homer
" "
in which the term Argos is used to include Sparta and Corinth and islands. No doubt he finds
it difficult
^
to understand how the city of Argos could be called parched and waterless, with its
river flowing by it, and considers the tale a figment of the poets for he cannot see how the tra-
;

dition of the sinking of wells associated with Danaus, which turned, in the words of Euripides,
the waterless (awSpoi/) Argos into a plain rich in water («ui;8poi'), applied to the district on the
other side of the Inachus, made fertile at this very day by a like system of wells.
For Strabo the history of the district begins with the Danaans, whom he associates exclusively
" When the descendants of "
with the city of Argos and Mycenae. Danaus," he says,* received the
inheritance of his sway in Argos, and there mixed with them the Amythaonidae, originating in
Pisatis and Triphylia, one would not wonder that, kinsmen as they were, they divided the district
into two kingdoms : at first, in such a way that the two sovereign cities in those kingdoms were to
be seen situated close to one another at a distance of less than fifty stadia,
— namely, the cities of

Argos and Mycenae,

—
and that the Heraeum, standing towards Mycenae, was the sanctuary com-
mon to both of them." It will be seen that he has entirely omitted any mention of Tiryns. He
summarizes the of the in the terms " was
then history district following Originally, then, Argos :

the more predominant, after that Mycenae, which received considerable impulse through the immi-

gration of the Pelopidae to it. For after all had joined the sons of Atreus, Agamemnon, as being
the older, received the sovereignty, and, by the aid of good fortune and ability combined, added a

large district of the country to the possessions which he had before received. And, in particular,
he added the Argolic district to the Mycenaean. Thus Menelaus had the Laconian district while ;

Mycenae and the country as far as Corinth and Sicyon, and the land which at that time was called
the land of the lonians and Aegaleans, fell to the share of Agamemnon. are told that, after We
the Trojan war, Agamemnon's rule came to an end, and Mycenae was humbled and this was ;

especially so after the return of the Heraclidae. For the Heraclidae occupied Peloponnesus, and
expelled the former rulers ;
so that those who held Argos also held Mycenae, now united with
Argos. Butin after years Mycenae was destroyed by the Argives, so that now not a trace of the

city of the Mycenaeans is to be found [?]. Seeing that such has been the fate of Mycenae, one
ought not to wonder if some of the places catalogued under Argos are no longer in existence."
And thus Strabo leads over to his short account of the " deserted " Tiryns and Midea.
has been necessary to quote this passage in full, because it makes clear that the researches of
It
Strabo do not lead him further back than the Danaans, since he is restricted to the Homeric poems
as his supreme guide. We
ma}' also point to the change of locution, the moment his Homeric
information ceases with the downfall of the house of Atreus as bearing upon this question.
For, without warning, he passes from the direct statement to quotation in using the infinitive
(raTrtiyw^Tji/ai), which he has not used before, and which he does not apply afterwards
when he
comes to the inroad of the Dorians.

NOTE B (See page 12).

Our
jirimary interest in the ancient remains of this important site and their history need not
debar us from dwelling for a moment upon the supreme beauty of the natural scenery. Indeed,
the primary claim to archaeological and historical intei-est which the country of Greece naturally
=
>
Cf. end of VIII. 6. 5, 369. VIII. 6. 4 and 5, 370.
= * VIII.
VIII. 6. 9, 371. 6. 10, 372.
 THE VIEW FKOM THE HERAEUM 87

puts forwanl lias often stood in i\w way of tlic due appreciation of tiie tnuuoentlc'Dt beauty of it«
natural sctMiery, so tliat this feature often takes the viHitor by
Murpriite.
Of all the many beautiful views in Greeei, that from the Heraeum in
certainly one of tlie niwiit
beautiful. If in tiiis brilliant atmosphere, clcjar and lucid, yet never
ln|Miinf; int« flaring vulgarity,
without ever having the coarseness of the too-manifest, wo Mtand on the temple platfonii and gaze
over the Argive plain, we see on the left, to the southwest, tlie peaks of Parnon and I'arthcnion

rise in a
]>ale blue limpid light, which seems but a continuation of the blue strip of sea in the
Naupliau (iiilf, and which causes the azure sky behind, cut into graceful fretwork by the delicata
outlines of tlio mountains, to appear a paler blue. This delicate lino of mountain range, ehiseled
in its finely cut yet never hard features, like beautiful profiles on (ircek gems, continuous in its
course, harmoniously varied, flows in one long-drawn sweep from our left to our right. And in
this evenly flowing outline we can distinguish Artemisium op|N)site, shelving down
by stc|M, Lyeone
and Larisa, to where Argos lies, its white monastery of the Punagia crouching and nestling U> the
rock, a bright white speck above the town. The line of mountains is carried on to the more diittant
and higher ranges grouping round Cyllene, until, at our right, it is lost in the hills that encircle
Nemea. And you know that, jealously guarding the plain where the ])asses lead to these norttioni-
most mountains, Mycenae crouches among its r(x;ky glens, like a mediaeval keej), wilder, more
dismal, as if it stood on guard against a northern land and iKiople. But on our left again, to the
south, where Tiryns lies, when the sun turns after noon, the rock fortress of Palaniidi juts forth
into the blue sea the sun's rays beat upon its walls, and the windows from the houses of
;
Nauplia
gleam and twinkle in the distance, like earth-born daylight stars. And l>efore us, all the time, in
peaceful languor, stretches the generous plain of broad-breasted mother Gaia, with all shades of
green vegetation in its wheat, barley, and oats, and clumps of olive-trees. lietween this green are
the bared, dark, red-brown patches of earth where the rude metal-tipped womlen plough, drawn

by oxen goaded on by the long-pointed rod, has cut its furrows. These await the tobacco plant,
which in its delicate infancy has been sheltered fi-om the rough winds by wicker hurdles, and is
growing happily, as from the distance it paints the bright, golden strips between the brown and
green. As the sun shines on the snow of the peaks, they gleam like broadened lance-heads of
polished silver ;
and farther down their sides, in the gullies and beneath the rocky ledges, the
strong ribs and sinewy flanks of these lofty giants, where the snow has remained, the silver gleam
flows out into winding threads.
And all this rich variety of line, form,and color is changed and multiplied in its aspect, though
harmonized in unity of
itstone, by the succession of the seasons, of the day's lights, and of the

capricious effects of atmosphere. But even in the still moonlight nights, when the bells of the

sheep, grazing on the slopes of Euboea, sounded in our tents as if they were but a few feet from
the canvas and awakened us, and the owl screeched its shrill and monotonous call, the sight at
our feet — the plain, the mountains, the sea, and sky
— exercised a spell of beauty unrivaled in

any part of the globe.

To the effect of this natural beauty come the historical associations of the spot to intensify the

artistic charm where can such condensed historical associations, big with man's history, and
; for

rising out of the very earth before you and from the remains recoveretl
from her womb, crowd in
upon the imagination ? They stamp their most characteristic features on your mind in the form
of a general artistic mood (which often years of learned reading and thought fail fo pro<luce in
the scholar), which represents the quintessence and living soul of each past jierioil. And this mood
is evoked, not by vague and uncertain and nebulous suggestion, but by the very handiwork of

the men who in the distant past produced these remains now restored to the present, nay,
—
made part of the present and its spiritual life by the pick and spade of the excavator ; for the
is now as it was then, and contains the life and
clay moulded, the stones cut, the metal wrought,
the soul infused into them from the worker's hands, now as they did thousands of years ago, —
..." pure crude fact
Secreted from man's life when hearts beat hard
And brains, high-blooded, ticked [long] centuries ago."
88 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
Standing above the Upper Temple platform, the beholder has before him, immediately at his feet,
the remains of the Older Temple, covering, without hiding, vestiges of man's history which preceded

by centuries the age of Homer's heroes. Here the descendants of Phoroneus marked the begin-
nings of man's civilized life in Greece ; here the Cyclopean masons built their wall in the times
of Proetus of Tiryns. At our very
feet stood the temple where the Achaeans worshiped, and
where (Dictys tells us) they chose Agamemnon as their leader when they set out for Troy. Hither
the sturdy Dorians came, —
Temenos and all his clan. Here Phidon set up the symbols which
marked an era of wider commerce. At the gates of this temple Cleomenes III. of Sparta in vain

sought admittance into the shrine.

And in the glorious age when the Hellenic genius manifests itself in all its lasting splendor,
when Athens leads the world, after the Persian host fi-om the east has been driven back, when the

figure of Pericles stands forth in shining light and Phidias hallows the Parthenon with the lasting
beauty of his sculpture,
—then Polycleitus fashions a statue, "the most beautiful of all," for
that temjile the foundations of which so clearly lie at our feet below the older shrine. One of the
buildings at our left was probably erected in the time when Alexander the Great undertook the

conquest of the world. On our right the elaborate walls on the lowest level of the precinct were
erected by imperial Rome, perhaps when Hadrian presented his golden peacock to the temple.
And then we see the early Christians, the Byzantines, and the Prankish and Norman knights take
possession of the country, destroy this sanctuary, build ovit of its ruins the churches you see scat-
tered over the plain, and erect their fortresses at Palamidi and Argos. Then the devasting Turk
lays his yoke on the people of the plains. We
see the traces of his handiwork in the plain, —
Pasha,
the village straight before us is called, —
and of the army of the great Venetian republic, all trans-
porting building material from this shrine to their mosques or their castellated citadels over yonder.
The Venetian rule is succeeded again by that of the Turk until, in the narrow pass, Dervenaki,
;

up there to the north, in that glorious struggle of the new Greeks for freedom, Kolokotroni
annihilates the Turkish host. Argos yonder was once the capital of this young republic. All
these stages in man's history, like great earth-ghosts, rise from the land at our feet as we gaze
over the plain. Suddenly there is a distant, faint, yet shrill whistle, and we are awakened out of
this over-full, dreamlike succession and condensation of historical moods and here we see, far over
;

the plain, on our right, threading its

way along like a centipede, a weird, elongated,
moving thing,
puffing smoke from its head and rapidly gliding on to Argos.
It is then that we are recalled to the life immediately before us, at our feet the hundreds of
;

workmen with marked Southern features, in varied and picturesque costumes the small native ;

horses drawing numerous carts with their rumbling noise, through which the shouts of the drivers

pierce,
—and all these men speaking the language of ancient Greece, changed and attenuated
and abused, but still the tongue of ancient Hellas. Dotted among them are foreign-looking young
men, different in feature and garb and tongue, watching over the work. And we ask, Who
are these new men, these new Dorians, who speak the foreign tongue ? and whence come they, and
wherefore? And the answer is. They come from afar, from the land of the setting sun, thou-
sands of miles over the salt sea. But they come not to destroy and conquer, but to restore to the
light of day the life that has been buried under that soil for countless ages. And we afe over-
come by the sense of the great poetic justice, the rightness of things, —
that the youngest inheritors
of Hellenic culture among the nations should restore to the light of day the oldest sanctuary of
ancient Hellas.
THE GEOLOGY OF THE HERAEUM REGION
 THE GEOLOGY OF THE HEIUEUM REGION
By henry STEPHENS WASHINGTON
The
geology of ArgoliH, as compared witli that of other jwrtH of Greece, ia Himple.
Argolis is not only, from a geological stiindpoint, quite recent in foniuition, hut it \m»
also been the scene of nnich less disturbance; than other parts of Greece. None of the
rocks exposed back beyond the Jurassic Period, and there is little of the profound
diite

metamorphism which has prodiu-ed the marbles and schists of Attica, which according to
Lepsius* are either Palaeozoic or Archaean.
In the present paper it is
purposed to sketch briefly the geology of the district imme-
diately surrounding the Argive Heraeum, sjvy within a radius of fifteen kilonu>tr(>M, to
examine the agencies which tend to bury ancient remains, and to discuss the site of the
Heraeum ui the light of the information so
gained.

GEOLOGY OF ARGOLIS.'

Alluvium. — The geographical and sociological centre of Arg(dis

the Argive phiin, is

a flat expanse of loose alluviinn, roughly triangular in shai)e, the ajiex to the north,
with an area of approximately 170 square kilometres, and an average elevation alM)ve sea
level of perhaps twenty-five metres. Near the coast are swamps which apparently are
slowly drying up, and which will eventually disjvppear as marshes or will move st;award.
Beyond these, to the north, is a flat, nearly horizontal plain, forme<l of brown, jKirtly
loose and sandy, and partly clayey loam, without stones. Nearer the mountjiin bonlers,
especially to the east and north, the altitude is higher and the sIojm; greatt^r, and the
gi-ound confciins many pebbles brought down from the moiuitjiins. This ]>ebhly, higher
zone extends north of a line curving round from Merbaka to Kutzopodi.
This plain is the latest formation of the Argive district, having been formed in ge«)-
logically very recent times by the deposition, in a previously existing bay,
of sediment

brought down from the surrounding mountains. It is difficult, if not impossible, to give
even an approximate estimate in years of the age of this plain. Measurements of the
rate of deposition along the coast would furnish a basis for calcidation, but at present
such data are wanting. They woidd also yield uncertain results, since it is highly

probable that the rate of deposition at present is diflFerent from, and proVably greater
than, that of former times. The matter is still further complicated by the fact that the
coast along the Gulf of Nauplia probably has been, and is now, sinking. This fact is
discussed by Cold,' who cites several insbmces of ancient Greek ruins now lying beneath
the sea. He mentions, among others, the site of Lerna, and also refers to a nmd which
led from this place to Nauplia along the shore, which was restored by the Venetians,

1 von Attica (Borliii, 1803), p. 170.

'
C. Cold, Kiistetweranderungen im Ankipel (Munich,
Lepsiiis, Geologie
2 information about this
For the greater part of my 1886), p. 14.

region I am indebted to the excellent work of Dr. A.

Pliilippson, Dcr Peloponnes (Berlin, 1892).
91
92 THE GEOLOGY OF THE HERAEUM REGION
but which now at several places is no longer above sea level, so that without doubt a
sinking must have taken place since that time. Whether this sinking is going on at
the present day is not known, nor, if so, Avhether the deposition of sediment is fciking

place along the shore at a greater rate, with consequent seaward growth of shore line.
The latter is jjrobably the case.
At any its general features the Argive plain has
rate, it is certain that in changed
little in historical and although to-day considered one of the most fertile districts
times ;

of Peloponnesus, the characterization of TroXySixpLov given it by Homer (II. iv. 171) still

applies to it. It is probable that, like the rest of Greece, it was once far better wooded
and watered than at present, and that it is consequently dryer, sandier, and less well
cultivated than of yore, the deforesting of the surrounding mountains not oidy tending
to dry up the streams, but also allowing more rapid and extensive denudation, and a

consequent increased deposition of detritus on the plain below.

The Argive plain is drained by several streams, of which only the Erasinos, on the
southwest, contains water throughout the year. The others, Dervenaki, Panitza (Inachus),
Xerias, and several more of less importance, have for the greater part of the year dry
beds, covered with rounded limestone pebbles, not even a brook trickling through them.
On occasions, as at the melting of the winter snows or during heavy rainfalls, they
become for a few days or hours raging torrents, Avhich, as certain visitors and members
of our party have good cause to remember, are awkward to cross. At these times they
overflow their low banks, and cover considerable areas of the surrounding laud with
mud, sand, and pebbles.
Neogene.
—Bounding the Argive plain on the north is an area of conglomerate
belonging to the Late Tertiary (Neogene) Period. This is a southerly extension of the
Tertiary belt which stretches along the north coast of Peloponnesus as far as Pylos.
The Tertiary is the period preceding the present or Quaternary, and the fossils found
in the Late Tertiary indicate (for Europe, at least) a climate and set of conditions less
tropical than during the Early Tertiary, and more nearly like those prevailing at present.
The road from Corinth to Argos, as far as Phichtia, runs through deposits of this age,
and in it are excavated the beehive tombs of Mycenae. The rock south of Nemea is

chiefly a coarse conglomerate formed of limestone pebbles imbedded in a fine calcareous

cement. The same rock is found at the foothills traversed by the path which leads from
the Heraeum to Mycenae.
Eocene. — The lower flanks of the Arcadian Mountains, bounding the Argive plain
on the west, are composed of a very fine-grained, light-colored limestone, which splits
'

readily into slabs. This limestone (the Olonos-Kalk of Philippson) underlies Neogene
conglomerate to the north, and belongs to the Early Tertiary Period, when the climate
of Greece Avas far more tropical than now. The hill crowned by the ancient citadel of
Argos is
composed
(Larisa) of this limestone.
Cretaceous. — To the Argive plain we meet with the oldest rocks of this
east of the

region,
— limestones, shales, and sandstones of Lower Eocene, Cretaceous, and possibly
Jurassic age. The slopes from east of Merbaka southward to about Nauplia are com-
posed of shales and sandstones (Philippson's Lygourlo-Schiefer)," which dip to the
south.
Northward as far as Hagios Vasilios, on the railroad, and eastward to the Gidf of
Aegina, the mountain masses of Hagia Trias, Tzernikelo, Trapezona, and Arachnaeon are
2
>
Op. cit. pp. 400 ff. Op. cil.
pp. 53, 390.
 GEOLOGICAL HISTORY OF THE REGION 08

composed of a gray, coinpatt, Hiiti-giiiiiu'd liineHt<jne. ThU limeHt4)Hf, whit-h uiiderlii?*,

and hence is older than, the Lygourio slialeH, in referred '

hy i'hili|)|>Hon ratiier doulit-

fiilly
to the Jurassic Period, and the Lygoiirio shaleH to the I»wer CretaoeoiiH.
U'lmiiut'
thinks that it is Cretiiceoiis. to the
paucity of gwtd foHnil renuiinn, the qiieKtioii
Owing
is (lillicult to decide hut I am inclined to agree with
definitely, I^epHiuH an to itM age,
especially on the ground of its
petrographic reHemhIance to the Cretaceoiw liiiietitoiiMt of
Attica and the similar occurrence of gal)hroH and which are found in Heverul
seriKjntine,
places hrcaking u|» through the limestone.
Geological History of the Region. —
During CretateouH and Eocene timcH the region
which now forms the Argolic I'cninsida was heneath the level of the
Hea, and the \kh\h
of limestone were being accumulated the of marine on
largely through growth organitiniM
the shallow and slowly sinking sca-hottom. The accumulation wa»i aided
by the lU'int-
sition of sediment brought from then hind areas near which have in iwrt
existing by,
disaj)peared through denudation and subsidence, and in part are left on the niainhind of
Greece and in the Cyclades.
In Post-Neogene time there was an elevation of this area, and the immenw* mam of
rock which had been forming and hardening for ages beneath the sea wjw niise*!
shiwly
many thousand feet into the air. This elevation, though gradual, was the means of still
further consolidating the rock-mass through pressure and
partial metamoq)hihni, and
was accompanied by much cracking of the crust.
Indeed, the Aegean Sea and the surrounding countries have been the scene of so much
disturbance that the whole region is, as Cold puts it, crossed by a " network of cnicks."
One of the most important of these is that which, beginning at Cos, curves round
through Santorini, Melos, and Aegina to the Isthmus of Corinth, and thence along the
Gulf of Corinth. It is on part of this line that the Greek volcanoes have been fonne<l.
In fact, it is to these cracks that the main configuration of these Aegean countries is

due, with their lines of islands and peculiar coastal features.

Only two of these fracture-lines, however, concern us. One is the volcanic line

already mentioned, which cuts off Argolis abruptly on the east, and on which we find
the volcano of Methana, the small eruptive mass of Poros, and the small outflows of
dacite near Kalamaki. The other is that which runs in a southeasterly direction from
about Phlius, through the Argive plain and out into the Gulf of Nauplia. This latter
separated the massif of Argolis from that of Arcadia.
As soon as the Argolic massif had been raised above sea level, it became subject to
the destructive effects of the atmosphere, rain and wind, heat and fnjst, which agencies
are constantly tending to reduce all elevations of the earth's surface to a so-called base

level, which would be eventually (if other forces did not come into play) that of tlie sea.
The on the upraised surface of the old sea-bottom, and dissolved it and washed
rain fell
it off. The heat of the sun and the frost of winter split up the rocks, and vegetation
springing up aided the disintegration. The surface material was washed sejiward, the
rainfall gradually forming regular channels for itself, as one can see in miniature on a

sandy road after a heavy rain.

The main lines of drainage would be determined by the two fracture-lines, which
would offer channels for the drainage, and which would be the parts toward which the
surface water would flow. Toward these, then, the small streams made
their way, gradu-

ally widening and deepening their own channels and cutting back farther and farther
1
*Op.eU.f. 81.
Op. dt. p. 390.
94 THE GEOLOGY OF THE HERAEUM REGION
into the limestone massif. This was consequently cut by valleys sloping' toward the fault
lines, and the ridges between them were subject to the same changes through the action
of smaller streams tributary to the first. An examination of Philijjpson's topographical
map of the region will reveal traces of the course of events, though subsequent erosion
isthe cause of some obscurity.
In this way the main topography of the mountains has been carved out by running
water, and they themselves were subject to the same unceasing forces till their sides
were furrowed and their spurs in many cases were cut off from the parent moimfciin. It
was on such a spur, isolated by erosion from the mountain mass of Hagia Trias, that the
Temple of Hera was built.

The site is near the top of a small eminence, roughly triangular in shape. The apex
istoward the mountain to the north, from which it is separated by a deep valley this, ;

coming down from above, forks at the Heraeum hill. The ravines on either side, the
ancient Eleutherion and Asterion, are gullies in the limestone, generally dry, but occasion-

ally flowing with rain-water.

Toward these and at the apex, the sides of the hill are
precipitous, with talus and earth-slopes below.
The surface of the hill slopes somewhat
steeply down from the apex toward the plain, the slope being broken by two terraces,
on which the two temples lay. At the top the gray cretaceous limestone of the moun-
tains crops out in abundance, but below it is hidden by deposits of earth, part of which
he beneath the temples and other buildings, and part of which serve to cover and pre-
serve the remains.
It is to the consideration of the accumulation of this protective mantle that the fol-

lowing pages will be devoted.

BURIAL OF ANCIENT REMAINS.

The questions of the methods by which soil and other materials accumulate over ruined
buildings, and the sources whence the material is derived, are often of great interest.
Little, or nothing, so far as I am aware, has been written specially on this subject, so
that it
may be not withoutinterest to the archaeologist to discuss the matter in general,

pointing out the various agencies that may contribute to the result.
I feel that this

may be especially useful, since I was often asked during the excavations how so much
soil could collect on the surface of the isolated hill on which the temples stood.

The various agencies by which, in the course of time, ancient remains are covered up

may be grouped under two main heads, inorganic and organic. Each of these may
be further subdivided, but must be understood that in the great majority of cases the
it

process is complex, and that more than one of the various agencies have been active.
It is also to be remembered that the conditions of the site, topographical, geological,

and meteorological, as well as the surrounding fauna and flora, and its relations to war
and later occupation, are the complex factors which determine the processes involved
at any site.

Inorganic Agencies.
— The two
principal inorganic agencies which tend to bury objects
lying on the surface of the ground are wind and water, and of these let us consider first
the wind, this being that which has been chiefly involved at the Heraeum.
Wind. — The action of the wind in raising and transporting dust and sand is a matter
of common observation on any dry, windy day, but it is only on further consideration
that its importance from this point of view is recognized. Although the air is 813
 BURIAL OF ANCIENT REMAINS «6

tiini's li<>liter than water, and

its
carryinff jMiwer conHeqtiently far Uiin, yet, owiiif^ to itit
jifi-eater velocity
of motion, its
power of tranHportin^r material of certain kinclH iM fully u
j»reat. On an averaj^^e the lar{«est sand j^rain wliicli can l)e HUHtaine<l hy ordinary windii u
only 0.1 mm. in diameter,' ho that the material tranHported liy win<I in naturally only the
finest in j^rain. It must also naturally he dry. Furthermore, since the raiMin}r of dust
into the upper layers of the air, where velocities are jfreat«*r, in )p«atly facilitated f{twt«, hy
swirls, and eddies, its transportiition will he facilitjited hy conditionH tendinj; to prtnluco
" the conditions
these. Hence, as Udden s<iys, favoring wind erosion are a dry cliniat«
and a topography of ahrupt and hroken reliefs."
It will he seen that the climatiil and topographical conditions of Greece and
esiiecially
of the Heraeum site are highly favorahle to wind transport^ition. There is the dry,
dusty plain surrounded hy mountjiins, the former supplying the material and the latter
aiding by rendering the normal winds gu.sty and irregular. It was
hy no means uncom-
mon from the excavations the clouds of wind and dust drifting across the plain
to see

below, and the amount of dust raised by the winds froni the excavations themsi'lves was
at times a serious annoyance.
As to the deposition of the dust so raised, it is evident that, since its
tnins)H)rtation
depends largely on the velocity of the winds, anything tending to check the motion will
tend io deposit its earthy burden. Objects projecting above the surface will do this, so
that any ruins will become a nucleus for aeolian deposits (as they are called) on a small
scale. The growth of grass and bushes will also have the siime effect, and the growth
about ruins is facilitJited
by the presence of the fine aeolian deposits, which, through the
selective action of the wind and other causes, are richer in plant food than the s<iil they
are derived from, and where also such material is in a more easily assimihtble condition.
The application of these remarks to the Heraeum will be deferred to a later page, hut
that dust (largely wind blown)
'-'

attention may be called to the calculation of Lanciani

accumulates on the floor of the Forum of Trajan at the rate of an uich a year, or over

eight feet in a century.

In this connection may be mentioned, for the siike of completeness, the burial of build-
ings and towns in Holland and elsewhere by sjind
dunes. In this case, however, the
motion of the dunes a rolling one, the wind blowhig the hack and top biyers of sand
is

continuously forward, so that the dime moves bodily forward as a whole through
the
motion of its
component particles.
Water. —
The action of water in burying ancient remains is of the highest impor-
tance, and takes place in several ways.
Rain falling on sloping surfaces of earth tends to wash the loose surface matter down-
Rivers and brtMiks
ward, and hence to bury objects which lie at the bottom of the slo[>e.
carry enormous amounts of sediment
down from higher to lower levels, where jKirt »»f the
material is the rest
deposited, out to sea or being deposited on the bottoms J)f lakes.
jjassing

Low-lying sites in and on plains at the foot of mountiiins are es|)ecijilly

river valleys

apt to be buried by such means.

This action of rivers is gieatly aided by the occiu-rence of freshets, where the stream,
much increased in vohime and velocity, and hence carrying far greiiter hwds of stnli-
ment than far from its banks and deposits material over areas which
usual, spreads
the normal flow never reaches. A well-known instiince of this is the site of Olympia,
which was covered largely by material brought down by the Cladeus and depositetl in
1
J. A. Udden, Journal of Geology, II. (1894), p. 322.
"
Lanciani, Ruins of Ancient Rome (1S97), p. M.
96 THE GEOLOGY OF THE HERAEUM REGION
times of flood. A similar action, aided by the detritus washed downward by the rain,
is seen at Sardis, which buried to a great depth by the deposit of sediment from the
is

overhanging heights of Sart Kalessi, the ancient AcropoHs. This height is composed of
loose, crumbling, sandy marls, which are easily washed away, not only by brooks but by

falling rain. To such an extent has this erosion taken place that the mountain crest
isa mass of fanfcistic pinnacles and turrets, and of the ancient Acropolis but a very small

part remains. The rest is gone to bury the city at its base, thus preserving the dead
remains of what it protected in life.
In the case of sites near the seashore and at the mouths of large rivers, under certain
conditions the sea is a prominent factor, causing a deposition of sediment where the
river current is checked on entering the sea,gradually closing up harbors, forming-
deltas, and adding to the land. Ephesus and Miletus are prominent examples of this
class.

Another agency which water plays an important part are landslides.

in Here
the water acts by loosening strata or by lessening the friction between two layers of
earth or rock, so that large sections of a mountain-side may slip suddenly down, over-

whelming all that lies in their path. Instances of this will be recalled by any one who
has visited Switzerland, and landslides from Mount Cronium aided materially in burying
Olympia.
Finally we must note the deposition of carbonate of lime or travertine, etc., from
solution in water. This action is extremely local and of little importance in classical
archaeology, though in the case of cave deposits it has been the means of preserving for
us most important remains of prehistoric man.
Volcanoes. — As a agency may be mentioned the action of volcanoes
final inorganic

which bury sites at their bases, not only by lava streams, but by flows of mud and by
the ejection of immense quantities of ashes and scoriae. Pompeii and Herculaneum will
occur to every one in this connection, and the prehistoric remains of Santorini
may also
be cited.

Organic Agencies.
— Of the organic agencies, man is
bymost important, at
far the
least in the region of classical archaeology. The
superposition of one building on the
remains of an older, the growth of a new settlement on the site of an older one, the

general use of mud brick for private houses in antiquity, the immense accumulation of
stone, brick, earth, mud, and rubbish of all kinds wherever man abides, are exemplified
at Troy, Nineveh, Athens, Rome, in fact, wherever the excavator's pick has
penetrated.
This mode of burial is in many respects the best known to archaeologists, partly
through itsobvious features, and partly through the importance of the superincumbent
It is needless to enlarge on this factor, but reference
artificial masses. may be made to
'
the striking remarks by Lanciani on the burial of Rome.
Of other animals than man only one, the humble earthworm, constitutes a factor
of any importance. This animal brings up earth from its burrows and deposits it at the
surface in the form of the famihar worm-casts. In one of his shorter but very interest-
"
ing books Darwin much
space to the development of the theory that worms are
devotes
to a large extent responsible for the burial of small objects lying on the surface of the

ground, and even of ruins. He gives several instances of the pavements of recently
excavated Roman England being gradually buried beneath such deposits and
villas in

slowly sinking. Though Darwin is

perhaps inclined to attribute to the worms more
' 2
Op. cit.
pp. 98 ff.
Vegetable Mould and Earthworms.
 THE HERAEUM SITE AND ITS BUKIAL W
than their fair share in these cases, yet the effect is undoubted. While the rate of
of worm-casts, and
(lt!i)()Hiti<)ii consequent suhsich-nce and huriiil, is very Kh>w, yet thew
animals form a fa(!tor not to ha entirely overlooked in
consichfrin}; tliesubject.
In addition to the animal orj^anisms, plants must not be
forgotten, since they aid very
not as wind-breaks and
materially, only by actinjr conse<|uent dust-gatherent, but ahiu
throuoli tlui accumnlation of matter
by their d«fath and <lecay. They ahMi promote the
preservation of hnried remains by binding the soil together, so that wind un«l rain liave
less
opportunity for action hi removing it.

THE HERAEUM SITE AND ITS BURIAL.

In fciking up the site of the Ileraeum more in detail, it must 1m; recalled tliat the
temples
are situated on a spur of Mount. Hagia Trias, which is cut oif from the main mass
by
a deep erosion valley. As has already been sjiid, this hill is largely com])ose<l <if gray
limestone, which lies close to the surface at the upper part, north of the old temple. As
the rocky surface sloped too steeply, the massive Cyclopean
retaining wall was built for
the support of the Old Temple platform, which was
pnd)ably Lirgely artificial. Below
thisno limestone was met with in the course of the excavations, and it is rather uncertain
to what extent the slope is natural. From the fact that layers of gravel were met witli at
low levels in several places, we can infer that much of it was part of the old mountain
slope, while in other places there has been extensive filling in before the construction of
buildings. Covering all the remains of buildings was a layer of soil and earth, which
varied in depth from about half a metre over the Old Temple to four or five along the
south and west slopes, especially against retaining and back walls.
This soil is of course subsequent to the destruction of the buildings, and it will be
not without interest to see whence was derived.
it

The existence of the deep erosion valley back of the hill precludes the possibility of
any wash of earth from the mountain slopes above. It was also evident from the results
of the excavations that there had been no settlement, at least of any size, on the hill
since the abandonment of the site as a place of worship of Hera. In this res|)ect it
differs radically from such sites as those of Troy and Plataea. This is due jvirtly to
the fact that the site, at least since the earliest primitive times, was never a place of
residence, but only of worship and pilgrimage, and partly, also, because the hill was «jf
little or no strategic importance, as was that of Platiiea. In some respects, from the
excavator's standpoint, this is a misfortune, since not only would the accumulations of a
settlement have aided in preserving the ruins, but also the use of the site as a quarry
would have been localized, and the blocks and other objects would not now be scattered
far over the Argive plain.
The main agency involved, then, must be attributed to the wind, as Lis l»een already
mentioned, the material being derived from the mountain above, and still more from the
plains below. These aeolian deposits were never of great thickness, except .igainst steep
slopes and in hollows. Thisbe expected, in view of the small area of the hill
is to

and the lack of abundant vegetation. Trees are entirely absent, and, except for a
few thyme bushes, the only vegetation is short, coarse grass and plants of no greater
height.
Worms may have played some part in the process, but in all probability only to a small
extent. As far as I can recall, worm-casts were very rare on such surfaces as that of the
98 THE GEOLOGY OF THE HERAEUM REGION
cleaned-iip platform of the Old Temple, and the
accumulation of soil which necessitated
an occasional sweeping- for visitors was practically aU wind-borne dust from the plain or
from the excavations.
In this connection there described a somewhat striking instance of what may
may be
be called archaeological geology, especially since it throws some light on the methods
of the old builders.
The back of the South Stoa, which is several metres below the level of the Second
Temple, is poros stone,^ which measures about 30 cm. in height.
a wall of blocks of
As this building was uncovered in 1894, a steep bank, some 4 metres deep, was left for
a time behind it. In this section, at the west end, immediately behind the space where

formerly were the upper courses of the back wall of the stoa, there Avere seen five
narrow (2 to 3 cm.) parallel and horizontal stripes of white earth, standing out clearly

against the brown earth background. The accompanying

figure, drawn from a sketch
and measurements made at the time, shows the state of aft'airs.
Examination of the thin Avhite strips showed that they were composed of the dust of
2)oros stone, mingled with
some chips of the same. The earth between them varied
somewhat in character. At the bottom
w was red clay and loose gravel, in which
were found some objects of bronze and a
small grave, lined with rough stones, con-

taining a skeleton and the Mycenaean

vases described elsewhere. Above this is

about 1 metre of blackish earth, overlaid

by 4 cm. of yellow earth. Then follows
75 cm. of earth with some gravel, and
«-.\WAv')/AvVMWMH'MV«MH.™ii »f4m t»anS2
above this, in alternate order, three 2 cm.

layers of poros dust and three (25 to

30 cm.) of solid brown earth, the last of
these being overlaid by 3 cm. of poros
dust. Above this the I'elations are some-
what complicated by the presence of
oblique strata of gravel, but we have here
also 50 cm. of earth, 3 cm. oi poros dust,
again 50 cm. of earth, and then the sur-
face of the previous year's excavation, on
a level with the foundations of the Second

Temple.
Here an instance of archaeological
is

geology, which tells a story. In the first

Fig. 45a. — Section back of South Stoa, 1894.
place the red clay and gravel at the base
Explanation :
1, Soil. 2, Poros dust. 3, Gravel. 4, Soil of the section, and in which the grave
with some gravel. 5, Yellow earth. 6, Black earth.
lied clay and gravel, witli grave.
was found, is
evidently subsoil, existing
7,

prior to settlement at the locality, while

the black earth which covers it is the old surface soil. Poros stone is quite foreign to
the locality, and the presence of layers of this can only be attributed to the agency of

'
This is a soft wliitisli travertine, extensively used for building in Greece. It derives its name from one of the

locp-lities in which it is found.

 IGNEOUS ROCKS FOUND AT THE HERAEUM 99

man, and derived from material used in conHtruction,

preHumubly that of the liatk wall
of the stoa, which is coiiHtriicted of this stone.
he ohservetl tlmt the layern of
It will
earth are each about 25 cm. thick, or multiple of this
hy two or three.
The hypothesis which accounts best for these facts is as follows When the hUmi wan
:

to be l)uilt, it was necessary to cut

away some of the bank behind it, alxiut down t4» the
old In tliis, tlie first few courses were laid in a trench, as founcLition bIoek>». AImivo
soil.

three courses of l)locks were laid, which woidd make the

these, heiffht about as great as
a man could work comfortably. Eiirth was then thrown in behind, and the blocks for
the next course worked into shape, the dust from this
making; the first thin
poroa layer.
One course was laid, earth and more l)h)cks worked, and so on, the
tilled in,
siiace la-hind
beiiif'- filled in sometimes after one and sometimes after two courses. The sliipin^
bunds of <>nivel in the upper part are somewhat more diOicult of
exphtnation, but an
pr(»bably derived from earth thrown out of some excavation near by, forniinj; t^dus slopes.
This was possibly that of the West Uuildiufr, since the direction of is toward
ui>-Hh)i)e
this.

NOTE ON THE IGNEOUS ROCKS FOUND IN THE EXCAVATIONS AT THE

HERAEUM.
During the excavations at the Ileraonm site a number of rough, as well as worked, piece* of
igneous rock were met with. Since, as lias been previously explained, the only rocks occurring in
the immediate vicinity are limestones and shales, it is evident that these igneous rocks were
brought
from a distance, and it is believed that a study of tiiem niiglit throw some liglit on their possible
places of origin.
The writer accordingly brought home a nnniber of representative pieces, none of any archaeo-
logical value, 2)er se, and has studied them by the ordinary petrographical methods, the results of
wliich are here briefly given. Since but a small amount of space can be devoted to this topic,
which is rather foreign to an archaeological volume, no explanation of the technical terms employed
has been attempted, and, to the archaeologist, only the few conclusions which may l)e drawn will Iw
of immediate interest. The specimens
are grouped according to their })etrographical characters.
GS-abbro. —
With the exception of one unworked piece, all the specimens of this rock are repre-
sented by so-called " hammer-stones." These are cuboidal in shape (i. e. cubes with rounde<l edges
and angles), wliich vary in diameter from 3.5 to 7.5 cm., and in weight from 150 to 400 gmis.
The siu-faces are smoothed but not polished, and in some cases rather rough and pitted from in-
cipient weathering.
The use of " hammer-stones " was, as the name implies, for pounding, either taking the place of
our modern hammer, or as a pestle for reducing grain to meal. For this purpose a hard, tough
material is essential, and this quality being characteristic of the gabbi-os, this rock is highly suit-
able for the purpose.
Hammer-stones are very commonly found in prehistoric deposits in all parts of the globe, having
been evolved from the ])rimitive, naturally rounded pebble. Their relative abuudanee at the
Ileraeum, as well as at Plataea (where I also met with numbers of them ) and at other Greek
sites,would indicate that they were in common use among the Greeks down to a (pntc late date.
It would be of interest to collect and study all the facts available as to their occurrence at (Jreek

sites, since the appai'cnt survival of such decidedly primitive implements among a people in such
a higli state of culture is striking. It seems possible that this may have been the ri»sult of their

use in religious ceremonies, e. g. for preparing the meal for sacrifices, just as the flint knife was
used in sacrificial ceremonies in many countries long after the knowledge of bronze and iron had
become general.
A number found show signs of wear by the presence of an especially rough surface or
of those
jdmost ijolished face, indicate that they
chipped edges, while others which present a very smooth,
100 THE GEOLOGY OF THE HERAEUM REGION
were used as grinders or rubbers for making meal, just as similar implements are employed at the
present day by the Mexican Indians
and other peoples. One specimen even showed signs of both
uses, having its largest face quite smoothly rubbed, but with rough depressions in the centre, as if
it had also been used as a hammer against a chisel or other hard metallic instrument.
Gabbros are rather frequently met with in the eastern part of Greece, having been described as
coming from Euboea, Attica, and near the Isthmus of Corinth. As I met with one or two masses
of this rock cutting the limestone near Mycenae, it is probable that the material of these hammer-
stones comes from the neighborhood of the Heraeum, and that they were of home manufacture.

Petrographically these gabbros offer no especially noteworthy features. They are somewhat
are seen to be rather ophitic in structure, some of them
coarse-grained, and under the microscope
are composed of automorphic, rather basic labradorite, pale
being almost true diabase. They
diopside, and occasionally diallage, which are frequently uralitized, with some magnetite. little A
orthoclase is sometimes seen, which may be connected with the tendency of many of the rocks of
the eastern part of the Mediterranean basin to a monzonitic character. In general they corre-

spond with some of the descriptions of Becke and Lepsius of Euboean and Attic gabbros, though
no tendency toward glaucophanization of the pyroxenes was observed.
Felsite Porphyry. —
Several rounded, waterworn pebbles and fragments of two hammer-stones

composed of a dense green felsite were found. These are all more or less porphyritic, the pheno-
crysts being entirely of an apparently alkaline feldspar. In one or two instances there is a well-
defined flow structure in the apparently originally glassy base. But all the specimens examined
are thoroughly devitrified, the feldspars having lost their transparency, and the base being changed
to the usual very finely granular, cryptocrystalline aggregate.
These porphyries are somewhat similar to the well-known labradorite-porphyry of Laconia (yerde
antico), though the ^jhenocrysts are by no means as prominent or numerous, the color is much
lighter, and the feldspars are apparently alkaline rather
than a basic plagioclase, but in their pre-
sent altered condition this point can be decided only by a chemical analysis.
It seems scarcely likely that the pebbles would have been brought from any considerable dis-
tance, and they may possibly have been brought down by torrents from dikes in the neighboring

limestone, and this, possibly, is also the origin of the material of the two hammer-stones. While
it would not be surprising to find dikes of such rock in the region, yet it must be remarked that I
met with none such in my tramps about the district, and that none were noted by Lepsius. A
fragment of a similar felsite was found by me on the north coast of Aeginj,, where it almost cer-
tainly was not derived from the island itself, and it seems possible that the peculiar color of these
rocks may have been the cause of their transport from a distance.
Andesites. —
The specimens representing these rocks were with few exceptions rough frag-
ments of various sizes. Apart from these, one rather large oval slab was found, with a depression
in the centre, apparently a rough mortar for grain, as well as a fragment of a rather thin flat corn-

grinder, marked on one side with parallel grooves.

These andesites vary from rather coarse to fine grained in texture, one or two being quite dense
and vesicular. They are all hornblende-andesites, showing well-formed phenocrysts of yellowish
brown or brownish-green hornblende, a little greenish biotite, and a rather basic andesine or acid
labradorite, in a dusty glassy groundmass, which is hyalopilitic with microlites of the same minerals.
With one exception they are closely similar to the hornblende-andesites of Aegina, and it seems
reasonable to suppose that the blocks were brought from that island. This, at least, is the nearest
locality, though closely similar rocks are met with at Melos and on the west coast of Asia Minor.
The only exception is the corn-grinder, which differs from all the andesites of Aegina, Methana,
^
Melos, and Asia Minor that I have studied. There seems to be some reason for thinking that
this came from the small island of Nisyros (off the coast of Asia Minor north of Rhodes), which

was, according to Strabo,^ noted for its millstones.

Obsidian. — A number of flakes and " cores " of a black obsidian were found, which are exactly
like those found during the excavations at Plataea. Under the microscope they show a well-marked
^
^
Cf. H. S. Washington, Journal of Geology, III. Strabo, X. 5-16.
(1895), p. 73.
 OBSIDIAN FOUND AT THE HERAEUM 101

flow structure, occasionally banded (eutaxitic), but without phenoorysta of any kind, the flow
structure being brought out by the numerous globulitcfl and other oxceuively minute iMMiiea iM>«t-
tcred through the mass. Apart from the colorless glass the only constituentM are small miorolite*
of magnetite, diopside, and feldspar, which last is often in pretty skeletal forms.
No such obsidians have been found in the neighboring Aegina and Methana, but cluaely siniiUr
volcanic glasses are met with on Melos and Santorini (Tbera), and it is highly prubable that one
of these islands is tiie
place of origin for these specimens.
One or two obsidian arrowheads were found at the Ileraeum, an<l it ia |iossible tliat the flakes
and (;ores are the remains of the manufacture of these, or ]M)ssibly of knives for some laorad OM.
The ()ccurren(;e of these flakes and stone wea])ons is in line with tliat of the primitire hunner-
stones, all of them belonging anthropologically to a much earlier perio<l of devclo|>ment than tliat
of their place of discovery.
ARCHITECTURE OF THE ARGIVE HERAEUM
The Aroivk IIkkakum
Pum I

TEMPLE OF HERA ARCOS

- -
DETAILS
- -

ARGIVE IIEKAEUM. — DETAILS OF THE SECOND TEMIM.E. AND CYMA-MOULDINUS KKUM TUJi
SOUTU STOA
 ARCHITECTURE OF THE ARGIVE HERAEUM
By EDWARD LIPPINCOTT TILTON
The Argive Heraeum was at a very early time a place of liigh imp«irtjuieo in Greece,
and its architectui-al reniaiiiH silently indicate that it continued to Imj a relifrioiiM centre
for many centuries. The
buihlings themselves have indeed been entirely <leMtroye<l, hut
it is still
possible to piece together the fragments into a whole which may in a nieuMure
simulate the original, to restore as a result from excavations the teniplett, and purticueti,
other buildings of the famous sanctuary of Hera.

TOi'OGRAI'HY '
AND SURVKY.
The Argive
plain consists chiefly of an alluvium deposited during the course of ageH.
It comprises an approximate area of one hundred sqiuire miles, extending from the
Gulf of Argos northerly about ten miles to the entrance of the gorge of Mycen<ie, and

Fig. 46. — Akgive Heraeum : View from the north.

back of Naupli.i. The rocky eminence in the foreground is northeast of the
Showing in the distance the hills
Old Temple.

as This exceptionally flat eximnse of country is bordered on

miles east and west.
many
three sides by low foothills, beyond which roll higher hills
and mountiins like i)etrified
waves northward toward Corinth, east^vard toward Epidaurus, and westward
until they

blend with the mountains of Arcadia. The first ripple into

which the plain breaks on
i
See also Introduction, pp. 10-25.
105
106 ARCHITECTURE OF THE ARGIVE HERAEUM
the north rises about five hundred feet (152 metres) above the sea level, and the beauty
of the site is sufficiently attested by the fact that the Greeks chose it for the sanctuary
of Hera (Plates II., III., Figs. 46, 47, 48).
Fi<i-. 1 (p. 7) is a map of the Argive plain based upon Stett'en's map of the Argolid

given in his Karten von Alykenai, 1884. The site of the Heraeum is indicated upon it
by a small rectangle which is enlarged and shown in detail in the upper right-hand

Fig. 47. — Argive Heuaeum : \ u.w <ji the site from the east.
The rocky eminence is the same as shown
below which the tents of the excavating party
in Fig. 46,

are pitched. In the centre of the pictnre is the Cyclopean wall which supports the Old Temple
terrace ;next, to the left, is the Second Temple platform ; then the phylakeion and the slope to
the South Stoa. The retaining walls of the East Bnilding are visible near the centre of the
picture and in about a line below the Cyclopean wall. Tlie tilled ground in the foreground

is shown on Plate IV.

corner of the illustration.' Again on this enlarged plan is shown, by a small white

square, the position of the entrance to the tunnels or subway aqueducts which are

referred to by Dr. Waldstein in the General Introduction (pp. 14 fF.).

The Heraeum lay approximately three miles southeast by south from Mycenae,^ four
and one half miles northwest from Midea, six miles north-northwest from Tiryns, eight
miles north-northwest from Nauplia, and four and one half miles northeast from Argos.
The site is shielded on the north and northeast by the mounbiin peaks of Euboea and
Hagios Elias (Berbatiotikos), which tower in heights that vary from one to two thousand
feet above the level of the gulf. Plate IV. is a general map of the site of the Heraeum
showing the present condition of the ruins after excavation. The map is drawn on a
true north and south axis, the variation of the compass needle being 6° 43' west of true
north when this survey was made in April, 1895.^

1
The small Roman numerals on this larger rectangle- day, April 4, 1895, at midnight and four minutes I
are the same as in Plate IV., and are explained in the sighted Polaris with the star Alioth in line above it.
used throughout this until 12.28, I sighted the north star alone and
legend of this Plate. They are also Waiting
chapter, and elsewhere in this publication.
marked the spot (No. 1) under tlie plummet of the instru-
" To the left of
-
Pausanias, II. 17 :
Mycenae, at a dis- ment, and anotlier (No. 2) under a plummet depending
"
tance of fifteen furlongs (stadia) is the Heraeum (Fra- from a pole 1.35 m. from No. 1, and then placed a pin at a
zer's translation). As a stadium was about COO feet, point (No. 3) in line with No. 1 and No. 2, and 5.48 ni. from
Pausanias's statement would make the distance 9000 feet, the former. Friday morning, April 5, I fastened a taut
or less tlian two miles. string along the line 1, 2, and 3, and another string from
To survey the site I began on the rising ground north
8 No. 1 in the direction of the compass needle. Then
sighting each string in turn tlirongh the theodolite, read
of theOld Temple and placed the theodolite on the spot I

indicated on Plate IV. by a circle and cross-lines. The the degrees of variation as C° 43' west of true north.
direction of true north was obtained as follows : Thurs- From this station-point of tlie instrument I found the
 TOPOGRAPHY 107

The dry streiiin-hed around the north and west of the Kite \n the Revniu-tiiu-Kaiitrou,
and may he the Eleutherion of PaummiaH, while a natural afwumption wouhl
identify tlie
river-bed on the east as the Asterion, althou^^h the haliince of evidttnec wkmuh finally t4»

uphold Stellen's view that the Astt'rion is the stream which Howh down the far euHteni
flank of Mount Elias and loses itm^lf in the Klisura glen, and in not shown U|)on our
map.'
The architectural remains of the Heraeum an; unfortunately t<M) few to afTonI an exact
restoration of all the buildings. The peculiar prominence and accesflihility of tJie site

IS. — AWilVK Hkkakcm ViKW ok TIIK SITK KKOM

: TIIK WhajT.

The men are excavating the Lower Stoa (X).

rendered ita convenient quarry for later builders, and the mediaeval churches on the

plain and the fortresses on the adjacent hills have been birgely constructed of stones

direction of one peak of Mount Kuboea to be 30° 32' and isometric pers|)cctiTes of all the looM stonea sad
east of true north, ivnd its elevation above tlic horizon architectural fragments found on the site, 310 in all, and
18° 8'. Auotlier peak was 27° 53' north of east and made full-size drawings of all capitals to obtain their exact
elevated 12° 41'. Mount Araelinaeuni was 18° 37' sontli and of the ornamental details, e. g. lions' bead*
profiles,
of east and elevated 2° oi3'.
Directly soutli was the and cyraa-mouldings, and gave to each of the 310 frag-
island Bourzi, near Nauplia, with its water line 0° 51' ments a number in order to facilitate reference. Finally,
below the horizon. Directly west the mountain sum- I made colored drawings of the terra-cotta fragments and
mit was elevated 2° 38'. From the first station-point of water-color sketches of the landsca|>cs.
the tlieodolite I ran a line due south, and from this The method of procedure is describcil in full to show
erected verticals cast and west as base lines and obtained and of
that, notwithstaiuling the lack of expert assistance
the angle that the ruins of each building made with the fine measuring instruments, a careful endeavor was made

base lines. The running measurements were made with to obtain exactly all the data yielded by the site. The
a steel metric tape, wherein I was assisted by lohanncs, a results are now presented to the reader, who is thus fur-
little Greek boy from Chouiea. nished with all the materials, and can make his own
The extent of the site occupied by the construction is restorations of the buildings should be disagree with tJM
about 500 north and south by 1000 m. east and west.
ni. deductions of the author.
The difference in levels between the highest building (the It may be well to note here that the shadows on all of
Old Temple, I) and the lowest building (Stoa X) is the drawings are projected at 45°, thereby enabling one
29.34 m., as is shown by the table in the text (p. 108). to determine the height of an object by the width of its
When measuring the ruins my primary object was not to shadow on the plan, and the projection of an object by
formulate any theories, but to obtain exact data, and to this the height of its shadow on the elevation.
end I made careful running measurements of the joints I wish to express my thanks to Mr. Milton Bancroft,

of every accessible stone in the ruins of each building and Mr. K. A. Josselyn, and Mr. E. B. Nolan, who hare
made drawings of each to the scale of one centimetre to assistedme in rendering some of the drawings.
1
the metre, verifying all to insure accuracy. I next mea- Cf Dr. Waldstein's Introduction,
.
p. 16.
sured and drew to a larger scale plans, elevations, sections,
108 AKCHITECTURE OF THE ARGIVE HEKAEUM
from this source. At Olympia
the position of the Altis between the hill Cronium and
the rivers Cladeus and Nepheiis favored a more speedy burial beneath the rapid accumu-
lation of sand and material which was deposited by the river's inundations and washed
down from the hills by the rains, and consequently a better preservation of its ruins.

The Argive Heraeum, on the contrary, occupied a foothill of Mount Euboea,' above the
level of the plain, and its once sacred buildings had no doubt been robbed and demol-
ished by desecrating hands before the action of the rains and dust-storms had concealed
the foundations that now remain.
The was occupied throughout
ruins are sufficient, however, to indicate that the site
the ages from prehistoric to late Roman times, and to justify the attempt at a restora-
tion shown on Plates V. and VI. Following is a list of the ruins exhumed, with the
orientation and relative level of each.
The stylobate of the Old Temple is taken as the datum level, and the levels of all the
other buildings, being lower, are indicated by the minus sign.
 J

OLDEST WALLS 109

i'lu. 40. — AmiiVK IIkkakum : \ ikw i,()()kin(;nokth ii'd.N tiik t yci.«1'KA.n wai.i. and iNoltTiii- a--t

Stoa (III).

Stoa VI and
the old wall), and as burial within the temenus was doubtless prohibited,
the evidence is strengthened that this old wall is a portion of that which originally
inclosed the sanctuary.
Further remains of very old walls are shown on Plate IV. lying just south of the
Cyclopean wall ;
these may be the ruins of dwelling-houses for the priestesses or attend-
ants. Other vestiges of old stone work are distinguishable in the interior of the Second
Temple (V), indicating, at this most important point of the old temenus, the possible
position of the ancient altar, which probably stood on or near this site long before the
construction of this temple.
These walls consisting of unworked small-sized stones, laid up as rough irregular rub-
ble without mortar, indicate a very primitive state of architectural art, similar to the
walls found in the lowest layers of Hissarlik, and, like these, they may have had suj)er-
structures of sun-dried bricks.

CYCLOPEAN WALLS.
Next Cyclopean walls which supported the
in chronological sequence are the massive

Upper Terrace (I) these are shown on Plate IV., and in the plan on Plate VIII., and
;

in elevation on Plate IX. (cf. Plate III. and Fig. 49). The walls resemble and are
doubtless coeval with the earliest walls of Tiryns, which Dr. Waldstein supposes to have
been built by Proetus about 1900 b. c* One of these huge, irregular boulders measures
5.20 m. in leno-th 2.00 m. in height. Its width is concealed by the terrace. These
by
»
Cf. Dr. Waldstein's Introduction, p. 2.
110 ARCHITECTURE OF THE ARGIVE HERAEUM
large uuhewn conglomerate boulders were laid up as rubble work without mortar, fitted

together roughly with little or no cutting, their interstices being filled with smaller
stones, but produce a result that shows a great advance over the earlier walls and one
which arouses our admiration and wonder for even with modern appliances it would
;

be no small feat to construct a wall of such huge blocks with counterpoise sufficient to
withstand the thrust of the terrace, the shocks of earthquakes, and the disintegrating
action of centuries.

THE OLD TEMPLE PLATFORM AND THE OLD TEMPLE.

The terrace platform was originally leveled by removing the natural rock and earth
from the north side and by filling in behind the Cyclopean retaining wall (cf. Plate X.).
In order to make a firm foundation and to prevent the earth from being washed away

by the rains, a stone pavement was laid in width about eight metres parallel to the
retaining wall. The pavement resembles the oldest paving in a courtyard at Tiryns and
consists of irregular limestone blocks dressed roughly on the top, most of them triangular
in shape and averaging in length about 70 centimetres. The Old Temple (I) was built
partly upon this pavement, but mostly upon the natural earth and rock of the terrace.
The remains of the Old Temple, though very meagre, are still sufficient to justify the
restoration shown on Fig. 50, Plates IX., XL All that exists mi sittc, as appears
on the plan on Plate VIII., is a portion of the stylobate, of a reddish limestone, 19.20 m.
long, 1.04 m. wide, and 0.45 m. high. The diagonal jointings indicate early work. The
tops of the stones have flaked off and are much disintegrated, as though by the action
of heat when the temple was burned.^ This disintegration, however, may be accounted
for in part by the character of the red limestone, which deteriorates naturally in the course
of ages and is far inferior in quality to white limestone." Before our excavations, the

platform had been covered by dirt to a depth of one metre, and a layer of harder earth
similar in texture and appearance to caked lime was found in various places 0.30 m. above
the pavement, while beneath this layer lay a stratum of black burnt matter and charcoal.

Fortunately distinct traces are still preserved of three circles slightly depressed in
the stylobate, which indicate the position of columns. These circles are 0.80 m. in
diameter and spaced from centre to centre, 3.50 m. and 3.51 m. respectively, making
their intercolumniation 2.70 m. and 2.71 m. or about three and one third diameters.^
The columns and entire superstructure were doubtless of wood, as is indicated by the
small diameter and wide spacing of the columns, by the lack of any architectural stone

fragments,* by the remains of charcoal and other burnt matter, and by the absence of
any foundation under the stylobate.
" Above this * found several very archaic stone capitals and a
temple are the foun-
1
Pausanias, II. 17 : I
dations of the former temple, together witli the few other broken column-drum below this terrace which may have

remains of it that escaped the flames. It was burned belonged to the Old Temple, although I concluded they
down through Chryseis, the priestess of Hera, having were more probably fragments of the North Stoa (II),
fallen asleep, when the flames of the lamp caught the and the West Building (VII) see Plate IV.
; The
wreaths. Chryseis fled to Tegea and took sanctuary in capitals are shown on Fig. 51, B, C, H, and will be
the temple of Athena Alea. In spite of this great referred to again in connection with the North Stoa.
calamity the Argives did not take down the statue of The column-drum (V in Plate XXIX.) shows a slit

Chryseis, and it still stands in front of the burnt temple." for lifting by means of a rope. Of course, it is quite pos-
^
Dorpfeld, Tiryns, cap. vi. B, Technical Remarks. sible that stone columns were gradually substituted for
' The columns of the Heraeum at Olympia vary in the wooden ones as the latter decayed, which was done at
diameter from 1.00 m. to 1.28 ni. and the distances be- the Olympia Heraeum, especially as the late date, 423
tween centres vary from 3.09 m. to 3.63 ni., making the B. c, of the destruction of the building would lead us to
intercolumniations average about two diameters.
 THE OLD TEMPLE 111

At a of 7.18 m. north of the

(listjuioo
Htylobat« in a bane huilt of irregular Mtoiiec
This base ineasureH 1.80 in. wjnare, an in Hhown on the In my rectfiration of the
plan.'
ground plan of the Old Temple (Fig. r)0), I have atwumed thw baae to Imj jwrt of the
foundation of the old Htatiie of Hera, and to lie on the longitudinal axiH of the
buildinf^.
North and Houth of tluH axis and at ecpial diHtanceH from it I found Hiight iiidicatiotui of
what I assumed to be the foundations of the celb-wallH. The HUiwnttructure may have
been of sun-dried bricks, since no deKnite vestiges remain.
I continued the peristyle by spacing the columnH three and one half nietreii on eentreH

(B, C, D, Fig. 50), following the indications on the stylobate before nientione<l, and
found that one of tlu; columns of the pronaos (A, Fig. 50) coincided
exactly with a
mason's centring mark on a stone 24.90 m. east of the base of the statue. The Htone
is shown on the
plan (Platk VIII.). The result of the calculation wan a hexaittyle tem-
ple with fourteencolumns on the side and a cella 3G.30 ni. long and 8J30 m. wide, or
with width to length about as 1 4|. The proportions of the naoH inside are, widths
:

length, as 1 4. This
: is about the proportion which we should ex\MM:t to find in a temple
of great antiquity.'

My restoration of the entablature and roof is and illustnites only

entirely hyp«)thetical
the possible appearance of the temple. I have assumed that the beam ends showefl with

m
112 ARCHITECTURE OF THE ARGIVE HERAEUM

UPPER STOA.

Below the terrace of the Old Temple are several buildings (II, III, and IV on Plate
IV.), shown in section
on Plate XI., and in elevation on Plate IX. the present state
;

of their plans is shown in detail on Plate XII.

The walls in parts present some confusion, owing to later buildings having been super-
the west end of Stoa II seems to have
imposed on earlier constructions. For example,
been built on foundations of an earlier building. In the Northeast Stoa (III) are later
partition walls, and
between this and the East Building are several older foundation walls
which run at various angles that bear no definite relation to the buildings named.
I have attempted a somewhat free restoration of these buildings (see Plate IX.), since
the fragments found were too few to insure accuracy throughout.
In Stoa II (Plate XII.) the stone bases for the columns are in situ ; they are light lime-
stone and nearly every one has a small pry-hole, which indicates the position of a column.

They are cut true on top and on the sides to a certain depth, below which the stone is
leftrough, having been concealed by the flooring of mosaic or tile. The stylobate stones
are similarly cut on the inside and bear vestiges of pry-holes. On the outside exposed
surfaces the stylobate stones and steps are well cut and neatly jointed. Where some of
the stylobate stones have been removed, a foundation is revealed of irregidar stones, as
shown on the plan.
Two column-drums, of 0.60 m. diam. and with sixteen flutings, remain on bases in the
Stoa, and I conclude that the very old capitals of Fig. 51 were from this building, together
with two old cornice (geison) blocks, one of which bears traces of colored plaster. Owing
to the smallness of the columns and their wide intercolumniation, it is very probable
that the entablature of the Stoa was of wood, and the stone cornice blocks may have

belonged to an inclosed portion of the building at the west end. The height of the
portico columns could not have exceeded three metres (cf. Fig. 52, E). The rear wall
was built of j^oros stone, and a drain behind the wall indicates that the roof pitched to
the rear as well as to the front, with a ridge in the centre. This drain carried the rain-
water into a small reservoir running back into the ground, as shown on the plan (Plate
XII.), and in the elevation of the present state (Plate IX.). Adjacent to this reservoir
are remains of three cisterns or baths, B, C, D, with plastered floors.
Between this Stoa II and the Northeast Stoa is a level platform cut out of the con-
glomerate rock with a rear wall of fairly good workmanship (cf. Fig. 49). Several bases,

probably for statues, still remain on this platform, one being partially concealed by a later
wall. One of these bases at the west end of the platform is shown in detail on Plate
XXIX., B and H. It consists of light limestone in three sections rebated one over the
other, with joints cut to a nicety and filled with lead. Besides these bases there are many
cuts in the stylobate and elsewhere for stelae. This platform may at one time have been
roofed. The two walls which project forward from the rear are later than the rear wall
and are not bonded into it in any way. In my restoration I have assumed that the plat-
form was open and that steps ascended from it to the upper terrace, feeling justified in
this conclusion by the presence of the statue-bases and the absence of any evidence of
columns.
An interesting stone is one of a confused group shown on the plan about the centre
of the front steps of the platform. On it are carved two birds, probably doves (Fig. 53).
Another stone of great antiquity (Fig. 54) was found in the adjoining Building III, with
/
114 ARCHITECTURE OF THE ARGIVE HERAEUM
carving of fish and waves. The
hole through it was probably for the purpose of secur-

ing cattle before the sacrifice, and would lead one to consider it part of an old altar.

STOA III.

The Northeast Building or Stoa (III) is inside its walls 20.60 ni. in length and 6.00 m.
in width. The conglomerate rock was partially leveled to receive its finished flooring,
which appears to have consisted at one time of j)07'os stone blocks, as shown in the north-
west corner, where ten of them still remain in situ. It is evident, however, that these

n:
w7 A, Second Temple (V) exterior column.

^^
:

15,Second Temple (V) interior columns, as restored.

:

C, West Building (VIII) interior columns, as restored.

:

D, Soutli Stoa (VI) column. :

E, Upper Stoa (II) : column.

F, Northwest Stoa (VIII) : column.

r Ill 11 Ml
3
^
r=^
li :
1
!

V'-i

BCD
Fig. 52. — Columns from the Argive Heraeum.

stones were not part of the original flooring, since they are above the level of the column
bases. The original walls at the rear and side remain to the height of about one metre
(cf. Fig. 49). are built of light limestone carefully tooled, finely jointed, and laid
They
up without clamps or mortar. The east wall is 0.60 m. thick and does not bond with the
rear wall, indicating that the original intention may have been to extend the Stoa farther
 THE NORTHEAST BUILUIXG lU
tuwai-il thu c'UHt. The exterior of tluH emt wall im irrojrubr, Imviiig been OOnoeeled by
the l)jiiik of t'iirtli or hy Hteps aHceii<liiijr u> the lii^hvr level of tin* terrace. The
ii|»|)er
level of this hiiihliii^ iH

about two luetreH al)ovi'

that of Stoa II, and reinaiiiH

of Hteps exist aloiijj the en-
tiro loii};th. On Pi.ATK IX.
I have indicated a sufi^geH-
tion for the restoration of
these steps.
The foundations of the

sti!})s
are of poros stone,
the steps haviiifi; doubtless
been light limestone and a
continuation of those which
exist in front of the Stoa II
and the open platform be-
tween II and III.
In the Northeast Build- Fio. 63. —
Aroivk Herakum Stonk with doves carvku in HKumr.
:

ing (III) there are six lime-

stone column bases In .situ, averaging 0.(50 m. square, and along the front a Htylobate of
limestone rubble level with the bases. Upon this stylobate are some blocks of breccia
which seem to be of later date, as are also the partition rubble walls in the Stoa whicli
cover two of the column bases. A small dnnn of a column, 0.50 m. in diameter, and
having sixteen flat faces, stands upon one of the bases.
The two antie-caps, C and K
on Plate XXIX., were found on the wall of this Stoa. K
may belong to the Ejist Building (IV). C hiid traces of stucco upon which a fret orna-
ment was scratched and
which was, originally, no
doubt, painted. A cornice-
block sliowed a height of
0.15 m., and a small tri-
glyph fragment showed the
width to be 0.312 m.,
whence the following pro-
portions would follow :

Height of triglyph, about

0.47 m. of epistyle, alxiut
;

0.47 m. of cornice, 0.15

;

m., making the total en-

tablature 1.00 m. in height.
i'io. oi. — Akoivk IIkkakum Stonk cauvkii with HSU ajju wavks,
: The corresponding columns
BY INCISED UNE8. would then measure in

height about 3.27 m., in

diameter about O.GO m. and if spaced to allow two triglyphs between, there would
;

be seven ctdumns 2.49 m. on centres, as shown on Platk IX. If sjMicetl with one

triglyph between, there would

be thirteen columns 1.51 m. on centres, although this
116 ARCHITECTURE OF THE ARGIVE HERAEUM
arrangement would not allow the front columns to coincide with those of the interior.
It is furthermore possible that the building had at one time only a wall in the front
with doors and windows, or again a high socle with a colonnade of small columns.
The general character of the masonry indicates that the original building was a refined
structure and later in date
II. The still later interior j^Jirtition walls and the
than Stoa
front breccia wall seem to show that the building was at one time divided into rooms
and possibly used as a dwelling by the attendants of the sanctuary or as a treasure-house.

EAST BUILDING IV.

'
Next in order of position, although not in order of chronology is the East Building
(IV), which is 28.90 m. (about 9G feet) long over all, by 17.10 m. (about 57 feet) wide
(Plate XII., cf. Fig. 55). The line of its northern wall produced will strike the northeast
angle of the existing ramp to the Second Temple (V), leading one to concdude that its
orientation may have had some connection with the functions or mysteries of the Temple.
The plan of the building resembles somewhat the earlier " Hall of Initiation " at Eleusis,"
and is nearly the same in length, although less in width. The early Tclenterion of
Eleusis measured about 82 feet square inside, and its roof was supported by five rows
of five columns each. The main hall of our building measures inside the walls about
73 feet in length by about 50 feet in width, and its roof was supported by three rows
of five columns each. Both buildings had portico entrances that of ours facing westward,
;

while that at Eleusis faced eastward. A row of columns on the central axis is found in
each building and seems peculiar, although it is a feature common in Greek buildings
and is structurally a good arrangement, as it gives direct support to the ridge of the
roof. The orientation of the main axis of our building is seven degrees south of west.
I should ])lace the date of its construction in the latter half of the fcnutli century b. c.
The find of Egyptian scarabs in it suggests that its religious functions may have been
allied to the mysterious rites of Egypt.
A fine retaining wall of cut conglomerate stone supports the terrace on the south and

east sides (Plate XIII.). The conglomerate is of rounded pebbles. The wall is

built in regular coursed ashlarwork with stones about 0.35 m. high, between two other
courses about 0.74 m. high, and with an offset at each of the narrow courses. The joints
are much mutilated, from which I j iidge that the stones were originally fastened together

by metal clamps which have been stolen. The foundations of the north and west walls
and of the central piers or bases are built of ])oros stone. On the north wall are some
conglomerate stones, and a few finely tooled limestone blocks with clamp-holes.
I have attempted a free restoration of the building (Plates VI., XI.), since no definite
remains of the superstructure were foimd. Since the completion of the drawings, how-

'
A possible chronological sequeuce of the various con- Rest of Lower Stoa (X).
structions might be as follows :
— Stoa on site of Northwest Building (VII).
Old walls. Second Temple (V), 420 B. c.
Cyclopean walls. Lower Stoa (VI) and steps, 410 B. c.

Old Temple (I). Reconstruction of Stoa (III).

Upper Stoa (II) and possibly early construction on the East Building (IV), fourth century B. c.

Northeast Stoa (III).

site of the Later construction on Northwest Building (VIII).
Early structure on site of Northwest Building (VIII). Partition walls in Stoa (HI).
Part of Lower Stoa (X). Roman Building (IX), first century B. c.

West Building (VII), sixth century B. c. ^

Cf. Frazer'.s Paimarikii, vol. iii., plan on p. 504.
Early Greek building on site of Roman Building (IX).
 THE SECOND TF:MPLE 117

Fio. 55. — Aroivk Hrrakum : Vikw lookim; NoiniiKAsr upon tiik Kast Building (IV) and thk KKTAixiitii
WALL ON IT» NOKTIIWKBT SIDE.

ever, Ihave concluded that a corner triglyph of ])lack stone helonjjed to this hiiildin};.
The form of the clam])-holes and the cut of the grooves indicate fourth century B. c.
work, or a date hiter than the best period. The tri<ijly[)h measures O.'M'y m. wide and
0.67 m. high, which indicates an epistyle about 0.67 in. and cornice 0.26 m., making
totiil entablature 1.60 m. in height. The columns would be about 4.80 m.
high, 0.80 ni.
in diameter, and spaced 2.07 m. on centres. This would give st>ven columns in nnfls to
the front instead of the three shown in the drawings, and would coincide exactly with
the total width of the building (cf. Fig. 56).

SECOND TEMPLE.
We may turn to consider the Second, or Fifth Century, Temple (V), where we find
now
ourselves on firmer ground both historically and architecturally for the princii>al part of ;

'
Pausanias's description of the sanctuary is devoted to this temple, while the archite<-

'
Pausaniiu, II. 17. 3-C :
"They say that the architect work of Polyoleitus. On her head i« a crown with the
of the temple was Kupoleiniis, an Argive. The sculpture Graces and the Seasons wrought on it in relief in one
:

over the columns represent, some the birth of Zeus and hand she carries a pomegranate, in the other a sceptre.
the battle of the gods and giants, others the Trojan war The story about the pomegranate I shall omit, as it is of a
and the taking of Ilium. Hefore the entrance stand somewhat mystic nature but the cuckoo perched on the
;

dtatuvs of women wlio been priestesses of Hera, and

iiiive sceptre is explained by a story, that when Zens wax in love
statues of lieroes, including Orestes for they say that
;
with the maiden Hera, he changed himself into this bird,
the statue which the inscription declares to be the Em- and that Hera caught the bird to play with it. This and
peror Augustus is really Orestes. In the fore-temple are similar stories of the gods I record, though I do not
ancient images of the Graces on the left ; and on the accept them. It is said that beside the image of Hera

right is a couch of Hera and a votive offering consisting once stood an image of Hebe, also of gold and ivory, a
of the shield which Alcnclaus once took from Knphorbus work of Naucydes. And Iioside it is an antique image of
at Ilium. The image of Hera is seated on a throne and Hera on a colunm. Kut her most ancient image is made
is of colossal size ;
it is made of gold and ivory and is a of the wood of the wild pear-tree it was dedicated in
:
118 ARCHITECTURE OF THE ARGIVE HERAEUM
tural remains, although few, are fortunately sufficient to justify a complete restoration
of it (cf. Plate XIV.).
great revolution in the whole history of the
The Heraeum is marked by the burning of
the Old Temj^le in 423 b. c. and the erection of tliis new temple on the second platform.
And it is well to recall that, about forty years earlier in the century, the Mycenaeans were
finallyovercome by the inhabitants of the city of Argos, who thenceforth maintained their
absolute predominance on the plain. We expect, therefore, the new buildings to bear
the impress of Argive artists and as the Argive School of Art was in the fifth century
;

rivaled only by that of Athens, we need not be surprised to find the architectural details
those of the Parthenon.
equaling in beauty and refinement
The first task of the Argive architect Eupolemus and his colleagues was to level the
second platform upon which an ancient altar probably stood. The platform consists

§
n "^

.l=t

-E.LEVATIOM/

1
Cp¥" q)
Q G) G) G) _GLi
I
'

I
FLAN. I .,<-'
.C-2

Fig. 56. — Argive Heraeum : East Building, restored.

of a conglomerate rock sloping towards the south. Eupolemus cut away the rock from
the north side and filled iu the south and west sides, building u retaining wall of poros
stone outside the wall of the ancient peribolus, which was completely covered and so
remained until exhumed in our excavations.

Tiryiis by Pirasus, sou of Argos, and when the Argives Hercules. The altar is of silver. Further there is a
destroyed Tiryns they brought the image to the Heraeum. peacock of gold and shining stones dedicated by the Em-
It is a small seated image I saw it myself.
:
Amongst peror Hadrian, because this bird is considered sacred to
the remarkable dedicatory offerings is an altar, on which Hera. There is also a golden crown and a purple robe,
is wrought in relief the fabled marriage of Hebe and offerings of Nero" (Frazer). See Introduction, pp. 21 ff.
 THE SECOND TKMI'LE. 119

The retiiining wuU was built iiuarly parallel to the new temple uii the Miuth aiitl weMt
about 20 ni. diHtant. Along the western Hide of the terruce, the direction of the wall wuh
n'<;ulat(!(l by tlio
position of the West Building (Vll), which had been constructed in
the previous century (cf. Platk XV.).

Against the southern retaining wall a beautiful Stoa (VI) wuh built, and a IuindM4>nie
fligiit of steps leading up from the lower level to the platform of the new temple, Ixjth
of which I shall describe in order (cf. Fig. 57.).

Turning again to the temple, we find its orientation to bo W 23' south of eaiit. The
plan of the present sUite of the crepidoina or foundation walls is shown on Platkh IV.

Fig. 57. — AuiavK IIekaevm : Viicw kkom tiik soutiikast looking ltox tuk fliuiit ok bTWS ; the Soittr
Stoa and tiik Skconu Tkmplk abovk.

and XVI., the section of the walls on Plate XI., and the elevation of the .south wall on
Plate XIII. These foundation walls measure J^ifitisn. al«)ng the north edge ;—3ULiii»
along the south edge 2 0.08 m. and 20.10 m. along the east and west, resjjectively.
;

The natural conglomerate rock had been carefully cut away and leveled to serve as f(M)t-
ing for the northern walls of the crepidoma and the cella. The southern wall of the
cella starts from a footing course of large flat irregular stones, while the southern crepi-
doma walls are carried down to a depth as shown in section (Plate XL).
These walls are built of regular courses of alternate headers and
^joro.s stone in

stretchers carefully breaking joints vertically (excepting in one case on an interior pier
where the joints coincide in two courses). The average dimensions of these s<piared
stones are 1.20 m. in length, 0.60 m. in width, and 0..'?7 m. in height. The totid width
of walls is 3.73^ m. The stones are laid up without mortar or clamps, but so nicely fitteil
that at some of the joints they seem to have grown together.
I shall now describe the course of reasoning which I followed in mv restoration of
the temple (Plate XVII.). Fig. 58 shows a beautifully veined limestone block resem-
120 ARCHITECTURE OF THE ARGIVE HERAEUM
blino- marble. It measures 1.633 m. in length, 0.32 m. in height. The other dimensions
could not be measured, as the stone was brokeil. The face of this stone is cut with a
drafted edge at one end, and with two fillets and a slight cove moulding along the bottom.
Its top shows sufficijmt traces of the
H
scarnlUl to determine exactly the size

L-o/*
of the base of the columns. The
channelings cut on the stone were
m
sufficiently intcict and clear to enable
i
.ott
-rgST
^LCYATION or fjKC OF $TONC:. me to find the centre of the circle by
erecting perpendiculars to the chords
of two flutings. At the intersection
of these perpendiculars I foimd a
small centrnig hole ana a mason s
scratch-mark at right angles to the
face of the stone. One leg of the
mason's compass had been set in the

hole, and with the other a radius of

O.GG m. had been marked off on the
stone. The radius to the chord of
the channelings is 0.65 m.
These dimensions are of especial
interest, as they give a clue to the
unit of measurement which I found

prevailed throughout the building.'

One MCTCK The Greek unit equals 0.326 m., mak-
Fig. 58. — Argivk Hkraeum Actual statk of a stylobate
; ing the length of the stone, as before
given, 1.633 m., equal to five units,
STONE OF THE SECOND TeMPLE.

and the diameter of the columns be-

tween chords (twice the radius 0.65 m. 1.30 m.) equal to four units. =I foiuid the

triglyphs measured two units and the metopes three units. By referring to the eleva-
tions (Fig. 59 and Plate XVIII.), it will be seen at a glance that if the triglyphs are
spaced five units on centres, the columns will be spaced ten units on centres, except the
corner ones, which, owing to the position of the triglyphs, are spaced one unit less from
the next adjacent column or nine units from centre to centre.

Proceeding on this line still further, I found the following proportions developed as
shown graphically on Plate XIX. The front of the temple measures from centre to
centre of columns, in units, 9 -f- 10 10 10 9 + + + =
48 luiits. The height of temple to
the under side of the cornice equals 36 units. Considering 48 units the base of a right-

angled triangle and 36 units its height, the hypothenuse will be 60 units, which if thrown
over and added to the base of 48 units, yields 108 units, or the length of the temple, viz. :

9 + 10 lO-f-lO+ + +
10 10 +10 -MO -h 10 -I- 10 + 9=
108. The above triangle may have

'
In this connection, I wish to express my obligation Many of the minor measurements seem to indicate that
to Dr. Dorpfeld, who first discovered, when looking over tlie unit may have been subdivided into twelfths, like the
my note-books and diagrams, that the measurements English foot, as follows :
—
shown by the stone in question coincided with the unit of ,15=. 027-
measurement at Olympia, or about 0.326 m., being \ of
an inch longer tlian the English foot, which equals
0.304 m.
 KECONSTKUCTION OF THE SECOND TEMPLE 121

it t<) 4 for hjuje, 3 f«)r

eacli side divided l»y 12, reduciii}>; height, and 5 for hy|)otlieiiuiMi,
whicli the HiinpleHt right-iin^led triuiigie known.'
is

To rettini to th(t (h'biiled rccoiiHtriictioii of the temple I found Heveml poruH Htone :

capitiils with well-preHcrved profiles. Tlie firm line of the eehinuH (Fij;. /il, A, and Fijf.

•12, A) and the <>;enei-al proportions of the eapiUtl ehisely resiMnliht thoM* of the Parthenon.

The width of the ahacus in 1.30 ni. or, Hke the Parthenon, a little more than the

Fig. 59. — Akgivk Herakum : Front Elkvation of Second Temple. Restored by Howard L. Tilton.

diameter at the base of the cohimu ;

the heigiit of abacus is 0.24 m., eqiml to ^'^
of a
unit ;
the height of the echinus inchiding annulets is 0.203 m., and height of the neck Ls

*
This proportion of the length equaling the width .37 isto 112 as 1 J is to 4^, 37 x 4} r- 1 12 x 1 J = 167. Or
plii9 the hypotlieniisc of a triangle which has ns its third the height to the width of the temp!.- is as in the major
side the height to the cornice prevails here because the scale in music, viz. two full tones and a half tone to three
:

temple has but twelve columns on the side. A similar fulltones and a half tone, and height is to length of

proportion may be found in these hcxastyle temples :

temple as in the minor scale in mnsic, viz. one full tone
:

"
that of Zeus at Olyinpia, the " Thcseum at Athens, and and a half tone and a half tone. I cite
to four full tones
the temple of Poseidon at Paestum, if limited to the this analogy because so much has been written about
twelfth column on the side and if this twelfth column is the Delation between Greek architecture and music,

sjiaced as a corner column. although I do not suppose that any such musical pro|ior-
I found another series of equations .i.s follows : The tiou was considered by Kupolemus. It docs convey the
width of temple to outside of columns (sec Plate XIX.) is idea, however, that what is pleasing to the eye may bear
52 imits, its corresponding length is 112 units, and its a certain harmonious relation to that which is pleasing to
height to top of corona is 37 units, whence devclo{)ed
— the ear in music, and to the minil in geouu-try :ind nmth-
37 is to 52 as 2J is to 3J, or 37 x3i = 52x2^=130, and ematics.
122 ARCHITECTURE OF THE ARGIVE HERAEUM
0.127 m., which together is 0.33 m., equaUiig one unit or one fourth of the diameter of
the cohimn at base. Dowel-holes exist both in the top alld bottom of capitals, one"
measuring 0.15x0.17 m. and 0.20 in depth (cf. Fig.-

51, A). The diameter of the hypotrachelium be- -

^
_ ._^^
^...^^
. tween bottom of channels .967 m. or three units,
is

I
Y^ ^^,5===-;^^^ n7 exactly the jjroportion of the Parthenon. I found""
several drums of poroa stone which fitted properly
one over the other (cf. Fig. 60), the lower one^
agreeing exactly with the scamilli on the above-
described stylobate stone (Fig. 58). Some of the
drums measured slightly longer on one side than on
the opposite, and doubtless inclined inward toward
the building, a refinement practiced in the best pe-
riod.^ The columns had twenty channelings. The
length of the chord of a channel at the hypotrache-
lium measured .16 m. or one half of a unit the ;

depth of the channel was .013 m. Slight vestiges

of plaster remained which originally no doubt cov-
ered the columns to offer a smooth surface for paint-

ing. I determined the heights of column drums as

follows, beginning with the bottom (cf. Fig. 60)

(the interrogation mark indicates that the exact

height was not found) .87 : + .86 + .86 + .86 +

.84? +
.84? + .84 .84? + -i- .57 m., making a
total,^ including capital, of 7.38 ni. or 22 units j*'^

or 5.67 diameters. The Parthenon columns measure

10.42 m. or 5.29 diameters. The columns of the
" Theseum " measure 5.72 m. in
height or 5.55
diameters.
I arrived at the dimensions of the entablature as
follows :
—
A fragment of poros triglyph gave the distance
between centres of glyphs as scant 0.22 m. three ;

times which showed the total width of triglyph to

be 0.65 m. or two units. The total height of tri-
glyph of this period is about 3| X 2 their width,
which in this case would be 3^ X .325 = 1.029 m.
In temples of this period the height of the epistyle

equals the height of the triglyphs ; a fragment of

the epistyle confirmed this measurement by showing
the fcienia to be 0.09 m. high, and the regula 0.06 m.

'
Since none of the stylobate stones remained in situ, I was nnable
to ascertain whether there were any of the refined cnrves which Pen-
nethorne discovered as having prevailed throughont the Parthenon ;
but judging from the general beauty of detail in the existing frag-
Fro. 60. — Argive Heraeum : Column ments, it would seem that every aesthetic refinement known at the
ani> stylobate stone of second time must have been practiced in the design and construction of this
Temple. Argive temple.
 ORNAMENTATION OF THE SECOND TEMPLE 128

high, which are in due proportion for an epiHtyle l.()2 ni.

high.' RemainM of Ktucco
adhere to this epistyle fragnn'iit.
The guttae under the regulu were 0.058 ni. in diameter. A oomice hhick {f/e{»on), alao
of jjoros stone, gave the widtli of the niutuh-s aH 0.G4 ni., tlie diameter of tlieir g^ittae as
0.055 m., and their distance on centres, 0.115 m. The niutules were K|Niced 0.172 m.
apart, making the distjuice from centre to centre of the mutuh'H over the triglvphs
1.G24 m. or (practically 1.03 m.) -5 units. The height of the face of the cornice from
the top of niutulcs to the top of the heak-moulding was 0.!n5 m. ;
add the height of
mutule, 0.047 n>., and we have 0.3G2 m.
We now have the totjil height of the entahbiture as follows :
—
Epistyle 1.029
Frieze
Cornice, omitting cynia or crown moulding ...... 1,02
.362

2.411 m.

This is a little less than one third the height of the columns, which, as above shown,
was 7.38 m. The is as 1 to 3.05.
exact proportion The proi)ortions in the Parthenon
are as 1 to 3.07."
The
slope of the pediment I could not verify exactly, so I assumed the height of the
tympanum equal to one ninth of the tot<d length of the horizontjil cornice,' which is
equal to the width of eleven triglyphs at 0.G52 m., or 7.17 plus ten metopes at 0.978 m.
or 9.78 m. plus the overhang of the cornice at each end, which, omitting the heak-mould-

ing, is 0.49 m., and for both ends is 0.49 m. X 2 or 0.98 m. The total horizinital length
therefore 17.93 m., which equals 55 units.
is

The height of the tympanum is I X 17.93 or 1.99 -|-.

The height from the stylobate to the apex of the tympanum is therefore shown to be
as follows :
—
Columns
Entablature
Tympanum
..........
. . . . . . . . . .
7.38 m.
2.41 m.
1.99 m.

11.78 m.

This is almost exactly 36 units (cf. Plate XIX.).

The cyma-nioulding and head watei^spouts are shown in detail on Figs. 61, 62.
lion's

They are of white marble. In this connection I may remark that white marble is the
material which was used for the sculpture and carved portions of the temple, i. e.
all

the metopes, the pediment figures, and the cyma-mouldings, and for the r(M)f tiles as well.
The crown-mould of the cornice or cyma is beautifully carved in high rslief with the
conventional anthemion ornament interspersed with Hera's typical bird, tlie cuckoo-
dove {Macro])y(jia ?), symbolical of gentleness, peace, and love.* The anthemion orna-
ment was frequently used to decorate the cyma during the best period of Greek art, but
made ' This
the me.isiirenieiits witli great care, but owing pitch is a little steeper than that of the Partbe-
'
I
" "
to the worn condition of many of the stones and the non, but nearly the same as that of the Tbeseum and
slight differences caused by the stucco, absolute accuracy less than that of the temple at Suninm.
*
could not l)e assured. In the drawings of the restored Compare the old stone, Fig. 53, and the Argi»e
elevations the epistyle is a little too low and the frieze as coin which shows Hera's crown ornamented like the cyma
much too high, making the total height correct. with anthemion (Fig. 1'2), and again her sceptre as de-
''
P. FsvuriJ, Thinrie des Proportiom en Architecture, scribed by Pausauias (cf. Note on p. 117, and Fig. M).
Paris, 1803, plate 16.
124 ARCHITECTURE OF THE ARGIVE IIERAEUM
in other examples which are left to us it is

only painted ; this carved cyma is therefore

quite unique. I found a great many frag-
ments of the cyma, some well preserved and
others much weathered, probably due to their
relative exposures on the north and south sides

of the temple. A difference in execution was

also discernible,showing that different carvers
had been employed. The profile of the mould-
ing is shown in Fig. 62 ;
its
height over all is
approximately 0.27 m. or |§ of a unit, or about

equal to the combined heights of the cornice

fascia and beak-moulding. The broad fillet of
the cyma 0.075 m. high, the small moulding
is

at top 0.028 m. and the overhang is 0.03 m.

beyond the line of its fillet.

of lion's head watei"-spouts

Many fragments
were found attached to portions of the cyma
and well carved from the same white marble.
They are superior in design and execution to
most of such gargoyles as are left to us from
the temples of the period. Several of these

heads, which were almost perfect, were of two

sizes. In my restoration I have placed the

larger head over each column and two smaller

ones between, as this arrangement seemed to
space properly when laid out full size with the
anthemion.
The roof of the temple was covered with
white marble tiles, which, we are told by
Pausanias, had been used at Olympia about
forty years earlier.' Plate I. (Frontispiece
of this chapter) shows the details. The width
of the flat tiles was about 0.54 m. or \ | units.

The ridge-tiles covering the joints were

0.19 m. or -jV units wide. Every alternate
ridge-tile was carried down and attached to

the back of the cyma, while those in a line

with the lions' heads were closed at the ends
and stopped about a half length back of the
cyma to allow the water to riui out of the
lions' spouts.
"
Kuergus, a Naxian, dedicated me to the offspring of Latona,
'
* In describing the Temple of Zeus at Olympia, Pau-
EuergUB, son of Byzes, who first made tiles of stone.'
sanias writes (V. 10): "Tlie architect was Libon, a
" This
native. The tiles are not of baked earth, but of Pentelic Byzes lived in the time of Alyattes, the Lydian,
marble, whicli is shape of tiles. They
wroiiglit into tlie and of Astyages, the son of Cyaxares, king of the
say that this was a contrivance of Byzes, a Naxian, who Medes." .

is said to have made the

images in Naxos which bear the
following inscription :
—
 PLAN OF THB SFX'OND TEMPLE 126

Thu
^ruiipH of Hculptiire hIiuwii in the ixMlinient iiml tlio inetojieH in the n*Kt4irution are
coinitustMi entirely from iniaj^inution U) give the |M>HNil)le a|)|)euninee uf the original tttniple.
We know in frjfntTul, however, from I'auHjiniuH that the Huhjeetn of the M-nlptiireH were
'

" The of Zeus," " The Jiattit; of the Uods and (iiantM," ami " The Siege of 'I'roy
IJirth

and Taking of Ilium." One of the pediment groupH prohahly illnHtrat4>d " The Hirtli of
ZeiiH." Fig. G!i hIiowh a fnigment of meto{)« with a |K)HMihle reHt4mition,whicli in oiTertsI
to show how some of the larger torno
fragments and heads fonnd may properly
helong to the metopes."
Before entering the temple, we nmy
consider its
plan more fully. The tem-

ple was a hexastyle-peripteros-pycnostyle,

having six coluiinis at each end, twelve

on the side, and with intereolumniations

of one and one half diameters. The
restored plan is shown on Platk XV II.
The inside of the foundation is indicated

by the dotted line which shows that the

corner columns centre over a 45° line
that connects the outer and inner angles
The pU'roiud was Fig. 62. — Aroivf. IIkraki;m Marbmc lion'* iirad oar-
:

of the foundation.^
goyi.k ani> watkk-8i-out from okco.md tcmplk. o.nr
paved with limestone similar to that of kiktii tiik actual 8izic.

the stylohate. These paving stones are

shown s(piare on the plan, although many were ohlong beneath them were breccia ;

blocks which rested on tha pi >r»s stones of the foundation. The walls <»f the cella were,
1 think, of poroK stone, like the columns, and similarly plastered with stucco. The ceil-
ing of the pteroma was coffered and formed of limestone, the sides of each lacuna being
decorated with a fret ornament cut in the hard stone to a depth of two millimetres.*
The plan of the temple developed certiiin proportions, graphically illustnited on
Plate XIX., which I discovered after the completion of the plan of the restoration.
The width of the cella is % of -18 units, or I of the width of the front of the temple
between the axes of the end columns. The distjince from the axis of the sixth coliunn
on the side to the antii of the cella wall is 36 iniits, which equals the height of the tem-
under side of roof. The measures also 'M\ units from the same anta t«» a
ple to dist<ince

columns on the opposite side. Again a triangle with a height of 36

line tiingent to the

units and a base equal to the width of the cella will have a hypothenuse which, if swung
around and added to the height, will give the total length of the cella.
The ai)proach to the temple is by a ramp similar to that of the temple of Zeus at
01ym])ia.
In Fig. 64 I have attempted a restoration of the interior of the temple."' The height

'
Note on y. 117, and Introduction, pp. 21 ff.
Cf. The intercolunmiations e(pial one and one half diam-
^
For tlie architectural sculpture see tlic next chapter. eters, making a pycnostvic, the proi>ortion usual for the
^
As it was mure usual to have an uneven nundxT of best tiftli century work.
columns oii the side of the temples of this perio<l, I at tirst *
I found stones from the ceiling and the crepidonia of

attempted a restoration of this one with thirteen side the temple built into the walls of the Cluipel of the Fkli»-
columns, but fonnd afterwards, upon piocinjj together the gia near the village of Merbaka.
fragments of the entablature, that twelve columns fitted
'
For sections through the entablature see Platk I.,

exactly both the superstructure and the crcpidoiua. frontispiece of this chapter.
126 ARCHITECTURE OF THE ARGIVE HERAEUM
from floor to ceiling as shown is about 8.60 m. The Hera is based on
seated figure of
the descrijjtion of Pausanias (see p. 117, and above, pp. 21 it'.), and upon repre-
note on
sentiitions of the goddess found on Argive coins. It is interesting to note that her crown

or (TTeijidvr) was decorated Avith ornament which resembled the cyma-moulding described
above.' The detfiils of the throne are partly taken from Laloux's restoration of the
stjitue of Olympian Zeus.
The columns in the tiaos I have restored as shown in Fig. 52, B. The poros
interior
stone capital for the lower column (Fig. 51, F) I found in the museum at Argos. It
has no remains of channels, but it has square dowel-holes at top and bottom, and on

opposite sides of the neck there are round holes, as though a grille of mefcil had been
secured between the columns. The capital for the superimposed columns, also of j^oros

Fig. C3. — Akgive Hf.raeum : Mktope from thk Second Temple, uestoeed
from fragment.

stone, Ifound lying in the West Building (VII). It has a profile almost straight, square
dowel-holes, and a section cut out of the echinus, as shown in Fig. 51, L, as though a
wooden upright had been fastened to the column.
1
Cf. Waldsteiii, Journal of Hellen. Studies, XXI. (1901) pp. 31 £f.
 TIIK SOUTH STOA 127

tieuorrd fry /CittmnI L. Tylmm.

Fiu. 04. — Aroivk Hkkakum : Ukstokkd Skction of Second Tkmplk, 8Howi:«o Stati'K ok IIkka.
Som. — Fur the correct Mctiou tbrough entablature ne Putm L

SOUTH STOA.
If we leave the Second Temple and turn to the ri{?ht, we soon reach the head of the
beautiful flight of steps which descends to the lower level and to the South Stoa (VI).
(Cf. Plate IV.)
The actual sfcite of the ruins is shown on Plates XX. and VII., and Figs. 57 and
65. On Plate XX. the height of the various objects is indicated by the shadows,
which ujion all the drawings are projected at 45°. The Stoa measures, inside the walls,
44.45 m. in length, including walls 46.09 m., and from the inside of the ^«^ar wall to the
outside of the stereobate 12.74 m. The stereobate is 1.08 m. in width. The long axis of
the Stoa is16° 30' south of east, and its level is 22.93 m. below that of the Old Temple.
The rear wall is 21 m. south of the Second
Temple foundation, and is nejirly parallel to
it. The face of the rear wall consists of light limestone, the joints are very close, and
the tops of the stones are fastened together with clamps about 0.60 m. long of the
double T-shape which were used in the fifth century B. c. and thus aid in establishing
the date of the building. The existing wall has three offsets of 0.065 m., and the
height of the first coiu-se above grade is 0.20 m., of the second 0.37 m., and of tlie
top one 0.39 m. There are four projections from the rear wall (cf. Fig. 65) resembling
pilasters and possibly intended to take trusses, although the projections do not all
128 ARCHITECTURE OF TFIE ARGIVE HERAEUM

exactly coincide with the columns in front

of them. The lower portions of the end walls
are also constructed of light limestone, fomiing socles or dados (as shown on Plate XI.)
to the height of the rear courses (of. also Fig. 65). The base of the dado is 0.26 m.
and the main course 0.86 m. in height. Over this are three courses of poros stone each
0.35 m. high. The Stoa was built against the retaining wall of the terraces which had
been previously constructed of j^oros stone fastened together with T-clamjJS. The
retaining wall is about two metres thick, and is strengthened by buttresses 2.00 X 1.80 m.
extending into the bank. Still farther back are the two ancient graves, and a portion
of the old peribolus wall described above (cf. Plates XX. and VII.). On the floor of
the Stoa there still remain nine limestone column-bases of the dimensions and spacing
as are shown on the
jilan. The existing crepidoma or stereobate is carefully built of
poros stone, the blocks averaging in size 1.20x0.60x0.35 m. The architectural frag-
ments that were found were sufficient to enable me to make a restoration of the Stoa
which shown on Plate XXI. Owing to the variation in the width of several of the
is

metopes, it seemed possible to restore the Stoa with either seventeen or nineteen columns
along the front ; the latter I am convinced is really the correct solution (Plate XXI.),
as this arrangement makes every other column of the front coincide with a column in the

centre, and it makes the relation of diameter to intercolumniation about as 1 is to 1],

a pycnostyle arrangement like that of the Second Temple, while the wider metopes fit

on the end walls.

The profiles of the
columns resemble those of the temple (cf. Plate XXII. and
Fig. 52, D).
Four had column-drums in situ, the most eastern base having two drums
interior bases

erect, while the remaining drums and capital of this column, all of jxjros stone, were

lying prostrate as is shown in section (Plate XI. and Fig. 65). Traces of stucco

painted yellow were apparent on the drums, and red paint on the echinus of the capital.

Vestijjes of stucco were visible also on the entablature.

I shaU letter the drums downward from the top as A, B, C, D, E, F, beginning with
the capital, and give the height and the bottom diameter of each measured between
the chords of the channels.

Capital
A
••...... AMETER.

B
C
D
E
F
Total height of columns 6.357 m.

— which exactly 19i units of 0.326 m. each.

is

of the column is equal to 7.30 diameters of the base, which at first appears
The height
out of proportion for Greek work of this period, but by referring to the section (Plates
XI. and XXII.) it will be observed that these interior columns support only a wooden
roof, whereas the outer columns are one drum less in height, or 5.342 m., which is about
6.16 diameters.*

1
At Olympia the interior columns of the Biileuterion ameter being measiired just above the plinth. Tlie Leo-

are 7.70 diameters in height and the cohinins of the front uidaenm columns are 6.42 diameters high.
in the Echo Colonnade are 6.40 diameters high, the di-
 THE SOUTH STOA 129

Some of the coliunn-drunis ineaHure one centimetre liif^her on one Hide tlmn un tlie
other, iiidicatin^ tliut th»'y inclined shjfhtly inwardM. The drnniH hud dowel-lioh-n nt Iwith
top and 'hottoiii, al)()iit 0.10 ni. K(|iiai«' and O.lO ni. (Im'\>, with an oiTHet. Tlie caiiitiilM
had similar dowel-liohiH and inaKun's wratrh-inurkH to nhiiw tin* eentntt. The aharnH in
l.Oli ni.
Hcinare and 0.18 m. hi^h tlie echinuH, unnnletM, and ntn-k Un^vtUer, 0.27K ni.
;

in heijfht.

The entjd)latunf of stone, stnocoed and |iaiiited. and theeynia, with its fillet, wan
/>o>v*.><

of tena-('ott<i.Tliee|iistyle was().71 ni. hi^h, and was made (»f two stones in thirknetiM
iiji

0.42(5 m. each, to<(((ther ecpialin^ the diameter of the e«dnnin at its l»a«f. The tri};ly|>hH
were 0.77 m. hijfh.
The top of the epistyle had a scratch-mark to show the location of mpto|H', O.fVl/) m.
ha(;k from the face of the tillet. One of the epistyle hlocks had on its face nnder the

Kiu. Go. - Akuivk Hkuakum ; \ii;\v i.doki.nu ka.st o.n tiik Sol'th .Stoa (VI).

Note the fine rear wall with its pil.ister-like projections, and the coluinn-driiins and bases. Mount Aracbuaeum
shows in the centre distance.

centre of a trigly]ih a small hole which may have heen made by a nail that secured a
bronze or other ornament.
It is interesting to note that the unit of measurement of the temple, eipial to 0.32G ni.,

prevailed throughout this Stoa.

The clue to the restoration is given by a cornice (geison) block whose mntides were

0.475 m. wide and spaced 0.097 m. apart and as a mutule is the width of a triglyph and
;

every alternate mutule centres over a metope, we have the width of the triglyph 0.47/) m.,
and of the metope 0.097 -f- 0.475 -|- 0.097 m. = 0.GG9 m., making the distjince from centre
to centre of the triglyphs 0.475
-}- 0.GG9 m. = 1.144 m. Twice thi.s. or 2.288 m., gives
the spacing between column centres, but 2.288 m. is seven units (within six millimetres
130 ARCHITECTURE OF THE ARGIVE HERAEUM
or one fourth of an inch). The distance from each end column to the outside of the
anta is a half triglyph more, or 2.52 m. = 7i\ units, which gives a total as follows :
—
Spacing at ends 7^^^ X 2 = 15-j^2 ^^^^s
= 126 "
Spaces between columns . . . . 18 X 7

"
141A
141-1^2units at 0.32G m. equals 46.07 m. This is only two centimetres (three fourths
of an inch) less than the measurement of the actual ruins given above, viz. 4G.00 n>. :

This gives nineteen cohunns to the front or one opposite each interior column and one
opposite each space between.
For the end walls a corner triglyph measured 0.428 m. wide on one face and 0.363 m.
on the other. I found that eleven times 1.144 (the width of triglyjihs and metope as
above) plus 0.428 gave 13.01 m. which coincided with the actual measurements of the
ruins. This distance, 13.01 m., furthermore, equals 40 units.
To return to the front, the entire height of the order is, as before shown :
—
Columns 5.342 m.
Epistyle .71

Triglyph .77

lines with the top of triglyphs ......

Cornice from top of beak-moukling to bottom of mutule which
.295

7.117 m.

This is nearly 22 units (22 units would be 7.172 m.), and I found the difference
accounted for by a terra-cotta fillet which fitted into the cut above the beak-moulding as
shown in the detail on Plate XXII. The fillet is described below.
The height of the entablature, which is made up of the sum
of epistyle, triglyph, and

cornice, as above, is 1.775 m., and is thus one third the height of the columns.
The cyma was .20 m. high, of colored terra-cotta, shown in detail on Plate
XXIII., G.
The
different pieces of terra-cotta cyma probably were secured by a rod running
through the hole. A
violet line, 0.023 m. wide,
along the under side showed that the
cyma overhung the fillet so far.
The fillet below the cyma was a flat terra-cotta band, 0.07 m. high, decorated with a
(Plate XXIIL, B). The soffit of this band
fret similar to that attached to the antefix
was painted for a distance of .08 m. back from its face, showing that it overhung the
beak-moulding of the cornice, and it had a projection cast on it which fitted into a cut on
the top of the cornice and was thereby kept in place. (Cf. detail section, Plate XXII.)
I found a fragment of a painted terra-cotta lion's head, from which I restored the entire

head, as shown in the upper right-hand corner of Plate XXII., and assumed that
it
belonged to this Stoa. A small piece of a ridge-antefix similar in design (Plate
XXIIL, C) also may have belonged to this building.

THE STEPS.

Our attention is next naturally directed to the broad flight of steps which lead up to this
Stoa from the south and continue upward along the east side to the level of the temple.
The length of the flight in all was 81 m., or about 25 units its run about 30 m. and ;
 THK WKST m:iLI)I\(} 181

its rise about 13 m. The eaHtern retuiiiin^ wall (hIiowii on Platk XIII., A) reiiembletl
that Building IV., the Htoiie
«)f work being hiid in coiii-hch where two wide courses alter-
nate with ()n(; narrow course. At an obtuse angle from this wall ran another in the
form of high being about 0.75 m. wide and of the same height. The
steps, each course
renmins of the main Hight of steps under considemtion consist of poroM st4jnes carefully

jointed but without clamps. The finished steps were probably limestone. The width
of the treads measured on the jxiros foundations is about 0.4.'3 m., and the rise 0.32 ni.
Portions of the foundation stones were, fortunately, in situ at the eastern end and
half way up the slope, which indicated that the steps had been continued to the temple
terrace.
In my restorations I have placed aii altjir at the head of the steps (»n the rectjingle of <dd
walls, upon which the P/ii/fakeion now stands, and various cuttings in the stones imply
that other altiirs and stelae uuiy have been placed at diiferent levels on the steps.

WEST BUILDING.
The next building in order of position is the so-called West Building (VII), of which
I have attempted two free restorations, one shown in the perspective on Platk VI. and
the other in Fig. GO, but owing to the insufficiency of data, for neither of them can I
claim any certiiinty. The ruins are, however, of interest.
The orientiition of the building is 8° 30' east of north, and its level is 21.35 m. below
that of the Old Temple. The foundations measure over all 33.30 m. along the east side
and 30.40 m. along the south allowing for offsets, the main walls must have measured
;

almost, if not exactly, 100 X 90 units of 0.326 m. each. It is much older than the Second

Fig. 66. — Aroive IIkraeum : West Building ;

free restoration of the elevation.

Temple and probably dates from the sixth century B. c, as is indicated by (a) the paving
stones in the central court, (h) the dove-tail clamps, (c) the columns whose channels are
fourteen and sixteen in number and (d) the spread of the echinus of
instead of twenty,
the capitals, as is shown in detail in Fig. 51, E, I, and K. (See Piate XXIV, )
The building lay outside the original walls of the peribolus on the south side of an early
road wliitli led up to the siinctuary. The ground for the building had been leveled by
cutting away the native conglomerate rock (at the northeast corner to a depth of nearly
five metres), and by filling in the lower sides
against retaining walls previously con-
structed. The walls remaining along the south (Plate XIII.) and half of the eastern
sides are of fine light limestone with tooled faces and Ciirefully fitted joints. The backs
of the stones are irregular, having been buried in the earth. The western retaining wall
132 ARCHITECTURE OF THE ARGIVE HERAEUM
was built of larger blocks many of which had been later removed, thereby causing the

partial destruction
of the terrace. These walls on the west side appear to be older than
the others, and may have belonged to an earlier Stoa to which was added later the rest
of the building. The foundation stones of the north and east sides are of regular poros
blocks similar to those of the temple and as carefully fitted and leveled (cf. Plate

XXV.). The plan of the building comprised a peristyle court with five columns on
the north and south sides and six on the east and west, counting the corner columns
twice. The positions of several of these columns are shown by the circles on the lime-
stone base course. The distances between the centres of corner colimms measure 13.10 m.
and 10.90 m., or about 40 and 33 units. The main entrance to the building was on the
north side, where a limestone sill 0.75 X 1.73 m. has two dowel-holes about one metre
apart and 0.35 m. from the stone jambs, indicating wooden casings (see the plan). The
door opens into a vestibule about 2.50 m. wide and 6.50 m. long leading to the central
court. Three rooms, each about 6x8 m., occupy the remainder of the north side of the
building. On the other three sides the roof-span is supported by columns whose spacing
is somewhat irregular. On Plate XXIV. the present state of the building is shown ;

on Plate XXVI. I show a plan and section restored, and in Fig. 52, C, a detail of the
columns.
The original destination of the building is
uncertain, and conjecture has made it a
gymnasium. Its location, however, and arrangement lead me to think that it
may have
been a hospital especially for women, which would be a natural accessory to the Heraeum,
whose goddess was the special patroness of births and marriages. In the two rooms
flanking the vestibule were benches or couches, shown on Plate XXIV. These couches
consist of upright blocks of limestone rebated 0.05 m. deep into the base course of the
rooms. The uprights are 0.25 X 0.75 m. and 0.55 m. high with dowel-holes in their
upper surfaces by which the horizontal slabs were secured. Lead is still visible in one of
the dowel-holes. The distances between the uprights varies, as is shown on the plan,
from 1.22 to 1.45 m., to which the addition of twice 0.25 m., the width of the uprights,
makes the total length 1.72, 1.95 m. The width
of couches, as similarly indicated, was
one metre. It is possible that the horizontal slabs overhung the supports both in length
and width, and they may have been of wood, since I found no stone which fitted the
position.^
The most rooms has no indications of stone couches, and may
easterly of the three
have been used as a strong room to keep the gifts, money and tokens, received from the
It had a noteworthy limestone door, a fragment of which is shown on Plate
patients.
XXVI. (cf. Plate XXV.). The pivot was 0.10 m. in diameter, cut from the solid stone
of the door, and originally it revolved upon a bronze plate let into the dowel-holes in
the limestone door-sill.^

right side of the door-sill is worn more than the left, indicating that the corre-
The
sponding valve of the door was more frequently used. The dimensions of the dooi--sill
are shown on Plate XXVL, and the sunken cuts at either end indicate that there
were wooden door-jambs.^ The doors were evidently fastened by a bolt which slipped
into the rebate shown on the face of the sill. The stone step inside of this room was
'
For couches of similar construction found in a rock- a grave at Palititza now in the Louvre Heuzey, Mission
;

cut grave on Aegina see Expedition de More'e, III. p. 40. Archeologique de Macedoine, pi. xxi.
' For the
Also Guhl and Koner, Life of the Greeks and Romans, arrangement of wooden door-jambs and
Figs. 102 and 103. casings, see Durm, Die Baukunst der Griechen, and also
^ For a similar stone door see the marble door from the Olympian Heraeum in the German work on Olympia.
 THE WEST BUILDING 188

Fiu. C7. •
Argivk Hkkakum : Vikw looking northwkst upon thk Nortiiwkst RuiLDINfl (VIII).

Mycciuic lies among tliu liillx in tlit;

riglit distimci;.

made of pieces which were secured together by metal clumps. Flanking the doorway on
the east side are two poros stones with centres carefully hollowed out, althougii for what
reason is uncertain.
In the central court we find an old paving of iiTegular blocks not unlike that on the
Old Temple terrace. Over this older paving was a better one of limestone blocks, about
flush with the podium or stylobate, with which, in the plan of the restoration, I have
shown the entire building to have been paved. From the court a stone drain carried the
water beneath the floor and through the south wall.
The only column-drum remaining upright is on the northeast base (ef. Plate XXV.).
It measures 0.58 m. in diameter between the chords of the opposite flutings, which are
sixteen in number.
The only fragments I found with which to attempt a restoration were the small j>oros
stone capitiils (Figs. 51, E, I, and K), each with only fourteen channelings, the capitiil B
with sixteen channelings, and the pieces of entablature (Plate XXVI.), cornice, triglyph,
and epistyle stones ; and as regards the cornice block, I am in some doubt, since the shai)e
of the clamps would indicate a later building. This apparent discrepjincy may be ac-
coiuited by supposing that the building had been, at a later time, reconstructed or

repaired. In other respects, the stone might have belonged to this structure. Another
block which resembles it has the earlier dovetail-shaped dowel-hole, and still another has
a very large T-shaped hole, as though to tiike a dowel of wood instead of met;il. The
lifting-holes are shown on the top of the stone. The mutules alternate with rows of five
and four guttae, and I foimd one which had been repaired by fastening a gutta in place
134 ARCHITECTURE OF THE ARGIVE HERAEUM
with lead. The
epistyle block also has but five giittae under the regula. The face of
the cornice is plain and may have been covered with terra-cotta like that of the Treasury
of Gela at Olympia, since a nail-hole is seen on one of the cornice stones.
The soffits of the cornice bear evidences of red paint. The cyma may have been as
on Plate XXIIL, D.
The southern outlook over the plain from the site is so beautiful that one might expect

Fig. 68. — Argive Heraeum View looking west from the Northwest Building
:
(Vlll).
The men are excavating the Roman Building (IX).

an open colonnade on this side, but the existing walls evidently did not support columns.
In order to harmonize the idea of a wall with a colonnade, I have made a sketch as a

suggestion in Fig. 66.

THE NORTHWEST BUILDING.

In the Northwest Building (VIII) there is still less to guide one in attempting a
restoration (cf. Fig. 67, and Plate XXVII. ). The rough walls are built over lime-
stone bases, which indicate an earlier Stoa. is possible also that this
It may have been
the of an ancient Propylaeum.
site I think the capital P, Fig. 51, shown again in Fig.

52, F, may have belonged to the late building on this site.

THE ROMAN BUILDING.

The remains of the Roman
Building (IX) (Plates XXVIII. and XXIX., and Fig.
68), are somewhat confused, but the construction of the floor is interesting. An earlier
Greek structure had occupied the eastern part of this site, the remains of which are a
finely cut limestone wall, door-sill, ^oros stone foundation, and a fragment of mosaic floor.
 TIIK LOWER STOA 1S6

shown in detail on Plate XXIX., W. The lionian floor-level wan alniut 0.i5C m. alM>ve
that of the Greek. On
the plan in Plate XXVIII. the four irrej^ular circleu are indicia
tions of wiiat uppear to he ciMteniH, which were in depth from IfA) to 3 ni.
The })rineipiil interest in the huildiii^ eentreH iu the h^'i>ucauMt «>r hollow floor and

Fig. 69. — Argivk Heraeum ; Roman Building (IX) : plan and elrvation restored.

wall construction, through which wanned air circulated as in other Roman buildings,

notiihly the baths at Pompeii. On Plate XXIX., A

and G, are shown tlie actual jjlan
and a restored section. The floors were first covered with flat tiles al)out 0.60 ni. 8C]iiare,
upon which were built piers about 0.70 ni. high of smaller square or round tile and in
one case of stone. On these piers large tiles were laid, upon which was 8pre;i(l the con-
crete about 0.17 m. thick, and all was fini.shed with a floor of mosiiic or niirble tile. The
hollow walls were made by special flat tiles about 0.49 ni. square by 0.02 m. thick, with
projecting lugs, as is shown by a fragment, Plate XXIX., A, and the section G.
A coat of plaster was first ap])lit'd to the wall of the building to even the surface and
to tiike the points of the tiles, which left an air space of about 0.06 m. The tiles were
then covered and held in place by a coat of plaster 0.085 m. thick.'
Small })assages or ducts through the walls were left between the rooms and under the
floors to permit the warmed air to circidate throughout the various ajKirtinent.*.

'
The Stabian Tliorinae at Pompeii liave tlic floors by 0.10 in. Tliis pipe coiistniction starts from the top of
and walls of the tcpidariiim constructed as above de- the hollow floor, and is carried up the walls around tlie
scribed, but the walls of the calidariuni are made of tile vaulted ceiling and down to the floor a^in, thus permit-
pipe rectangular in section, measuring inside about O.OC ting a complete circulation for the hot air.
136 ARCHITECTURE OF THE ARGIVE HERAEUM
The room on the plan (Plate XXVIII.) is where the fire was probably made,
central
as it is suppUed with what appears to be a smoke-flue, and there are vestiges of burnt
matter.

Many spread directly on the earth with

of the rooms have floors of plaster, which is

rounded plaster-angles between floors and walls, indicating that the walls were also plas-
tered. Some of these compartments may have been used as reservoirs and others as
plunge-baths. The sketch-restoration (Fig. 69) is merely a suggestion and makes no
claim to accuracy. In the plan I have assumed that the purpose of the various rooms

may have been as follows :

—
A. Atrium. F. Kitchen and Fnrnace-room.
B. Room for Attendant. K. Sleeping chamber.
C, M, and N, and possibly E. Warmed rooms. L. Anteroom.

D, G, J. Passages. O. Cisterns or tanks for swimming.

LOWER STOA.

South of the Roman Building are the remains of an L-shaped building (X), one leg
measurin"' over all 74.33 m. and the other about 52 m. in length. At the extreme
southern end a retaining wall was built which was continued beyond the line of the
the original intention to carry the building around one
building, and it may have been
or both of the two open sides. It may have formed a court for herding cattle before

the sacrifice.
are insufficient to justify an attempt at restoration.
The remains The outer walls are
too narrow for column foundations, and indicate that the building was inclosed with a
central row of columns to support the roof. See the plan of site restored, Plate V.

CISTERNS.
shown on the general plan, Plate IV. A, west of the
Several cisterns or baths are :

Old Temple B, C, D, in the Upper Stoa (II) E, Ea, east of the Lower Stoa. This
; ;

last is underground and cross-shaped. F, a small bath south of E in this chamber a ;

striffil There were several drains. The one dotted on the plan between the
was found.
on
Upper Stoa and the Temple was constructed of tile pipe, a detail of which is given
Plate XXIX., Y. The underground aqueducts south of the site have been referred to

by Dr. Waldstein (above, p. 16).

 i
ii

111

Mm
-- -5

'•2 S
f

•^ • = a

S -si I

98
o
H
<
OS
u
K .5 5 -S

u
>
3
OS

"11 -

3 J - TJ
I

3
u
a

>
O
a;
•<

p
u
«
Id

3
<
!S
H
The Abgive Heraeum

ARGIVE HERAEUM. — GENERAL PLAN OF TI

Drawn and surreyed hij

I. Old Temple III. Northeast Stoa V. Second T

II. Noitli Stoa IV. East Building YI. South Sto
XI. Pbjlakeion A,
 Plate IV

SITE : ACTUAL STATE AFTER EXCAVATION

unl L. T'dton, Architect

VII. West Building IX.Roman Building

VIII. Xoitlnvest Building X. Lower Stoa
!, D, E, F. Cisterns and Baths
I

O
<
J

o
I

3
X
<
The Aegive Hekaeum

% II l!
*
lillLIJKtIlff
r

ARGIVE HERAEUM. — REST

By Edward L.
 Plate VI

-v'*-

lTion in perspective
.,
Architect
\
 I

i
I

r
I
1

I
few I
I

S 5

'J =
j^ %
•X =
8 1

» "S
->

I -3

— «
^ s
io

- s

-o £ =

s
9
H a a
•a
a
I 51
«
0) -i —
I tf
<
u
a =
>
>
a
I*
< I §
I il
The Argive Heraeum

a/o

1 -^TXT
HV<>ai%^X
M3h.

S^

of

ARGIVE HERAEUM. — OLD TE

Measii ivd lui
 Plate VIII
r
Rock
\

§
N

I
/e fo

C^'O^

'^^^m

'^m-

\
iE PLATFORM: ACTUAL STATE
nril L. Til ton
I
II

II

It
The Argive IIeraeum

•py-

*- *-
kt

^ ";
*-
w

'iimr

^' "J 1.
1 ! 1 1
mi 1 1 1 1 1 1 1. 1 1 1. nu 1 1 H 1 1 1 1 1 1 u III u mun 1
11

'aESTORED-niJEV

, -T?^

"
.q7r>^ ^"^> <t^

'>*^.?-.

'«L"^*'

ARGIVE HERAEUM. — THE OLD TEMPLE AND STO.

Pleasured and Mestori
 a :^''-^-

iiiiiiiiiiiiii'.nnnii
PI.ATE IX

I. AND III.: ACTUAL STATE AND RESTORATION

Edward
'ard I
L. Tilton
w
H

Oh

d
g

3 •- 3

a -^
« 3
« 1

il9
-J

a !

il

g
?;

>
I

K
b -1)
OS
M
a
>
O
M
<1
u
H
^

II
The Argive Heraeum

AEGIVE HERAEUM. — SECTION THROUGH SITE Fl

RESTORED
Measured and Besti
 Plate XI

'H -.-%>'..

^^5^' *(
"«.+> ,

'^"?^>

NORTH TO SOUTH ACTUAL STATE BELOW AND

:

SW ABOVE
1/
Edward L. Tilton
y
 •3 -2 II
2^
C3 01 -tf

<1 ^ m

&
<

w
H
^
 k1

a,

->
< 3S

u .s

Si

£J
§^
—^ «

a
" '5
'J -^
s, -^

-
3
d 8
I*

>^.
J

a
3 —

> ja

=5
i
u
•< > t
3 -
OS
u
a 25 2

u
H
1
 u

2-1

-J

s
i
i^ "^ .a

A
I

it!
O *•
o
S "

8 ~t

>
c; e •a
E s
I
s ^

Ij
» 2
I -
u .a _.
a a rS

o
"^ 3
•S S

u — c-
B •a
H
 The Akgive Heraeum
K

ARGIVE HERAEUM. — SECC

Measured hy
 Platk XVI

»• GncCN UNITS'

TEMPLE: ACTUAL STATE

'•(/ L. Tllton
I

.
'
.
—r [\

?5
O
H
o
H

S
Q
S
o
•p

H
O

S
D

>

u
a
H I
'

I
'

.
'

I
'

I
'

I
'

I
'

I
'

i
'

I
'
^l=<^-^>r^'*AV\V^* sv^v^v^y^^

ARGIVE HERAEUxM. — SIDE ELEVATK

XoTEs. — The roof-tiles, metopes, and cjiua-inouldiiig are of wliite lULirbk
are of limestone. The carvings sketched in the metopes are purely iu
cyma-moulding is very imperfectly reproduced.
 Plate XVIII

)F THE SECOND TEMPLE: E

coniice, epistyle, and eolunms are of ;w-
ry. Owing to the great reduction of tlu
%
f
The Argivk IIerakum Plate XIX

^^.
\.
\.

tot i/Nin^i.cN9TH or
rr
J^
p) O O O "0~CT ^- f 1.

r7'Kra"0"r1r
o
% o
\
o X
o
o
o
o o
o o
o o
\i-

o o
o o
\
\

6\ o
o o
U t)-a-U i

o o
O Q Q O O Q 14
T -^

'J 'fc» KETCRS.

ARGIVE HERAEUM. — OUTLINE PLAN AND ELEVATIONS, SHOWING THE

PROPORTIONS OF THE SECOND TEMPLE
y 'Tf f- 04 Hfc
;. AS t f-

""rm "^,^r^''f/m\

STATE OF SOUTH S

Measured by
 ''"'

t«lllp

(VI) AND OF STEI

/ L. TUton
 u
t
H

PH
Ico: in
t3=E

ICEX
ICXI

iciir

lEUX

o
<
K
H
 3
Ah

<

<
X
H
Thk AwiivK IIkuakim Platk XXIII

AUGIVE IIERAEUM. — PAINTED TERRA-COTTA ARCHITECTl'RAL FRAGMENTS

(
The Aroive Heraeum

ARGIVE HERAEUM. - WEST

Measured by
 Plate XXIV

Zl

IN« (VII): ACTUAL STATE

/ L. Tillun
 a
i

Pi
i

1
.5

H i
iS I
«1
a
5 i
2la
Ui

Es -2 I

5 2 g

^ I-'

s ^
6 -a

-^ s

s
2
S
s

I
The Akgive Heraeum

West Building' (XTI) : Section restored

West Building; (VII) : Plan restored

ARGIVE HERAEUM. — WEST Bl

 Plate XXVI

^.

:l

Actual state of wall retaining the wmt side of the Terrace of the ijeoond Temple, and adjacent to the Went Building

Cornice, triglyph, and epistyle blocks

NG (VII): PLAN AND DETAILS

The Argive Hebaeum

/ff/S-
>
'^y/Z'fc

^
>
-:(-

ARGIVE HERAEUM.— NORTHWK

 Plate XXVII

xijo
y'\

l^^riiiiiftrriiniiiv'iNfiiiiiMa
?S;j^. ,.,.
\llllllf,„^0/f ^,

T
I

,''*'

^^..#"' .mil'
1

;§
t
I

.>;?

d J<3

'

T
*

Mf
if
*

'
i g ii I
T*
III i V
°

Y
" Mtrora
<Mf£K iMin
Measured by Edward L. Tilton

QILDING (VIII): ACTUAL STATE

I— (
c
<u

..-1 -K

n
 'A

O -1)

Q
J
1-1

5 -^

PS G-
I -.)

OS
K

O ^ -5)
PS

^t-/;?/-^i4-rf»/—4-*>'-4»fc<'4—— ^ —— <*^o/

i
 The Argivk IIeraeum

B
-d cr-
D a • • q o o I,

] [:: a m a • • q o <: t

] n i:i • • • o o o :

] G D •:• • • C' [

a a o • c o c (: .-• • C: [.

c • c o o • • • c

] o • • • • c

] o • • o c.

] C :;;

a _jzj _j:n cn._

H
G
N

1 .Jo

M
 Plate XXIX
E

^TX

^<^;PT'

ONSTRUCTION (A, G). FRAGxMENTS FROM OTHER

GS
MARBLE STATUARY FROM THE HERAEUM
 MARBLE STATUARY FROM THE IIERAEUxM
By CHARLES WALDSTEIN

THOU(iU there were numerous finds of plastic work in other nuiteriuls inade durin}^
the excavations on this site (notably in terra-cottii and bronze), the larger works of ticn\\>-
ture are almost exclusively of marble. This has been the case in most {freat excavations,
and ivory,
owing mainly to the fact that sfcitues of other materials, bronze and gold
were, from tlie intrinsic value of the material, seized and utilized by the
hordes that suc-

cessively swept over the sites of classical antiquity.

An of large terra-cotta sculpture, which
exception is furnished by two fragments
escaped our notice while we were arranging our finds transported from the Heraeum to
the Central Museum at Athens. rediscovered, by Professor Richard Norton,
They were
at the bottom of one of the numberless baskets in our storeroom. He tells me that they
are certainly archaic, but were too fragmentiiry and amorphous to be published.
Another exception is furnished by the fragment of the rude stone pillar referred to in
General Introduction which, though it cannot be called a work of sculpture,
my (p. 43),
must find its place here (Fig. 70), for if I

am right in my surmise, it would be the

image in stone of
earliest extiint symbolical
a Greek divinity. That such pillars were
frequently symbolical renderings of Greek
divinities has been recognized and at the
;

Heraeum we hear of such a pillar as the

" "
earliest image round which the priestess
"
CaUithoe wound her ribbons.* This pil-
"
lar was fractured at about half its height,
and smaller fragments of the upper part
were subsequently found. It was probably
hollowed out at the fractured end in later
times. In its present state it is 0.91 m.

high by 0.47 m. wide at the base. This 1- KAlj.Mh.N 1 iih A Mom-. I'lLLAR.

base is formed by cutting away the four

corners of the square block so as to give a hexagonal form to the pillar, and only leaving
them at about a foot from the bottom. At the front, moreover, this base projects
slightly in the middle as well as at the angles, thus giving it the general appearance of
the rudest primitive terra-cottas. The whole pillar tapers upwards but just before the
;

point whereit is now fractured, in the front view there is a slight turn outwards. There
isno architectural or other purpose which we could assign to it and considering the ;

rough primitive method in which it is worked and the corners are beveled away with
some rude implement used like a saAv, we venture to suggest that the most ancient
pillai--like image of Hera has here been preserved to us.
'
1
Phoronis ap. Clem. Alex. Strain. I. 24, § 151.

139

b
140 MARBLE STATUARY FROM THE HERAEUM
noteworthy fact that out of so large a number of sculptured fragments of stone
It is a

preserved, there should be only two insignificant pieces of 2^oros statuary, all the others
being of marble. One of these jjoros fragments represents the hock of a colossal horse.
These probably belonged to pedimental groups of early buildings erected many years
before the destruction of the Old Temple, and may possibly have come from restorations
of this Temple at a date corresponding to the erection of the temple on the Acropolis
at Athens, which was adorned by the i^oros groups there found during the last exca-
vations.

SINGLE STATUES.
It is also remarkable that out of this large number of marble fragments there are but
few isolated specimens that can, with any degree of probability, be ascribed to separate
single statues
—
statues, that is, which stood by themselves on separate pedestals, whether
inside the buildings or in the open air. We can, in fact, distinguish as belonging to
this category only the following marbles :
—
I. —Four fragments belonging to a female figure of the archaic period about life-size

(Fig. 71). No. 2 is a mass of regular folds gradually converging straight grooves, not ;

deeply cut, with a rounded rise between each two grooves. No. 1 is a more elaborate

5 7

Fig. 71. — Fragments of Archaic Sculpture.

mass of the same drapery, with a broad, central pleat-like fold, from which the smaller
folds descend terrace-like. The edges are here more sharply cut, but on either side of
this centralmassing we find the same rounded folds with straight shallow grooves.
No. 3 shows the same general folding, only here the edge of the garment falls in freer
zigzags. No. 4 is of the same size as No. 2. This class of drapery is well known in
archaic Greek marble sculpture and has its analogies in extant statues.* No. 6 appears
'
Cf., e. g., the Hera of Samos (CoUignon, Hist, de la ii. and iii.) ;
the draped female figures from the Acropolis

Sculpt. Gr. 63); the draped female figures from

I. p. (Cavvadias, Musee d'Athenes, 1886), etc.
Delos (Homolle, Btdlet. de Corresp. HeUen. III. 1879, pis.
 SINGLE STATUES 141

to be a fragment of an upper arm extended, with indications of straight folds and

possibly of the long hair hanging over the shoulder. krger fragment, No. 5, niay A
have to the siinie figure, with shallow but linuly cut grooves at larger inter-
belonged
vals than in the other fragments, converging towards one point, probably the shoulder.
This appears to be a portion of the back covered by the himation or upper garment, and
being at the back, the elevation of the folds is Hatter than in the other fragments. The
.statue in question could
not have
belonged to a
later time than the first

quarter of the fifth century

B. c.

II. — Small archaic torso

of a female figure, with
close-fitting upper garment
and indications of a girdle
{z(me) at the waist (Fig. 71,
No. 7). There were long
curls hanging over either
shoulder. There are two
terra-cottjis of the archaic
'

period which correspond

to this marble torso.*^
Between these fragments
of archaic sculpture and
those belonging to the
Graeco-Roman period there
are no works which we
coidd ascribe to single and

separate sfcitues. But of

the Graeco-Roman period
there are portions of two

statues, the one evidently

over, the other slightly un-
der, life-size. — Marble
Fragments, probably part of a Female Figure
Fig. 72.

III. — Five
fragments,
OF THE GrAECO-KOMAN PERIOD.

probably belonging to the

same statue, remain of a large draped female figure, probably seated (Fig. 72). The
marble appears to me to be Parian. No. 1 is the upper and front portion of a large
female head, from upper lip to occiput. It was found during the digging at the West

Building, and was evidently transferred here, at some distance from its original position,
in later times. The dimensions are the following :
—
Greatest height of fragment (in centimetres) 29.50
Greatest width " " . . . . 22.50
^ These will be flgared and described in the second Hellen. Studies, XVI. 1896, p. 277); Olympic, III. p. 27,
volume. pi. v.; similar types, Collignon, op. cit. I. pp. 120 £f.

"
Cf. the winged "Nik^" attributed to Archermus I must thank Dr. Carroll N. Brown, who rendered val-

(Collignon, op. cit. I.

p. 135) ;
the statuette of one of the uable assistance in the taking of measurements of the
"Eumenides" from Olynipia (P. Gardner, Journal of marbles at Athens in 1896.
142 MARBLE STATUAKY FROM THE HERAEUM
Width between outer angle of eyelids 12.

From pupil to pupil

From root of nose to extant end of nose ....... 8.30
8.20
« "

From temple
"

to
"

temple
" end of

..........
forehead, middle of hair 4.70
17.30

The head evidently iconic, as is clear from the receding forehead with projecting
is

brows, beneath which the eyes appear deep-set and at the same time bulging and heavy,
encircled by band-like eyelids. These eyelids seem to join at the outer edge on the same

plane, and thus, in connection with their band-like treatment and the bulging iris, sug-
or from a distance) an archaic character, like that of the eyes
gest (when viewed hastily
in the heads from the Olympia pediments. But upon closer inspection it will be seen
that a slight line at the outer angle of the juncture of the lids marks the continuation of
the upper lid over the lower lid —
a characteristic which, I have long since maintained,
marks the change from archaic sculpture to the highest freedom about the year 450 B. c.
The superficial "archaic" appearance of the eye is thus counteracted as regards the
lids, later character is further accentuated by the deeply cut eyeball with pupil.
and the
Though think
I the prevailing impression which has found its way into literature, that
the indication of the eyeball by sculptured incision marks a late Roman origin, is as
unfounded as widespread, the peculiar deep cutting of the pupil noticeable in the
it is

left eye of this head seems to me to point to a later period. In general, however, it will
be well for us to remember that in marble statues of all periods where the iris is not
indicated by incised lines, it was painted in ; and that in heads like the very early head
of Hera from the Heraeum at Olympia {Olymjna, HI. pi. i.) there are indications of the
incised iris ; while in bronze and chryselephantine sculpture the eye was generally ren-
dered in its detail
by various materials. It was only later, when in the Hellenistic and
Roman period the sculptor, reveling in his technical skill as a pure modeler, dispensed
with jjolychromy in sculpture, that the deeper carving of the pupil came in.
The iconic character of the head is produced further by the deep hollowing below and
round the lower eyelid, and the sinking in of the temples at the end of the frontal bone ;

and the furrow slanting away from the and accentuating the fleshiness of the
nostril

cheek gives individuality, while indicating a more advanced age.

The elaborate arrangement of the hair, with braid following upon braid wound round
the head, is paralleled in many heads of the Roman period, and appears to me character-
istic of the coifPure adopted by priestesses. From this fact alone it is not impossible

that the statue may have been that of a priestess of Hera in Roman times which, accord-

ing to Pausanias (II. 16. 5), stood before the temple. But the late character of the
work is manifest from the mechanical and, at the same time, slovenly treatment of the
braids or twisted meshes of hair. These are indicated by means of shallow parallel
grooves subdividing the hair at equal distances, without any variety or modeling to
suggest the real texture of hair.
No. 2 is the largest fragment probably belonging to this statue. It seems to represent
the shoulder and upper arm covered by drapery. The dimensions are :
—
From
Extreme height
width
............
top of shoulder to massed folds below centre (in centimetres)

. . .
. . 46.
53.
29.

depth 22.50

The folding is flat and superficial on the side of the shoulder and arm, deeper on the
 SINGLE STATUES 143

mass hanging duwn inside the Hhuukler. But these mure deeply cut £old-grooves are
mechanical and coarse and throughout show the use of the drill. The short groove
bt'twcon the two deeper and longer folds on the toj) illustrates this.
No. 3. Part of a draped upper arm, with hare forearm of similar dimensions and
marble to the previous fragments. What remains of the folding is similar in late chai^
acter to the previous fragment. Compare the mechanical cutting, the shallower short
perpendicular fold near the hare portion of the arm. It is not im])ossil)le that frag-

ments 4 (hand) and 5 (thumb with round object) belonged to this arm, though the
fractures are not such as to allow of piecing them together. It cannot be determined

with certainty what the object to which the thumb is attiiched is, but it seems probable
that it was the internal boss of a sacrificial j)atera held in the extended hand of the

priestess, an action which is familiar in stiitues, vases, and terra-cottas. Tlie fractured
foot with elaborate sjindal (6) also may have beh)nged to this statue.

The dimensions arm —

Extreino length (in centimetres)
" width
........
of the fragment of are :

46.
29.
"

Bare forearm
depth
......
............
Inside elbow joint to end of fractured forearm
21.
18.
11.50

IV. — Torso of a draped figure, probably male, two thirds life-size (Fig. 73). Found
at no great depth on the south slope. It apparently represents a boy, holding a large bird
(dove ?) in his left hand. Dowel-holes
at the neck of the fi«fure and of the ^^^^-^ ,
^.
<^^^^^^^^^^^^bk,.
bird probably point to later restora- H^^>^ /^'S^
tions, after the head had been broken . 'i«'i; ';,*/>

ott". The figure is clad in three dis-

^^^ ^^^^^^
tinct garments :
(1) a chiton which ^BflE^'K ^^^^^B ^
appears clearly inider the triangular ^Bp^^^/SL, ^\ ^^^^m\ ™kfmJ' \i
opening of the second garment below ^mJ^i i T
the neck, (2) a thick, flulfy shirt-like
^/T^ i '

garment, either sheepskin or of

of
^R^ X/ ' ^^^^
rough, hairy lamb's wool, such as HE^ jp/ "^

peasants and shepherds, particularly, ^^UmK ^Py-

wear to-day, and (3) a heavy himation
over the back, the ends falling over
the left shoulder and arm, which it
covers ;
drawn under the left arm, it

leaves the greater portion of the left

, ,
, , ,
_-, ,
Fig. 73. — Latk Torso, found on the South Slope.
arm and shoulder bare, ilie work-
manship is rough and unskillful, and is either quite provincial or very late, or both.
V. — Finally there are several smaller fragments (Fig. 74) heads of various sizes —
and workmanship, as well as an object, perhaps representing a liydria which cannot be —
assigned to the main body of Argive sculpture with any degree of probability. The
only one of these about which there can be any doubt is the much corroded head with a
portion of neck, cheek, and lower portion of hair, between which and the fractured upper
portion of the head there is a sharply cut groove. The fragment of a helmet distinctly
belongs to the metopes.
144 MARBLE STATUARY FROM THE HERAEUM

ARCHITECTURAL SCULPTURE.
The whole large mass of sculptured marble fragments,
with these exceptions, belongs
to one date and style of

workmanship, and, as we
shall later see, forms parts
of the sculptured orna-
mentation of buildings,
either metopes, friezes, or

pedimental groups.
Yet it must not be be-
lieved that in the ancient

days of the Heraeum

there were not nimierous

single statues distributed

over the sacred precinct.
Pausanias' definitely men-
tions statues of priestesses
and of heroes as standing
in front of temple.the
Some of the bases belong-

ing to these and other

statues were found in our
excavations at the east end
of the temple. From ana-

logous experience in other

excavations (Olympia, Del-

phi, etc.), we know that a

small portion of the great
number of statues which
studded the sacred pre-
cincts of ancient sanctu-
FiG. 74. — Fragments kkom the Akgive Hekaelm. aries, like trees in a grove,
have come down to us, and
how vastly the works of architectural sculpture predominate in proportion.
'
Paus. II. 17. 3. avSpiifTd t€ eiTT^Koiri irph t^s iaiSov, dedicated to Athena, representing one of the girl basket-
Kal yvvaiKuy at yeySvaffiy Upetai rris "Hpas, Kol rjpwuv &\\vf bearers {Kavri(p6poi) who figured in her worship. Professor
T€ Kal 'OpftTTov •
rhv yap fTrlypafifia txovTa its etij $a(ri\€vs Curtius thinks that there may have been whole rows of
AC7ou(rros, 'GpeVrTji' flyai Xiyovaiv. Ibid. 7. 'Ap^eioi Se Kaitrep such statuettes in the temples. See Arch. Zeit. 1880, pp.
KaKov TTjKiKovTov Trap6i^Tos ff(pi(n tV ftK6va ov KatfetAoc t^s 27-30; Curtius, Gesammelte Abhandlungen, II. pp. 286-
\pv(TrjiSos^ afdKiirai b( Kal 4s rovs rov vaov rod KaraKavBfvTos 294. The Argives dated their years by the priesthood of

tpnrpoatfv. The latter passage seems to show that some Hera. Hellanicus the historian, b. c. 480-395, wrote a
of the statues of priestesses before B. c. 423 still stood in history of the priestesses of the Argive Hera, which must
front of the ruins of the First Temple in the time of Pau- have been of great importance for Greek chronology. See
sanias, while the statues before the Second Temple all Preller, Ausgewahlte Aufscitze, pp. 51 fE. ; Fragmenta histor.

belonged to dates subsequent to b. c. 420. Statues of Graec. ed. Midler, I. pp. xxvii. seq. 51 seq. Frazer's Paus.

priestesses stood also before the temple of Demeter at III. (notes), p. 182. Similar bases of statues to those in
Hermione (Paus. and at Cerynea in Achaia.
II. 35. 8), front of the Heraeum have been found also at Epidaurus.
There were statues of women, said to be priestesses, at Statues and statuettes of basket-bearers have been found
the entrance to the sanctuary of the Eumenides. (Paus. at Athens, Eleusis — in fact, on most sites where there
VII. 25. 7.) A statuette at Paestum has been found was a temple dedicated to a female divinity.
 ARCHITECTURAL STATUARY 146

This is due mentioned above, that a hirge proportion of such single statues
to the fact,
were of bronze, which were the first to be carried off, and, furthermore, to the fact that
statues which stood below, on the level of the terrace, were more readily destroyed and
fciken away by the iconoclast and despoiler than those which ornamented metopes or pedi-
ments of a hif"!! buil(lin<>-. We remember, for insfcince, what difficulties the Venetians,
and later Lord Elgin, liad
lowering in from the Parthenon. At the Heraeum
stjitues

such statues could be procured only after the building had fallen in, and then had to be
extracted laboriously from beneath the debriH of the ruined building.

Undoubtedly this was the fate of this ancient sanctuary of Hera. From its lofty posi-
tion on the slopes of the hills, it commanded the vast plain of Argos. But at the same
time this glorious group of resplendent buildings had to pay, as it were, the penalty of
its serene position and of the attractive beauty of its shrine gleaming through the limpid

atmosphere of Hellas to the furthest confines of the mounfcvin-encircled plain. There was
no point from which it could not be seen. And thus the Byzantines, Franks or Normans,
Slavs or Albanians, Venetians, Turks and modern Greek peasants, passing through or

settling in any part of the plain, made the Heraeimi their stone quarry and their lime- —
"
kiln.' The " Larisa or mediaeval cibidel of the town of Argos, the Palamidi of Nauplia,
and, nearer home, the Byzantine and Frankish churches of the neighboring villages,
Chonica, Merbaka, Anyplii, Priphtani, Pasia, as also the well-stones, Untels, and thresh-
olds of the peasants' hoixses, all made heavy drafts upon the ruined Heraeum for their

building material.
To this must be added as an important fact (to account for the comparatively small
remains of extant architectural sculpture), that in the manufacture of the great amount
of excellent mortar used by these later builders, the lime produced by the
burning of
marble was preferred to all other, and that thus marble sculpture of all kinds was espe-
cially sought after.

What was not carried away or destroyed by the hand of man was undone by nature.
The buildings that were not actually pulled down were shaken down by earthquakes,^ and
the remains of sculpture lying about the ground and beneath the debris of the buildings
were either carried off by the despoiler, or further mutilated by the iconoclastic hordes
passing through or dwelling in the Argive plain, because they represented Pagan
religion. The great height from which the sculptures of pediment or entablature fell to
the ground caused the thinner and more undercut portions, extremities of bodies and

drapery, to break off most freely. It was not worth the barbarian's while to transport
these smaller fragments to his lime-kiln or to use them as building stones ; thus the

larger portable masses of marble

—
torsi, larger heads, etc.
—
were first chosen by him,
and, if too large, they were split or cut into portable larger fragments.
Wecan thus understand why the excavations yielded so few specimens of sculpture
besides architectural sculpture, and, furthermore,
why there should be found so few
larger or complete specimens of even these works ;
we can reaUze also how fortunate are
the accidents that have yielded such fine and representative specimens of important sculp-
ture, for which, under these untoward conditions, we hardly dared hope.
The vast number of smaller pieces, the numerous hands and feet of men and horses,

'
See W. G. Clark, Peloponnesus, p. 84. fragments from the South Stoa on the pavement of the
'
That there must liave been some such destruction, having been broken while other portions
latter, the roof
and that it was probably by earthquakes, is proved by of the Stoa stood when the temple fell in.

metope fragments found underneath other heaped-up

146 MAKBLE STATUARY FROM THE IIERAEUM
of armor and drapery, evidently belonging to metopes or friezes in relief, of themselves
make us realize that the Second Temple was decorated with sixty-four metopes ; while, as
will presently be proved, the of larger figures in the round belonged to
many fragments
the pedimental groups of that temple, which each contained at least thirteen life-size fig-
ures —
together at least twenty-six, and probably
well over thirty statues in the round.

Yet though of the metopes only three larger pieces and, fortunately for us, seven com-
plete heads
were found, only one of these larger pieces could, after patient search
among the fragments, be so supplemented as to form an almost complete metope (Plate

XXX.). Of the pedimental statues there is only one torso and a few larger pieces,
whde we found of these but one head, the attribution of which to a pediment, however,
is not beyond all doubt.
Still maintain, with some degree of certainty, that all these marble fragments
we may
formed part of the sculptured decoration of the Second Temple (the only architectural
this site), and that the other buildings in the sacred
sculpture noted by Pausanias on
precinct of the same period give no evidence of having been decorated with figures and

groups either in relief or in the round.

These conclusions are based upon the collective arguments which will form the remain-
der of this introduction.
The fragments of relief work, as well as of statues in the round, are all of the same
"
"Parian marble.^

THE METOPES.
That metopes surmounted the columns of this Doric temple is, of course, proved
architecturally. The question is whether all, or how many, of these were decorated
with sculpture in relief.

The
existence of such sculptured decorations is proved by Pausanias's phrase vnep rous
KLOvas- Among our finds there are marble reliefs which were undoubtedly from metopes
of this temple. There are no less than twenty-nine separate fragments which show the
high work rising from the background of the metope while two metopes are
relief ;

nearly complete, and at least five larger fragments give us the essential portion of a fig-
ure on a metope. From these as well as from architectural evidence we learn that these
metopes were 1.029 m. high by 0.978 m. wide, and that the block from which they were
carved was about 0.34 m. thick. The unworked backing, or portion remaining for the
background, averages about 9 cm. The highest point of relief from the background is
26 cm. This corresponds with the height of the relief of the metopes of the Parthenon.
The extreme original thickness of the metopes would thus be about 34 cm., or about
one foot. Out of this background the relief rises very boldly, the heads and the limbs
being quite undercut and worked in the round. In falling these would break away from
the relief, while the thin portions of the background would also be fractured into many
'
I did not think that on so important and teclinical a the specimens it would be difficult if not inijjossible to

question as the identification of different marbles I could identify the marbles beyond all doubt,
trust my own judgment; and considering the scientific These doubts and misgivings of Professor Lepsius have
mineralogical work done by Professor Lepsius, of Darni- been fully justified, for portions of what can be proved
stadt, on Greek marbles, I felt that in this instance his to be the same metopes were assigned to different mar-

help ought to be invoked. Accordingly I sent liini speei- bles. I thus abide by the decision at which I arrived and
mens of marble chips taken from the fractured portions which supported by the judgment of Dr. li. S. Wash-
is

of our sculptures, which were necessarily very small. He ington, as well as our helpful friend Mr. Kalourgis, the
warned me in his letter that in view of the smallness of marble-worker at the Museum at Athens, in considering
aU these beads and fragments to be of Parian marble.
 THE METOPES 147

pieces. that so nuiny fraffinents of lejjs, feet, and arms, and undercut drapery,
Thus it is

together with several solid heads, have come down to us, and tluit the larger pieces of
metopes that hav(i heen preserved are thos(! in which the torso formed one thick mass
with the Imckground.

Contrary to what might he inferred from the description of Pausiinias (see helow) and
"
from analogous huildings, such as the " Theseum at Athens, the sculptured metopes of
the Ilenu'um were not confined to front and hack, —
j)erhaps overlapping for a few
intercolumniations on either side, — hut ran round the whole of the temple. This might
of have heen inferred from the comparatively great numher of lind)s, hands, and
itself

feet helonging to such metopes which have come down to us. A general view of fragments
on the floor of one gallery in the Athens museum, assigned to us for purposes of sort-
ing, will illustrate this (see Fig. 7.')).' This is furthernu>re confirmed hy the fact that a

Fiu. 75. — Makblk Fkagmknts, as akrangeu ton soktinc; on tuk flook ok a Room in tuk Ck.nthal
Museum, Athens.
The st.atues in the background do not belong to the Heraenni Marbles. The statue on the right is the
Diaduinenos from Delos.

numher of metope fragments were actually found, not at the front and hack of the temple,
hut at the north and south sides. Several of these (aniong them one complete and one

fragmentiiry metope head) were discovered on the spot on which they must have fallen
from the entablature which is on the south side of the temple. Crashing through the roof
of the South Stoa, these and other fragments from the falling temple above were deposited
on the floor of this Stoa, and were covered anew when the Stoa itself was destroyed.
There is a further question, whether all these fragments of relief sculpture, which

etc., p. 23) mentions 42 fragments of bands and arms, and 160 fragments of feet and
'
Rangabd (Amgrabungen,
1p!js foiniil during his tentative excavations.
148 MARBLE STATUARY FROM THE HERAEUM
undoubtedly are of the same period and workmanship and of the same building, all
belong to the metopes, and whether the temple may not have contained other ornamenta-
tions of relief-work, a continuous frieze, for instance, as is the case in the Parthenon ?
The varying dimensions of some of these fragments might encourage such an hypothesis ;

for there are several fragments, such as a beautiful front of the torso of a draped female

figure, several hands, arms, legs,

and feet, as well as two heads, which differ in dimensions
from the generality of these metope fragments. But this doubt is dispelled at once, since
these divergences are too few in number to justify the assumption of smaller relief deco-
ration, and since these differences in size are common
Greek metopes. The in ancient

most striking material for comparison with our works are the reliefs from the Parthenon.
We discover, for instance, that one of our larger relief heads with a helmet (Plate
XXXIII.) measures from top of completed helmet to chin about 191 cm., while the Ama-
zon head from the metopes (Plate XXXL, No. 3) measures only 181 cm. from the peak
of the helmet to the chin, but we find still greater divergences between different heads

among the Parthenon metopes. The ordinary Lapith head from the Parthenon measures
about 17 cm. in height, while a Centaur head from top to point of beard measures about
25 cm. Even in the Parthenon frieze there are differences more marked than in the
Heraeum fragments before us. So the head of Zeus from the eastern frieze measures about
20 cm. in height, while the head of the girl from the central slab immediately beside him
measures only 13 cm. Finally, if we take two metopes from the Parthenon (Michaelis, Dei'
Parthenon, pi. iv. 32 and pi. iv. 30), marked discrepancies in the dimensions of other
parts of the body occur. Thus the Lapith of No. 32 measures but 25 cm. round the
neck and 282 cm. round the calf, while No. 30 is as much as 35J round the neck and
3O2 round the calf. Therefore, the slight discrepancy in size between some of our relief
fragments in no way affects our conclusion, based upon style and workmanship, that
they all formed part of the metopes of the Second Temple.
How
the subjects mentioned by Pausanias are to be distributed among the metopes
can be discussed only after we have examined the question of the pedimental sculpture.

THE PEDIMENTS.
Pausanias describes the sculptured decoration of the Heraeum in the following terms :

" The
sculjjtures over the columns rejjresent, some the Birth of Zeus and the Battle of the
Giants, others the Trojan War and the Taking of Ilium."
^
Gods and
" "
Assuming for the moment that the phrase over the columns included pediments,
there is as yet no consensus of opinion as to how the scenes enumerated by Pausanias
were distributed. Now it appears evident, and is admitted by all authorities, that the
words of Pausanias imply a broad twofold division in the distribution of the subjects.'
He seems clearly to indicate that the Birth of Zeus and the Gigantomachia were on the
one side (probably the front) and the Trojan War and the Capture of Troy on the other
(the back). All authorities seem agreed that one scene certainly belonged to a pedi-
ment, probably the eastern or front pediment, —
namely the Birth of Zeus.^ It is in
* ^
Frazer's translation, Pausanias, I. p. 95 (II. 17). The It is liardly conceivable that this scene could have
Greek text runs : oiriaa 8e iirep rovs Kiovcij e(TTiv tipyairufva, been split up into single metope compositions, while its

Tik ixiv es T^v Aiij yiveaiv koX Beiiv Hal yiydvTwv fiixv" fX*'i ^i intrinsic character would for the principal pediment.
fit it

3J is Thv irphs Tpoi'ax Tr6\(fiot> Kol 'ixlov t^jv aKuaiv.

Exactly how the scene was represented it is difficult for
^
Cf. Waldstein, Excavations of the Am.
Sch. of Athens us to conceive, for we have no good guide in extant mon-
at the Heraion of Argos, 189'2, p. C; Frazer, op. cit. III. 182. uments, nor do the literary records instruct us upon the
 THE PEDIMENTS 149

the distribution of the three other Hcenes that we meet witli the greatest diverfjeiice of

opinion.
"
Cnrtius' and, followiufj hin>, Welcker assifjn the Captiu-e of Troy to the west<?rn
the Gif^antoniachia below the Birth of Zeus in
pediment, and then appropriately place
the metopes on the east side, leavinjj scenes from the Trojan War to adorn the metoi>eM
on the west, beneath the crowning event in the war, the Capture of Troy. Professor
''

Tarbell and Dr. Bates put forward the conjecture the ground for which I fail to—
Hee — that the Birth ofZens and the Battle of Greeks and Trojans occupied tin; ])edi-
nients, the Gigantomachia and lliupersis occupying the metopes. Mr. Frazer,* while
first suggestion
" inclines more towards the restoration of
considering my plausible,"
Curtius.
In the preliminary publications of our firat year's finds,"' I based my conjectural
distribution chiefly upon the comparison of this passage in Pausanias with his description
of the pediments of the Parthenon (1. 24, 25). The description would thus follow the
usual method of the periegete in enumerating the various objects and places as he suc-

cessively saw them in their place, and he would thus group together first those scenes
at the front and then those at the back. The further analogy of the Parthenon, in which
a scene from the Capture of Troy was represented in the metopes, and the analogy of a
scene of departure and preparation to be found in the eastern pediment of the temple
of Zeus at Olympia, led me to assign the Capture of Troy to the metopes and the depar-
ture of the heroes for Troy to the pediment. The appropriateness of representing the
moment of preparation for
their departure to Ilion is

manifest, as, according to

a late tradition,'' the He-
raeum was the spot chosen
for this puri)ose.
But the bearing of at
least one of our subsequent
finds, the significance of
which is made clearer by
the very comparison with
the metopes of the Parthe-
non, causes me to doubt
the claims of my own con-
and to revert to the
Fig, 7(). — Mauiilk Ima(;k, with Hand guaspino it at thk Back.
jecture
Pi'obubly from the Western Fedimeut uf the Second Temple.
hypothesis of Curtius, the
strength of which, on other grounds, I had always felt. The find in question is the
archaic torso of a ^oavov, round the back of which a life-sized arm is roughly sculptured
— evidently the arm of one clasping the sacred image as a protection against an advan-
cing foe (Fig. 76). This finds its complete parallel in the scene represented on a metope
of the Parthenon showing Helen clasping the Palladium, while Menelaus is advancing

artistic presentation of this obscure moment in Greek *

L. c.

' Excavations of the American School at the Heraion,

mythology.
'
Der Peloponnes, II. p. 570. p. 7.
* «
Andke Denkm(iler, I. pp. 191-194. Dictys Cretens. Bell. Troj. I. 16.
' American Journal of Archaeology, First Scries, VIII.
(1893), p. 24.
150 MARBLE STATUARY FROM THE HERAEUM
towards her, a scene so ingeniously reconstructed from the fragmentary metopes by
Michaelis in a comparison with a red-figured vase painting.
' But our f dai^oi^, with the
be assigned to the pediment and not to the metopes,
arm, must, from the dimensions,^
and I therefore conclude with Curtius and Welcker that the general representation of the
Troian War is to be assigned to the western pediment, and the separate scenes from the
Trojan War to the metopes below it.^

The disjointed scenes

from the Trojan War would thus reach their climax in the most

important and
final event in that great drama, the Capture of Troy in the pediment.
It is probable that the patron divinity
of the Atridae, Hera, was the central

figure in this jiediment, presiding over

the victory of the Greeks. The high-
est types of Hellenic life in divine
and heroic mythology would thus be
forcibly presented in the front and
back of this temple, as in the Parthe-

non a great and consistent idea com-

bines the sculptures of the front and
back. Weshould then have repre-
sented on the Heraeum :
— in the front,

the establishment of the rule of the

great Hellenic divinity, Zeus, whose

birth marks the downfall of Cronus
and the overthrow of the giants by
Zeus and the divinities over whom he
presides ; in the rear, the assertion of
the national unity and national supe-
Fig. 77. — Fi!agmk.nt ok a Metopk, with Pelta. riority of the Hellenic people over
whom these gods rule, in the over-
throw of the great eastern rival, and the victory of the heroic ancestors of the historical
Hellenes (headed by the Argolic Atridae). All these sculptures illustrate the great steps
in the establishment of Hellenic civilization, its social, conjugal, and domestic laws, over

which Zeus and Hera presided. The front refers to Zeus, as the rear shows the sway of
Hera, in truly typical scenes from Greek mythology.
In the preliminary publication I had also suggested that Pausanias may have described
merely the metopes in front and rear, and that
—
as we should expect from his cursory

description of the Heraeum — he had omitted all mention of the scenes depicted in the
metopes of the side. Even after our first year's excavation it appeared to me probable
that an Amazonomachia was represented in the metopes of at least one of the sides. This

hypothesis has since received confirmation from our discoveries. Among our marbles
there are a head (Plate XXXI., No. 3) and several torsi (Plate XXXV.) which are

distinctly of the type of Amazons another fragment of relief appears to me a pelta

;

(Fig. 77), the shield characteristic of Amazons.

'
Der Parthenon, p. 139. Thickest part of arm on back 8.2
^
The dimensions of this fragment are :
— Length of arm from wrist to elbow .... 22.

Extreme height .34.

» I bow to the force of Mr. Frazer's criticism {I. c.) of
(in centimetres)
"
breadth 27. ray rendering of the ri Se es rhv irphs Tpoiav Tt6K(nov as
implying the preparation for the departure.
^*
thickness 15.
From breast to breast 9.5
 THE PEDIMENTS AND METOPES 161

Moreover it is hardly conceivable that two definite battle-BceneH could have been con-
tinued tlirouf^hout sixty-six metopes. Even on the sides of the Parthenon the series of
Ceiitauroinacliia-nietopes was interrupted and varied by interpohited subjects. Thus the
Aniazonomachia was probably introduced on one or both of the lonjf sides of the
Heraeiim. If on one only, the other side may have been decorated with the Centauroma-
chia, thoupfh no traces of this subject have come down to us among our fragments.

According to the evidence at our command, both literary and monumenUil, we should
assign the following subjects to the dill'erent parts of sculptured ornamentation on the
Heraeum :
—
The eastern pediment contjiined the Birth of Zeus — perhaps with Cronus and Rhea,
whose rule is about to cease at that moment, in the centre. The western pediment had
the Capture of Troy, with perhaps Hera, or Zeus and Hera, presiding over this first

victory of the Hellenic race under their divine sway. The eastern metopes contjiined
scenes from the Gigantonuichia, as the western had representations from the Trojan War;
and these scenes may have overlapped from the east and west front to either side on north
and south. But the bulk of the metopes on these sides were decorated with the Amazono-
machia and, })ossibly, the Centauromachia or some similar mythological scene. These
(with the exception of the Birth of Zeus, which ap])ears to have been an individual and

— Cornkr of the Room in the Central Museum, Athens, containing Fragments ok

Fig. 78.
Drapery from Figures in the Round, probably from the Pediments of the Heraeum.

original idea of the great Argive artist) are subjects Avith which Ave are familiar in the
fifth-century buildings (the Parthenon, the temple of Athena at Aegina, the temple at
Sunium, the temple of Apollo at Bassae, the temple of Zeus at Agrigentum, etc.) and
on numerous works of minor art in all periods. No doubt we must look back^vards to
the great mural paintings by
Polygnotus for the establishment of these scenes in art,
and not to the works of sculptors, for he appears to have furnished the sculptors with
the dramatic compositions that deal Avith these
subjects.
We have hitherto proceeded on the assumption that the Heraeum was decorated with
pedimental statuary as well as with metopes. Before our excavations this assumption
was founded on insufficient evidence ; for the phrase of Pausanias, imp tov<; KCoi/a<;, is
 152 MARBLE STATUARY FROM THE HERAEUM
so singular when applied to pediments that, tiiken by itself, it would lead us to infer that
there were only metopes, for had he meant to include pediments he would, following
his usage, have added some such phrase as iv tois Ka\ovfx.€voi<i deroi?. Even quite
recently, since I published the results of our first year's work in 1892, Mr. Stuart
' " "
Jones maintiiins that the phrase used by Pausanias unmistakably refers to metopes
and not to pediments. But the excavations show beyond all doubt that there were sculj)-
tures in the pediments. Among our finds are many fragments (Fig. 78), of the same
style and period,
that formed part of statues in the round and not of reliefs, which could
not all have belonged to single statues placed separately on their pedestals in monu-
mental repose. The action of the bodies as indicated in the numerous fragments, the
fluttering of drapery of figures moving rapidly forward or through the
could not, air,

esijecially in this period, have come from single statues placed in the open air or within

buildings. Even if there had been one or two such exceptional statues, there could not
have been so large a number as is
suggested by a mere survey of such fragments massed
together, for purposes of sorting, in a corner of our room in the Museum of Athens.
It might perhaps be held that some of these fragments of drapery, drawn
tightly
round the limbs or fluttering freely,
belonged to Nike-like figures used as
Acroteria or corner decorations, as at

Epidaurus. But these fragments point

to statues in life-size, which Acroteria
would not have been. Furthermore,
even the extant fragments furnish too
large a number of such figures for
Acroteria. Finally, several of these
show that the statues to which
distinctly
they belonged were meant to be seen
from a side view and not from all sides,
and this treatment clearly indicates
pedimental statuary.
Further, the fragment representing
the lower portion of a leg resting upon
a cushion (Fig. 79) can hardly be ex-

plained unless as a part of a reclining

— Fkagment figure at the angle of one of the ])edi-
FiG. 79. of a Leg resting upon a Cushion, /? i i i p
PROBABLY FROM A Pediment OF THE Hebaeum. ^^uts, as wB fiud that thc figures at
the angles of the western pediment of
the temple of Zeus at Olympia were resting their arms on cushions.^

Finally, this is confirmed by the backs of several extant fragments. First, the beautiful
torso of a draped female figure found by Rangabe (Plate XXXVII.) shows, with the
exquisite finish of the front, a rude treatment of the back, which could be found only in
a pedimental figure. The last and most convincing evidence is furnished by a small
*
Anc. Writers on Gr. Sculpt., p. 138 :
" Waldstein Extreme length from end of drapery to button

appears to take Pausanias's words to be a description of of cushion (in centimetres) 36.

pediment sculptures. This would be to tV to?s atToh in Extreme breadth along leg 32.

the language of Pausanias; while tci iirfp tovs Kiovas nn-

Thickness 24.

mistakably refers to metopes." Length of leg from ends of fractures . ... 32.
From below knee to fracture at ankle . . . 23.
2
The dimensions are:—
Thickness of calf 9.3
 PEDIMENTAL STATUARY 168

which the back,

fragment of a large figure (Fig. 80), a piece of drapery and Hhoiilder, of
treated in the sjinie manner as the female torso, has a large scpiare hole for a dowel,

which, as we know from the Parthenon, was the regular means of fixing the pedimental
statues to the of the pediment.'
tympanum
We shall be less astonished to find divergences of dimension among the pediment;il

figures than in the case of the fragments from the metopes. We find tliese divergences

Fig. 80. — Fuaomknt of a Pkdimental Fiourk from thk Hkrakum.

The back view shows the dowel-hole.

pedimental sculpture in the round, such as the porox sculptures

in the earliest stages of
from the Acropolis," the figures found at Delos by the French,^ the pediments from
Aegina in which the statues of the eastern pediment are on a distinctly larger .scale than
those of the western,^ the central figures of the Olympia pediments,'^ which are much

larger than those in the angles. In later times, in the Parthenon, we find that the
torso of Poseidon and that of Athene are on a much larger scale than are those further
removed The same difference is found in the statues ascribed to the
fr(nn the centre.

Epidaurian temple of Asclepius, and many others.

While, therefore, the pedimental sculpture of the Heraeum was in scale about life-size,
some fragments, such as the leg on the cushion, which probably was placed at the extreme
angle of the pediment, as well as several nude legs and feet of warriors (see Fig. 81), are
slightly below life-size and differ slightly among themselves.
There are also slight divergences of workmanship and style, cerfciinly not greater
—
than are to be found among the Parthenon marbles, if as great, yet all insignificant
—
in comparison with the technical resemblances.

THE GENERAL STYLE OF THE HERAEUM MARBLES.

The
general workmanship, the actual method of carving the marble, and the peculiar
of tools are markedly the same, not
use only among the fragments coming from the
'
The dimensions of this fragment of shoulder and
^
Collignon, op. cit.
pp. 205-215.
front of drapery are :
— ^
£„;;g, ^g q^^ Hellin. III. (1879), pp. 515 ff. (Ho-
Extreine height of fragment (in centimetres) . 27. molle).
breadth 37. «
Collignon, pp. 286-.'«)0.
Thickness 21. 6 See Olympia, III., Sculptnren, pp. 44 «f.
The dowel-liolr is (in nini.) in heiglit .... 5
in widtli .... 4
in depth .... 7
154 MARBLE STATUARY FROM THE HERAEUM
metopes, but also in those which we assign to the pediments.
In contradistinction to
the Parthenon marbles (where even the parts that were not visible to the spectator, the

backs of the pedimental figures, received a comparatively high finish), these works are
roughly blocked out on the back and on the inner side of the figures that are freely
undercut from the background of the metopes.' The treatment of the back of the
large pedimental torso (Plate XXXVII.)
illustrates this fully. This rough working of
the invisible portions stands in the strongest contrast to the high and dehcate finish of
tlienude and the drapery where they were visible.
The blocking out and the working away of superfluous marble (the rough surface thus
remaining invisible, or being carefully worked over in the finish when visible) was carried
out, moreover, in a peculiar manner, the traces of which can still be clearly recognized.
This peculiar method con-
sists in the free use that is

made of the drill. The

cU'ill was of course fre-

quently resorted to, to bore

holes for the fixing of
bronze ornaments or ac-
cessories to the sfcitues, as
is evident in the earhole
of the Hera head
large
(Frontispiece and Plate
XXXVI.), at the side of
the helmet (Plate XXXT.,

4), at the side of the large

torso from the pediments
(Plate XXXVII.), or the
warrior head from the me-

topes (Plate XXX.) as ;

well as in the hands hold-

ing swords and spears

(Fig. 82). Its use is not
luicommon for this pur-
pose, for we find it as

early as in the figures from

the pediment of the temple
of Athena at Aegina. But
a more peculiar use of the
drillfor blocking out or

undercutting the marble is

manifest in these Argive

Fig. 81.
-
Legs and othkr Fragments, probably from the sculptures, and this method
Pediments of the Heraeum. I have not met before.
When the sculptor had
to cut away the marble from the back or the side of a head, as it rose freely from the
• Plate XXX., and the backs or sides of heads nearest the background in the metopes, Platks XXXI., XXXII.,
XXXIII.
 GENERAL STYLE OF THE IIERAEUM MARBLES 166

background in the high reHef of the metopes, lie saved liiniself troiililc by using the
drill, which he ran through tiic portion
of niarhh; between the head and the background,
which was to be worked away in order that the head should stand out freely. He thus
"
weakened the " isthmus
of marble, so that it did
not require violent chop-
ping with mallet and chisel
to cut away the solid mar-
ble, for this might have
fractured the whole head.
Thus in the female head

(Plate XXXII., 1 and 2),

at the unfinished side neai--
est the background, we
see two broad runs or
grooves which Avere forced
"
through the marble isth-
"
mus holding the head to
the background. It was
thus made easy for the

sculptor to work away the

marble from the back of
the head without fractures.
This same method, with
the same use of the drill,
we find applied, not only to
other heads from the me-

topes, such as the back of

the head in Plate XXXI..
1 and 2, but also in other
portions of figures, even in
those from the pediments.
So, for instance, the frac-
tured lower portion of a
Fig. 82. • •
Fragments from the Metopes Hands that held
:

draped figure from the ped- Swords and Spears, and Feet.
iments (Plate XXXVIII.)
clearly shows beneath the drapery that has been broken away, behind the foot and
between it and the plinth upon which the figure stood, the hollowing out and under-
cutting of a triangular space by means of a series of such drill holes.
Now in later times, especially in the Hellenistic and Graeco-Roman periods, the drill
was constantly used by scidptors (see above, p. 143). But in those works this mechanical
appliance was used on the visible finished surface, in order to economize the artistic labor
of the scidptor in giving grooves to the drapery and similar phases of actual modeling.
The result is an inferior artistic effect, in which the mechanical working obtrudes itself to
the detriment of the illusion which careful modeling and hand finish (such as we find in
our Argive marbles) produced upon the specfcitor. In our marbles the drill is never used
to work the finished fold groove, but has only been applied for the rough blocking out
156 MARBLE STATUARY FROM THE HERAEUM
and working away of superfluous material. We detect its use only in those portions
which are not meant to be seen.
In all visible portions we must be struck by the complete naturalness and truth in the
rendering of pose and movement, and by the exquisite finish of the surface. In this the
mechanical working of the material never obtrudes itself, and each minutest part is treated
with a care and finish unequaled or, at all events, unsurpassed by any extant works.
And this minute becomes the more remarkable when we remember that the figures
finish
in the metopes were only half life-size, and, placed as they were about thirty-eight feet
from the ground, were hardly visible to the spectator in the details of their elaboration.
The freedom, naturalness, and boldness of pose and movement in all these figures is
not only evident in a few rather complete torsi that have come down to us, such as the two
metopes of Plates XXX.
and XXXIV., the draped
torsi from the pediments
of Plate XXXVIIL, but
in similar fragments of
bodies (Fig. 83), as well as
in the legs, hands, and
feet of Fig. 82, all of which
enable us to reconstruct in
our minds the flowing com-
position of metopes and
pediments. The attitudes
and movements of these
figures are, on the one
hand, as far removed from
the constraint of the ar-
chaic period or the severe
art of about the niidcUe of
the fifth century as they

are, on the other hand,

from the violent contor-
tions of the Hellenistic pe-

riod, or even the more

passionate movement which

began with Scopas.
As regards our appreci-
ation of the treatment of
the nude figure, we can
(jnly fall back upon the

^ Fragmknts beautifully preserved tor-

Fig. 83. from the Metopes, illustrating chiefly the
SHARP YET delicate CUTTING OF THE FOLDS IN DRAPERY.
so of Plate XXXIV., —
which, however, is enough
in itself, — and
the numerous smaller fragments of bodies, legs, hands, and feet. The
treatment of the nude female figure we can divine only through the treatment of those

portions which are covered with the thin undergarment, and this leads us to form the
very highest estimate in this particular. The absence of the nude female figure among so
 GENERAL STYLE OF TIIK IlERAEUM MARBLES 157

great a imiiilicr of fiagiiu'iits pcrliaps jiiHtificH us in concluding tliat the female figure was
not lepiesented in its nude form; and tliis would struiigtlien our general conclusion that
these works are not to he placed in the fourth century u. c, hut in the fifth. Judging
from the extant remains of draped female figures, however, we may venture to say tiuit at
least as regards the supreme finish of modeling, no works of architectunil sculpture mani-
fest the same perfection. It is not too much to say that not one of the Tjapithae from the
Partiienon metopes shows the same delicacy of modeling and finished surface work as does
the torso of the youthful nude warrior from our metope. This is evident if we examine

every portion of the body and for the supreme finish of detail, I would draw special
;

attention to the hand ])ressed against the armpit, and to the peculiar and uni(|ue trcjit-
ment of the inguinal region, whicii is so striking that anatomists have assured me it must
have been copied from an individual model showing this abnormal idiosyncnisy.'
In spite of this minute finish it can never be siiid that the figures, taken :is a whole,

present that exaggeration and obtrusion of the anatomical study of muscles or, on the
other hand, that extreme softness and sensuousness {morbldezzn) in the treatment of the
nude which characterizes the art of a later period. There is in them still a certain hardi-
hood that shows them to be the offshoot of a Peloponnesian feeling, the precurs<jr8 of
which we might find in the Aeginefam marbles.
In the treatment of the drapery, the fragments, whether in relief or in the round,
all manifest the same character. They are bold and free and delicate without conven-
tionalism or restraint, and yet without florid exaggeration or want of conciseness. The
larger folds cover the limbs in broad masses, freely undercut and sharp in their edges,
resembling in this respect the pedimental drapery of the Parthenon. Yet if we
except the Reclining Fate (or Thalassa, as I should call her) from the eastern pediment
of the Parthenon, the elaboration or finish of the drapery in the majority of our figures
and fragments goes a step further and finds its nearest parallel in some of the Nikes from
the balustrade of the temple of Nike-Apteros. This is especially the case with the system
of small folds encircling or stiirting away from the breasts of female figures. These
folds are worked in delicate relief from the smooth surfaces where the thin drapery is

stretched over the rounded forms ; yet in spite of the delicacy of these reliefs, they never
lose their sharpness of edge, as, for instance, is the case with the Olympian Nike by
Paeonius.
No who gives some time to the examination of the numerous fragments of
student

drapery from these marbles can fail to receive the impression that they are all of the
same workmanship and style, whether they belong to figures in relief or in the round.
If now we turn to the heads, we shall find, talking them as a whole, that, compared
with the treatment of the bodies, nude and draped, they are comparatively severer. To
begin with, not one of them can be said to reflect in its expression the strong movement
and action whicli are manifest in the treatment of the extant bodies and as the scenes we
know have been depicted would lead us to expect. The female head of Plate XXXII.,
to

3, was evidently pulled to the side with violence, the hair on the top of the head clutched
by a warrior; and yet the expression of emotion was limited to the attitude of the head and
a very delicate and slight indication in the upward and sideward turn of the eye, perhaps
also in the modeling between the nostril and the angle of the mouth. The graceful head
of Plate XXXIL, 4, has the lips well parted, with a clear indication of the teeth, yet
'
Further account will be given of this when dealing with this metope separately.
168 MARBLE STATUARY FROM THE HERAEUM
it upon any definite shade of emotion in it.* The same applies to the
would be hard to fix

head of the warrior placed upon the torso of Plate XXX. The turn of the eyes with
their downward gaze in the head of the Amazon (Plate XXXI., 3) would not help us
far in appreciating an expression of pathos, if it were not for the actual downward and
sideward droop of the head ;
for in the face itself there is but slight if
any indication
of emotion.
All this tells us simply that our sculptor still
clung to the severer traditions of art
maintained in the fifth century b. c, in which emotion was not yet freely expressed in
the heads of Hellenic type, though the bodies rendered with perfect freedom every phase
of life and action. To our knowledge the step towards more adequate expression of
emotion in the heads was not made before the time of Scopas or towards the middle of
the fourth century B. c.
If we compare these heads with each other we shall find, looking at them superficially,
that they present a certain variety of type and that there are certain differences of
detailed treatment. As regards the variety of type, we shall find that this may corre-
spond to the variety of subject. For among the nine heads or fragments of heads
three are heads of Greek youths, two of which have helmets (Plates ; XXXI., 1, XXX.
2, 4), and these are distinctly of the same type, while the others are female heads, one
of an Amazon, another probably of a helmeted goddess (Plates XXXI. 3 ; XXXII.,
XXXIII., 1, 2), another of a young girl, two others of maturer young women, and the
last of a girl whose hair is being clutched. The difference is thus seen to be due to the
difference of subject and action.
The same applies to the differences of detailed treatment a head with a downward :

look is different in the treatment of the eyes from one with a straight or upward

glance. So also as regards the position of the head as it follows the movement of the
torso. Moreover, it must be remembered that all these heads, with one exception, were
worked in relief, and were thus meant to be seen only from one point, be it in profile,
full face, or three-quarter view ; and that thus, among the comparatively small number

of such heads (we roughly compute that there must have been in pediments and metopes
at least 190 heads) which have come down to us, we are fortunate in having so large
a number as three belonging to the same category.
thus a very slight divergence in the treatment of the eyes of one or two of
There is

these heads, and there is some difference and uncertainty in the treatment of the hair.
If the Parthenon metopes and frieze (unfortunately we have no head which
we compare
we can assign to the pediments beyond all doubt) as regards the treatment of hair, we
shall find fully as great a variety, —
from a cap-like treatment to the finished modeling
of locks and strands ; so, also, in the pediments and metopes from the temple of Zeus
at Olympia, even with regard to the heads coming from the same pediment. But it
appears to me that in our marbles, and perhaps in those instances I have just quoted as
well, the sculptor who has evolved a fixed style for the rendering of hair in monumental I
sculpture, in bronze or gold and ivory, may be still hesitating and searching for the
proper manipulation in the rendering of such texture when he comes to marble sculpture
which "he uses in the decoration of great edifices. We must not forget that so far as the

evidence, both literary and monumental, now at our disposal goes, we have no proof of
the perfect working of marble in the minute indication of texture and all its inherent
artistic qualities before the advent of Scopas and Praxiteles.
'
The earliest instance of showing the teeth known to the Third Temple, and in the fallen hero from the east-
me is in the fallen giant from the metope of Seliuus from em pediment of the temple of Athena at Aegina.
 GENERAL STYLE OF THE HERAEUM MARBLES 159

In spite of this sli<;lit (liver<>eii(!t', I confidently niaint<iin that no one who is thor-

ou<>hly tiuniliar with a hirjije series of heads in the different periods of Greek art, and
has carefully observed and studied these sculptures from the Heraeuui tojjether, can fail
to see that they definitely belong to the same school, and that they have in common
marked characteristics which not only point to a common origin, but clearly distinguish
them from tin; heads of other schools.'
To
begin with, they all have the sjime structural frame, the same broad outline, the
same formation of the skull. It can best be described as stjuare and massive ; and this
applies to the profile as well as the full face. It is neither strongly oblong nor pear-

shaped with a point at the chin on a triangular system, nor oval, nor round and ball-
like.^ The hair is in its main arrangement close fitting, not free and rich in its
treatment as it rises from the head ;
but it seems almost slavishly to follow in its outline
the main square shape of the skull. And this is so even in the case of the more profuse
hair of the female heads. With the exception of the female head whose hair is grasped
on the top, the hair, generally parted in the middle, is arranged in the «ime system of
waves on either side of the central parting and covers the upper part of the ear. The
forehead is thus left in a comparatively smooth arch-like curve. The brows are cut in
the same simple arch with the same angle to the nose both lids of the eyes are then cut ;

in the same firm line with the same indication of the lacrimal gland. The nose is com-
paratively broad and thick, with a strong bridge slightly thickened in the middle and a
broad rounded tip. The nostrils, too, though they do not project far in comparison to
the breadth of the tip of the nose, are thick and well curved. The upper lip is well
arched and clearly defined, in most cases slightly opened, giving something of a pouting
expression to the mouth. Mr. Edward Robinson of the Boston Museum of Fine Arts
has drawn my attention to a marked peculiarity in the treatment of the ujjper lip, which
he has noticed in the heads hitherto ascribed to Polycleitus, and which is to be found in
all these heads from the Heraeura. It consists in an upturning and
widening out of the
curves at either side of the central point, which accentuates the peculiar pouting expres-
sion. This expression is still more heightened by the hollow between the upper lip and
the nose and the marked protrusion of the lower lip, with the short, deep hollow between
itand the chin. There is thus a central mass of the lower'lip, well defined in all these
heads, which protrudes in its rounded curve, and this central protrusion is clearly divided
from either side of the lower lip. From the curve under the lower lip the strong,
rounded, but not over-long chin projects almost within a line of the foremost point of
the lower lip. The cheeks present a broad, well-rounded surface, not approaching chubbi-
ness, but, on the other hand, far from thin or tapering towards the chin. In the profile
view the middle of the frontal bone above the nose, and the outer tip of the upper lip
are about on the same line. The forehead, rising upward, inclines slightly inward, as,
in a downward
direction, the lower lip and chin slant inward. From this most promi-
nent point of the frontal bone the nose outwards All these peculiar-
projects gradually.
ities these heads have in common.

'
Since tliis was written I have endeavored to define '
See the discussion on this point in my previous publi-
the style of these heads in an attempt to identify the cation of one of these lieads. A mfrican Journal
metope
Argive Hera with a liead in the British Museum.— of Archaeologi/, IX., lS9o, y>. 3M (Papers of the American
Journal of Hellenic Studies, XXXI. (1901), pp. 30 ff. School at Athens, VI. p. 252).
160 MARBLE STATUARY FROM THE HERAEUM

THE PERIOD AND SCHOOL OF THE HERAEUM MARBLES.

We must now solve the question, To what period and to what school may we assign
these sculptures?
The manifested in these works, as well as the details of
"-eneral characteristics of art
towards the fifth century b. c. But if we compare these
style and workmanship, point
the metopes from the Parthenon, we shall at once
metopes from the Heraeum with
assign to the former a later date than to the latter. They undoubtedly mark a greater
elaboration, more detailed modeling, more accentuated finish in the nude and in the

drapery than the most advanced of

the Parthenon marbles. As an outside limit in the
other direction, I should put the fragments from the Tegean temple and of the Sco-
manifest a later development in the rendering of indi-
pasian School, which certainly
In their manifest outside
viduality and of emotion
in the treatment of the heads.

limits they must thus have been produced between the years b. c. 438 and 360.
we may compare them with the Phigalian marbles from the temple of Apollo
Positively
at Bassae. But these are coarser in workmanship and in sentiment. The heads are
rounder, more bullet-shaped, the movement more exaggerated, esjiecially in the restlessly
fluttering drapery, in the stretched folds of drapery
drawn into parallel lines by the knees
bent apart —
a feature characteristic of these sculptures. The Heraeum marbles have
the greatest analogy among exfcmt works, as regards the treatment of the body and of

drapery, with the beautiful reliefs from the Balustrade of the temple of Nike Apteros at
Athens, and with the reliefs and pedimental figures from the temple of Asclepius at
Epidauriis. Yet a minute examination will show that there is greater elaborateness and
sensuousness, as well as complexity, in the treatment of drapery in the Athenian rehefs
from the Balustrade, which appear to me distinctly less severe and, in so far, later in
character. The Epidaurian sculpture, again, has a very close affinity in style ; but
especially when we take the Acroteria (Nereids
and Flying Victories), it shows greater
softness in the indication of the female figure and greater complexity and heaviness in the
treatment of drapery than we find in our works, which are in so far of an earUer period,
i. e. earlier The difference between the sculptures from these two
than about 380 B. c.

Argolic sites corresjjonds very much to the difference which I have noted with regard
^

to the si7na from the Heraeum (see above, p. 124) and that from the Tholos at Ejji-
daurus. A careful comparative examination of the sinias of various Greek temples will
show that the Heraeum sima is later than that of the Parthenon, and that of the
temple
of Apollo at Bassae while it is distinctly earlier than those of the Epidaurian building,
;

the Mausoleum of Halicarnassus, the second temple of the Ephesian Artemis, and the

temple at Priene. The closest approximation to it is found in the ornamentation of

the Erechtheum of Athens, but this shows signs of being a slightly later development
of the pattern which is given on the sima of the Heraeum.^

*
See my Excavations, etc., pp. 15 and 16. monuments and critical renderings of texts combined. I
^ It would be impossible cannot
to exaggerate the importance in this instance develop the fnll import of such a
of a careful comparative study of such architectural details, comparison in all its details; but the mere outline of the
which I feel confident will bear the most fruitful results, comparison I made between thesecarvings in the buildings
when viewed whole history of Greek art.
in the light of the referred to in the text will illustrate my meaning. Coni-
In the present instance, a careful tabulation, followed by a pared with our sima, that of the Parthenon is simpler in
conscientious analysis of the honeysuckle pattern as given design and line, while the lions' heads are less conven-
on simas and cornices, in connection with the treatment of tional. I do not mean by this that they liave any of the
the lion's head serving as water-spout, will furnish a safer realism which some belonging to later buildings (which
chronological foothold than many elaborate treatises of often combine these elements of realism with more de-
 PERIOD AND SCHOOL OF HERAEUM MARBLES IGl

As we more clearly the further we proceed, there is every reason to accept

shall see
a eerfciiii relationship between the Argive Ileraeiuii and the P]pidanrian works of art;

only this relationsliip would mean that the Argive works influenced the construction of
those at Epidaurus.' The younger Polycleitus, grandson of the great sculptor, was com-
missioned to produce the beautiful Tholos at Epidaurus, and from the proximity of tiie
two places we might well expect an Argive influence there."
As
the architectural decorations have the clearest affinity with the Erechtheum of

Athens, so the head of llera lias some points in conmion with the heads of the Caryatids
from that temple. But as we shall see later, this resemblance, as far as it goes, makes it
more likely that the type of head in the Caryatids was influenced by Argive art than
that the reverse current of influence was in force in that period.'
All this internal evidence of the monuments themselves naturally lesids us to fix the
date of these sculptures, judging them merely from their style, in the second half of
the fifth century n. c, later than the Parthenon ami slightly earlier than the Erechtheum.
And when, further, we have the definite sbitement that the temple was burned down in
42'J 11. c, and bear in mind that it must have been
are justified in rebuilt at once, we
assigning to these sculptures the date determined for the erection of the temple, that is
420 B. c. This date, moreover, is the one assigned by Pliny (N. II. XXXIV. 49) to
Polycleitus, and has universally been admitted to refer to his making the stjitue of
Hera for our temple. When, further, we remember that, at all events, the metopes had,
for reasons of construction, to be put in their place before the building was completed,
there can hardly be any further doubt respecting the date of these sculptures, a degree
of certiiinty which is hardly equaled with regard to any other monuments that have
come down to us from Ancient Hellas.*

veloped conventionalization in oilier features) have. The stem of the scroll pattern ;
the whole is later and more
sima of the Phigalian temple is similar in arrangement conventional. The similarity is still more striking if we
to ours, but is on the whole harder and less developed. can assign the fragment with the bird to this building.
On the other hand, as I pointed out in the first publica- But one thing seems to me clear that the Erechtheum
:

tion in 1892, the Kpidaurian siina is throughout more ornament and that from the sima of the Heraeum are
" In the Man- most closely related, and that of the two the Krechtheum
barocco," a distinctly later development.
soleum of Halicarnassus, the lotos and honeysuckles is slightly later and marks one step further in the natural

alternating have a more conventional character, with a history of ornament.

'
touch of Orientalism, while the lions' heads with the According to the inscription published by Cavvadias
deeply sunk eyes are at once more realistic and yet have (Fouilles d'iSpidaure, I. p. 23), and Foucart {Bull, de
a more conventionalized pattern to the " whiskers." The Corresp. Hellen. XIV. [1890], pp. .')89-594), the mmlcis for
lions' heads in the temple of Athene Polias at Priene are the pediments were furnished by the artist Timotheus for

similar, but are generally coarsened in workmanship. Still the sum of 900 drachmae, inferior artists being engaged
further conventionalization is to be noted in the Nereid under him. This famous artist Timotheus we can follow
Monument from Xanthus, in which the lines about the in his successful career for many years in the fourth cen-
jaw, cover the whole nose and cheeks, and have
etc., tury n. c. We know that he collaborated with
Scopas,
become a mere decorative pattern. Perhaps earlier than Bryaxis, and Leochares at the decoration of the Mau-
heads from the Ephesian temple of Arte-
these, the lions' soleum of Halicarnassus, but there is nothing to show to
mis confine these lines to a symmetrical arrangement up what school he belonged, whether Attic or Argive.
the nose the eyeball is sunk in a deep-cut circular chan-
;
^
We cannot even say that Thrasymedes, who made
nel surrounding it, the two ridges on the forehead have be- the gold and ivory statue of Asclcpius in the Temple at
come conventional channels. So, too, the beautiful scroll Epidaurus, belonged to the Attic school. His former asso-
pattern on the sima is an advanced elaboration of that on elation with Phidias as his pupil rests
merely upon the
ours with greater conventionalization. Each one of the mistaken late statement of Atheuagoras (177 A. D.) in
volutesis elaborately grooved (where it is simple in
ours) his Leg. pro Christ. 14, p. CI.
with foliage overlapping —
blossom and twig are here '
See below, p. 167.
confused and mingled with each other, as well as in the *
It might lie said that the metopes were let in with
neck of columns. On
the other hand, the patterns round rough marble projections to be worked in relief in situ at
the door and console of the Erechtheum are nearest to a later period, —
tJicre is absolutely no reason in favor of
our own, only there is additional grooving in the twirling this very unlikely proceeding.
1G2 MARBLE STATUARY FROM THE HERAEUM

POLYCLEITUS AND THE HERAEUM MARBLES.

The date of these works thus being fixed, the next question is that of the school to
which we must ascribe them. We
shall see more clearly, the further we proceed, that

there is every reason, internal and circumsfcintial, for assigning them to the Polycleitan

school, and no valid reason against this.

In the first place, we must naturally assign to the leading sculptor of the place, who is

charged with the creation of the great temple statue, the superintendence, if not the

designing and elaboration, of the sculptured ornamentation of this very temple. The
probabilities in favor of these temple ornamentations being representative of the art of
that the Parthenon marbles
Polycleitus are as great as, if not greater than, the probability
are representative of the art of Phidias. For while we know that Phidias had a poAverful
opposition against him in the Athenian state which tended to limit or to interrupt or even
to stop completely his work at Athens, we know of no such disturbing elements which cur-
tailed and limited tlie dominating influence of the leading Argive artist in his home. If
the local Argive artists were of inferior talent, or even second to some other leading artist
in Hellas, we could understand why part of the great Avork should be assigned to a

foreigner. But we find that at the time of the construction of the

Heraeum, Polycleitus
was facile princeps, that he stood unrivaled among the artists of the whole of Greece,
and that he was at the head of a most flourishing school of sculpture, which for genera-
tions after, when this school passed on to Sicyon, made its influence felt upon all suc-

ceeding artists, so that even a Lysippus in the following century acknowledges this direct
influence. When we consider these general facts, there is at least no a priori reason
for assuming the advent of foreign sculptors to decorate the temple for which Polycleitus
fashioned his famous statue of Hera.
I have just emphasized the unique position held by Polycleitus after the death of
Phidias. But as a matter
of fact, the prominent position of the Argive sculptor did not

depend merely upon the absence of his great Athenian rival, the greatest of ancient

sculptors. For subsequent generations, who had the works of all the great masters before
them, assigned to Polycleitus a place which (though in our eyes it does not detract from
the supreme genius of Phidias) secures for him the same general plane of excellence from
which Phidias rose above his younger contemporary. We
may ignore for the moment
the passages containing the exalted praise of his great statue of Hera, as well as those

concerning his peculiar artistic qualities, with which we shall deal later, and we still

find that the representative judges of the ancient world couple his name with that of
Phidias when they mention the greatest artists of antiquity ; just as in modern music —
and the analogy is tempting in many other respects is — Mozart
coupled with Beethoven.
Xenophon,^ in speaking of the greatest artists, selects Homer to represent the epos,

Melanippides the dithyramb, Sophocles tragedy, Zeuxis painting, and Polycleitus sculp-
ture. Aristotle
^
and Dionysius of Halicarnassus * single out Phidias and Polycleitus,
the latter placing Polycleitus first. Cicero chooses him by preference to illustrate the
and of "
highest sculpture, says his works,* They are moi-e beautiful and, in fact, quite
preferred." Quintilian, Statins, Juvenal, Lucian, and Aelian all adopt the same tone.
Finally Pliny,'' speaking of bronze work, says that Polycleitus developed this art to the
highest point, and carried to perfection what Phidias had opened out.
• •*
Memorabilia, I. 4. 3. Brut. 18. 70.
2
Eth. Nicom. VI. 7. » N. H. XXXIV. 56.
^
De Dinarcho, 7, and De Isocrate, 13, j).
541.
 POLYCLEITUS AND THE HERAEUM MARBLES 103

who kept up the tradition of the Polycleitan school,

Is it at all likely that the Arfjives
of which they must have been proud, and allowed the j^randson of Polycleitus, Naucydes,
to make Hebe to stand besid«; Hera, is it likely, with this giant artist in
the statue of
his own sons and grandsons) spreading
their midst, with a tin-iving school (in which were
its ramifications to other great art centres in Greece, that they would have turned to

other parts, even to Athens, for sculptors to decorate their great temple ? And at what
period would they be doing this ?
This was a time when Phidias was dead, and with him Pericles, and a strong wave of
Attic opposition was likely to counteract the vitjility of the school of Phidijvs ; when the

Peloponnesian War
was exhausting the wealth and checking the artistic advance of that
centre of Greek taste when, as a matter of fact, so far as undoubted evidence is con-
;

cerned, we have a lacuna as regards great sculpture in Attica. At this very time the
genius of Polycleitus and the vitality of his school reach their highest point. As Furt-
" The Argos marked no
'

wiingler puts it : rise of Polycleitus in less an epoch than that

of Phidias in Athens the Doryphorus is as decided an advance on its predecessor as
;

the Lemnia and the Parthenos on theirs."

Is it not more likely even that Argive artists of the Polycleittm school would be called

to Athens than that Argives would call in inferior Attic artists, the two states being
allies at the time ? Are we not even more justified in expecting to find at this period
the artistic influence of Argive sculpture at Athens than post-Phidian influence at Argos,^

especially when we remember that such influence had become traditional from the time
of Ageladas, that at an earlier period Polycleitus had vanquished Phidias with his statue
of an Amazon, and that, in the Attic tiilk of even the period when Phidias was alive, the
names of the two artists were familiarly coupled together, as is shown in Plato's Protago-
If, moreover, as I hope to be able to do, I can establish the identity of pattern on
'
ras ?
the diadem of the Hera from the Argive coin (admitted to be a reproduction of the
famous Polycleitan statue) and on our sima from the temple in a most individual feature,
I shall have gone far to show, by actuaUy extant works, an immediate relation between

the maker of the great statue, Polycleitus, and the marble-workers of the temple —
a fortiori of the sculptors who carved the metopes and pediments.
When now we find that among the marbles from the metopes of this temple we have
a head which is unmistakably Polycleitan, closely related to the head of the Doryjjhorus
and to other heads rightly assigned to Polycleitus,* that the second of our six extant heads
'
Masterpieces of Greek Sculpture, translated by Eu- a building and not of a statue on the eye-line. For this
gt^nie Sellers, 1895, p. 226. variation in the treatment of hair, as well as for its simi-
^ I shall have to
point out, for instance, how the weight larity to Polycleitan work, I would also ask for a com-
of probability goes to show that the Erechtheura Caryatid- parison of our head with that in the possession of Sir
type was intlueuced by a famous statue of Polycleitus. Edgar Vincent (Furtwangler, fig. 103) and of the head in
^
Of this
passage (.'Ul c) Furtwiinglcr says (p. 225) : the Hermitage of St. Petersburg (ihid. fig. 104), which
" Plato
evidently citing the two most celebrated artists
is
Furtwangler considers to be the best copy of an athlete
and leaders of the two schools most in renown at the time by Polycleitus. He says of the hair "The hair, though :

in which the dialogue supposed to have taken place."

is individual enough, is not worked with much detail. The
* more the case
Any intelligent comparison of our Argive liead with style is distinctly Polycleitan; this is still

that of the Doryphorus and the replicas of this statue will in a copy of the head in the Hermitage." I would fur-

at once demonstrate this. The difference between the ther ask for a careful comparison between our head and
two in the treatment of the hair is on the one hand to be that of the beautiful statue of a boy in Dresden as given
ascribed to the difference of the development in the treat- by Furtwiinglcr (ifiirf. fig. 112). It will then be seen
ment of hair in Polycleitan works from the Doryphorus how view the general arrangement of the
in the profile
to the Diadumenus, as well as to the difference of bronze hair round the ear and at the back of the head, though
and marble technique, —
especially when we remember roughly blocked out in the metope head and carefully
that our head formed part of a metope placed high up in elaborated in the boy's statue, is essentially the same.
164 MARBLE STATUARY FROM THE HERAEUM
from these metopes, that of the Amazon, shows close relationship to the type of an
Amazon head hitherto identified with Polycleitus, on what ground can we reasonably
assign these sculptures from the Heraeum
to any other school than to that of Polycleitus

of Argos ? I firmly maintain that we cannot.

Still this Furtwiingler has rather hastily said (although he acknow-
has been done.
' " All these
ledges, in a footnote,
that he had not seen our finds) sculptures have :

not the least relation to Polycleitus and his school. The head of Hera, as well as
. . .

most of those pieces of sculpture from that place [Heraeum] known to me are certainly
Attic."
had intended to pass over this positive statement, together with other remarks by
I
the same author, without further attention, believing that their somewhat dogmatic tone,
as well as the inadequate and superficial habit and method of scientific observation of
which they seem to give evidence, would prevent their having an influence on the
thoughtful reader. But I find that he has repeated his assertions in the Meisterwerke,^
a book that is widely read and contains much of extreme interest and value, although
this is closely connected with some rather precipitate and apparently unwarranted views,
which are unfortunately so expressed as to give the impression of being firmly established
facts. As this work is widely known and often quoted, I feel that it would not be deal-
ing justly by the treasures which a good fortune has put into our hands, if we were to
allow their proper scientific ajjpreciation to be perverted or even retarded.^ I must there-
fore attempt a refutation of Professor Furtwangler's doubts as well as of his assertions,
which will at the same time lead to a more detailed appreciation of the light which our
discoveries throw upon Polycleitan art.
It to account for such opinions as those expressed by Professor Furtwangler,
is difficult

or to find adequate reasons for them. In studying his Meisterwerke, however, to learn
the grounds upon which he rests his own conviction or opinion, I find that these views
rest upon a general theory developed in an earlier portion of the book, into which he
is
naturally led to fit other facts as they arise. This general theory is that of the
widespread influence of the artist Cresilas. On p. 243 of his Meisterwerke he says :

" We assume a certain amount of Attic influence in the later period of Polycleitus,
may
and for this Cresilas may well have been the medium ;
for we know that he was working
at Argos just at this time. And we must
bear in mind that, as I have previously shown,
the fragments of sculpture from the Heraeum of Argos are worked in a style in which
Attic influence preponderated, and are decidedly akin to the figures on the Nike Balus-
1
Archaeologische Studien Heinrich Brunn DargehracTit, have enabled Professor Furtwangler to produce funda-
April, 1893, pp. 89, 90. mental and enduring work such as we have in his great
2
Mehtenmrke, p. 223. monographs on vases, gems, bronzes, and in the intel-
'
I feel this the more, because of course the work ligent cataloguing of great collections. It is true Pro-
which Professor Furtwangler has done entitles him to a fessor Furtwangler's view has, so far as I know, not

very prominent position among archaeologists. If he been accepted by any authority. Collignon {Hist, de la
seems to me to be lacking in the power of delicate artis- Grec. 1897, p. 168) " M.
Sculpt. says :
Furtwangler la
tic appreciation and to be overhasty in judging the rela- considfere comme une oeuvre attique. Mais je crois qne
tive value of evidence and the relative degrees of cer- M. Waldstein a raisou d'y voir une oeuvre de style
tainty, his apprehension of mechanical decorative detail Argien." Overbeck refers to the head in similar terms,
and hisfor these important matters are astound-
memory E. A. Gardner (Handbook of Gr. Sculp. II. p. 341), while
ing not so, I believe, his appreciation of pure sculpture
;
admitting the Argive origin of the Hera head, liesitates,
on the artistic side. Still, I fully that his and assumes an Attic influence, to be ascribed to the fact
recognize
stupendous productivity, his intimate acquaintance with that Argive artists had come under the influence of
monuments and literature, assimilated into a phenomenal Phidias. Tarbell hesitates in a similar manner (Hist, of
memory, together with an excellent perception and mas- Greek Art, pp. 211, 212).
tery of decorative forms and technical details in art,
 POLYCLEITUS AND THE HERAEUM MARBLES 165

trade at Athens, all of seems to point to tlie probability that Attic artists were at
vvliicli
" The head Ileraeum
work ill Argos." In a footnote he adds :
lately found at the
which Waldstein considered to be Polycleitjin is more likely Attic."
Now this Cresilasthe point upon which rests Professor Furtwiingler's assertion of
is

the transportiition of Attic art into Argos. All we know of this artist with certainty is
that he was not an Athenian, but a Cydonian, and that he most probably emigrated from
his Cretjvn home into Greece. He
made a portrait of Pericles which is inscribed
certiiiidy
with his name,' the inscription having come down to us. A second inscription found
on the Acropolis was dedicated by a certain Hermolycus, and dates back to about the
middle of the fifth century.'' A found
same place,* is considerably later.
third, in the
A fourth inscription is on the base of an offering to Demeter Chthonia at Ilermione *
in Argolis. A conijianion inscription dedicated by the sjime man, Alexias's son, gives
the name of an Argive artist."^ To this Furtwjingler adds " Cresihis is thus shown :

engaged on work for a family of Hermione in company with an Argive artist and the ;

probability is that he was living at Argos at the time, and received the commission
jointly with the native artist." In the last two inscriptions Cresilas calls himself a Cydo-
nian. Upon these facts Professor Furtwiingler builds uj) the life of this artist (p. 116) :
" Even from this view itself we can
gather a good deal of infonnation concerning the
artist's life. Born at Cydonia in Crete, he must have left home early in order to culti-
vate his talents, for we know of no school of artists in Crete at that time. ... It was of
course only natural that the young artist should turn his steps to the brilliant and artistic
Athens. Here he seems to have succeeded in working his way up among the first artists
and in obtaining a great rejjutation, especially as a portrait sculptor. Otherwise he
would certiiinly not have been intrusted with the bust of Pericles, the most distinguished
and most powerful man in the city. ... As to the migration of Cresilas t() Argos, it
was doubtless occasioned by the outbreak of the Peloponnesian War, which must have
rendered residence in Athens unpleasant for an artist, especially if he was a foreigner,"
etc. Now it is this Cydonian artist who, Furtwangler maintains, brings Attic sculpture
to Argos in the time of Polycleitus.
If we were so inclined, I believe we could
more readily make a theory that this Cresilas,
who worked jointly with an Argive artist, who was beaten by Polycleitus in the competi-
tion for the Amazon sfcitue, who, as it were in imitation of the
great artist, makes an
Amazon and a Doryphorus, migrated from his Cretan home to Argos, and might thus be
considered an Argive artist rather than an Athenian artist. But we should consider such
an attempt frivolous.
There are other more definite grounds upon which Furtwangler bases his assertion
that our Argive sculptures are Attic in These are to be foimd in a comparison he
style.
establishes'^ between our life-size head of Hera and a small marble head of a
boy (83 mm.
in height) which came from Brauron, and which, I am told, is in his
private possession
(Fig. 84). To
head he assigns the date of circa b. c. 420. On a former occasion^
this
Professor Furtwangler brought this little head into direct relation with the
Olympian
sculptures, and pointed to the similar treatment of the hair in the old man of the eastern
pediment and the treatment of the eyes in Olympian pedimental heads.^ These state-

1 AfXrioy -Apxo'oA- 1889, •

p. 3C. Loewy, ibid. No. 51.
-
•
Loewy, Imchr. G. Bildh. No. 46. Archaeologische Studien, etc. p. 89, pi. iii.
'
Loewy, ibid. No. 47. ' Athen. Mitlheil. V. (1880), p. 45.
*
ibid. No. 45. ' " Die Haare sind behandelt wie z. B. an aem alten
Loewy,
166 MARBLE STATUARY FROM THE HERAEUM
and maintains that " the nearest parallel to my small ' Attic
'
ments he now retracts,
head is the newly discovered beautiful head from the Heraeum of Argos, belonging to
the same date. This head is that of a girl who, however, like our boy, has a hraid at
the 2>u^'thig in front [the italics are all nune] ; behind the band, however, this braid is
not continued. One of the Korai of the Erechtheum, also of the same date, has quite a

Fig. 84. — Small Marble IIkad from Braubon.

Ill the possession of Professor Furtwilngler.

similar braid at the parting. Also the strongly leaving hair is analogous in the heads
compared. With the head from the Heraeum our small head is furthermore specially
connected through the cut of the eyes, the formation of the eyelids, and the lacrimal
glands {T\ix&nenk?ix\m\iQ\), furthermore through the supreme sweetness of the mouth
^
and the flat dimpile of the chin." For every point of similarity which is here sujjposed
to establish a direct connection between these two heads we might almost put contrast or
marked difference, and I would ask the reader to compare the cuts here given with our
Plates (Frontispiece and XXXVI.).
1. The general build and outline are quite difPerent. The upper part of the Brauron
head, when taken in full face, is broader throughout, and maintains this breadth across
the cheek. It thus follows a round, and not a square or rectangular prhiciple. In the
profile view, the top of the head rises more from front to back its highest point is not ;

in the middle, but more towards the back while the whole outline of the face, with the
;

receding forehead and the receding lower lip, the comparatively great breadth and flatter
surface of the cheek between nostril and ear, give to this head a remarkably different
character from that of our Hera.
" "
2. The strongly- waving hair is dealt with in so peculiarly delicate and almost washed-
out a manner that it stands in strong contrast to the well-cut waves of hair in the Hera,
as well as in the Caryatids from the Erechtheum. It is no doubt this peculiar quality of

long, roundly cut waves which led Furtwilngler to make the comparison (justified in this
point) between his head and some of those from Olympia. A further comparison of the
Brauronian head and its hair with that of the youthful Triptolemus from the famous

Maiine vom Ostgiebel ;

die Augeii ferner mid das etwas eineu Zopf hat ;
hinter der Binde setzt sich dieser indess
hervortreteiide Untergesicht siud wideruiu jenen Sculp- niclit fort. Eineu ganz gleichartigeu Sclieitelzopf hat
turen direct verwandt." Would be thus also consider eine der Korai des Erechtheions, die um dieselbe Zeit zu
our Hera direct verwandt with the pedinieiital heads from Auch die stark wellige Behandlung der
datieren sind.
Olympia as regards eyes and the lower face ? Haare an den verglichenen Skulpturen analog. Mit
ist
' " Seine dem Kopf vom Heraion ist der unsrige iioch besoiiders
nachste Parallele ist der iieugefundene ebeii
um diese Zeit [b. c. 420] datierbare schone Kopf vom durcli den Schnitt der Augen, die Bildmig der Lider uiid
Heraion bei Argos. Dieser stellt eiii junges Miidelien der Thriinenkarunkel, ferner durcli den iiberaus lieblichen
dar, das aber wie unser Knabe vorne auf dem Scheitel Mund und das flache Kinngriibchen verbunden."

\
 POLVCLEITUS AND THE HEKAEUM MARBLES 167

Eloiisinian relief inij^ht he instructive and profibible. But in modeling there is no analoj^y
to the liair of our Ai<>iv(; head.
li. The outline of tlie recedinj"-,more wavy forehead in the Ihauroniiin liead, with it«
straij^ht line about the braid, differs essentially from the simple eireukr sweep of forehead
in the Hera.
4. as for the " cut of the eyes, the formation of the eyelids, and the hicrinml
And
glands," they aie distinctly different. The orb of the eye itself is flatter and nu>re
almond-shaped in the Brauronian head. This is especially due to the different treatment
of the upper lid. In the Brauronian head the curve is very slight and flat, ^ while ^
in ours it has a bold circular sweep y^ ^^
This alters, not only the whole asi>ect
.

of the lid, whole expression of the eye and face, which becomes more dreamy in
but tiie
"
the Brauronian head. The " Thrilneukarunkel is larger and more prominent in the
Arg^ve head.
5. The " supremely sweet " mouth,besides being closed in the Brauronian head, is
much smaller, the ])rojecting upper lip having more of an arch-like curve while the ;

lower lip has not the characteristic narrowly defined thickening which is so notable a
feature in all these Argive heads.
The one point of similarity between the two heads is the " braid," which runs from
the forehead to the back of the Brauronian head, and is not continued behind the band
in ours. No doubt it was this vague and trifling similarity of one detail which led
Professor Furtwiingler to make what I must call

superficial observation and to draw such a hasty

conclusion. The analogy in this arrangement of
the hair is much closer between our head and the
maiden from the Erechtheum ;
and no doubt this
obvious similarity again has led others to observe
an Attic character in the Argive head. But
though this peculiar arrangement of the hair is
the same, the Caryatid, with the long curls on
either side, shows a more mechanical and wooden
treatment in this central braid, coming straight
to the forehead, while in ours the waves of hair

l)artsymmetrically and yet organically beneath and

beside it. It looks almost as if the
sculptor of
the Caryatid (Fig. 8o) had not
fully understood
the natural arrangement as given in our head.
Fig. So. -IllOAL) (_)!• ONK Ot lllK KoKAI
In spite of the similarity of arrangement between FROM TIIE KkECHTIIEUM.
these heads, a glance at the rounded forms in
forehead and cheeks, the more fleshy treatment of the Attic work, compared with the
spare, sharply cut outline of our Argive work, will well illustrate the difference of style
in spite of the similarities.
If there be
any connection between these two works as regards the type or subject repre-
sented, not more rational, in view of the general state of sculpture in that period, to
is it

which we have referred above, to assume a Polycleitiui influence in Athens, rather than
a dependence of Argive sculpture
upon Attica ? And does not this become still more
when we find that world-famous works by Polycleitus were
pressing in this definite case,
two Canephorae holding a sacred vessel on their heads " according to Attic custom " ?
168 MARBLE STATUARY FROM THE HERAEUM
* ^
Cicero praises them for
supreme grace (eximia venustate), while Symmachus
their

mentions them, together with the Zeus of Phidias and the famous cow of Myron, as
the most famous works of art in existence. If Polycleitus, whose fame was estabHshed

long before the Erechtheum

was built, created a type of maiden carrying some object
on her head, a work of world-wide fame, is it not more likely that the inferior Attic
sculptor who fashioned these
maidens for the Erechtheum should be influenced by such
a type than that the Argive sculptor should borrow
his type from the later Erechtheum ?
If there was such Polycleitan influence in Attic
works of the second half of the fifth century, there
might certainly also have been, and there most
probably was, a certain Attic influence in Argive
work. Even so great an artist as Polycleitus could
not fail to be affected by the technical advance
made by Phidias and the great sweep of his artistic

genius. We can thus trace the influence of the

technical progress made by the Van Eycks in oil-

painting through Antonello da Messina in nearly

all the great Italian masters ; the artistic spirit of

a Diirer even is modified by his travels in Italy;

even a Giorgione and a Titian are not to be wholly
explained by the specifically Venetian current of
artistic growth ; Raphael is affected by Michael
Angelo ; Francia, even at an advanced age, by
Raphael ;
Mabuse the Fleming by Italian art ;
Rubens expands his genius after his stay in Italy
i'lii. 8G. — Head of thk Uoiivriiwiius. and Spain so Van Dyck and so many others. But
;
Ancient marble copy of the statue now in the
these alien influences do not extirpate or hide the
Museum of Naples.
"
" if it ever was
strong original and native style
the direct expression of a marked and vital artistic personality.
" "
So, too, while recognizing the strongly surviving Doryphorus element in the

youths' heads from our metopes, we see certain changes from the severer bronze technique
as manifested in the head of the Polycleitan Doryphorus (Fig. 86), especially in the
treatment of the hair. This is no doubt due, in the first instance, to the change in

material, and consequently in technique, from bronze to marble. Polycleitus, more-

over, was chiefly noted as a bronze-worker, while Phidias (though his chief works are
caelaturae) was more proficient in actual carving.* But this must never lead us to
believe that the great sculptor and his thriving school were restricted in their work to
the one material, bronze, and could not extend their activity to the plastic decoration
of the great temple in which they were working, especially when we know that his Zeus

'
Cicero, In Verr. IV. 3. 5. Erant aenea praeterea philosophis iudicare? Licet alienas spectare virtutes :

[in the collection of Heius] duo signa, non maxima, verum nam et Phidiae Olympium lovem et Myronis buculum et
eximia venustate, virginali habitu atque vestitu, quae Polycleti canephoras rudis ejus artis hominum pars magna
manibus sublatis sacra quaedam more Atheniensium vir- mirata est.
'
ginum reposita in capitibus sustinebant, canephorae ipsae Dionys. Halicarn. de Dinarcho 7 : . . . koI irKda-Tai

voeabantur. Sed earum artiflcem ? Quemnam ? Recte tA noXuicXtfTOu ical y\u(f>f7s rJt 4>ei5Iou.
adinones, Polycletum esse dicebant. Aristot. Eth. Nicom. VI. 7.: . . . oiov ieiSiac \i6ovfiyhv
'
Symmachus, Epist. I. 23 :
Tune, inquies, audeas de aotphv Kol no\vK\tiTov avSptayroiroiSy.
 POLYCLEITUS AND THE HEKAEUM MARBLES 169

Meilichiiis
*
was a marble stiitue. No actual marble Htatue is ascribed to Phidias. More-
over, his very excellence as a ttXcio-ttj?, as a modeler, would make Polycleitus best
fitted

to make the wax or plastic models, rvnoi, for the architectural compositions such as the

Epidauriau inscriptions tell us were made by Theotimus for that neighboring temple, the
figures to be carried out in marble by his colleagues
and pupils.
Furthermore, these deviations from the treatment of hair in the Doryphorus type are
to be ascribed to the peculiar constructive purpose which these heads, as metope heads,
served in the architectural scheme of the temple. Small heads seen at such a height in
the building by the spectjitor below could not receive the same delicate, almost engraved,
work in the modeling of the hair as is given to the Doryphorus heads seen on the eye-
line and thus they required the bolder and
;

more massive subdivision of locks, which is

found in ours. We know from the study of
the Parthenon marbles how carefully these
conditions of distance, lighting, and peculiar

position of the works in their relation to the

spectator were considered by the sculptor."
Finally, we must not forget the natural
development and advance of the sculptor him-
of greater breadth and
self in his acquisition

freedom. On
this point I have been ably

anticipated by Professor Furtwjingler,^ who, in

discussing the development of Polycleitan art,
arrives at a conclusion which I had reached
independently, and which our finds strikingly
confirm ; namely, that we can distinguish an
and a later, freer style in the
earlier, severer,
master's work on his Doryphorus and on his
Diadumenus. This is clearly noticeable when Fig. 87. — Head of the Diadumknus.

we compare the heads of these two statues with Ancient marble copy, now in Dresden.

each other and then perceive the advance in modeling and general freedom of composi-
tion and execution in the Diadumenus (Fig. 87).*
With a very slight turn to the side, the head of the Doryphorus is placed almost
upright and at right angles to the chest in the simple and severe manner of earlier art.
" "
Now, a marked feature is the build of the skull (Schcldelbau), which is square in
its outline. The hair is laid over the square structure at an even height, never pro-
jecting strongly so as to interfere with the marked suggestion of the construction of
'
Pausan. II. 20. 1: A165 MfiAiX'ou, \i$ou \fvKov, tToAu- the two works, but simply as arising out of a literary
K\flTov Si Ipyov. This work is ascribed by some to the desire of the author to give variety of style. Pliny, or
younger Polycleitus. the writer from whom he copied, I thought, desired to
"
See Waldstein, Essays on the Art of Pheidias, p. 79, avoid the repetition of the same phrase, and thus chose
note 1 pp. 201 ff.
; note D, pp. 227 ff.
; terms which iu a different form expressed the same fact.
^
Masterpieces, pp. 243 ff. The technical distinction in ancient Greece marked by the
* Before our finds at the Heraeum led me to recon- ephebic age was conveyed by the technical meaning of
sider carefully the extant monuments and records concern- juvenis and puer ; and thus the molUter drew down the
ing Polycleitus, I was wont to explain the difference of drew up the puer to the same point
juvenis, as the viriliter
phraseology applied to the two works by Pliny (^N. H. of age between youth and manhood. Though such a
XXXIV. 55), fecit moUiter Juvenem, for the Diadumenus, literary desire may still have been active, I now think
and viriliter puerum, for the Doryphorus, as devoid of any that the two terms do qualify and actually distinguish the

purpose of special characterization or distinction between two different works.

170 MARBLE STATUARY FROM THE HERAEUM
the skull, and then worked in graceful variety in the locks, engraved into this
is

uniform mass rather than modeled upon or chiseled out of it. All is kept in restraint
and reserve by a prevailing sense of symmetry, which, with all the variety of line in
the hair, giving freedom and vitality and removing any suggestion of archaic conven-

tionality, still casts

a touch of severity over the life and vigor of this art. In nearly
all Polycleitan heads this symmetry manifests itself in a characteristic manner in the

treatment of the locks in the middle of the forehead, where they form a distinct archer's
bow. So the Doryphorus.
If now we turn to the Diadumenus, we find a marked advance. This is found esj^e-
cially in the head, but also in the bodies of the numerous replicas* of this once famous
statue, which were valued at the high price of one hundred talents in ancient days.
As
regards the body, there can be no doubt that these copies of the Diadumenus pre-
sent in general build and construction, as well as in attitude, the same type as that of the

Doryphorus. But the treatment of the surface, the indication of muscles and articula-
tion, the delicate transitions are more advanced," and herein they approach more nearly
to the modeling of the torso from our metopes. This is still more the case with the
beautiful small terra-cotta figure now in the possession of Mr. C. Blacker in London,^

though we dare not attach too much importance to statuettes for comparison Avitli life-
size figures as regards details. Of course the greater elaboration and greater delicacy
and naturalness of modeling may in these copies be due to the relative skill of the
copyist but especially in view of the changes in the head and the modeling of the hair,
;

the variations in the modeling of the body are more likely to be due to the difference in
the bronze original.
The heads again
are practically the same in general structure and form. The marked
shape of the skull is the same, though with the different treatment of the hair the
superficial appearance of the outline may be somewhat altered. The features, nose,
mouth, eyes, cheeks, and chin, are of the same characteristic, somewhat heavy quality.
On the other hand, as in the body, greater delicacy, more sentiment, are given by the
changed position of the head, which, compared with the almost upright and straight
position of the head in the Doryjihorus, is here more turned to the side and drooping,
though far from the more sentimental attitudes observed in fourth-century works.
But the great change takes place in the hair. No doubt the advance marked in the
modeling of the hair is amply explained by the progress made in the art of modeling by
the artist himself, with his practice and experience, as well as the observation of the
work of other masters, within a period of, say, twenty-five years. But the first real
cause in the change is to be found, as I have so frequently pointed out in other s})heres
of Greek art, simply in the constructive conditions of the work, in the peculiar and indi-
Besides the Vaison statue, so frequently reproduced, Paris, Monum. et Mem., 1897, vol. IV. p. 62, pis.
'
head ;

replicas of the Diadumenus have been published by: i., ii.; HuUet. de Corresp. Hellen. 1895. Another, perhaps
Michaelis, Annali del' Inst. Arch. Rome, 1878, pp. 1, seq., the most interesting of all replicas of the head, I saw two
Alonwnenti, pi. x. ; E. Petersen, Bullet, della Cormn. or three years ago in the possession of a dealer in Athens,
Arch. Communale, Rome, 1890, pp. 185 ff.; Furtwangler, but cannot trace it to-day. (See infra, p. 171, note 1.)
^
Masterpieces, etc., pp. 238 ff., where the previous and Cf. Furtwangler, Masterpieces, p. 242 Couve, I. c. ;

other replicas are considered. Since Furtwangler's publi- ^ A. S. Murray, Journal of Hellen. Stud., 1885, pi. 61.
cation, the following replicas have been published Mur- : Tlie body of this statuette- shows greater slimness and
ray, /Jei^ue /4rcAeo/.XXVII. (1895), pp. 143 it. pis. xi.,xii., delicacy than the other replicas,
— though the Madrid
a head in the British Museum Couve, Monuments et Me-
; copy is an advance in this respect upon the copy from
moires, 1895, vol. III. pis. xii. and
the beautifully
xiii.; Delos, and still more upon that at Vaison, — and thus
is

preserved copy found in a house at Delos by the French, nearer to the torso from our metopes. But too much im-
a better reproduction of the Madrid statue, with body and portance must not be given to so small a replica.
 POLYCLEITUS AND THE IIERAEUM MARBLES 171

vidual subject dealt with. In this case it means that the Doryphoriw liad no taenia
or baud wound ti<;litly round his head aiul hair ; while in the Diadumenus this forms
tlio central and most important part of the action or situation depicted. Thus in the

maint^iin with greater strictnesH his characteristic

Dory[)h()rus the artist could naturally
uisistence upon the square shape of the skull, even while skillfully indicating the texture
of hair in his delicate ciaele modeUng of each lock. He could also (continue his sevei-er,

traditional system of bronze modeling of hair by means of careful engnived work, in

contradistinction to bold modeling of masses, —
a feature which was handed on from
the bronze technique which prevailed in the archaic period. But when once the tying of
a broad band round the head became, not merely a casual accessory, but the central func-
tion in the stiitue he fashioned, the effect of such a tight band drawn over the pliant
texture of hiiir had to arrest his attention and call forth his artistic skill in modeling,
now concentrated upon the changed character of the hair. The square outline of the
skull could no longer be so rigidly preserved, and the even, caplike trejitment of the whole
mass of hair, with its delicate surface-modeling and engraving, had to make way for a
much freerand radically different treatment. This hair had to rise out at the edge of
the tight band fiatly compressing the locks under it to the skull, in higher relief locks ;

were disturbed in the regular arrangement one stood out higher than the other the direc-
; ;

tion of its curve was altered, and some had to project over the band.
This is exactly the change which takes place in the hair of the Diadumenus. While
some points "
maintiiiniiig in relationship, its
its consanguinity," to the hair of the Dory-
phorus, it rises out boldly over the fillet in a large plastic mass of locks, and escapes

beneath it. It produces a varied tangle of locks projecting beneath it at the back of the

ear, as well as above and in front of the ear over the temples in fact, over the eye. —
Now these changes are essentially the same in all the best replicas, the Dresden, the

Cassel, the Madrid, the Delos

—
in fact, all Diadumenus heads.
" constructive "
Though the artist followed this impulse, dictated by the subject he
dealt with, the vigor and freshness of this new modeling of hair, when once he had
mastered it, mark an advance over the restrained and severe methods guiding him when
he made the Doryphorus, which is so pronounced that our appreciation of the art of
Polycleitus, as based upon the one head, must be essentially modified when wfe include
the other. Yet the various fine replicas differ from one another in the actual elabora-
tion of this siime general system, —
especially in the manner in which the copyist was
able to reproduce, not so much the freely modeled, almost undercut, masses of projecting

locks, as in the manner of transferring to marble the peculiar crisi) and firm finish of the
"
bronze locks in the original and the survivaLof careful " engi-aved work in the indication
of texture on the surface of each lock.
In this respect I should place highest the head in the British Museum and the one I saw
at Athens, as I can clearly remember this characteristic treatment.' The bronze treat-
ment of the locks must here be much nearer the original than is the case in any of the
other replicas. S. Murray recognizes that la presence des char act eres qui rap-
Mr. A.
pellent la sculpture en bronze parait attester la fidellte de la replique.- There is

'
I have thought it right to leave the text of my maun- head now in the British Museum aud the one I saw at
script standing as I wrote it, and to add this footnote just Athens are —
the same head.
as we are going to press, for it appears to me a striking ^
Revue Archeolog. XXVII. (1895), p. 143. Recog-
enumerate that I should
coufiruiation of the facts I here nizing this truthfulness of the copy in its relation to the
" Mais ces charact^res
have heard by accident, within the last few days, that the original, Mr. Murray proceeds :
172 MARBLE STATUARY FROM THE HERAEUM
another curious feature in the British Museum copy which I distinctly remember in the

head I sjiw at Athens ; namely, a slight puffiuess, or rise of the skin in the infra-ocular

memes ne seraient-ils pas diis k une certaine affectation ? replicas of the Biadumenus head. When Mr. Murray
Un tel luxe de fantaisie dans les details ne ddpasse-t-il considers all these facts, I believe he will not refuse
our congratulations on his having under his charge
pas nieme la portde de I'^loge do Qiiintilien, diligentia in

ac decor ? A mes yetix, la difficult^ se pr^sente dans les many respects the finest of the Polycleitan Diadumenus
termes siiivants. L'exuWrance, la liberty et la beauts heads.
des cheveux sont, d'une part, en parfaite harmonie avec
si I subjoin some notes taken before this head chiefly in
le visage, qu'elles inipliquent une conception nou alterde ; view of a comparison witli our head of the youth from
d'autre part je ne puis trouver de preuve, meme chez the metopes of the Heraeum :
—
Quintilien, que Polyclete ait attaint, dans le traiteinent Generally softer and more detail than in our head, but
des details, cette singuli^re richesse de fantaisie, au lieu coarser workmanship of actual carving excepting in hair.
de la large simplicityque Ton atteudrait de son style et Head slightly rounder and broader in cheeks, shortened
de son temps. En somrae je consider* comme certain in proportion. The eye is similar to that of our metope
que la nouvelle tete appartient k une pdriode tr6s post^- head, the iris somewhat oblique, showing a downward
rieure Ji Polyclfete cela est suffisamment attests rien que
;
look. Probably colored indication of iris, as in ours.

par le traitement de I'oreille droite et de la boucle de The upper eyelid overlaps slightly at angle, a sliarp
cheveux devant I'oreille. Ces details prdseutent tous les short sunk line where upper lid fits into brow. Marked
caractcres de I'art grec posti^rieure au V° sieole." I can lacrimal gland. Sliort upper lip, slightly opened mouth.
sympathize with Mr. Murray's difficulty, the more so as Lips do not come sharply to a point at angles, but the
" "
(vid. infra) I formerly held the same general conception laughing muscle bulges out slightly. Nose and lips
of the art of Polycleitus, based upon the insufficient monu- are much damaged, but the nose clearly the same broad,
mental evidence formerly at our command, and the con- tliick character as in ours. Hair the band seems sunk
:

sequent incomplete appreciation of all the passages in more into curly hair, which gives way and spreads over
ancient authors relating to that sculptor. If Mr. Murray it, tliau in otlier Diadumenus heads. Curls well defined
feels that the head contains a too careful elaboration of on (its) right side of head. Bulge out strongly towards
details in the hair, why should he stop short at the well- back on that side. worked in careful
Tliey are real curls
known passage from Quintilian concerning diligentia ac bronze teclinique. Here an interesting point While on :

decor f Wliy not, for instance, take note of what Cicero the top of the head and on sides we have really modeled

(de Oral. II. 16. 70) says of the rendering of the lion-skin locks, separately modeled in relief, tlie flat Doryphorus
and of the hydra, or what Plutarch (rf« Profectib. in Virt. type of liair has survived in other parts. So in front,
17) lets Polycleitus liimself saj' concerning the complete under tlie curls there remains the engraving technique of
finish of modeling, —
and then reconsider what Quintilian regular parting of the Doryphorus. Nay, this character-
means by diligentia ac decor f His difficulty is that, on isticsymmetrical arrangement shows in the curious sur-
the one hand, he is forced to admit that the careful and vival of two tusk-like meshes of hair further towards the
free working of the hairis of a piece with tlie whole, and
side showing under the band -n ^. We also have
is therefore to be traced back to the original (though
something, however little, will have to be ascribed to the the same lock at the side of the ear in front. Behind and
transference from bronze to marble by a later copyist), above band, which was crossed over be-
his right ear the

while, on the other hand, there is for liim too much deli- hind, was pulled out and held in his upraised hand. At
cate detail work and his age.
for the severe Polycleitus back on the right side there is a curious grooving work,
Now, if the artist of the Doryphorus normally advanced where the band might have been. This must have been
from the stage marked by his earlier work, and, owing to like drill-work at the back of our metope heads, though
this natural progress and to special reasons in the making now corroded away.
of a youth binding a fillet round his head, advanced in the When the light falls from above we can detect a soft
freer rendering of the texture of hair, would he not aban- rising or puffing under lower lid at the infra-ocular de-
don the flat relief work as well as the severer symmetry ? pression, which I remarked in a clearer manner in the
"
Would not this treatment of hair with
its careful, crisp Athens head. Also note sliglit " bronze applique ridge
modeling of single locks be the natural result ? So or sharp edge over left eyebrow as in earlier bronzes.
much for the style of Polycleitus. And as to " his age," As far as the face, from the brow downwards, goes,
I must ask Mr. Murray what fully authenticated head of our metope head is nearest to this. The hair in ours is
the fifth century, from a statue, an HyaAfia, we have upon in rougher masses and less defined, but locks by the ear
which to found his denial ? Take the head of the beau- same in their general arrangement.
tiful charioteer recently discovered at Delphi (Homolle, Let me finally add that wlien Mr. Murray notes the
Monum. et Mem. IV.
1898, pis. xv. and xvi.), and con- pouting expression of the British Museum head, and con-
'
sider the treatment of tlie hair in this statue, especially siders that this air morose does not suit a victor, he
'

in the treatment of the " ear and of the locks of hair in points to a characteristic feature which all the Polycleitan
front of the ear," not to mention the singular indication of heads, from the Doryphorus downward, have in common.
whiskers. Yet I doubt whether anybody will place this It arises chiefly out of the peculiar treatment of the lower
head less than forty or fifty years before the year B. c. 420. lip,which can be seen in all our lieads, in conjunction with
Moreover, these locks before the ear recur in all the other the generally heavy treatment of the nose and other fea-
 POLYCLEITUS AND THE IlERAEUM MARBLES 173
"
depression under the left eye of the head,' a degree
of " Hterahiess in detail modeling

which is
paralleled by the curious rise in the groin of our torso from the Henieuni

metope. And this work cannot he placed later than 420 H. c.

The any careful comparison of these heads shows that the Doryphorus, as
result of
well as the Diadumenus, is clearly Polycleitan ; and that the Diadumenus marks a distinct
advance in freedom and delicacy of modeling over the Doryphorus. Furtwiingler,-'
while! assi<;iiin<;- to tlic Dorypliorus
and the Amazon the date B. c. 440, thinks that the
Diadumenus should probably be assigned to the siime later period of the artist's career
as the Hera (b. c. 420). "I think," he says, "lam not misbiken in finding certain
kinship with the coin of Hera." Without attempting to assign any precise date, all that
we are prepared to stiite is that the Diadumenus presents the master's latest style that ;

all these heads of the Diadumenus are of the sjime general character as the hejid of our

youth from the Ileraeum metopes, and that some of them invite interesting comparisons
with our larger female head, which we have called Hera, and that it was the revelation
of finish and delicate modeling in our torso from the metopes which enabled me to

appreciate these qualities in the heads of the Diadumenus.

A Diadumenus and of our Heraeum finds gives us quite a new

full appreciation of the

conception of the art of Polydeitus. For years I had in my teaching constructed a view
of Polydeitus based chiefly upon the Doryphorus, the poor copy of the Diadumenus from
*
Vaison,^ and the Amazon, as well as upon the chief passages referring to him in Pliny
and In this light Polydeitus appeared as an artist of undoubtedly great
Quintilian."
talent, but devoid of genius, who never attjiined to the truly artistic and spiritual expres-

sion, the grandeur of a Phidias, and was wanting in weight deesse jiorubis. And —
though he may have added ideal beauty to his stiitues, he never attained that ideal which
the Greeks, like Phidias, embodied in the statues of their gods nam ut humanae formae —
deeorem addiderit supra verum, ita non explemsse deorum auctoritatem videtur. His
great merit lay rather in the academic direction of sober construction, drawing together
in a masterly manner, in technical and moi-e theoretical control over his art, the separate
currents of genius in the various Greek artists that made for the pure beauty, grace, and

grandeur which Hellas has handed down to posterity erudisse but not ajieruisse. —
The highest praise bestowed upon him and his works is more of a theoretical and sober
nature, dlUyentia ac decor. He is thus able to establish a canon of human proportions
from which subsequent artists could take the rules of art as from a laAv — quern canona
artifices vacant liniamenta artls ex eo petentes velnti a lege quadam. But he achieves
this at the cost of the spontaneity and variety of his productive genius and imagination.
And thus there is a certain sameness in his work, which a mere survey of the sidijects
ascribed to him — chiefly athletes and purely masculine figures
— suggests, so that they
tures. It is another strong point showing that all these *
N. H. XXXIV. 56 Proprium ejus est uno crure
:

heads, including our Heraeum heads, are of the same ut insisterent signa excogitasse, quadrata tamen esse ea
school. tradit Varro et paene ad exemplum.
'
See account of the head at end of previous footnote. ^ Inst. Oral. XII. 10. 7 :
Biligentia ac decor in Poly-
^
Meisterwerke, p. 442. cleto supra ceteros, cui (luanujuam a plerisque trihuitur
' In the British Museum. This copy has long heen palma, tamen, ne nihil detrahatur, deesse pondiis putaut;
recognized as inadequate and as being worked over in the nam ut humanae formae deeorem addiderit supra verum,
head. It appears to me as if there had not been sufficient ita non explevisse deornm auctoritatem videtur quin ;

marble on tlie left side of the head, or that some acci- actatem quoque graviorem dicitur refugisse nihil ausus
dent had forced the copyist into greater flatness here. ultra leves genas.
174 MARBLE STATUARY FROM THE HERAEUM
are all after one pattern, or closely follow the model — proprium ad exemplum or unum
exemplum. One can even recognize this in that it is thought necessary draw atten-to

tion to one definite attitude, the walking attitude, as peculiar to him, — projjrmm eius
est lino criire ut insisterent signa excogitasse,
— an advance over the stiffness of archaic

artistswhich the transitional sculptors, Pythagoras of Rhegium, and Myron, had long
since achieved. And all his works are rather heavy and massive, vigorous and square in
type,
—quadratae tamen esse ea tradit Varro,
—
sane and healthy and unsentimental,
like the Doryphorus. On
the whole, with all his greatness and the lasting advance his

activity marks in the history of Greek art,

he followed the conservative spirit of Argive
tradition as confirmed by Ageladas and laid down in the archaic period by the sculptors
who said of themselves in an inscription that they practiced art " as handed down by
^
their forefathers."
This was, in short, the estimate I had previously formed of the art of Polycleitus. Yet
even while enunciating these views, I had frequent misgivings when I realized the
supremely high place accorded him by antiquity, his juxtaposition with Phidias, so that
sometimes, as is done by Cicero, he is even placed highest in the scale. I felt that the

Doryphorus by itself, as we know that statue, could not account for the beauty and grace
ascribed to his statues and his heads, by trustworthy authorities. With the discovery of
our Heraeum marbles, and of the new and better copies of the Diadumenus and the
advance these mark in the treatment of the head, the doubt as to the fairness and
completeness of my former view became stronger, and a complete reconsideration of
the ancient literary records concerning that artist has convinced me of this one-sidedness.
While I feel that in general the former negative appreciation of the great master holds
good for the Doryphorus, I am convinced that such a view would apply to the artist's
career only at the earlier stages, to which the Doryphorus belongs (say somewhere about
B. c. 450), while the work at the Heraeum (circ. B. c. 420) marks a later and far more
advanced period. Who could do justice to Raphael if he only considered the works of
the earlier Peruginesque period ?
While thus, in spite of its one-sidedness and consequent exaggeration, my former view
does apply to one characteristic side of this great Argive sculptor, we must now realize
that there were many sides not adequately touched by it, and these not only present a
greater variety and versatility of subject, but even show that the quoted passages deal-
ing with his style and technique suggest a different interpretation in the light of the new
discoveries of the Diadumenus and of our Argive marbles.
chief artistic qualities of Polycleitus are summed up by Quintilian as dlligentla and
The
decor, qualities which I formerly felt were not naturally in harmony with the master
of the Doryphorus, the creator of the square, massive, healthy type of physical strength,
with broad chest and strong limbs standing in simple power upon one leg, the other
resting on the toes behind.
This decor, as we can now understand comes nearest to our word " beauty," the
it,

absolute beauty of form. To render this absolute beauty of form in human beings, the
artist had to avoid the
developed forms of mature manhood, and had to limit himself to
youth {nihil ausus ultra leves genas) and though he no doubt idealized the forms of
;

youth into complete harmony and beauty of proportion (which he esfciblished in his
canon) as they are not met with in nature, combining the actual details of life into the

'
Tf'xi'ai' fti6Tfi ix irpoTfpuv, inscription on the work of mentioned by Paiisanias, VI. 10. 4. ; Overbeck, Schrifl-
the early Argive sculptors Eutelidas and Chrysothemis, quellen, No. 388.
 THE ART OF I'OLYCLEITUS 176

ideal unity of perfect harniony {tU humaiiae fonnne decorem addklerit sujjra verum),
he could not <>ive tlieni that spirituality of expreKsion and soul and character and dijj^nity
inlierent in the j^reat <«()ds like Zeus (non cj-jj/frissc dcoruin auctor'dntnii) which l*hi<lias
had given. He had further to avoid the violent contortiouH of the body and the exprcK-
sion of moods and pathos in the face to preserve his beauty of outline in the body and
his severe proportion (»f line in the face. And further, tliis absolute beauty did not
in his works (K'pend upon tlie sensuousness and softness of treatment (he is still the
" "
Doryphorus, a character maintained in essence in the body of
sculjjtor of th(! s(|uare
the Diadumenus), not upon the morhidezza of the modeling of flesh, as in the later
in modeling of muscles, an in
fourth-century art, nor upon the anatomical insistence
ilclli'uistic art. thus significant that we find only two stiitues of female figures
It is

I'liunicrated among his works one was the most serious and matronly divinity Hera, and
;

" "
the other the most masculine woman, the Amazon. His beauty of treatment depended
upon i)roportion and line and upon the extreme aiul perfect finish of his work without
appeal to sensuous associations. This is expressed in the word dilUjcidin, which leads to
the decor. This finish within the careful study of line and outline in his composition of

every figure, he put into the most careful and complete modeling of every detail so that,
as Cicero
'
indicates when he insfcmces the treatment of the lion-skin or the Hydra in

his stiitue of Heracles with theHydra, every given with the utmost
defciil of modeling is

completeness and mastery. And this quality of art Polycleitus himself singles out with
words which Plutiirch puts into his mouth.'-'
" The earlier
emphasis in the st<iges in
" the real work of the true artist begins when
sculpture are not so important," he says ;
it comes to the when the clay adheres
finest last point of finish, the fingei--nail point,

to the fingei'-nail."
" There are," he observes, " the ordinary workers in any sphere,
and those who really advance their art in the world, those with high ideals, who must —
'

go further than what is just good or just good enough,' who use their ideal as if it
' ' '

were a measure,' and give the most difficult last touch of perfection which makes the
great work."
This was the aim he set himself, and in his sculpture it led to the complete harmony
of line and the extreme finish of the modeling. Without suggesting anything like real-
istic reproduction, it means supreme finish of detjiil and the instances of such supreme ;

finish in the nude male torso from our metopes and in the hair of the Diadumenus help

us to realize this.
We can understand thus that, sacrificing everything to this absolute beauty of form,
he may be wanting in the weight {2)ondtcs) and sublimity of a Phidias, in the sensuous-

ness and pathos of a Praxiteles and a Scopas, in the dramatic action of the Pergamenians
and Rhodians. Raphael could not remain Raphael while giving the strength and gran-
deur of Michael Angelo, or the sensuousness and glow of Titian, or the dramatic sensa-
tions of the Carracci. the sculptor of Beauty, as Phidias is the sculptor of
Polycleitus is

SubUmity, Praxiteles of Grace and pure Greek sentiment, and the Pergamenians and Rho-

'
De Oral. II. 16. 70 : Similiter arbitror in Iiac sive subject and the situation, tbat the fully developed Poly-
ratione sive exercitatione diceiuli, (jui illam vim adeptus cleitus was far from being restricted to the simple walk-
sit, ut eorum meiites qui audiant ad
. . . suuiu arbi- ing attitude of his Doryphorus; aud we cau understand
trium movere possit, ilium de toto illo gencre reliquarum how, when his task was to represent battle-scenes, as in
orationum non plus quaesiturum, quid dicet, quani Poly- our metopes and pediments, he could extend his diligenlia
cletum ilium, quum Hereulem fingebat, quemadmodum to the adequate rendering of figures in motion,

pelleni aut Ilydram fingeret, etiamsi haec nuraquam sepa-

^ De Pro/ectib. in Virt. 17. Quaest. Conviv. II. .3. 2.

ratiin facere didicisset. This also shows, as regards the

176 MARBLE STATUARY FROM THE HERAEUM
"
dians of Action. This beauty we have long since called classical," in the restricted

sense, as distinguished from the ruder Gothic and the romantic. Polycleitus is thus the
most truly classic artist of antiquity.
The fuller and truer appreciation of Polycleitus, our Heraeum discoveries enable us to
grasp and make our own. In the future these marbles, together with the replicas of the

Doryphorus and Diadumenus, will have to be the starting-point in the study of that
artist and his school, as the few fragments from Tegea must be the fixed point of depar-

ture in the study of the art of Scopas.

 DESCRIPTION OF THE PLATES.
PLATE XXX.
Portion of a Metope fitted together out of seven separate fragments^ consinthuj of Head, Torso,
Legs above the knee. Shield, and Portions of the upper Background, with projecting hand from
tdfi of a Metope. Tho arms and shoulders are broken away
the left arm, extended, held the ;

shield, the inside of which turned toward the spectator the right arm and shoulder were drawn
is ;

l)acU, and, no doubt, the hand lield the sword or spear. The action of the figure is not clear the :

weigiit rested on the right leg, which was bent outward, the left leg drawn up so that the thigh
approached a horizontal position, the body twisted round toward the right and slightly drawn
back. The head, turned toward the right shoulder and itudined downward, suggests an adversary
lying or crouching on the ground, on or against whom the uplifted left foot may have been pressed.'
The action of the warrior would then denote a drawing back of the upi)er part of the figure in
order to strike or thrust downward. A
small drill-hole in the abdomen near his right groin

might, then, perhaps, have served to fix a bronze support to the shaft of the spear, which would
have passed from his upraised right hand, drawn backwards, down past his left thigh to the oppo-
nent at his feet. On the other hand, the action may denote a drawing or sinking back on the
part of a wounded warrior, and the forward droop of the head might support this view, as well as
the fact that the shield is turned out so as to show the inside, and leaves the body unprotected.
The small have held a bronze arrow, or the point of some other weapon, to
drill-hole might, then,
denote the fact that the warrior was wounded.^
Like the warriors in the Aeginetan pediment and the groups at Olympia by Onatas,^ the warrior
was thus armed only with helmet, shield, and spear (or sword), and had no breastplate or greaves.
Dimensions :
—
Total height as mounted 78. cm.
Breadth « < 63.
Elevation of figure from backgrouud 17.5
Breadth of body at waist 15.7
" " " at groin 16.
below shoulder 19.8
" of neck 7.6
" of right thigh 10.7

Deptli
" «

Height from base of neck to mouth

Estimated breadth of shield (horizontal diameter)
...........
.........
11.5
23.
54.

Unfortunately, the body of this warrior is so much fractured, and what remains of the surface has
suffered somuch from corrosion, that the surface of the figure cannot give us an adequate notion
of the finished modeling carried to so high a point of excellence in these metopes, although it does

convey the life-like freedom in the pose and general composition. Fortunately, however, another
male torso from the metopes (Plate XXXIV.) is in a wonderful state of preservation with regard

just to the surface modeling of the nude, and thus supplements our knowledge of the style and work-
manship of the artists who made these metopes. Still, in spite of corrosions and fractures, the
working of the muscles on the warrior's right side above the waist, as well as in the region of the
*
groin and of the thighs, manifests careful observation and study of muscles and high finish of
modeling. There is but one further point to which it is important to draw attention, as bearing
'
Compare for possible parallels the metopes in Mi- has split away, it is conceivable that the drill-hole was
chaelis, Der Parthenon, pi. iii. Nos. iii., xxiii., xxiv., xxvi., used to repair this fracture (caused by some flaw in the
pi. iv. No. xxxi., pi. V. Nos. ix., xiii. ; cf., also, pi. iv. ai\d marble) in ancient times,
°
what is said on this point there. Pausanias, V. 25. 10.
2
Finally, as the whole of the front portion of the body
*
See on this point remarks on Plate XXXELL
178 DESCRIPTION OF THE PLATES
to the Sculpture as regards the methods of manipula-
upon what has beeu said in the Introduction
tion in the marble-work employed by Polycleitan artists it is the frequent use of the drill.
: This
is used to bore holes for the insertion of bronze bars or ornaments, as the small one at the groin,
the ones in front of the ear and immediately below the helmet, and the still larger ones
larger
above the shield. The hole between the ear and the right temple either served to hold some bronze
ornament connected with the helmet, or held the end of a si)ear which indicated the fatal wound
received by the warrior. The large hole over the shield sliows that these metopes, differing in
thisfrom those of the Parthenon, were marble slabs, couiparatively thin, fixed on a ground behind
the metope, and not the solid blocks, part of the whole construction of the entablature. It shows

that the marble imported from a distance was valuable material which had to be used economically.
Still more interesting is the use of the drill at the back over the buttocks, to work away the mate-

rial fr'om the background, a practice already referred to in connection with the metope heads.
The head, on the other hand, is in excellent preservation, not even the tip of the nose being

wanting. It is evidently that of a warrior with a crested helmet. A

portion of the crest is broken
away. The head and face have allthe massive, square proportions common to the other metope
heads (of. Plate XXXI.), with the same broad forehead, the same massive, heavy cheeks and
rounded chin, the same nose, broad from root to tip, the same treatment of eyelid and orb, though
here the inward slant of the orb is probably connected with the downward look, which again may
be the only sign the sculptor adopted to indicate the suffering of a wounded warrior. Above all,
there is the same extremely characteristic mouth, with the short, protruding upper lip, and the
curious flattened arch, indicating more of the red portion than is usually the case, while the lower

lip, not tightly pressed to the upper lip, has the same fullness and the projecting thickening in
the middle —
all giving a peculiar pouting, stolid expression which is borne out by the heavy

character of the face as a whole.

Dimensions :
—
Breadth of face . 8.C cm.

..........
Length of face (helmet visor to chin)
Depth of head (forehead to back of helmet)
10.2
13.2

...........
Outer corner of eye to outer corner

.............
Inner corner of eye to inner corner
7.2
2.3

Breadth of mouth
Breadth of helmet, extreme
...............
Breadth of nose (at nostrils)

.............
2.5
2.7
11.4

Length of nose
.............
...............
Breadth of ridge over crest
4.

1.8

Height of visor
............
Breadth of eyes (outer corners)

It will be seen that these measurements are practically the same as those of the youth's head
2.8
2.7

figured as Nos. 1 and 2 on the next Plate.

PLATE XXXI.
Nos. 1 and 2. Two views of a Youtlis Head from a Metope. Paiian marble. This head was
by me
^
first
published in the American Journal of Archaeolo(/y
shortly after its discovery in 1894.
As we realized immediately after its discovery, the head of this ephehus, corresponding in its
peculiar size and style of workmanship to all the other metope heads from the Heraeum, bears
the unmistakable characteristics of Polycleitan sculpture as manifested in the hitherto known
statues of the Doryphorus and Diadumenus.^
—
Dimensions :

Height of fragment (neck, 8 cm.)

Breadth of face (cheek to neck)
...........
............ 15.9 cm.
8.7

1 Vol. IX. (1894), must refer to the original

pp. 331 ff. pi. xiv. reprinted in
;
the conditions of its discovery, I
Papers of the American School of Classical Studies at American Journal of Archaeologi/, as vieW as
yiaper in the
Athens, vol. VI. pp. 252 ff. pi. xx. It has since tlien been to what has been said on pp. 168 ff., in the Introduction

reproduced by Mr. Frazer, Pausanias, vol. III. p. 172. to the Sculpture in this volume.
"
For the further description of this point, as well as
 PLATE XXXI. HEADS FROM THE METOPES : 179

Height of face (liiiir to cliiii)

10.6
13.2
Deptti of head (forehead to bock)
Outer corner of eyes to outer corner 7.3

Inner corner to inner corner . 2.2

4.
Leii};th of nose
.

lireadtli of nose (at nostrils) 2.3

" " month 2.7
" " 2.7
eyes (inulusive lids)

Both in the jirofih; and in the full face view the head shows the squareness and niassiveness char-
acteristii! of Polyideitan types. The.se characteristics are moreover manifested in a marked manner
in all the other features, especially in the nose and mouth. The nose is
perfectly preserved, and
presents a broad ridge from root to tip, with a very slight thickening ahout the middle. In pro-

portion to its width it is thus conij)aratively short, and adds to the heavy expression which this
and the otlier heads from the metopes have in common with the lieads whose attribution to Poly-
cleitua is well-established. One of the most characteristic features in this and in all our metope hca<U
is the mouth. As the strikingly individual treatment of this expressive feature in the human face
is common to all these heads from the Ileraeum (the Hera as well), and is to be found in the same
form in the heads liitlierto I must here enter into further details.
recognized as Polycleitan,
The
peculiar pouting which all these heads have in common is due
or, rather, stolid
expression
not only to the strikingly thickened and protruding mass of the lower lip to which reference has been
made above,' but to the treatment of the mouth in every aspect and in every part. In the ujJiJcr
lip, which is never firmly pressed upon the lower lip, the thickness of the projecting deep red ]>or-
tions of the human lip is markedly indicated in almost the whole extent of the lip towards either
corner of the month,^ whereas in most other sculptured heads this thickening serves to accentuate
the rise of the firm archer's bow (so-called Cupid's bow) on either side of the
middle, and thus loses the effect of heaviness by contributing to
the well-curved, symmetrical outline of this bow firmly drawn. f \

This difference can be best appi-eciated by comparing, for instance, ^T^"

the mouth
any one of the Polycleitan heads (Fig. 88"), inchid-
of

FiG 88* — From "^S ^'^ ours, with the type like the head at Bologna, identified

the Ileraeum l>y Furtwiingler with the Lemnian Athena of Phidias (Fig. 88'').
Metopes. Owing to this diffei'cnce, moreover, the downward protrusion in '

the middle of the upiier

•1 lip
1 seems to be caused in mouths like ., ,
the L.emnian
"
that of the " Lemnian Athena by the upward curve of the two bows of the arch Athena,
on either side of the middle and this gives to the whole mouth an of
— the central protrusion seemsexpression
;

vivacity if it does not suggest a smile be caused by the upraising

to
and arching of the portions on either side of the centre. In our Polycleitan heads, on the con-
trary, this central protrusion of the upper lip actually appears like a downward pressure of the
centre, because there is no active suggestion of an upward movement in the portions of the lip on
either side of the centre.
Still more and individual
characteristic isthe treatment of the upper lip when seen in profile.
from the point where the lip " red " of the
Tlie distance joins the nose to the beginning of the lip
is almost abnormally short in all the Polycleitan lieads, especially when considered in proijortion
to the distance between the beginning of the red in the upper lip above and the end of the red in
the lower lip below. This will become clearer when all these heads from the Ileraeum, together
with all the Doryphorus and Diadumenus heads known, as well as some of the most characteris-
tic Amazon heads (such as the Amazon of Berlin and one in the British Museum, London) ^ are

placed side by side. It will then be seen how

have this marked feature in common, and this
all
will be realized the more readily when the treatment of the upper lip in these is compared with
•
Cf. p. 159. I should consider the Amazon heads which Michaelis
*
Mr. Edward Robinson drew my attention to the (Jahrhuch des Kais. Deulschen Arch. Inst. Berlin, I. 1887,
flattening of this curve in the front view. pp. 27 ff.) assigns to type I., as nearer the art of Poly-
' On the
ground not only of this feature, but of the cleitus than either type II. (the Amazon of Woerlitz, pi.

general outline and character of the heads as a whole, iv.) or type III. (the Amazon at Petworth, pis. i. and ii.).
180 DESCRIPTION OF THE PLATES
that of the so-called Lemnian Athena. It will then be seen how the space between the nose
and the red of the lip in all Polycleitan heads (Fig. 89") is not more than half the distance between

the limits of red in the upper and lower lip

i
while in the Lemnian Athena (Fig. 89'') the two
;

distances are about equal. The rough sketch of this feature here given will illustrate this point.

Furthermore, it is important to note that this interval in the Polycleitan heads is strongly curved
inwards, the curve projecting slightly where it joins the red of the upjier lip, while in the Lem-
nian head it is comparatively straight or shallow without the
marked projection below. The effect thus produced in the Poly-
cleitan heads that the upper lip, in fact the whole mouth,
is,

protrudes, and accentuates in its totality the pouting or heavy

N."~"^ ^ —^ j
expression which we have already noted in the lower lip.
The chin is slightly damaged.
The hair has already been described on pp. 171 ff.
Reference has already been made to the peculiar use of the
drill in thishead for purposes of undercutting where the head
approaches the background of the relief.^ The left side of the
head and the portion of the back of the head toward the left
side were nearest the background, and though they were rudely

undercut, there is no attempt at finished modeling here, neither

the locks of the hair nor even the left ear being indicated.

p,£, 89». From Fig. SO*. — From Deep grooves that are left manifest this rough work of the drill
the Heraeum the Lemn i an as well as that of the chisel. From this working it appears that
Metopes. Athena. the head was not meant to be seen quite in profile, but slightly
turned round towards the left shoulder of the figure.
No. 3. Head of Amazon from the Metopes. Parian marble.
This head, found in 1892, was already figured and described by me in the preliminary pub-
lication.^

Dimensions :
—
Height of fragment (pointed helmet included) 22.6 cm.
Breadth of fragment . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15.
Depth of head 12.3
Extreme breadth of face
Width from outer corners ............
.............
of eye
. 8.3
6.6
Inner corner to inner corner
Length of nose
Breadth of nose (at
...............
.............
nostrils)
2.4
3.6
2.5
Breadth of mouth 2.8
Breadth of eyes 2.5

In the preliminary publication I left it doubtful whether this was the head of an Amazon or not.
Further comparative study of the head itself and of other Amazon types, as well as the fact that
some portions of the female figures among these metopes were of Amazons (see, for instance,
Plate XXXV.), make it practically certain that this head is that of an Amazon. The peculiar
helmet, rising to a point like a Phrygian cap, is typical of the Amazon. It appears to me that the
helmet here given is really a development of the Phrygian cap in metallic form. Perhaps the
sculptor invented this form of helmet for the Amazon out of the Phrygian cap typically ascribed to
her. This would explain in an interesting manner the curious piece of drapery which flaps back
from the head on the left, immediately below the helmet, above the hair. It is readily confused
with the hail' at that point. This piece of drapery in this position, under and behind the helmet,
" survival " of the soft
is a kind of Phrygian cap made of cloth. The cloth cap, as we see it in
Persians and Amazons (for instance in the figures of Persians and Amazons in the Vatican and at
Venice, ascribed to the Pergamenian school), was like the long-pointed knitted caps which the
'
Of course there is a slight variation in this proportion, '
Excavations of the American School of Athens at the
as the lips are more or less parted. Heraion of Argos, 1892, p. 16, pi. vii.
^
Introduction to Sculpture, p. 154 ff.
 PLATE XXXIl. : HEADS FKOM THE METOPES 181

Nc'iiiwlitaii fisheriiieii wear, and either could be drawn far down over the back of the heml with
now
the flap lianging down, or could be twisted or tied at tiie back. When a metal helmet of this
form takes its jdace, it apjwars that a piece of drapery was inserted under it at the back of the
head, jjrobably meant to protect the back of the heatl from the sun, a» is frecjuently done with
helmets and militaiy caps in the present day. One of the Amazons from the frieze of the Mau-
soleum of llalicarnassus ' shows this arrangement in a manner very similar to that of our Amazon
from the Argive Ileraeum.
Thougii this head is sliglitly disfigured by abrasions at the ti]) of the nose, over the right eye,
and on cheek and chin, it is in a comparatively excellent state of preservation, and shows in a
marked manner all the characteristic features which we have hitherto ascribed to these heads. The
evident inclination of the head to the left shoulder gives more expression or sentiment to this head
than is usual among these works. The position of the head was almost in full face, slightly more
towards the background on the right side, in which direction the head is inclined. At first it
looked as if the mass broken away at the right was a kind of jmntcllo joining the head to the
background, and that thus the head was in profile turned to the right but closer examination ;

makes it more probable that this projection represented a mass of hair clutched by some adversary
pulling the Amazonover on the right side. Still the head must have been slightly turned inward
on the right, as this side of the face is less fully finished in carving than the other side, in which
the hair and the mass of drapery beneath the helmet were fully visible.
No. 4, A split Portion of the Head of a Warrior, from the Metopes. Parian marble.
There remains here the left half, including both eyes, of a helmeted head very similar to that of
the warrior on Plate XXX.
Dimensions: —
.............
Height of fragment (chin to socket of crest)
Breadtli of fragment
16.6 cm.
9.3

Depth of fragment
Height of face
Outer corner of eye
...............
(foreliead to back)

to outer corner . . .
.

.
133
10.
7. •

Inner corner of eye to inner corner 2.

Length of nose . 3.5

Breadth of nose (at
Breadth of mouth
Breadth of eyes
..............
nostrils)

.
2.3
2.8
2.6

The side here preserved was evidently not the one foremost, from the spectator's point of view,
since, towards the back, the carving is hardly finished, and must at that point have approached the
background of the relief.

PLATE XXXII.
Nos. 1 and 2. Female Head, from the Metopes. Parian marble. Here given in full face
and in profile.
This head is the only one from the metopes which was discovered by Rangabe in his excava-
tions of 1854.2
Dimensions :
—
Height of fragment
Breadth of fragment
... 17.
12.5
cm.

Depth of fragment
Breadth of face .............. 15.
8.4

...........
Outer corner of eye to outer corner
Inner corner of eye to inner corner
Length of nose
6.6
2.1
3.3
Breadth of nose (at nostrils) 2.4
Breadth of mouth 2.7
Breadth of eyes 2.0

*
Overbeck, Gesch. der Griech. Plaslik, II. fig. 171,
'^
See General Introduction, pp. 67 flE.

Series iv. No. 3.

182 DESCRIPTION OF THE PLATES
or young woman and, in its original position,
The head evidently that of a fully matured girl
is

was meant to be seen almost in full face (about | full face). The variation from the full face view
consisted in the turn of the head to the right, so that the left side of the face was less fully visible
than the right side. This is manifest from the fact that the right side (her left) is less complete
in itsmodeling and elaboration. The hair, sketchily treated throughout, is hardly modeled at all
on the left side, not more fully than it is on the back the eye on this side is smaller and less fully
;

and delicately worked in the orb, lids, and brow. The same applies to the cheek. In the profile
view here given we have nevertheless presented this imperfect side because it illustrates so fully
the methods of cutting away the stone from the background of the relief, and the use of the drill
for this purpose —
to which frequent reference has been made above. The whole square and
massive outline characteristic of these heads is here manifest in both views, as is also the peculiar
rendering of the several features,
—
eyes, nose, and, especially, the mouth. The hair, treated in a
more sketchy manner than is the case in any of the other heads, is parted in the middle, the masses
in front drawn over on either side, and tied together behind. They thus cover the ears, leaving
only the lobes visible at either side. A
noteworthy peculiarity in the treatment of this hair is the
fact that the parting is not accurately in the middle of the head, above the centre between the
brows, and that its line and direction does not follow the line of the nose. Further notice will be
taken of this fact in the description of the helmeted head on Plate XXXIII. As this head was
not supposed to be seen in the profile view, neither of the ears is indicated with any degree of finish,
— the lobes are merely sketched in mind the sketchy character of the work and
in. If we bear
some distance from the spectator, we must be struck
the fact that this small head was to be seen at

by the grandeur and dignity coupled with a severe grace which the artist here succeeded in giving
to his work.
No. 3. Female Head from the Metopes. Parian marble.
A girl or young woman whose hair is grasped on the top of her head by some adversary (traces
of the fingers still visible), the head being pulled over to the left.
Dimensions :
—
Breadth of fragment .............
Height of fragment (including 3 cm. of neck)

..............
19.6 cm.
13.

Depth of fragment
Extreme breadth of .............
face
13.
8.6
Outer corner of eye
...........
to outer corner
Inner corner of eye to inner corner
. . . . . . . . ... 7.1
2.1

Length of nose (broken)

Breadth of nose (at ............
..............
nostrils)
3.7 ?
uncertain
Breadth of mouth
Breadth of eyes .............. 2.8
2.8

The scene given in this metope was evidently one of contest in which a female figure is being

violently grasped by the hair. This situation is often presented in battles of Amazons (three times
on the Phigalian Frieze, in the Mausoleum Frieze, and on numerous vases) or in scenes of the sack ;

of a city (as when Cassandra is dragged from the altar at which she has taken refuge) ^ or, finally, ;

in such scenes of abduction as are to be found in the Centaur battles. Troy As the destruction of
was represented in the sculptures, according to the testimony of Pausanias, and the battles of Ama-
zons, from the testimony of the extant monuments themselves, this head would probably belong to
a group from one or other of these scenes. The situation, to the indication of which this head
gave expression, is strongly individual, and thus the artistic treatment of this head differs in some
respects from that of the others. It is more violently drawn to one side, and this action necessitates
a greater degree of expression than is to be found in the placid heads hitherto described. The
hair being drawn up on the top, the slightly indicated waves are all vertical in the grooves while ;

the line of demarcation between the hair and the forehead is indicated in a severe and precise arch
from temple to temple the brow remains comparatively smooth, but the line of the eyebrows is
;

"
not so " placidly horizontal with flat, broadened lines as is the case, for instance, in the head that
we have just described. The line of the brow thus rises sharply upwards from the outer angle
'
Cf. Overbeck, Bildwerke zum thehischen und troischeti Heldenkreis, pi. xxvii.
 PLATE XXXII.: HEADS FROM THE METOPES 188

tow.ards the nose, and tliiiH corrcspoiulH to the lino of the more ]M>inted arcli in the demarcation of

the hiiir above tlio forehead. The eye itself is more widely open, the orb more prominent and
rounded tlian lias hitherto been the case, while the lids are more evenly joined at the outer angle.
The nose unfortunately broken away. The treatment of the region immediately l>elow the lower
is

than in the heads previously discussed. The total effect of this treatment is a
lid is also softer

comparatively greater softness and less placidity and repose in the expression of this face than is
seen in the head immediately above it. More complex sentiment is further produced by the hollow
groove beside the nostril, accentuated by a softer rise in the cheek at that iwint. There are no
further indications of emotion or suffering,
—
unless these l)e found in the treatment of the mouth,
which is here more firndy closed than in any one of the other heads. The original position of the
head was again probably almost full face.
No. 4. Head of a Vouiuj Girl, from the Metopes. Parian marble.
Dimensions :
—
Height of fragment
Breadth of fragment .............. 16.
12.0
cm.

Dopth of fragment
Extreme breadtli of face .............
.............
12.7
8.C
Outer eye to outer corner
Inner corner to inner corner
Length of nose
............. 0.8
2.

2.8

lirc.adth of mouth
Breadtli of eyes
...............
Hrcadtli of nose (at nostrils) 2.5
2.6
2.5

It was at first doubtful whether this head belonged to a male or a female figure, but further exam-
ination showed that it is undoubtedly that of a girl. The hair, though modeled with some care
only in front (more especially on the right side), is
quite unfinished and roughly blocked out on
the top, back, and sides behind the ears, but the parting in the centre and the pointed arch-like
demarcation of the line between hair and forehead show that it did not consist of short curls, but
of long strands gathered up from either side of the parting and tied together behind. Moreover,
the softer treatment in the modeling of the whole face shows it to be that of a girl and not of a

young man. The actual position of the head in the relief was about J full face, the head turning
towards the left (about like the view here given on the Plate), only slightly more turned to the left.
This is evident from the fact that the left half of the face is less fully elaborated on the side, and
more especially from the treatment of the hair and the ear. The ear is but very slightly indicated
on the left side, while on the right side it is perfectly modeled, and seems slightly turned forward
in order that it should be i)roperly visible. Further, the hair in front on the left side is merely
roughly blocked out at the point above and in front of the ear, while no attempt at complete model-
is made on this side from the parting to the ear at a distance of half an inch above the
ing
forehead. Moreover, it is on the left side at the back that a series of five drill-grooves are man-
ifest. Unfortunately in this case, too, the nose is broken away, while the upper lip, which was
curiously drawn up so that the teeth should show, is also damaged in the middle portion. The
expression of this head is distorted by this slight fracture of the upper lip. The lower lip of the
opened mouth shows the characteristic thickening in a marked degree. On the whole, this
small head shows more vivacity than do any of the others, and, in spite of the disfigurement

resulting from the fractures at nose and lip, possesses a peculiar charm.

PLATE XXXIIL
Nos. 1 and 2. Head of Athena with Helmet. Parian marble.
Dimensions :
—
Height of fragment 20. cm.
Breadth of fragment 14.0

Depth of fragment (measured from front to back of helmet) 17.

Extreme breadth of face 10.2
Outer corner of eye to outer corner 7.7
184 DESCRIPTION OF THE PLATES
Inner corner of eye to inner corner 2.7
'
4.6
Length of nose
. .

Breadth of nose (at nostrils) 3.

Breadth of mouth 2.7

'

Breadth of eyes (including lids) . . . 3.3

It will readilybe seen that this head is slightly larger than those hitherto examined and though ;

the head undoubtedly formed part of a high relief, the difference in dimensions caused a doubt
whether it was to be ascribed to the metopes at all but when these dimensions were compared
;

with those of the Amazon head measured from the point of the helmet to the chin, and when it
was realized that this head was that of a divinity, the force of this doubt was no longer felt.
This was especially the case when it was realized that similar differences exist in all known reliefs
and metopes.^ That this was the head of a divinity, in fact that of Athena, who would be present
at such a contest,^ became manifest when once it was recognized that this helnieted head was that
of a female and not of a male figure. As in the case of the young girl's head just described,
the treatment of the hair did not make this manifest at once, for the rough blocking out at the
sides does not make it
apparent to the hasty observer that it was long hair parted in the mid-
dleand drawn over the ears behind the back of the head. Careful observation of the hair at the
side will, however, show that this is the case, and this conclusion will be confirmed when the
mass behind the ear at the back is recognized as a continuation of the hair in front. The treat-
ment of the fleshy part of the face, moreover, is softer than in that of the male warriors and the
youth on Plates XXX. and XXXI., and finds its closest parallel in the girl's head (Plate
XXXIII. No. 4). Unfortunately, the face is much disfigured by fractures at one side of the nose,
which, so far as extant, together with the eyes, has the same characteristic treatment found in all
these heads. This common treatment is still more marked in the modeling of the mouth. The
helmet, too, the central portion of which is broken away, is peculiar to Athena on reliefs of this
A
detail of this helmet serves to illustrate clearly the care and
" science " of the
period. sculptor
"
as he considered the peculiar "perspective effects in sculpture from the point of view of the spec-

tator. The effect of such considerations upon the sculptor has already been noted with regard to
the sculj)tures of the Parthenon.^ In the view presented in No. 2 it will be seen that the central
division of the two halves of the helmet and the metal tongue which projects between them (the
cheek pieces and the nose covering) are not in their proper place immediately above the middle of
the forehead, nor do they follow the line of the nose. When, however, the head is seen more in

profile, turned to the right and from below, as is the case in the view given in No. 1, this dis-

crepancy, painfully manifest in the front view, is no longer felt. This is due to the fact that this
head was not seen in full face, but slightly inclined upwards, and turned to the right. This is
manifest from the fact that on the right side, ear and hair are not so completely worked as on the
left side and show chisel marks. It was this position which necessitated the peculiar direction

given this dividing line in the helmet in order that, from the spectator's point of view, the lines
should fall in their proper places. In the same way the slight divergence in the parting of the
hair of the female head on Plate XXXII. is rectified when the head is turned slightly to the left
and is seen from below; while the Amazon head on Plate XXXI., with the divergence between
the central line of the helmet and the line of the nose, is also rectified when tilted back and viewed
from the right —
an experiment which can even be tried with the Plate.
Nos. 3 and 4. Portions of Uvo Heads. Parian marble. From eyes to chin.
Dimensions of No. 3 :
— i

Extreme breadth, cheek to cheek 12.2 cm.

Height, bridge of nose to chin
..........
..........
Outer corner to outer corner of eyes
Inner corner to inner corner of eyes
11.5
9.6
3.2
Breadth of nose at
Breadth of mouth
Eye-holes
..............
nostrils (base) 3.6
4.2
5.3
'
See Introduction to Sculpture, ^
p. 148. Cf. my Essays on the Art of Pheidias, pp. 79, 80, 205,
^
Compare, for instance, the friezes of the Temple of 227.
Nik^ Apterus at Athens, the Theseum, etc.
 PLATE XXXIV.: TORSO OF YOUTH 185

Unfortunately, both No. 3 and No. 4 are in so fragmentary a condition that little can be said
of them, and we can only feel regret at what we have lost in the misHing parts. As will be seen
from dimensions, these heads, which belonged to figures in the round, did not form part of the
tlie

metopes, nor have we strong grounds for attributing them to the pediments. The eyes in No.
3
were hollowed out with deep grooves, and were i)robably originally supplied by some paste set into
the sockets.
a slight difference in proportion of outline, in that the cheeks at either side
In No. 8 tliero is

of the mouth maintain a square massiveness

in an exaggerated form. This effect is no doubt
heightened by the fact tliat the front of the chin is damaged. The mouth and nose, however,
show the characteristic treatment of Polycleitan art and the iHjrfeetion of the workmanship in
;

both these fragments makes us realize that these were once good specimens of the marble sculpture
of the period of Polycleitus.

PLATE XXXIV.
Tico views of a Torso of a nude Youth, from the Metopes. Right leg and arm upraised, with
a hand pressed under this upraised arm, belonging to some figure against whom the youth is
advancing to deal a blow with the sword, originally held in his right hand. Parian marble.'
Dimensions :
—
...........
Breadth of fragment ns mounted ?
Heiglit of fiagiiient as mounted
."Vi.

55.
cm.

Navel to base of neck .............

Deptli of fragment as mounted

..............
. . . 23.
19.6

Nipple to nipple
Breadth of lower waist ............. 13.
17.3

...........
Breadth of lower waist just above navel (narrowest part of torso)
Breadth of thighs inside to outside
Breadth of thigh front to back (left thigh)
16.
11.
11.3

.........
Breadth of arm (raised) at shoulder (top to armpit)

............
Breadth of wrist of hand placed on torso
Breadth of hand on torso
6.2
3.8
5.7
"

If in the metope representing a warrior (Plate XXX.) we had to deplore the state of imperfect

preservation of the surface, so that we learn but from

as to our artist's modeling of the
little it

nude, it is a jjiece of great good fortune that this torso from the metopes has come down to us
in an exceptional state of preservation with regard to the surface of the marble, as showing the
finished modeling of the nude.
The youth here represented was undoubtedly a warrior shown in the supreme moment of contest
in one of the battle scenes from the metopes. His opponent, to whom he is dealing the fatal blow,
was probably not of his own sex, but an Amazon. This is suggested by the short, dainty hand
with its little dimples on the back below the fingers, and the delicacy of articulation of each finger.
The adversary has probably sunk down on one knee and is pressing her upraised hand against the
youth's side below his upraised arm, while he, resting his weight upon his left leg, has probably
planted his upraised right foot upon her thigh as she is kneeling before him just before he strikes.
An extant portion of a thigh, including the knee-cap from the metopes (Plate XL.), shows the
foot of another figure planted just above the knee, in the manner in which the youth from our
torso planted his foot on his fallen adversary. The upper part of the body was thus strongly
drawn backward to the right, while the lower portion pressed forward to the left in the direc-
tion inwhich the upraised right foot was planted on the adversary. The left leg, upon which the
weight of the figure was chiefly carried, must have been slightly bent at the knee, as is evident
from the tension of the muscles of the thigh.
In the modeling of the nude this torso is among the finest that have come down to us from
Greek sculpture. The general masses of muscles of the chest and of the abdomen, firm and decided
in their articulation without hardness, gentle and flowing in the more delicate transitions without
softness and without unnecessary insistence upon details, are as far removed from any trace of the
Found See Excavations, Browusou, Am. Jour, of Arch. VIII. Frazer, Pausan.
'
in 1892. etc. pi. vi.; pi. x.; I. c.
X86 DESCRIPTION OF THE PLATES
conventionalism of archaic art, or from the severity of the early fifth century b. c, as it is from the
over-elaborateness and anatomical pedantry which began to set in towards the close of the fourth

centnry B. C. In the skill of modeling

and in the care with which every detail in the surface is
of the metopes of the Parthenon.
finished, it really marks one step in advance Though these
the same completeness of finish in the modeling which is
metopes are larger, they do not show
manifested by these metopes of the Polycleitan period and school. The minute care in the ren-
has been drawn in the Introduction to the Sculpture
dering of each detail, to which attention
(pp. 156 ff.), is illustrated by the delicate details in the modeling of the hand of the female adver-
sary, and especially in
the treatment of the upper parts of tlie thigh, and the curious round protru-
sion in the groin to which reference has already been made. I have had casts and
photographs of
this torsoexamined by several friends, surgeons and anatomists, leading authorities on this subject
both in England and in America but it has hitherto remained an unsolved problem. From tlieir
;

knowledge of the human figure dei-ived from the dissecting-room and the operating-table they have
not been able to account for this feature in normal anatomy. They either confessed their inability
to explain it, or maintained that it was a pathological phenomenon, the result of a too violent strain
or of the enlargement of the glands. But it was difficult to believe that, especially in this period of
art, so accidental a feature should have been copied, especially when we realize that in the torso on
Plate XXX. we have in the right leg of the warrior an indication of the same rise, though in a

slighter and less

markedly visible form.

Kecognizing these facts, I have carried on experiments with the living model under the direction
of Dr. Louis Waldstein, whose letter I here subjoin, with the result that in two of the most power-

fully developed professional athletes in London, the presence of this formation as a muscle in the
human body was But the muscle appeared in this form, not when the ath-
fully demonstrated.
letes were in repose or general action, but only when the exact attitude of our torso was assumed

by them. It was not even enough that the weight should be thrown on the bent left leg when
the right leg was upraised, —
to this had to be added the strain of pushing against an adversary
with the upper body, as in our torso the combatant is pressing against the adversary whose hand
ispressed against his side.
I cannot here dwell upon the interesting anatomical results of this observation. What it shows
us in the first place is the careful observation of nature and the painstaking rendering of these
observations in the art of modeling, —
characteristics which the passages referred to in the Intro-
duction emphasize as a leading feature in the art of Polycleitus. At the same time I cannot refrain
from citing this as a striking confirmation of my exposition published some years ago, with regard
to the influence of athletic games upon Greek art.^ I there said : ^ "It was here [in the palaestra],
with hundreds of nude youths, not only Wrestling, jumping, and running, but endeavoring by syste-
matic practice to remedy any defect or abnormality in any one limb or organ, that the artist day
by day studied his anatomy of the human figure without the need of entering the dissecting-room
or calling in the help of the anatomist." ^ I there pointed to the difference between the attitude
of mind, observation, and creation of the ancient Greek and of modern artists in this respect. It
must be regarded as a misfortune that the modern artist is dependent upon his one model, and
receives his training as regards human structure from the anatomist.* On the contrary, the real
" "
plastic anatomist should in the future have to discard from his mind the reminiscences of the
dissecting-room and should study the structure of the human figure bones and muscles in — —
action, in their function, as the ancient Greek sculptor studied them.''

'
See my Essays on the Art of Pheidias, pp. 394 ff.,
° from a letter of louis waldstf.in, m. d.
reprinted from the Proceedings of the Royal Inst, of The striking round prominence in the left groin of the
Great Britain, 1883. Argive torso suggests at once either an enlarged gland
'
Pp. 400 and 401. (bubo) or package of glands, or a rupture (hernia), because
'
Cf. also bottom of p. 402 to p. 403 ;
and pp. 406 and these are found exactly in that spot. But, for obvious rea-
407, where this point is further developed. sons, both possibilities must be excluded from consider-
*
It looks as if this had been the case in ancient Greek ation, from the artistic as well as from the medical point
times only during the period of decline marked by the of view.
schools of Pergamon and Rhodes. The triangle, which is so well marked in the figure, is
occupied al-so by the large blood vessels and the crural
 PLATE XXXV.: TORSOS FROM THE METOPES 187

PLATE XXXV,
No. 1. Tursu of (I Wdrrior nnth breastpi <itv in /lir/h rillrf, from the Metofies. Parian marble.
It is evident that thiu fragment belongs to the meto|)eH, as it is of the same dimenHions and

workmansliip and hIiowh at tlie back a ]K>rtion of tiie background of the meto|)e, while the tech*
niquo corresjwnds to that of the best specimens from the nietojK;s, those given on this Plate, aa —
well as smaller fragments not given here. The fragment Indonged to the figure of a warrior wwn
in full face, in violent .action, the lower ]>art of the body turning towards the left, while the up|M'r

))art is turned towards the right the right arm pressed over the breast towards the left shoulder.
;

Thougli tlic warrior is protected by a breastplate reaching to the waist, we cannot be absolutt-ly
certain whether we Imve not here a female figure (an Amazon ?), as the drapery covering the

thij^li below the waist,

and the rounded form which it covers, are suggestive of female garments
and forms. Unfortunately, but very little remains of this figure, and the greater part of what
does remain is in such a fragmentary condition that it does not help us towards further identifica-
tion. The lower part of tiie breastjdate and the drapery below it
wtill-pri'served jwrtious are the
from the waist upper part of the thigh. These portions, however, convey clearly the exqui-
to the
siteness of artistic finish in the modeling of these metojjes. The undergarment has evidently l)een
massed together beneath the biilt round the waist uiuler the breast|)late, and thus ])r<Mluce8 a suc-
cession of short, tiiickly massed folds, which have their analogy in the same arrangement (though
on a slanting downward) in No. 2 of this same plate. lielow these thickly massed folds the
line

undergarment of thin texture clings about the rounded forms of the thigh in very delicate folds
that are indicated by slight flat ridges in relief
—
a method of indicating thin and pliant drapery
covering rounded forms without interfering witLC the indication of the roundness in human, esjje-
cially female, figures.This same method can/be noted in the region of the thigh of No. 2 and of
the right side of the waist in No. 3 on this same plate. It is the .same system which is to 1h'

found in the drapery below the breasts of the large female torso from a pediment of this Temple,
figured on Plate XXXVII.
nerve, of which, however, are found laterally from the
all obliquely towards the back and side of the
directed

prominence in question. Tliere remain therefore to be median line. It is this course that so sharply defines the
considered only the muscles of that region. In order to form of the protuberance, for it corresponds only to the
bring them well into view the leg must be flexed in the uppermost part of the muscle, which is alone near enough
knee, and must be fixed with unusual tension of all those to the skin to appear thus clearly, while the remainder of

groups of muscles that serve to fix the pelvis upon the the muscle gradually recedes more and more from the

thigh the whole body must, in fact, rest upon the left
;
surface and is therefore hidden from view,

leg. In this position the extensors along the front of the In the living subject the Pectineus seems to be feebly
thigh bulge out, and the adductor group is well con- developed, for it could be seen but very slightly protrud-
tracted, so that tlie triangle (Scarpa's) is clearly defined, ing in two powerfully developed athletes, while in other
It will be seen that the nodide in question is in no way subjects no such indication of its functional power was
connected with any of the muscles forming the trian- produced. This proves, it would seem, that the exercises
gle, but that it is clearly separated from its base and its of the modern gymnast do not engage this group of
median boundary : it must, therefore, proceed from that muscles ;
for it must be said that the function of the
structure which forms the floor of the triangle. These are Pectineus not isolated, but will necessarily go together
is

the Pectineus and Ilio-Psoas muscles, whose function it with the Iliacus and the Psoas muscles. They are chiefly
iseither to flex the trunk upon the fixed thigh, or to draw brought into play in wrestling, —
wrestling, moreover, of
up and inwards the thigh upon the trunk. Of these two a particular kind, where the athlete contracts forcibly the
functions the first only need be considered, since, in the muscles of the gluteal region as well ; all that apparatus,
figure, the leg is in a rigidly fixed position, all the more in fact, that serves to fix the ball and socket joint and
fixed as the right leg is raised, and as the other com- thereby unite as into one rigid pillar the leg and the
batant is endeavoring to throw the entire weight of the pelvis. This enables the combatant to oppose with the
body bej'ond the left log. utmost power the force of a pushing attack. It would
Constructively and functionally, therefore, it is com- appear as if the modern wrestler relies much more upon
paratively simple to explain the round swelling under subtle agility than upon a concentration of pure muscular

consideration, and to see in it the forcibly contracted power. Such, at least, must be the inference drawn from
Pectineus muscle, a muscle which from its origin along the fact that the Greek artist reproduces a powerfully
the anterior ridge of the pubic bone to its insertion contracted muscle, which can hardly be found in the
directly under the trochanter minor of the thighbone, is modern gymnast.
188 DESCRIPTION OF THE PLATES
Dimensions :
—
Extreme height 45. cm.

Extreme width 21.5

Extreme depth 27.5

Height of relief from background 14.5

From base of neck to belt 26.
From breast to back 19.5

No. 2. Torso of a Female Figure, prohaMy an Amazon, from the Metopes. Parian marble.
The arrangement of the drapery in this lightly clad figure is typical of that worn by Amazons.
The light and short undergarment is fastened above her right shoulder, and then falls in undu-
lating curves over her right breast, leaving the whole left shoulder and breast bare. It is held

firmly to the body by a broad belt or zone round the waist. The baring of the left shoulder and
breast is not purely accidental and momentary, inasmuch as the amount of drapery thus left free

is on this side massed together under the belt. The consequence is that two strongly marked
masses of drapery, accentuating pronounced cross-lines in the composition of the figure, run from
her right shoulder and the right side of her waist, slanting downward in diagonal curves. These
lines, besidesgiving graceful variety to the composition, also accentuate the attitude : namely, the
bending of the upper part of the body backward to our right, while the lower part, with the right
hip, is pressed upward towards our left. The Amazon may thus be in an attitude of retreat or
avoidance of a blow coming from her right side above, or may be sinking down on her left knee in
consequence of a wound. In the modeling the same exquisiteness in the treatment, both of the
soft nude portions and of the folds in the garment, is maintained. The rippling larger mass
of folds, as the edge of the garment seems to flow from the shoulder to the waist, marks that
combination of firmness and crispness, together with softness, which among extant monuments
we find in the Thalassa or the reclining Fate in the Parthenon pediment, or the Victories
from the Nike balustrade. The thicker mass, running crosswise to the belt above it and below,
though full of life and variety, is not carried through with quite the same skill, especially as the
rounded mass above the belt bulges out without a proper suggestion of its continuation below
the belt. The broader, flatter masses of drapery below these cross-folds suggest the rounded forms
that they cover in the manner we have noted before, and have the same flat folds in relief, inter-

spersed between the smooth masses, clearly suggesting the nature of the drapery, and still accen-
tuating the rounded forms. The large species of dowel-hole cut in the side below the left shoul-
der I am unable to explain, —
whether it served for the insertion of some object in the original
statue of the metope, or for some subsequent repair, or for some use to which the fragment was

put when destroyed.

Dimensions :
—
Extreme height 48.5 cm.
Extreme width . 27.
Extreme depth 23.

Height of relief 16.6

From
From
base of neck to belt
breast to back of outer side (t. e. from right nipple to block) ..... 14.5
17.

No. 3. Torso of a Draped Female Figure, probably an Amazon from the Metopes. Parian
marble.
This torso comes from a figure similar to the one just described, only that there is no belt round
the waist. The thin undergarment is here also fastened over the right shoulder, and expands
from and towards the middle between the
this point in four relief folds over the right breast

breasts,where it evidently meets a similar arrangement of folds from the left shoulder (no longer
extant). These two masses of folds where they meet create, as is usual, the V-shape overlapping of
drapery at some distance below the neck between the breasts. From this point downward, in
well-marked wavy curves, the drapery falls down to the waist. Towards the right side and below
these marked folds, there are traces of the same treatment, suggestive of thin drapery over rounded
forms, which has been noted before. The modeling
of this fragment of drapery is bold and firm
and yet delicate, completely in keeping with the finished style as we have recognized it in these
metopes from every aspect.
 PLATE XXXVI.: HEAD OF IIEHA 189

Dimensions :
—
lireiultli of fraj^inciit 26.6 cm.

Height of fragniunt •• 34.

15.
Depth of frngiiiuiit
Breadth of torso below arms 17.

FRONTISPIECE AND PLATE XXXVI.

Four views of the Head of Hera, i)rohahly from tfie Western Pediment of the Temple. Parian
marble. Life size.

Dimensions :
—
Height of head 27. cm.
Breadth of liead 19.7

D.'i>th (depth of head, 22.7)

25.8
Breadth of face 13.2
Outer comer to outer comer
of eyes 10.

Inner corner to inner corner of eyes 3.1

Length of nose 5.5

Breadth of nose (at nostrils) . 3.0
Breivdth of mouth . 4.8
Breadth of eyes 3.7

Tliis head has been fully described in my preliminary publication of 1892.* I have also referred
at to the discussion arising out of that publication in the Introduction to the Scul|)-
some length
turo in this volume.^ It will be seen that though most authorities, headed by Collignon,'' have

accepted my headed by Furtwiingler,* have somewhat rashly a.scribed it to

identification, others,
Attic art. The head
on the whole in excellent preservation, though the left side, from its jwsi-
is

tion in the earth, has been strongly corroded, and the whole of this side, as well as the tip of the

nose, has been worn away. The lips have suffered in the same manner. In all other respects,
however, we may consider this to be one of the most representative heads of the great period to
which it belongs.
The head formed part of a female figure, probably draped, and, from extant indications, the
whole figure must have borne characteristics of grandeur, if not of severity, in attitude and execu-
tion. It was evidently meant to be seen in full face from the front view, for, though the hair is

modeled in ridges at the back as well as at the it is

unmistakably showing
front, much less finished,

that the back was not meant to be seen. Moreover, the head is placed without any turn to right
or left on the neck, which again must have risen at right angles between the shoulders and this ;

alone would be expressive of a certain solemnity, nay, severity in the general attitude. The
position
same character is preserved in the composition and modeling of this head in every phase of the
work. In full face as well as in profile the outline and general build of the head present that
square rectangular massiveness which we have found to constitute a leading characteristic in all our
heads as well as in those commonly attributed to Polycleitus. This broad, simple, severe character
is maintained in the general arrangement and elaboration of the hair, in the severe lines of forehead

and brow, as well as in every feature of the face, —

though in this larger work the finish and refine-
ment of the modeling is blended with the breadth and moderation which stamp the head as a whole.
Moreover, we must always remember when comparing the execution of this work, originally destined
for marble, with that of other Polycleitan works, which are copies from original bronze or gold and

ivory statues, that a certain softness and indefiniteness is a characteristic inherent in marble sculp-
ture as such.^ The squareness of general outline is most pronounced in the profile view, whereas
in the front view this is slightly counteracted by the necessary protrusion of masses of hair on either

See Excavations, and by the technique of marble sculpture in Polycleitan heads

'
etc. pp. 8-13, pis. iv. v.
^
See pp. 164 if. in the treatment of the hair in our head of a youth from
« Hist, de la Sculpt. Grecque, II. p. 168. the metopes as compared with the Doryphorus and Dia-
* L. c. dumenus. Cf. pp. 169 ff.

'
We have noted this modification of style as affected
190 DESCRIPTION OF THE PLATES
side of the forehead. The from squareness can be most readily appreciated
scale of this deviation

when we compare head of the Doryphorus with that of the Diadumenus, and
in this respect the

finally arrive at the Amazon

heads of Polycleitan type, in which this bulging out of the hair corre-

sponds to that of our Hera. The hair was parted in the middle, the parting continuing behind the
narrow stephane down the back of the head. From the middle of the forehead two masses of hair
are combed wavy line, and, covering the greater part of the ear,^ are joined
to either side in a

under the stephane above the back of the neck while the mass of hair from either side of the
;

in one thick coil down the back. A curious feature is the small braid-
parting behind these hangs
like line of curls which projects out of the central mass of hair between the stephane and the
middle of the forehead. This curious feature is to be found in the Caryatids from the Erechtheum,
and, as I have pointed out in the Introduction,^ probably led to the singular misconception on
the part of those who see Attic style in this head. The wavy mass of hair combed towards either
side from the central parting covers the ears and allows only the lobes to be visible. Holes are
drilled into these which evidently served to hold metal earrings. The line of demarcation between
the hair and the forehead is firmly drawn in its arch-like outline in spite of the wavy contour of

the hair, a feature which we have before noted in the metope heads on Plate XXXII. The
brow, too, is treated in broad simplicity without minute modeling and half-tones, herein also corre-

sponding to the treatment of the metope heads on Plate XXXII. The relation between the
bi'ow, the eyelids, and the orbs is very similar to the treatment of these metope heads, only that
in this life-size head the working is more elaborate and the individual features more firmly cut. It
is in the treatment of the eyebrow and the eyelid that the maker of this marble head betrays him-
self as being chiefly influenced by the firmer bronze technique traditional in his school.
In spite of the corrosion and the breaking away of the tip, the nose shows the same treatment
that we have found metope heads and in heads attributed to Polycleitus. Unfortunately,
in the

these breakages give awrong impression of the whole face, especially in the profile view. In the
same way we must regret that the middle of the upper lip and the whole of its left side have been
partly broken off or worn away. In spite of this, all the characteristics of Heraeum and Poly-
cleitan heads that I have described in the treatment of these features are to be found in a marked
manner in this Hera. The same is true of the lower lip and of the chin. At all events, I can
hardly believe that we shallmeet with a dissentient opinion conscientiously formed and honestly
held in stating that if the Bologna head, supposed to be a reproduction of the Lemnian Athena, is
characteristic of Attic art, then, in general character as well as detailed composition of the features
and in modeling, this Argive head would be contrasted with it ; whereas if the various heads, —
that of the Doryphorus, the Diadumenus, the Amazons, and the so-called Bacchus head in the
1
It has been maintained — though never, so far as I as in this head of Hera. Moreover, we find, even as early

know, in print — that this head was of a far later date than as the sculptures from the Temple of Zeus at Olympia,
the fifth century b. c, because it is held that in statues of that the ears of Hippodamia are completely covered ; that
the fifth and earlier centuries before our era the ear was on the nymph in the metope of the Hesperides, as well
not covered in this way, but was fully modeled. Apart as in the female head in the metope with Atlas, the ear
from the fact that whoever would ascribe this work to a is covered as in ours; that in the Parthenon Frieze the

late origin proves himself to be utterly devoid of any maidens as well as Hera have their ears partly covered,
appreciation of the broad difference of style in Greek art, and that the same is the rule with the Amazons and other
the statement about the ear is flatly contradicted by the female figures from the Phigalian Frieze, while it is em-
evidence of extant monuments. It is true that in heads phatically true of the Polycleitan Amazon. Even on
of the Archaic period, notably on coins, the ear
is generally coins approaching the date of our statue we meet with

completely modeled, even in an exaggerated form, where the same treatment, notably in those from Argos repre-
the hair ought to cover it. It may even be maintained senting Hera, one of which (taken from Mionuet's casts,
that it was usual not to hide the ear in most heads during Gardner, Types of Greek Coins, pi. viii. 14) shows the
the earlier, and even the best, periods of Greek art. Still earrings hanging from the lobe. And if we go further
it will be well to ask ourselves the
question, how many afieldamong coins, a glance at those of Terina with the
well-preserved, quite authentic heads, especially female nymph Terina, of Cephallenia with the head of Procris,
heads with long hair, we have belonging to these early of Rhegium and Croton with the long-haired Apollo, will

periods ? Yet even among these it is well for us to realize forever dispel this absurd generalization which I have
that on our heads from the metopes of this very temple, heard quoted as a chronological landmark by an archaeo-
such as the Amazon head, Platk XXXI. No. 3, and two logist of some reputation,
of the heads on Plate XXXII., the lobe only is indicated, ^
Pp iqq g
 PLATE XXXVI.: HEAD OF HERA 191

Mtiseum (wliich I have now identified with the Polycleitan Hera),'

Britisli if these
represent the
—
Aigivo work of the Polycleitan jwriod, then this Hera shows most striking reHcmblances to it in

every respect.
I have called this head Hera.^ I fully admit that the identification of this head as Hera is far

from being beyond all doubt, and if I continue to use the name of this goddess, I do not do this
with any claim to dogmatic certainty. I only mean that among all |)ossible designations this still

appears to me the most likely. I do not see how any degree of probability attaches to the identi-
fication with lebc.1 P]ven if the type of this goddess were fully established in well-identified sjHSci-
mens (which assuredly not the case), I believe that the severe character and the indication of the
is

age in our head would not correspond to the conception whicli, from other sources, we should form
of tills youthful attendant upon Hera. For though I do not see in this head any indication of a
distinctly matronly character, certainly suggests to me at once full maturity, stateliness, and grace.
it

Tliis with the stephane, shows this heatl to be that of a divinity. In look-
very stateliness, together
ing about the Greek divinities after Hera, there are three others to whom characteristics in this
work might possibly apply Aphrodite, Artemis, and Athena. This order marks my preference
:

of identification. For Aphrodite the character and expression seem somewhat too severe, while
the presence of the earrings and the general effect they must have i)roduced seem to me to mili-
tate against the character of Artemis as well as of Athena. Finally, it might be maintained that
this head may have belonged to one of the female figures of priestesses which, according to Pau-
sanias (II. 17. 3), stood before the temple. Here, again, the absence of the veil and the presence
of the earrings forbid such a supposition, and, moreover, the place where the head was found

directly contradicts the assumption that it belonged to one of the statues placed in front of the
temple. For the position of this head in the earth made it most probable that this was one of
the few works which had remained on the spot where it hatl originally fallen. This spot was
immediately in front of the western side of the temple, on a line with the stylobate. From the
nature of this region at the west end of the temple, it seems highly improbable that statues were

placed here on their bases ; while the evidence from the numerous bases that were found still in
the wide space in front of the temple at the east end shows that this was the region where statues
were massed together, and not the back. The actual provenience of the head thus strongly con-
firms the view that the head belonged to a figure from the western pediment of the temple, from
which it had fallen to the actual spot where good fortune enabled us to discover it in such excel-
lent preservation, as one of the very few Greek heads of these, and one of the noblest from the
fifth century B. C.

PLATE XXXVII.
Torso of a draped Female Figure, from the Pediments of the Temple. Parian marble.
As I have already stated in the Introduction,^ this torso, which was excavated by Kangabe, cer-

tainly belonged to a pedimental figure. It is part of a life-size statue.

Dimensions :
—
Breadth of fragment
Height of fragment
Depth of fi-.^gment
..............
..............
41.
40.
33.5
cm.

Breast to breast 14.5

Width of upper arm at elbow
Extreme thickness of upper arm ...........
Breadth of torso just below breast
8.8
9.2
24.

That it formed part of a pedimental figure is evident from the fact that, whereas the front is
modeled with exquisite finish, the back is only roughly blocked out. This will readily be seen by
comparing the front and side views given on the Plate. A hole is cut in the centre of the neck,
which may either have been worked in later times, when the temple was destroyed and the statue

»
'
Joum. o/Hellen. Stud. 1901, pp. 30 ff. See p. 152.
^ maintains that it is certainly not
Furtwiingler (I. c.)

Hera, but probably Hebe.

192 DESCRIPTION OF THE PLATES
broken, or may have been a when it was originally made, or during
dowel-hole to hold the head

subsequent repair. So, too, a hole

on the right shoulder of the figure (clearly seen in the side

view) either may have been made for purposes of repair,

or may have served to fix some bronze
object or ornament. There are also traces of drill-holes in the drapery about the waist and under
the left armpit. If the drill was used for the purpose of elaborating the folds of drapery in

the marble, it was only ajiplied roughly to work away the material and was not meant to be
seen. The projecting portions of the drapery at this point which would have hidden these traces
of drill-work have been broken away. The drapery above the breasts is much corroded, while below
these it is in comparatively good preservation and shows exquisite modeling. The figure was
clad in a thin undergarment (^chiton), while round the shoulders hung a thicker cloak (Jiimatioii),
the edges of which can stiU be seen above the breast ; these, falling over the back, were massed
under the left arm of the figure, falling in a curve over the forearm and the hand. Mention has
^
already been made in the Introduction of the delicate modeling of the folds in the thin undergar-
ment as it covers the breasts, which this figure has in common with the torso from the metopes.
The naturalism of this modeling forms a striking contrast to the greater severity in a head like
that of our Hera. This contrast is the rule, and not the excejition, in the sculpture of this
It is not greater than that between the modeling of the youth's head on Plate XXXI.
period.
and of the nude torso on Plate XXXIV., all from the metopes of this temple. In respect to
the softness and elaborateness in the modeling of the female figure and the fall of the thin drapei-y
over it, we should place this torso half way between the reclining Fate or Thalassa from the eastern
pediment of the Parthenon and the sandal-binding Nike from the Balustrade of the Temple of
Nike Apterus. Our torso would well mark the intermediate stage of development in this respect
between these two works, which would, moreover, correspond exactly to the date ascribed to the
building of the Heraeum.

PLATE XXXVIII.
Nos. 1 and 2. Two views of a Fragment of the draped portion of the Lower Leg, from a
Figtire in the round belonging to the Pediments, standing on a plinth. Parian marble.
This interesting fragment of a draped figure, manifestly in violent motion, comes from a life-size

statue, which evidently belonged to the pediments.

Dimensions —
Extreme
:

........
height from top of knee to bottom of plinth 55. cm.
Extreme
Extreme
width of base as extant
breadth of base (including drapery) ......... 21.6
13.8
Extreme thickness of calf .

Thickness of plinth at the highest point

. .

..........
. . . . . . . . . .9.7
9.

That this fragment belonged to a pedimental group is proved, not only by the fact that in marble
and workmanship it corresponds to the numerous smaller fragments of drapery belonging to the
same class of figures, which evidently formed part of a larger group (see Introduction to Sculpture,
p. 152), but also by the fact that a figure in such violent motion could not have belonged to a sin-
gle statue standing upon its base in the period of Greek art to which all these fragments belong.
It might conceivably be a portion of a figure on a high pillar represented as floating through the

air, such as the Nike of Paeonius at Olympia but this Olympian figure was, if not unique, at
;

all events not a common type of monument, nor

is such a monument, which would probably have

elicited a comment of Pausanias, mentioned

by any ancient authority as being at the Heraeum.
The figure was evidently hastening through the air, the wind driving the drapery over the leg into
rounded folds behind. In all likelihood we here have a parallel to the Nike or Iris from the
Parthenon pediments, figures which, on either side of the centre, appear to be communicating the
news of the central scene to the seated or reclining figures at either angle of the pediment.^ The
bold curved lines of the sharply cut folds in this drapery illustrate the workmanship of the best
period of Greek sculpture. Within these sharp ridges of curved folds there is again a fondness
1
See pp. 157 and 187. "
See my Essays on the Art of Pheidias, p. 149.
 PLATES XXXIX.-XLI. : FRAGMENTS FROM THE METOPES 198

for smooth, flat surfaces

; while variety is given to these at the ]>oint8 where the dnipi-ry covers
the rounded calf of the leg l)y the thinner flat relief folds, again showing the same system whicli
we have noted in the torso (Platk XXXVII.), and in the three draped fragments from the
metopes (Platk XXXV.). In fact, if we but remember the different dimensions, and the differ-
ence between a figure in the round and one in high relief, the workmanship in this fragment of
drapery is quite the same as that of the fragment (Platk XXXV. No. 3) which belongs to a
metoixj in relief less than lialf the size of this pcdiniental statue. The pieces of undercut drajwry
that have been broken away behind and above the foot show, in both views here given, the use
of the drill for the puri)ose of cutting away the unnecessary marble before the final finish. It

will here be seen how several grooves remain, showing how the drill had been worked through
behind the foot from either side.
Nos. 3 and 4. Two views of a Fragment of Drapery covering portiorm of the Leg in a Female
Figure from above the knee to above the ankle, from a Pediment. Parian marble. This frag-
ment, like Nos. 1 and 2, and for the same reasons there given, formed part of a jwdimental statue.
Tlie figure itself was on the same scale.

Dimensions :
—
Extreme height G8. cm.
Extreme width
Tliickncss from middle of tliigli ............
............
60.
29.
From knee
Extreme
to beginning of .ankle
...........
thickness of calf (inside fold)
35.
11.3

Whereas the previous figure rapidly moving forward was evidently meant to be seen in profile, the
statue to which this fragment belongs was probably seen in the front view and did not stand

absolutely erect. At first sight it suggests the seated attitude as we know it from the Parthenon
pediments ;
but the figure could not have been seated, as the knee, though slightly bent, is not
sufficiently bent for that attitude. The drapery is massed in deeply cut thicker folds between the
legs, converging in almost parallel lines below the knee to the middle of the ankle, and then fall-
ing in divergent lines over either ankle. As seen in this fragmentary condition, the close massing
of these folds, when parallel, looks somewhat monotonous but this effect was imdoubtedly relieved
;

by the variety above and below this point when the figure was complete. The actual carving of
these folds is the same as in Nos. 1 and 2. Though the edges of the folds have been broken away,
it will be seen that in the side view. No. 4, the work is not so careful and
highly finished in the
back as in the front, —
whicli is a further indication that this was a pedimental figure. For an
acroterium above or on the side of the pediment the dimensions of the figure are too large.

PLATES XXXIX., XL.

Additional Marble Fragments from the Metopes.
I have here given a number of additional fragments that certainly belonged to the
metopes,
but which cannot be further identified and do not require detailed comment. One of these is
pieced together out of six separate fragments, and gives some notion of the arrangement of the
metopes, especially with regard to the background and the upper part. The hole drilled through
the background on the right-hand upper corner of Plate XXXIX*. is similar to that in Plate
XXX., and no doubt was the regular method of fixing these high relief slabs to the entablature.
I have also (Plate XL**.) given fragments of legs from the metopes. There is also one arm
vigorously drawn back, which held a shield. Among them are also the backs of two heads, one
with a helmet (Plate XL".).

PLATE XLI.

Additional Fragments of Drapery and Feet., probahly from the Pediments.

I have here selected from the large mass of such fragments portions that seemed to me to have
come from the pediments, since they belonged to larger figures worked in the round. These will
further illustrate the style of the drapery, and their number will help to support our conclusion as
194 DESCKIPTION OF THE PLATES
to the presence of such sculpture in the pediments Of the larger feet here given (Plate XIjT''.),
several rest on plinths. The right foot on
a plinth, covered with drapery over the instep,
belonged to a life-size figure about the dimen-
sions of the one to which the draped leg on
Plate XXXVIII. belonged. The varying
thickness of the plinth (5| cm. in front, 6]

to 8 cm. in back) makes it improbable that

tlie

it belonged to an ordinary statue on a base.

Tiie foot, moreover, is tilted forward, resting

chiefly upon the inside, and thus belonged to

a statue in motion, the forward movement of
which is further indicated by the curved direc-
tion of the folds in the drapery that covers the

instep.
The other dimensions are :
—
Length of fragment . . . 31.5 cm.
Extreme height (including plinth) . 20.

Depth
Width of foot .... 14.
9.3.

is the fragment of a wrist and hand

There
holding a piece of flying drapery. This is
probably from the pediments, and belonged to
a figure in which the cloak, fluttering in the
wind from the back, is held up by one end in
the upraised hand, as is often the case with
Nikes. There is also here a small fragment
of what appears to have been a marble vase.
There is no reason to believe that the frag-
ment of drapery in broad, flat folds with Fig. 90. — Miscellaneous Marble Fragments from
THE Hekakum
well-preserved painted border of a maeander
pattern, and below it spikes or rays, came from tlie pediments, while the other fragments proba-
bly did (Fig. 90).
XI

K
W
W
H
O

W
O
H
>
f
The Argive Hekaeum
Plaits XXXI

YOUTH (PROFILE) YOUrn (rvi.v-rACM)

W
xSia

AMAZON WARRIOR

THREE HEADS FEOM THE JIETOPES

IZZX

«2['iOT:tu .1TTT r/ro:r'r RaA.'irn rtr-raTiT

m!
The Ahgive IIeraeum Plate XXXII

HEAD OF GIRL (ranoabe) HEAD OF GIRL (BAMOABit)

HEAD GRASPED AT HAIR GIRL'S HEAD.

THREE FEMALE HEADS FROM THE METOPES

Jii7,n r,\ (i:-
The Abgive Hekaeum Plate XXXIII

HEAD OF ATHENE FROM THE METOPES

3 4
LOWER PORTIONS OF LARGER HEADS IN THE ROUND

HEADS FROM THE HERAEUM

I

1^

m
H
 a:
o

PS

3
 Si

K
O

A ;-

•X

O
The Argive IIeraeum Plate XXXVI

^
THREE VIEWS OF HEAD OF HERA
fl
J

B
H
O

O
CO

O
H
W
*1

H
The Ahgive Heraecm Plate XXXVIII

LOWER PORTION OF LEG ON PLINTH

DRAPED THIGH AND LOWER LEG

FRAGMENTS OF DEAPERY FROM THE PEDIMENTS

Thb Aroivk IIkraeum Plate XXXIX

Plate XXXIX* Plate XXXIX"

Plate XXXIX*; Plate XXXIX'

MARBLE, FRAGMENTS FROM METOPES
The Aroivk. Heraeum Plato XL

Plate XL" I'LATE XL"

Plate XL'^
MARBLE FRAGMENTS FROM METOPES
The Aroivf, IIerawtm Pi.A-re XLI

Plate XLI* Plate XLi^

Plate XLI''
MARBLE FRAGMENTS FROM PEDIMENTS
INSCRIPTIONS FROM THE ARGIVE HERAEUM
 INSCRIPTIONS FROM THE ARGIVE IIERAEUM*
PART FIRST
INSCRIPTIONS ON STONE

BY RUFUS BYAM RICHARDSON AND JAMES RIUNALL WHEELEB

I.

On
a jioroH block in a wall between the Second
Temple and the West Building. Tlie
block has a face 1.22 m.X.32 m. It was uncovered in the sprinjr of 1895.

The letters are in

general .10 ni.
high, but omicron is exceedingly small. This inscrip-
tion is probably older than No. ii. The three-stroke nujina alone would carry its date
to about 500 ». c.- Kappa is the most
striking letter in fonn. At first sight one
hardly notices that the upright bar projects above and below its junction with the oblique
bars, which do not meet each other. Only on closer notice the uprigh^ bar is seen to
project slightly. The wide gap between the oblique bars might seem to be a Theran
feature, as the inscription from Thera given in /. G. A. 454 (Roberts, Iiitrod. to
Greek EpUj. No. 4') has a form
almost exactly parallel.
in this respect But almost the
sjime peculiarity occurs in the Nicaudra inscription (/. G. A. 407), and in that on the

Apollo base at Delos (/. G. A. 409). In fact, we have almost a parallel at Argos itself
in /. G. A, 31.
II.

This inscription holds the first place in importance among all the inscriptions on stone
hitherto found at the Heraeum, both because it is one of the oldest and because it is so

preserved that it may be read entirely. It is cut in a massive block of limestone which
formed the upper part of the stele, the shape of which is shown in the cut. Its dimen-
sions are thickness, .28 m. ; height, from apex to the break at the bottom, .44 m. ;
:

height at right side, .37 m. ; at left, .34 m. ; breadth, .39 m. Below the inscription
there is a rectangular depression .22 m. wide and .005 m. deep. The letters vary in
1
The Inscriptions here discussed were, with a single The Inscriptions on Bronze (including the important
exception (No. I.), transported to Athens during or at archaic bronze tablet, first published by Dr. James Den-
the close of the excavations, and are now in the National nison Rogers in the American Journal of Archaeology,
Museum. The block upon which No. I. is cut was too Second Series, vol. V. [1901], pp. 159 C) are published
large to be removed. by Mr. Ue Cou in the second volume, under Bronzes.
Nos. and xv.-xviii., were first published
iii.-v., vii.-x., Inscribed vases are published by Mr. Ilecrmance in the

by Professor Wheeler, in the American Journal of Archae- same volume, in the chapter on Vases.
ology, First Series, vol. IX. (1894), pp. 351 ff., and tlie I wish to make acknowledgment here of the kindness
remainder by me in the same periodical. First Series, of Professor Max Friinkel of Berlin, who sent me advanoe
vol. XI. (1896), pp. 42 ff., where I also published, in vol. sheets of his Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum Pelopon-
IX. (1894), pp. ^0
ff., the Stamped Tiles. (These articles nesiacantm (C. /. G. P.), in which he has treated the
are republished in the Papers of the A merican School of Clas- inscriptions from the Heraeum. In Nos. n. and xiv.
sical Studies at Athens, vol. VI. pp. 272 ff., 261 ff., 299 ff.) I have es|>ecially profited by his suggestions.
— R. B.
In the present publication the order of the Inscriptions Richardson.
' RoberU's {Introd.
on Stone is approximately chronological, although the It would fall into to Greek Epig.
Otherwise little " second
criteria are not in every case infallible. p. 117) period of Argive inscriptions."
change has been made in the first form of publication.
198 INSCRIPTIONS FROM THE ARGIVE HERAEUM
height from .012 m. to .02 m. There is great irregularity in the spacing of the letters.
The irregularity of turning lines 4 and 6 clown at the ends is probably accounted for by
the desire to begin the following lines with a new name.
The stone was brought to the Central Museum from the Heraeum in the winter of
1893-94 with several others mentioned by Professor Wheeler as lying at the Heraeum.

Whether it was found in the excavations of 1892 or of 1893 I am not able to ascer-
tain. Professor Wheeler did not see it when he examined the inscriptions in the spring
of 1893.
The surface of the stone is slightly chipped at both edges. Room is found in this
battered space for B at the beginning of line 1, but at the end there is no room for the
N which might be expected. Neither can this N find a place at the beginning of line 2,
 INSCRIPTIONS ON STONE: NO. II. 199

where there is
only room for I. The rou<fh breuthinpf was a])]>arently not used Iwfore
lapd? as is seen by the dear case of iapofivdfiou€<;, hne 3.' At
the be^^nning; of Hue 3,
Imust have been crowded in, since the di))hthong is used in the very ohlest inscriptiouK.'
In hne 4 the first letter must be fl, since there is no trace of a cross-bar for B, wliich

^- A iTA k A •:

ll,A 1 B O ^ E I- A^^®l 'Ja oToAa «cai o rtka/juit

^ A^ •
I
A R Oa/\ /v a aa @/v^ ^>po 1
D (2i>s
l]af>a [T]tt« ["lljpot

[(Jat
•
lapo/ivdixovK
'•
I
Ta« '\frft-

roiS<'

%lv^>AWOA/:DVAAA/V'|:A'Fn^ IIvp^ttAtb)!' Av^i^ . . .

AfptfTtvt,
4hVA/^EN'fel\BVl^l^E Vr^-'^S :

f^R ^ TODA/VVO^ iB V llA7Av®_f;

•
'Wxafiiyrji YAA«vt,
I

rA< l
^''"-" ^^ ' «'*'^^- —— -^
-A y\y^ .
'ApwrroSa/ifK

'A/x^(Kp(TOf
•
"Y/jfaftos,

Ilaf^vX-

woidd be the only alternative. The surface of the stone where such a bar would fall is

perfectly preserved. The fourth letter is almost cerfciinly F, as the

surface is smooth
where the right-hand limb of a n would naturally appear.^ Furthermore, if such a limb
had had the length which it has in Ilai/^uXa?, line 7, it would have run into the A im-
mediately below it.
HvpfaXidiv is
probably a diminutive from irvpaXii, a kind of bird,
which in Hesychius is written TrvppaXi<; where the second rho seems to point to an
original dUjamma.
There are many interesting peculiarities of form in the letters of the inscription. The
most striking is the second omicron of lapop.va.p.ov^';, hne 3.* It is evident at a glance
that even apart from this omicron, which is probably an accident, we have an inscription
venerable for its antiquity. E==i7, o=:w, \r=\, indeed run on in Argos to the end of the
fifth ceiitiuy. But we find beside these usages 0=S, P=/>, V = w, Q=</), B rough breath- =
1
For tapis as '^i\6ii in Doric, see Ahrens, Dial. Dor. who bad already pronounced in favor of an Argive artist
§4.3. for this frieze on the ground of the Argive lambda in the
inscription, was inclined {B. C. H. XX. [1896], p. 599 f.)
2
/. G. A. 3.'!, 42.
' Tlie only other possibility, since gamma has the form to see in this crossed omicron of our inscription a cor-
A, line 2. roboration of his view. But since a careful scrutiny of
*
This would pass without question for a simple error allthe other omicrons of our inscription fails to discover
of the stone-cutter, but for the fact that an inscription any cross marks, the interpretation of this one ease as the
connected with the frieze of the treasury of the Cnidiaus survival of an Argive peoiliarity seems precarious. Pro-
at Delphi, which probably belongs to the sixth century fessor Friinkel, however, in his copy (C I. G. P. 517),
B. c, has two and perhaps three omicrons, crossed in the which is here reproduced, finds traces of these cross
same way. B. C. H. XIX. (1895), p. 537. M. HomoUe, marks in the at the end of the line.
200 INSCRIPTIONS FROM THE ARGIVE HERAEUM
ing, the digamma, and perhaps, more important than all these,the punctuation of the

words with three dots in perpendicular lines/ It may be added that M and N show very
later perpendicular ones. In the former letter the middle
oblique lines in place of the
lines in several cases fail to meet at the bottom. AlpJia also, which in the main looks
has in one or two cases the cross-bar quite far from horizontal. Forms
tolerably late,
^
like Avfiav<;,^ also, and Uav<l>vXa<; look old. In view of all these features, it would
seem rash to put our inscription much, if any, later than 500 b. c.
The dialect is Argive Doric, pure and simple. The names Alcamenes and Aristodamus
have also a good Doric ring to them.
The contents of the inscription is a list of four Hieromnemons, one from each tribe,
the name appended. 'lepofjivqiJiove^ was the usual name for the board hav-
of which is

ing charge of temple affairs, not merely at Delphi, where the usage is perhaps best
known, but in many other places as well. For the Heraeum it is seen also in vii., ix., and
XIV. The inscription is interesting as aifording almost the earliest mention of the names
of the four Doric tribes.* These are sufficiently well attested in later times for
Argos
and for various Doric communities connected with Argos.^ The editors of the inscrip-
"
tion in the Bulletin de Correspondance Hellenique, vol. IX. p. 350, remark Jusqu' :

ici les inscriptions du Peloponnese qui donnaient les noms des tribus argiennes dafciient

toutes de I'epoque imperiale il

y a quelque interet a les retrouver dans un document
;

qui remonte, selon toute vraisemblance au iii"" siecle avant notre ere." But our inscrip-
tion is two centuries older than the one in question.
at least
The Hyrnethians are not so frequently mentioned as the other three tribes, and are
regarded as a later addition to these original three tribes,*' the name indicating perhaps
an incorporation of a non-Doric element' into the community, a fact which was con-
cealed under the of Hyrnetho, the daughter of Temenus, marrying Deiphontes.
myth
But the addition of the Hyrnethians cannot have been very late, for our inscription
shows them such good and regular standing that they are not even relegated to the
in

last place in the catalogue, as is the case in the inscription just mentioned.

To the name of the Hieromnemon who is mentioned first is appended the word
dpptjreve.
fortune this very word, without the digamma, is preserved in Le
By good
Bas, Voyage Archeologique, No. 1, of the inscriptions from Asia Minor (S. G. D. 3277).*
The passage runs as follows dp-qreve Acwi' ySwXas o-evrepa?. Le Bas translates " Etait
: :

1
We
have become accustomed to find this method of ^
Gilbert, Griech. Staatsalter. II. p. 77, and the refer-
piinctuation in some of the very
oldest pieces which are ences there given. Also B. C. H. IX. p. 350 V. p. 217
;

well known, e. g. Rohl, /. G. A. Nos. 5, 37, 41, 42 (the (Cos) ;

VIII. p. 29 (Calyninus).
last three from Argos), 68, 119 (Olympia bronzes), 321, '
Steph. Byz. s. v. Aviiav :
— ipvKii AapUav fiaav ie rpf??,

322 (Galaxidhi bronzes). 'TAXeij koX T\6.}x^v\oi Kai Av^av€s 4^ 'Hpa/cAeouy, Kal TrpoafTfOr]
2
Ahrens, Dial. Dor. § 14, puts this retention of the v 'rpvvela iis'E(popot d. It is wortli noting that in the in-

combination vs as a peculiarity of Argos and Crete. Tipuvs scription given in Kabbadias, Fouilles d'^pidaure, No.
is an instance of its survival to the present time (cf. 234, of the latter part of the third century, in a list of 151
Kiihner-Blass, Grammalik, I. p. 257). Megarian names, only Hylleis, Pamphyli, and Dymanes
In the Argive inscription given by Foucart in Le Bas,
8
appear. Perhaps the Hyrnethii had not been added in
Peloponnese, No. 11611, o <pv\h. rZv Oa/iepuASj/ (Foucart, Ilo^- Megara. The old triple division appears in Herod. V. 08.
<j>iS\av), we have this form instead of the later form in Some would find it also in Aapites rpixdiKcs, Horn. Od.
OS. Unless age in alphabetic forms are
all single signs of xix. 177.
'
illusive, our inscription must be at the very least half a Roscher, Lex. Myth. p. 982.
*
century earlier than the one published by Le Bas, Voyage This inscription from Smyrna, which records a favor-

Archeologique, II. 3', No. 1, and assigned to 417 B. c. Of able verdict of the Argives for the Cimolians in an arbi-
this we shall speak later. tration between them and the Melians, may have been
•TheHylleis are mentioned in the earlier bronze transported from Cimolus by some ship carrying Cimolian
tablet, Amer. Journ. Arch. VI. (1901), pp. 161 ff. earth to Smyrna. See Le Bas, ibid.
 INSCRIPTIONS ON STONE: NO. II. 201

du second and adds the comment "

pretre senat," followinj; :
'Apijrtve, qui, Lieu qu'il
niaii(|iie
dans tons le.s
Icxiques, He deduit trcH-bien du memo radical qu' aprjTtjp et aprJT€ipa,

legaides tons deux justju'ici conime exclusivement usit^s dans le dialectc ionien."
'

In an inscription of the Hellenistic period from Mycenae, published by Tsountas in

'
the 'E<^T7/xe/3is Apxoii.o\oyiKTJ, 1887, p. 150, lines 4 and
5, are jfiven apiarivt. Sapiopy&v

AeXifiicju. The face of the stone is

very much defaced, so that certainty is hardly attain-

able, but Tsountus is now convinced that the real reading is not dplcrnvf. but dpiJTtve.
The eta is, to be sure, in this case very broad. Dr. A. Wilhehn, who decides that this
alone can be the reading, reinforces it by the consideration that in the prescript of
another edict published with this one, we have dprfr, which can be restored only as
dpTJTCve.
In all tempted to connect the word with the stem
these insbinces one is
f/Jt,' and
make it designate the speaker,' or in other words the chairman of a board.
'
We may
then think of Pyralion as the president of the board of Hieromnemons.
The word reXa/xwi/ or reXa/iw, line 1,
is difficult of
explanation. We have come to
associate the word with Caryatids and Atlantes, but it is almost certain tluit this associa-
tion will not hold here. We shall probably come to the proper explanation by taking as
our starting-point an inscription from Varna (C. /. G. II. 2056), at the end of which
the following provision is made : tov 8e leponoLov dvaypaxjiai to xlnjtfuapa tovto ei?

TtXa/xwt'a, Ktti delvai et? to lepov. With this may be assocmted another from Messim-
bria (C. /. G. 2053''), which closes with a like provision top Se TafiCav avaypdxjiavTa :

'
TO ^y](f)Lcrpa tovto eis TcXa/xwi/a \evKov \tdov dvaOiptv ei? to Upbv tov AttoWwvo^.
One can hardly hesitate to say that reXa/xwi/ here appears to be the equivalent in Thrace
for (TTTJXyj in Attica, where the latter word occurs constantly in the phrase prescribing

the setting up of inscriptions, a phrase which except for this difference is exactly the
same as in the two inscriptions cited. But our inscription mentions cttt^'Xtj and rekap-aiv
as two separate things, so that we have not yet arrived at a complete explanation. The
case seems at first sight to be complicated somewhat by a third inscription from the same

region as the first, and now preserved in the Museum at Odessa (C. /. G. 2056''), where
the phrase is : XevKov Xl0ov [xal] dual^deluai avrrjv eVl TcXa]-
[^dvaypaxliac ets cT^TtjXrjv
jnwi/o?. The inscription then proceeds to speak of [to dvdXcjixa ei? tyjv^ dvddicnv tov
Tf.Xap,<x)vo<;?
It is this inscription which leads us to the
liXapdiv is restored to light.
its function as a support in a way which fits our inscription very well. In regions where
marble was scarce, one may well suppose that an inscribed marble nteh might be inserted
into a larger local stone, which might then not inaptly be called a TeXapotv. It must

be conceded that C. G. 2053'', where the TiXapcav itself is of marble, affords difficidty.
I.

But it may be that even with the origin of the word TeXapdv as here proposed, the two
words came to be used in some quarters interchangeably.
It will be seen by the cut, p. 198, that something was inserted in our massive block.

There are dowel-holes on the right and the left at the top of the rectangular depression,
to which probably two others at the bottom, now broken off, corresponded. The one at
the left measures .07 m. x-02 m., the one at the right .06 m. x-02 m.; both about .03 m.

deep. These probably served to receive metallic dowels, inasmuch as they are provided
with channels for pouring in the lead when the inserted object was in situ, the channel
little

on the left running obliquely to the upper corner of the depression, and that at the right
'
Voyage Arch. II. 3^, p. 6. • There seems to be no reasonable doubt that the read-
*
Cf. Fpdrpa, I. G. A. Nos. 110, 112. ings given are correct, although
much has been restored.
202 INSCRIPTIONS FROM THE ARGIVE HERAEUM
Besides the dowel-holes there is an
running horizontally to the edge of the depression.
equally deep irregularly
round hole ahout .12 ni.X-07 m., which may have served also to
hold some strengthening dowel. That the insertion was original, and not connected with
some subsequent use of the block, is proved by the fact that the lines of the inscription
are shaped with regard to it, coming in around it to the right and to the left. The
object inserted cannot have been a statue,
nor a stele to which this block served as a
horizontal base, for in that case this inscription would have been hidden from view,

except to one standing so as to read it sideways

or bottom upwards. Probably we have
the reXa/Mwi/ into which was inserted a stele either of marble or bronze with an inscrip-
tion of greater length and importance than the one which we have here. This sei-ved
It should be noted that at
merely as a heading to the real contents of the inscription.
Argos marble was not at hand, and that most of the inscriptions found there were cut in
the local limestone, which was a most unsatisfactory material. The veins of the stone
and the cracks which come with age make the reading of these inscriptions an exceed-
ingly difficult task.* In this case, even at a very early date, a good piece of marble may
have been imported for an important inscription.

III.

Inscribed on a small Doric capital and on a portion of its column found in the West

Building (cf. Waldstein, Tioelfth Annual Report of the American School, p. 34), near
the third base of the inner row of columns, counting from the south (excavator's note).
Diameter of column, 1 ft. ; height of echinus, 4 in. width of abacus, 1 ft. 9 in. ; height
;

of abacus, 4 in. ; height of letters, about .8 in.

(a) is inscribed on the

abacus and is difficult to read, owing to the damaged state of
the surface of the stone. Professor Tarbell was the first to read line 1, but the defective

squeeze which he used did not show the letters in line 2. It is possible that the letters
TQ PI should be read before TT in line 2. This reading is due to Frankel, C. /. G. P.
510, who restores KXeiJTo/at.

(a) iv NfJ/neai Teyeai T£ v — w^

— w——
Topi Ti(Xkd.v[o. . . .

(h) is inscribed on the column, there being two letters in each flute, as is shown in the

facsimile. The uneven stretching of the squeeze has caused the lines to appear not quite
equi-distant from one another.

T I rF Ei A\e ® f fc e
Tl/XOKXrjs fJL f6r]K€

(a)shows clearly that the inscription is the dedication of some object by a victor in
games {cf. Furtwangler, Athen. Mittheil. V. pp. 30 and 31, note 2). Similar inscrip-
tions are quotedby Pausanias in his account of Olympia, and the excavations there have

yielded some of the same class {cf. Arch. Zeit. 1876-1878 ; Olympia, V.). The fol-
1
No. XIV. is a good example of this difficulty of reading, although the surface is not badly broken.
 INSCRIPTIONS ON STONE: NOS. III., IV. 208

lowing numbers from the Anthology may also be cited for comparison : xiii. 5, 8, 14,
15, 10, 18, IJ) ;
xvi. (Planii(lea), 23, 24 ;
vol. III. (Fiimin-Didot), i. 23, 24, 30, 44, 50,
82, 89, 102, lOG, 291 ;
Addenda Frankel, /. c, makes an inter-
to vol. III. i. 86 b.

esting conjecture, which would bring this inscription into connection with the house of
Theaeus of Argos, celebrated by Pindar in his tenth Nemean ode.

IV.

Found between the bases of the inner row of columns in the North Stoa (IT, on the
Plan, Fig. 2, p. 9) and on a level with them, at a point about one third of tlie length of
the stoa, measured from the west end. The inscription is on a marble block measuring
10 in. by 10 in. by 3.6 in. The letters are about .7 in. in height. There is a round
hole in the top of the block 1.6 in. in diameter. Of the name of the former dedicator
of the two only a single upright bar of one letter is
preserved.

N E O E T/v
Hu)8pt\as
avtOfTav

The name Hybrilas is found in a list of Proxeni, Bidl. Corr. JTell. 1891, p. 412, line
10 of the inscription, and in Bazin, Archiv. de Miss. Scient. II. 369. On the suffix
-Xa? see Fick, Griech. Personennmnen, 123, and Pape-Benseler, Lex. p. xxx.
p.
The really important feature in this inscription is the form P" B. With the excep- =
tion of a bronze plaque said to be from Hermione, but apparently of doubtful prove-
nience, the Argive inscriptions of early date give but one example of the letter B. This
occurs in the proper name BopOay6pa<;, which with others is inscribed on a stone that is
built into the foundation of the eastern tower of the ruined castle on the Liirisa at Argos
(cf.
LA. G. 30 = Dialekt-Lnschriften, 3260 = Roberts, Greek Ejng. 73). Here our
copies give the form
The plaque from Hennione has been published by Frfihner in the Revue Archeo-
logigue for 1891, ii. pp. 50 ff., and, with extended comment, by Robert in the Monu-
menti Antichi, 1891, pp. 593 ff. Here beta occurs twice (lines 2, 6) in the word D • h A.
It should be observed that the upper lateral stroke is not at right angles with the verti-
cal stroke, as is the case with the example from the Heraeum. There is, however, no
essential difference in the forms. If the bronze plaque is not Argive, but represents a
form of the alphabet Hermione, we must suppose, as Frohner has pointed out,
in use at
that there existed there almost simultaneously two forms of the early alphabet, that of

Argos (note the letter (r on the bronze plaque), and a form closely allied to the Lacethie-
monian Roberts, p. 284, and Kirchhoff, Studien* p. 160). It is more probable that
{cf.
the plaque is of immediate Argive origin, and this view, to which both Friihner and
Robert incline, is now shown to be almost certainly the correct one by the inscription
from the Heraeum. The resemblance of this form of beta to that of the letter in several
of the insular alphabets (C) and in the alphabet of Megara ( J^ )
has been remarked by

Robert, I. c.
204 INSCRIPTIONS FROM THE AKGIVE HERAEUM

Inscribed on a white fine-grained limestone, which spHts with conchoidal fracture.

Found in the North Stoa, between the back wall and the inner row of columns. Six
ii-regularly broken fragments of the stone have been found, five of which may readily
be fitted together. These measure roughly 1 ft. by 8 in., the sixth fragment 3 in. by
1 in. The height of the letters is A in.

(a) Fragments 1-5.

 INSCRIPTIONS ON STONE: NOS. V.-VIII. 206

No. 523, and his commentary should be noted. He would interi)ret the H after -lynrpov
as 7){lJLLv\^6pOv).
vr.

On a limestone tripod-base, found near tiie Wert Building, with a

north wall of the
diameter of .50 m. and a height of .41 m. The
top surface shows four dowel-lndeK, a
large s(puire one in the centre, and three smaller rectangular ones for the legs, at dis"
tances of .23 m. apart.

E H M I h h O $. AeH'>-^.

Height of letters .03 m. to .035 m. The rounded delta throws this inscription also
back towards the beginning of the fifth century. But its chief interest lies in the
doubling of the xi. This is
paralleled by the Boeotian Ae'^fiTTTTO?, Riilil, /. G. A. 150,
and AefftTTTra, 0. I. G. 1G08, line G.' The turning of xi on its side seems to be an
Argive peculiarity." It appears also on the inscription over the Cleonaeans who fell in
the battle of Tanagra C. I. A. I. 441.
: The cutting ofiE of the upper half of the middle
bar is, so far as I know, without precedent.

VII.

Found West Building among some architectural fragments.

just to the south of the
Inscribed on an irregularly broken fragment 1 ft. by 8 in. in size. The height of the
letters is about .5 in. In the museum at Argos.

©O KSptpdo^

AVKIVOV

^^ \t ] aponvdfi [ofev

Possibly the stone formed the upper part of a stele.

VIII.
"
This inscription is described as having come to light on the surface of the south
side." The stone measures 5 in. by 6 in., and is broken on all sides. The letters are not

deeply cut and the squeeze is difficult to read. The height of the letters is about .3 in.

S]X(c&/u'(uAAll=ll
. . Tov oX(ta ia>a a . . ,

. . ironjpta k (?) . 8 . . .
8ij«

(^loXa a'Em8<o[T]o

oXkol fi[y<u (?)

afyyvptoi/

(jravOinara Xtto .

<^taXav okKav Spa[jyiai(?)

(ftidXav
oXitck Spa[x^ (?)
6X]Ka 8[/>ax/«u(?)

•
For other cases of gemiuation^ see G. Meyer, Gr. »
Roberts, Introd. to Greek Epigraphs, No. 77.
Gram. § 227.
XcQ'aJ o<ii . a . . .
206 INSCRIPTIONS FROM THE ARGIVE HERAEUM
Frankel's reading, C. /. G. P. 526,
in line 4, cfnaXa a 'E7riSw[r]a, I believe to be right.

My squeeze appears to show the t, which I failed to observe before. His K[ii]8[aji'ta in
line 3 also seems probable.
The fragment is evidently part of an inventory of valuable objects which were stored
in the temple or in some other building of the sanctuary. In line 1 the value of some

object seems to be 22 minae, and perhaps 20 drachmas 2 obols ; that is, if we may under-
stand — = 10 dr. and I
= 1 obol, as in the which relates to the construction
inscription
of the temple of Asclepius at Ej^idaurus. Lines 7 and 8, however, show that the word
drachma was given in full, at any rate in the case of lesser values. The space preceding
the A which stands at the end of line 2 shows no trace of any letter. It would seem,

then, as if the value indicated were a single mina, unless A may possibly be taken as a
numeral. It is so used apparently in line 106 of the architectural inscription of the

temple at Epidaurus already referred to ; but, so far as I know, the letter has never been
interpreted there, and it is of no help in understanding the present inscription. The
A rather suggests dveO-rjKe or dvddefjia in this place (c/'. the records of the temple of
Apollo at Delos, passim, Dittenberger, Sylloge^, 588). The termination -St/s looks like
the ending of a dedicator's name, but unfortunately there is no means of determining
how much has been broken off at the beginning or ending of the lines. In line 3 we
might expect a word expressing an attribute of TroTtjpia (e. g. KcSpiva, which, however,
is hardly possible, or Kv8(ovLa (Frankel)). In line 6 the compound i-n-avdefiaTa is, so
far as I know, new, if we are to take it as signifying dedicated offerings. The use of
the accusative (f)i.okav in lines 6 and 7 has a parallel in lines 68 ff. of the records of the

temple at Delos.
IX.

An
irregular fragment, broken on all sides, measuring 1 ft. 6 in. Height of letters
about .4 in. I can give no note as to the exact spot whex-e this inscription was found.

Y P inl ATZ^Ci^MATJ^NnPIAMEl
T T Y r >< AN o NTAS: P-^AE N TA
I I

'

A OA\ A TONAIPON TAE N ox oNAj

^NKAITlt TIEXEirAynATANI
LN Tl ToilAPo/^ANAAAON e;:

.sr^AIKATAToNN'oy
>oNAIZiEKAA\WENl

. . . VKO . . .

ap'lyvpiq.
•
at Se ti? Ka tmv irpiafiev^oav
. . . JTt Tvy^dvovTWi TrafKev rh ir . . .

iTT\adiJia TOP Xnroina evo^ov a7r[oTZcrat

. . av Koi rk Tt e%et irafiaTcov k . . .

d'^avri, ToX lapoiJ,vd/iov£<;

BiKldfTtrai Kara rov v6/j,o[y
o . . .

aSe\\<j)6v
•
al Be Ka jj-rj
ev . . .

Bt,Kd'\cr(Tcoini, inre[J3
 INSCRIPTIONS ON STONE: NOS, IX.-XI. 207

Enough is left of this document to muke the conjecture |)rohal)le tliat it i» a [Mirtioo
of u record of certiiiu specifications touching the sale or lease of some piece of proj)erty.
The UpoiLvdjLov(.<;, line 0, whom several of the inscriptions from the Ileraeum men-
tion (see Nos. ii., vii., were douhtless the hoard which had charge of the nego-
xiv.),
tiations. The restoration SiKcto-o-ai, in line 7, was suggested hy Professor F. D. Allen.
That in line 9 seems to follow from it.
Notinvorthy is the inicommon word irafxaTOiv in
line 5. We have TaTrndfiaTa imrdnaTa) in Dialekt-fnHrhrlJ'lfUf 488, lines 163-
(to.
175. Compare cTTTracri? (Index to I^ialekt-Iuxchri/ten, Boiitien), and the interesting
compound vafiaToijiayelcrTai. {I. G. A. 321, Vnma ^^2, ^5 = Zf'ialekt-InxchrlJ'ten, 1478),
also the Homeric Trokvirdfiwv and Hesychius's ifiwafKov. The simple word nafia has
a rare literary use. (See the Thesaurus, «.
o.) In line 8 Frankel, C. 1. G. P. 521,
would restore lyypa\i\)ov.

Inscribed on an irregularly broken fragment found jnst above the eastern wall of the
West Building. The stone measures about 1 ft. 5 in. in height, 1 ft. 1 in. in width at
the widest part, and 7 in. in thickness. The top, which is roughly hewn, has two small
holes in it, 2 hi. by 2 in., and 1 in. in depth. Except at the top the stone is broken off

on all sides. The letters are from .6 to .8 in. in height.

tJAIITlAAy
iSOXMIO"
To]0 Ireo? a . . .

t]^ ^t\i0-[T/809

a4>P
, . , ai . . .
e7r(?)
.IE,
. . . . . .
e(?)

In line G. P. 532, would read ip.Tf\vvi tco?. The small holes make
3 Frankel, C. I.
one think of a dedicatory offering by Philistis or her brother, but it is useless to speculate
in detail about the inscription.

XI.

Found in the West Building, close to the wall at the southwest corner, April 2, 1894.
The stone is irregularly broken with an inscribed surface about .31. m. x .VI m., and is
about 12 m. thick. The letters are .005 m. to .007 m. high, very regular, and remark-
ably well preserved. They have no ornamentation except that the strokes are generally
broadened a little at the end. The inscription may belong to tlie third century, but
probably to the fourth, and is a fine example of careful cutting.'

'
Yet the first alpha in tiatiapxos, line 14, has no cross- an impossible combination. The first e/wj/on in Ao^<r*^«ia»
bar, which makes the words look like 'A7ofl<»i'oi' l^ixtpxos, in the next line also lacks the middle stroke.
INSCRIPTIONS FROM THE ARGIVE HERAEUM
n* E A I n
5 Q K P A T
§ fi K P AT
T E A A E A A
A N O A I A AG
S Q T H P I A A I

5YNETANrOI
-QiBIONSQKPA
A*POAITIANAAM
10 VllKYAIQNA$QnA1
MOSXIfiNAAPXEKP
niSTAN^IAQTISPG
SnKPATEIAN<}>lAnTI
TAOQNANAYAPXO?
15 MOSOENEIANNIKOI
''TOKPATEIANEPIKPA
.0NOEPSinNAAI<t>C
NAN<MAOKPATElAnA/
.ANEPIKAHSAIFQNY5
20 ...AAMO§0ENH§AIFfiN
SYPAPAIONIS
.... NAPISTOPGMSKE
.... KETOSKAE iOAl5
SANA
25 I A^
1

'^coKpdT[€iav
TeXXe'a A
'AvdiSa Ao
'^ooTTipiBa I
'^vverav Toi

'^(p^Lov "LcoKpd^TeLa

'A<j>poBiTiav Aayit[o«paTetO
10 MiKvXicova 2o)7ra[Tpt9
Moo-^iwi'a 'A/3%eK[/3aTeia
UlffTaV <I>lXd)Tl? Ho

'S.coKpd.Teiav <I>tXwTt[9

['A]7a0wi'a Nauap;)(;o?
15 Aa]iJioa-0eveiav Ni«o/x[a';^i7

'ApijoTOKpaTeiav 'E7r6«/3a[Teta
.... ov €)€pa-((ov Aai"^o'[i'T7j?
.... vav ^iXoKpareia 11 aX
..... ai' 'ETTt/cX?)? Aif(ovva-[iav
20 Aa/J.oa-devr]'}
Aifeov[^uaruW
"Evpa Hai.ovi'!
V 'ApicTToVoXi? Ke
KETo? KXe[o'7r]oXts
aav 'A
25 tXu
 INSCRIITIONS ON STONE: NOS. XL, XII. 209

We have here simply u list of iiiiincs, some in the nominative and Home in the ac-ciuia-
tive. On tlie left, where tlie original
edge of the stone is preserved, we seem to have an
accusiitiveat the heginniiig of each line. In the first instance in which we have two
consecutive names, line 12, the second name is in the nominative. In line 14 it is the
same, and so on apparently to the end. We cannot determine whether tlie third name
is an aecusjitive, tluis making a regular alternation, until we reach line 21. This line,
however, is
peculiar in having a little hlank space each side of tl»e preserved letters. It
ispossible that before Xvpa an accusjitive stood, sepamted from by an interval slightly it

greater than usual. Ilatoj/i? (which has a space after it for more than two letters),
is doubtless an epithet of Supa, and so does not break the alternation. Line 23 is the
only one which seems to do this, since -»c«tos is
probably the ending of a name in the
nominative and KXcottoXi?, which follows, seems to be a second name in the nominative.
;

It is also difficult to get a name short enough to precede ]»c€T09 supposing this were the
ending of an accusjitive, when only seven letters in all are lacking.
The inscription may be a record of emancipation of slaves, with the slaves' names in
the accusative, and the owners' names in the nominative. In such documents, at

Delphi and elsewhere, women's names generally outnumber men's names by more than
two to one.' In this list the proportion of women's names is even larger.
While some of the names are unusual, none of them are strange enough to be remark-
able. 'n(f)e\Lci)v
is interesting as occurring again in different shape in No. xiv. It is

perhaps a favorite in Argolis, asDial ekt-hiHchrlflen, 3269, 3341, 3401.

it
appears in
The use of the dlgamina in At/rc<Ji'ucr[taj'], which occurs twice, and the Doric ending a
for the first declension names, show some retention of old style, and caution us against

assigning too late a date to the inscription.

XII.

Found towards the close of the excavations of 1894. Of

irregidar shape, about .40 m.
long and .19 m. broad, .08 m. thick. Letters of the sjime size as those of Nos. xi., xni.

(.005 m. to .007 m.), and almost of the same foi-m." The surface is so badly worn away
that but little can be made of the inscription, and that little only on the left side.

Only a few proper names result from the most careful scrutiny, hardly enough to
make it profitable to add a transcription in small letters. Since the differences between
the letters of this inscription and those of Nos. xi., xiii., were at first hardly discernible,
and since this stone had no original edge preserved, it seemed as if it might belong to
the sjime inscription. The thickness of the stone would not be an insuperable objection,
as both fragments are extremely uneven at the back. Furthermore, while most of the
names which can be made out with certainty are in the nominative, we have Xapira in
line13 and an accusative ending apparently at the beginning of line 20. Even the two
consecutive nominatives in line 5, which may be regarded as certain, although this is
one of the most worn places of the stone, are paralleled in No. xi., as we have seen.
Some of the names are also the same, as 'Apio-roTroXi? (5), 'Aydda)v (14), perhaps
KXeoTToXts (19, 21), and in different form 'OifteWCcov (20).
But even the slight differences in the letters mentioned above, taken together with the
different thickness of the stones, make it safer to treat the two pieces as belonging to
different inscriptions.

1
Smitli, Diet, of Antiij. II. 61'.
-
M is somewlmt broader, with the upright bars more
perpomlicular. O is somewhat smaller.
210 INSCRIPTIONS FROM THE ARGIVE HERAEUM
1 N A § M I A I /»

ON0SAY...0S
A APXEMAX
A H I ;v E I A A * I A

6 APISTOPOAIS NAYPAIA-
AAAKJiAY A TOA
AA I P 1

AT H

PAT EY€
10
A<t> A H 5 E
sas T P A"
CAPITA . API
AYS 5 1

16 A r A o n
KAHrOPAP
X I P P A P
kaeiaaoka
PPOS KAEO
20 N 0<t> E I A A
4H5KAEO..AIAA
A/P1-IM...AMY

N A PAX N AS
1 va<! Mtat
wvo? Av[apx]o'}
a 'Apxei^dx[a
a ^iXeia A 4»A
5 'A/Jto-TOTToXt?
NauTrXi'a
a AaKco Av . . a . . . . to\
a Aipi
OTJJ
<r

10 par eW
a<f>ar]<;
'E

"^oxTTpaT^a
Xo/»iTO *A/3t[ffTo''7roXt?

Avo-ifffrpaTa

16 'A7a6'©[i»
KX7;7o[pa] n
'A/)]%tV'7ra
«Xei'fia '0«X
.''A/3;j^£]7r7ro9 KXeo[7roXt?
20 ov '0(j)e\\[ia)v

vr]<! KXeo[7ro]X(Sa
. . .
aiireifi 'A/u.i'[/cXato9

V 'Apdy(va<s
 INSCRIPTIONS ON STONE: NOS. XII.-XIV. 211

We seem to have this inscription, as -wvo? (2), *Apa\i/as (23),

{^enitiveH also in

]»cX€i8a (IH). Of
these, however, only the lust seems reasonuhly certain, as the first
inay
be -ovo<s, a nominative ending, and in line 23 we may have ^\pd\va followed by a name
beginning with %.
Line 22, which shows at the beginning several letters which are hard to combine into
any proper name, may contiiin something else than names, but this is doubtful. After
this line there is space for another, which was left bhink.

xin.
A
small irregular piece, .07 m.from top to bottom, .18 m. wide, of about the same thick-
ness as No. XII. The letters also are identical in form, so that in spite of diiTerent
'

weathering not unlikely that it formed a part of the same inscription.

it is It was

found at the close of the work in 181M. A small piece of the surface at the right, alniut
.04 m. square, is now detiiched. But the two fragnuMits fit so perfectly that there is

no doubt that they belong together.

KEi
\KioNAPi :max
<t>IAnNIAAN<t>l ^0
PISTANANOin
PYSIPPONS'^
N
IKl
'

^v\\dKiov 'A/3t[ffT<6 Pi.px\eiidx\pv

^iKfovi^av <l>t[Xft)Tt?]
Xo
XltWai' 'Kv6(Tr[irov

X]pvfft7nroi' 2a)

Kp')(€iid^ov in line
2 is suggested by the same name in xii. 3, although the space
israther scanty for so many letters. The two compounds in itttto? are matched by the
two ill XII. 17, 19. Uia-Tav occurs in XI. 12.

XIV.

The stonevery streaked limestone, .11 m. thick, irregularly broken.

is The greatest
length of inscribed surface, from top to bottom, is .30 m. greatest breadth, .23 m. It is ;

not finished off evenly at the top, where the heading shows that we have the original
edge. The letters are .01 m. high. A
remarkable feature of the inscription is that in
the top line where the stone is chipped off the letters are cut down into the breaks along
the edge.

1 mnamoneshpasoiei
apistokpath5timaropoy
teosthmeniaasistp
rveysantaseisaytoys
5 apkeiaa epm0renh$|s5ma
aapaboyanapikosIaE<i>ahn
5IA2 |SS<t> A H N AS A A M T A I

e AlSXPfiNOS TTQAAOEES
APXIAOS AG ANTITTATPA
10 TOS NAYTTAIA AAAPMON
'
This piece is so reddened that it seems at some time to have been exposed to fire.
212 INSCRIPTIONS FROM THE ARGIVE HERAEUM
NASYAAAI't'lAISTai^K
NIKHIATKAEYKPATEOS
<t>IAONIKASSMlPEIAAI
lAeOEOAOSIA S PQMAIA
15 ATAGONOSENAPrEIN
iENASKEPKAAAieiO
lOKAAAPIS TQ[m
<l>IAISTIQN|/^eiO<t>AN
.PITYAAA AYKO<)>P
20 .PATEOSNAYTTAIf:
....AIQNY2 OYK
....EIA2 A OAOP
1 "Hpa? ol i[_Tn
'lepo^fj.vdfjiove'?

'ApccrTOKpoLTrji; Ti/xayo/aou
Teo9 Trjixev iSa<; 'icrrp [ey-
yvevcravTa's et? aurov? [^aireXevdepcDV Twpoe
5 'ApKeiSa 'Eppoyevr]^ lAG Ma
Aapdftov 'Ai/S/DiKo? |AG *aT?V[as
crtas Ia5^ ^'aT^Va? Aa/AOiTa[8a5
e AujT^pwi'OS ncuXa^ce?
'Ap^tSo? AG 'AuTLirdrpa
10 TO? NavTrXta AA 'Apju,oi'[ias [4>aT7-
I'a? 'TaSat <l>iXt(rTw [AG K
viKTj |AG KXevK/sctreos
OiXoi'iKas S/xipelSat
*
IaE BeoSocria? 'PwjLiaia[?
15
^

Ayd6(iivo<; iv "Apyet
N
^eVas KepKdSaL @io [Aa-
jjiOKXa 'ApLCTTw |aS S
4>i\icrTtwj' [AG ®i-0(j)av

K]piTuXXa? Au/co(^/3[wi' [KXei^

20 /fjpareo? NavTrXta
.... AkovvctCov K
.... eias Aio8w/3[os

This inscription seems to be a list of certain persons who had become security to the
Hieromnemons for something.my In
pubHcation ventured to make the sign
first I

|AS, which does not occur elsewhere, a numeral sign, although I could not assign it a
value. The fact that in line 9 the form AG, and in line 10 AA, appeared made this
supposition seem plausible in view of the variety of numeral systems in the Argolid.'
But this explanation is so uncertain that I feel obliged to leave the meaning of the sign
or signs doubtful. It seems clear that certain persons designated by the nominative
case become sponsors for others designated by the genitive case, probably freedmen.
Probably we have lost at least half of the inscribed surface. The first line must have
contained after the eVi at least a proper name of some magistrate who gave his name to
the year. This would make a line of about thirty letters. If in the next lines we have
1
Nos. 328C (Argos), 3318
Collitz, Dialekt-Inschriften, (Hermioiie). See also Ditteiiberger in Hermes, VII.
(Nemea), 3325 (Epidaunis), 3362 (Troezeu), 3384, 3385 pp. 62 ff.
 INSCRIPTIONS ON STONE : NOS. XIV.-XVI. 218

the names ui four HieroiiiiiciiKtiiH, as we iMi<>lit

c'Xi)ect fntiii No. Ii., and the iiaiiieH of
their fathers, with some such formula as
ai^eypaxjiau tov<; eyyueuaai/ra?,' even forty let-
ters to the line will not sufliee. of <;ourse possihie that there were only three Ilie-
It is

romnemons at the time of this inscription. But line 5, to ^o no farther, with a name
like MaTpo8(opov, and another name with the usual H\\ri\ (for the order, up t<i line 9,
seems to he nominative, sij^n, genitive), would make a line of forty letters. It is the lack
of such a large part of the inscription that makes the intt'rpretition full of diHicultiex.
In line 9 the order appears to he reversed, the genitive coming hefore the Bign and the
nominative after it.

IIw\a6'ee? (8), 'TaSat (11), S/xi/JclSat (13), Kcp«(a8ai (16), seem to designatt! guilds or

possibly i/<-nt('s,
and may signify, according to Professor Fraukel's suggestion, '
Horse-
'' '

breeders,' 'Swineherds,' Polishers,' or

' '
Weav-
Sharpeners (literally, users of emery '),
ers.' The designations recall the names given hy Clisthenes to the tribes at Sicyou
(Herod. V. 08).
That the inscription is from Roman times may he inferred from the occurrence of
'Pwju,aia[?], although the forms of the letters alone would not liave led uh to aHcribe it

to so late a period.' Many of the letters are apicated.

XV.
Inscribed on a stone built into the wall of one of the structures that adjoin the
North Stoa. The wall is not of the best construction, and the inscribed st^ine was
undoubtedly brought from elsewhere and built in at a date later than that of the cutting
of the inscription. The dimensions of the stone, which has apparently been cut down to
fit into its present position, are 2 ft. and the upper line of the
11.5 in. by 1 ft. 11.5 in.,
letters is 3.5 in. below the top of the stone. The height of the letters is about 3 in.
The upper left-hand corner of the stone is broken off. The inscription is very clesirly
cut. The apparent dot in the first is almost
certainly only a break in the surface of
the stone. The form of sl/jnia is noteworthy in an Argive mscription.

D|fo^'yuo Aipovvaiov

Friinkel, C I. G. P. 512, reads Aifcjvva-iov on account of this form occurring in Nos.

XI. line 20, and xiv. line 21.
in a
Possibly this may be a patronymic genitive dedicatory inscription.

XVI.

Inscribed on a much-broken block of stone measuring 2 ft. 3 in. by 2 ft. by 1 ft. 3 in.

(height). Foiuid on the upper terrace just south of the remains of the earlier Temple.

A 1 1 AM i

'ApTdfii

For the form see Foucart in Le Bas, ExpKcat. No. 109«. The inscription there pub-
'
lished reads, UpajTicDv kpTapn. Foucart compares the forms Xapdin., "Itri, 'Avov^l {cf.
Mittheil. IV. p. 148, No. 508 ; Dlalekt-Inschriften, 3283).
'
iyyvfiw, though not given in the lexicons, is contained
^ The rounded epsilon which appears in the combina-
in Wescher et Foucart, Inscr. de Delphes, No. 139. tion p^ does not appear in the body of the inscription.
214 INSCRIPTIONS FROM THE ARGIVE HERAEUM

XVII.

Found same place as No. vi. The inscribed stone is of irregular shape, but
in the

the measurements may be roughly given as 11 in. by 5 in. The height of the letters is
about 1.2 in. The dot in the is not entirely certain.

. . . o (or o))u av^ed 7] Ke(J)

The squeeze fails to show any ti-ace of the line after v which Frankel notes, C. I. G. P.
509.
XVIII.

Inscribed on a very much oroken fragment measuring roughly 9 by 5.4 in. The in.

letters are about .9 in. in height. In line 2 the fourth letter is very likely, though not

quite certainly, theta ; and indeed

the second letter of the line, so far as form goes,

might be the same. In line 4 perhaps we should read ra instead of vTa.

e]o? ^6(?).

. . ev

VTa

Frankel, C I. G. P. 533, restores KX,]eoo-^£ ~ I

f'
[ avicrTy)(T]ev.

XIX.

M
On a fragment of a round base of limestone which must have had a diameter of about
1.50 m. with very elaborate moulding. The inscription is on a band .11 m. broad. Above
this is a projecting lip now badly shattered, once .03 m. thick and projecting at least
.02 m. ;
below is a concave moulding .01 m. broad, then a convex one, .02 m. broad ;

then a band .05 m. broad with a double maeander pattern. The shape of the fragment
is like that of a sector of a
cyUnder, the inscribed surface, i. e. the arc, measuring .24 m.
Height of letters, M .025 m., .02 m.
We have the beginning of the inscription, since there is a space of .14 m. before the M,
whereas the letters M and are only .05 m. apart. It is useless to attempt a restoration.

The inscription was probably brief, since other pieces of the base lying at the Heraeum
have no letters.
 INSCKllTIONS ON STONE: NO. XX. 215

XX.
Twomarble fm^inentH, rough at the hack, .00 ni. thick, both irregularly broken, (a)
about .'22 m. X .22 m. (h) about .15 ni. X .25 m. (height) lettere in both .OG ni. .07 m.
;
:

in height, and with large apices.

(o) y A i •»
(6) y X E
T P

Whether (a) is properly first in order of succession one cannot say, as a reconstruction
is not to be made out of such scanty fragments. All we can say is that (a) certainly
line AuTO(cpa]Topo[? and in the first line
yields in the second {Mirhaps 'Ai'[twi'iVoi;. (h)

yields 2ie[|SacrTot'.
It is in itself highly probable that the worship at the lleraeuni had
a period of revival luider Hadrian and the Antonines.
 PART SECOND
STAMPED TILES FROM THE ARGIVE HERAEUM
BY RUFUS BYAM RICHARDSON

Clay that is an opportunity easily to inscribe a name so that it shall

to be fired presents
become more durable than one laboriously chiseled in stone. This opportunity is one
too tempting to be neglected, and from the time when the Assyrians stamped their bricks,
down has been improved.
to the jjresent day, Tiles and bricks made by Romans, and
it

impressed with the names of the legions by which and for which they were made, have
been found all over Western Europe.^ At first less attention was paid to Greek material
of this character because the material itself has been less abundant. Birch (Ancient
Pottery, p. 116
ff.) gives
a list of the examples known at the time of the publication of
that work ; but that was nearly forty years ago, and even the second edition is more
than twenty years old. In this interval many additions have been made to our stock.
"
A partial list of these additions was drawn up by Paris in 1892, including contributions
from Athens, Piraeus, Corinth, Mantinea, Tegea, Lycosura, Sparta, Olympia, Dodona,
Tanagra, Thisbe, Met;ipontum, Velia, besides a considerable quantity from Elatea. This
Kst might be greatly enlarged. The two great excavations of Olympia and Delos were,
^
it is true, unfruitful in this sort of material ; but Pergamon has yielded one hundred
and twenty-four different stamps, with sometimes forty impressions from the same stamp.
^
The excavations at Megalopolis gave another smaller but interesting addition ; Chios,^
*
Magnesia," Tralles,^ and Eretria also furnish their contributions. Epidaurus has several
tiles with the stamp
ANTUUNGINOY"
In the recent excavations at Corinth were found several tiles bearing the abbreviated
title of the Roman city,
COL. I V L. CO R.'»

Of especial interest is a tile-fragment from the temple of

Apollo at Amyclae, now in
the Central Museum at Athens, and not yet published. On this the stamp has been
impressed twice. The first time it was done so carelessly that only the top line " took."
We read A TT A A W N 3.
however, from the breadth of the
It is perfectly evident,

indentation in the clay, that another line ought to be there. But by good luck the
workman saw his failure, and planted his stamp again about an inch higher up, this time
squarely. The larger portion of the lower line has been spared. Just at the top of the
fragment we read :
—
AA Wl
M Y K A A I I

1
Ancient Pottery, at * Athen. Mitth. XIII. p. 182.
Marini, Inscrizioni doliari ; Bircli,
tlie end. e
/j,-^. XIV. pp. 103 f.
2
Elatee, pp. 110 fp. In the Bibliotheque des Scales '
B. C. H. X. p. 327.
franfaises d'Aihenes et de Rome, Fascicule 60°°. *
Eleventh Annual Report of the American School of
'
Alterthiimer von Pergamon, VIII. 2, pp. 393 ff. Classical Studies at Athens, p. 40.
* '
Excavations at Megalopolis, p. 140, and Jour, of Hell. Kabbadias, Fouilles d'l^pidaure, p. 107, No. 247.
Studies, XIII. pp. 332, 33C. Am. Jour, of Arch. Second Series, I. (1897), p. 111.
i"
 STAMPED TILES 217

Hardly less
interesting is a brick from Sparta «tami>ed :
—
TTAIN0OIAAMOCIAICKANO
OHKACEHIKAAAIKPATEOC
EPrOJNANIKACIUJNOC'
It not necessiiry, to give here a complete catalogue of the material
is however,
vvhifh has been found in recent years and has received casual mention in various ix^ri-
odicals. Enough has been ssiid to show that certain stanqied tiles found at the Argive
Heraeuni are far from being an isolated phenomenon in Greece. Of these tileu, seven
fall at once into a class: —
(a)
 218 INSCRIPTIONS FROM THE ARGIVE IIERAEUM
with itXlvOo'; probably supplied. The three Tanagra tiles bear $ § A A.* I M The
Tegea tile bears AAMO§IO§.^ A fragment of brick, also from Tegea, has -aTr)<i
S' a.\i.ocriov.
3

Another tile an inch thick and of great concavity, found at the Heraeum, has
A A M I I.*

This word Sa/Aoiot does not put us in possession of any very definite information, such
as that secured by the English excavators at Megalopolis, who identified the Philippeum
by stamped tiles.'' The whole precinct was sacred to Hera, and the tiles of any build-
ing, or even of a drain-pipe, might have been said to belong to her.
One's first thought is of roof-tiles. But the tile that we have entire in the Poly-
technikon is very heavy and coarse. It is 1.10 m. long, .51 m. broad at the
top,
.44 m. broad at the bottom, .035 m. thick. The edges are cut off with a slant, making
a cross section of this form :
— ^^—^
been suggested to me that it might be a drain-tile, but so slight is the concavity
It has
that would take at least five such pieces to make a cylinder, and this
it

would be enormously large —

a metre and a half or more in diameter. Of
course, this might be the case the tiles, however, would not make joints,
but would simply touch one another with sharp edges thus
;

:
—
It is not likely that the edges would have been made to fit so poorly if this had been

the end for which the tiles were designed. Neither is it likely that tiles like this were
intended to go in pairs, making a flat drain (one being imposed upon the
other), for in that case the edges woidd have met thus :
—
For only one sort of a drain does a tile of this shape seem for an open drain.
fit, viz.,

The lower smaller end of each upper tile would fit into the broader upper end of each
lower tile, and make a good drain for a small quantity of water, e. g., the drippings from
a roof. But it would be strange if such drains existed in quantity enough to have
afforded us almost our only survivals of Heraeum tiles. Furthermore, a system that was
fit for an
exposed drain was fit to serve as a series of gutter-tiles on a roof (crwX^t'e?).
The zigzag edge was perhaps rude, but it could be covered by the Ka\.vvTr}pe<;, as may
be seen by the annexed cut :
—

There is a breadth of only slightly over .14 m. to be covered by the KaKvnrrjp. It

would be just .14 m. if the turned up edges of the o-wX^t-e?, for so we may now call
them, were cut off straight and not with a slant. If the KaXvuTrjpeq were as thick as
the a-ct)\T]v€s, they must have had a superficial breadth of .21 m." Perhaps we may
assume .25 m. as a maximum. The crwX'^ve? could have at most a breadth of only .30 m
exposed.^
This adjustment gave a roof divided in its surface about equally between gutter-tiles
'
Paris, op. cit.
p. 112. ters really look more like AIMO, an interesting iota-
2
Athen. Mitth. IV. 144. cism.
' '
Paris, op. cit.
p. 110. Excavations at Megalopolis, p. 141.
*
At Eretria, in 1894, a small fragment of a tile was * The computation would be as follows : the taper of
found bearing apparently the aw\i)v (.07 ra.) plus twice the thickness of its edge
AHMO EPETPI. (.14 m.).
If AHMO be the true reading of the somewhat worn let- '
The computation would be as follows : .44 m. —
ters, H and M are strangely crowded together. The let- (.035 m. X 2 -(- .035 m. X 2) = .30 m.
 STAMPED TILES 219

and The
taper of the jjuttei-tileH aft'ordH an easy way of fitting each one
coveriiifT tiles.
into the next h)wer. Probably the eovering tiles were arrange<l in the same ea»y way,
the narrow npper end being overlapjjed by the broad end of the next covering tile.
This did not make so Rne a roof as is found on buildings having nuirble tileft, with their
delicate KaXuTrrr/pe?, or as the roof of the Treasury of Gela at Olynipia with its more
carefully matched clay tiles. But that
a probable and natunil arrangement is siiown
it is

by the fact that tiles are now adjusted in the mime way. The only difference is that they
are now made much smaller. The tile in the Polytechnikon must be twenty or thirty
times as heavy as those now in common use on the roofs in Athens. Such tiles were
large enough to be held in position by their own weight, without mortar, even in sjiite of

considerable wind, thus making a roof comparable to those made of flat stones, so common
in the valleys of Northern Itjily, where fierce winds sweep down over the mountain luiHses.
These might be considered quite old and primitive were it not for the stjimp
tiles

which forbids such a thought. This even forbids our ascribing them to the time of the
erection of the new temple of Hera, which was probably begun soon aftt^r the destruction
of the older temple in 423 B. c, and completed before 400 B. c, to say nothing of the fact
that Pausanias mentions Eupolemus as the architect of that temple. The West Build-
ing, also, if the signs of its age have been correctly estimated by the visiting architects,
could not have borne these tiles on its Jimt roof. Its massive character, however, and
the short span of its roof would make it a very proper building to carry such heavy tiles.
As these were found in various spots, («) at the north side of the West Building, (c)
and (e) on and near the steps
of the East chamber, the place of finding furnishes no clue
as to the building to which we are to assign them.
Not to be too exact about the forms of letters on a stamp, and that, too, outside of
Attica, where we are always uncertain as to dates of certsiin forms, we may yet ssiy with
considerable safety that the stamp cannot be earlier than the fourth century, B. c. The
small omerja would seem to make it venturesome even to put it into that century at all.
But against any very late date may be arrayed the following considerations :
—
1. A has a straight crossbar.
2. $ has its upper and lower branches very divergent.
3. There is no attempt at ornamentation.

But it is of course possible that the stamp-maker may have indulged in an affected
archaism. Theirregularity of the ending EKTfiN may be due to that. On the Amy-
claean stamp there is no sign of a later date than 300 b. c, other than a very late form
of the omega (W). As for S with divergent upper and lower bars, it is found on bricks
made perchance a year ago at Chalkis.
'
The name Socles, a Kosefonn for Sosicles, is common enough, and affords no
'

particular interest. But the meaning of dpxi-TeKTcjv is an interesting qu<estion. The

word seems, judging from its use in numerous inscriptions, to have the definite meaning
'
of supervising architect,' holding office sometimes for the erection of a certiiin build-
ing, as in the case of the temple of Asclepius at Epidaurus, or for a term during which
he would supervise all building and repairs, as at Delos. His office is well described by
Fabricius {Hermes, XVII. p. 17), and by Homolle {B. C. IT. XIV. pp. 477 ff.),
who
remarks " Dans un grand sanctuaire comme celui de Delos, oil les reparations, a d^faut
:

meme de travaux neufs, exigeaient continuellement la surveillance et la ca|)acite d'un

homme de metier, on ne pouvait se passer d'un architecte. L'habitude d'attiicher d'une
fayon permanente un architecte aux temples etait assez repandue dans le monde grec."
220 INSCRIPTIONS FROM THE ARGIVE HERAEUM
In C. I. A. mentioned as an ap^iTeKTUiv, who with a ypafiixaTev<;
I. 322, Philocles is

belonged to a board of imcrTdTat. tov vew tov iu TrdXei, iu w to ap-^alov ayaXju,a, sup-
posed to be the Erechtheum. In C. I.
A. I. 324, a year later probably, for work on
the same building an apxi-TeKTUiv named Archilochus received 37 drachmas for one pi-y-

tany and 36 for another. This is pretty clearlj' a drachma a day. According to the
same account, men who worked on columns got as high wages as 20 or even 22 drachmas
a prytany. In C. I. A.\. 60, dpxi-TeKTwv and d.p)(iTeKTove<; are frequently mentioned
in connection with what is supposed to be the same work as that above mentioned. In
an inscription from Delos, published by HomoUe,' a certain Philistides receives a pay-
ment of one drachma a day. Homolle supposes him to have been the architekton who
supervised all the buildings at the time on the island of Delos.
At any rate, it appears
that nothing was done in great building enterprises without the consent and advice of
the architekton. KeXeuet dp)^LTeKT(ov is a phrase of very common occurrence in building-

inscriptions ; it occurs 34 times in the accounts of the hieropoioi of the temple of AjjoUo
at Delos, edited by Homolle in B. C. H. VI. pp. 6 fE. The hierojwioi make payments
at the order of the dp)(i.TeKTOvo^ koi twv eVijU.eXTjT(Sv, ibid. pp. 7, 8. In the Eleusinian
inscription published by Foucart, B. C. II. IV. 226 ff., Ave read ottov av Sokjj toIs iepo-

7701015 Koi rw dpxf-reKTovL. In the great building-inscription of Lebadea (lusc. Graec.

Sept. 3073, line 160), we see that a completed piece of work is submitted to the dpxi--
while minutiae like the separate joints are attended to by a u7ra/3;^tre/cTwi'."
TEKTCtiv,
In an inscription from Epidaurus^ mention is repeatedly made of an archUektoii Theo-
dotus, who served for a period of more than six years at a salary of a drachma a day.* But
the salary of an dp^iTeKTuv was not iniiformly a drachma a day.® In the year 279 b. c,
at Delos, he received two drachmas a day but at the same time certain workmen, Nicon
;

and same amount for working on a colimin." At Eleusis, in the time of

his son, got the

Lycurgus, an dpxLTeKTOiv received 72 drachmas for one prytany, or two drachmas a day,^
while an epistates of seven men received only ten drachmas for the same time.*
The rd iepd at Athens,' and the dp^i'T^KTCDv who had so much to do
dp^i-reKTCDV inl
with the theatre of Dionysus, were undoubtedly supervising architects, whatever other
functions went along with that office. The four persons mentioned in C. I. A. II. 194,
col. c, as dpx}T^Krove<;, are similarly engaged, although their work is at the Piraeus in
connection with the ships.
Two things appear reasonably clearly from this list of inscriptions :
—
1. When a man is called an
dp^ir^KTOiv, as Socles here is, he cannot be considered to
be the head of a factory.'" In that case he would probably have been called /ce/aa/teu?.
tile

Socles was doubtless the supervising architect for some particular building or for some
one or more years.
2. The other result may seem surprising ; viz., that a man who undertook important
"
»
B. C. H. VIII. p. 305 ff. Cf. line 71 of the great inscription published by Ho-
^
Cf. line 53 ;
apfaras To?s vfOTTotoTs xai Tif ct^x'TeKTOKi inoUe in B. C. H. XIV. p. 389 ff.

(it was easy for Ditteuberger to restore in No. 3075 '

C. I. A. II. 834''.
*
K(\(iri 6 a]px^T4KTwv). G. 226G, Ibid. col. line 9.
Cf., also, C. I.
[Koflis &!/ II.

^
line 19 : cVctSaj' 5e irvvTiXfaBij rh fpyoi^^ (TrayyeiAdru) & €py<ayrj^ Ibid. II. 403, line 28.
'" For the head of a tile-factory to style himself apxt-
ToTs fTKTTaTais Kai Tip apxnfKToi/i.
^
Kabbadias, Fouilles d'Epidaure, p. 78, Inscr. No. 145. t(ktui>would probably have seemed an unjustifiable as-
* His payment for one year is 350 drachmas for an- ; sumption of dignity. Foucart (in B. C. H. VIII. p.
other it is 353 drachmas. 407) understands a brick from Thebes to bear the stamp
'
See the list given by Homolle in B. C. H. XIV. p. of the maker's name, adding : Les marques de ce genre
478. sont encore aitsez rares en Gr'ece.
 STAMPED TILES 221

responsihilitit's, itvjuiriiig Hpecial knowledjfe aiul tmining, receivwl the Hniall itayiuent of
one or two cliathmas a day.' This may he a {^ooj ilhiHtration that offieialH in Gn>6ce
did not look for great profit. Quite likely, the <»nly reason why the urchit4H;t at AtheiiH
was paid at all, while the hoard of eVicrTarai with whom he wan axHoeiat^'d gave tlieir
services free, was that he had to give all his time to tiie
PerhapH the |Hiynient
up work.
given to a memher of the Boule during his time of actiuil service wan regarded un a
standsird in paying for this sort of work. the
proper Prohably oidy diiTerence l>etween
such an apxt-TCKTwu as Socles and Ictinus or Lihon was that the latter were engaged '•

in more important underfcikings.

A woril may here be added as to the practical reason for stiunping tiles. SoideH, who
may of course have had his own tile-making establishment, did not wish to have a pile of
his tiles stolen or mixed up with similar tiles.'' Perhaps it is not without a bearing on
such possible purloining that we read an account of the hteroj)oioi at Delos,^ running
thus: 'Bought 200 pairs of tiles; 70 pairs on one building, 44 on another; and turned
over to the following hltropoioi a remainder of 76.' No mention is made of the deticit
of 10.
Thewere probably formed in a wooden mould, like that referred to in an inven-
tiles
'
Tliat in some cases the stam]) wiis affixed
tory of Delos as a tutto^ ^uXii'o? K^pafiihoiv.
by a separate impression might seem probable from the fact that the upi)er stamp with
Socles's name was not exactly uniform with reference to the stripe above it. But this
may also be accounted for by supposing the metidlic stamp, which made the letters so

clearly cut, to have been a loosened from the wood of the mould in some
little crises. I

once saw some moulds at a brick manufactory in Eleusis in just that condition.

II.

A small, thin flat piece, .08 m. X .05 m., without resemblance to the Socles tiles, yet
bearing the letters
I I H.

These seem to indicate the same stamp that was applied at the bottom of the Socles
tile which is found entire in the Polytechnikon at Athens, i. e., AAM0I0IHRA5. The
dimensions of the letters coincide exactly, their height being .015 m., except hi the case
of the omlcrons, which are only half as high.
On a piece of tile painted black, with considerable curvature, are the letters MOIOI.
As the sfcunp is entire at the right end, it did not in this case have HRA2 Other- .

wise the letters are the same.

III.

ETTINIK
A

On a small piece .12 x .07 m., from the West Building.

After A what looks like P follows, but this is uncertiiin. The rest of the lower line is

worn away. Coming to this from the pieces just discussed, one would be predisposed to
That an architect was a man of some standing might
I
'
The stamp with Socles's name, being on the upper
end, would disiippear when the tile was laid, even if it
appear from the words of [Plato] Anieraslae, p. 135 B :

4v TTJ TiKToviKri rfKrova ij.lv hv irplairo irc'i/re ^ %i fiviv (ucfov, were a gutter-tile.

apx^'^fKrova 8e ou5' hv fiupittn' ipa-xpiuv.

x>. C. //. VI. p. loO.
-'
It is a little .strange that Pausaiiias (V. 10, 3) speaks
'•
Ibid. VI. pp. 29 £f.

of Libon as a TiKrav.
222 INSCRIPTIONS FROM THE ARGIVE HERAEUM
read 'EttiVi/co? apxi-TeKTajv, but it quite as likely that eVi is a preposition followed by
is

a genitive, as in so many of the Corfu stamps containing the names of prytanes (Riemann,
Les Isles loniennes, pp. 47, 54), or in the numerous stamps on amphora-handles collected
by Dumont in Insc. Ceramiques de la Grece.
The word following the name may be
ap-)(ovTo<;,
for aught we know.
IV.

Another fragment still smaller, .09 m. x .07 m., has a name clearly in the genitive.
To the left we read :
—
YO A I

A^

evident that the top line runs from right to left, and we probably have a name
It is

ending in ikov. If the next Kne turns back in a boustrophedon order, we may here have
eVl —
tXow dp^ovTos or dp')(i.TiKTovo<i. Such a turning back of the second line is seen
on one of the Megalopolis tiles.^ In our inscription, as in that one, AYO is also possible,
since the mark at the edge of the fragment, after the supposed A, looks oblique, and may
be a part of a Y. The reading of the name from right to left has many parallels in
stamps. A
Megalopolis tile^ has the name <^iknnToiixr]v read this way. The three tiles
from Tanagra read in the same way,^ as well as one of the three tiles from Chios before
mentioned. The maker of the stamp in these cases preferred to cut his letters running
in the usual order, regardless of the hundreds of impressions which would thus read
reversed.
We some cases the stamps were not cut as a whole, but were made up
are sure that in
of movable letters.* On an amphora-handle from the Piraeus,^ the reading is from
right to left ;
but the letters $, P and K are left turned the other way. In turning his
letters the workman forgot to arrange them so as to make the direction of the word and

of the letter consistent.

V.

A series of four tile -fragments found on the south slope below the Heraeum just at the
close of the work (spring, 1894). These contain :
—
eTTITTOAYrNO
eTTITTO
GT
They are impressed on the concave side of fragments about an inch thick. The
all

letters are not raised, as in the other fragments here catalogued, but depressed. The fact
that in No. 1 G is so close to the TT as not to allow room for the cross-bar of the latter to
extend so far to the left as in Nos. 2 and 3 points to a slight difference in the moulds,

possibly due to the use of movable letters. The date of this stamp is evidently very late.
Whether Polygnotus was an architect or a sacred official for the year is not known.
>
J. H. S. XIII. p. 336, No. 1. and Dumont, Inscr. Ce'ram., pp. 395, 396, 398, where are
^
Ibid. cuts illustrating the making up of these stamps, in some
' B. C. H. XI. p. 209. of which letters are misplaced.
* ^ B.
Blumner, Technologie und Terminologie, II. p. 32 ; C. H. XI. p. 207.
 STAMPED TILES 228

VI.

V0t>3A heCpov

Two friif^ineiits, one .18 m. x 0.18 m., the other .10 in. X .19 in., one with a raiHed Inirder
.05 in. above the sbiinp, and the other without it, hut the Ktiiinpevidently the same on
iH

both pieces. The letters are .01 to .012 in. hij^h. We HCem to luive here u ca«e of a
stJimp reversed in which
the character J) =
p was not reversed like the other letteni. It in
singular that the break should occur in both pieces at
exactly the «ime place, and ho
leave us in doubt whether we have the genitive of Acipo; or of some longer name.

VII.

EHIKOP
MAKIA
A fragment found at the close of the season of 1895. The field of the stamp is

.10 m. X .05 m. The letters are .02 m. high. Another fragment bears f^p^ which seems to
be a duplicate of this. KOP is probably an abridgment of Kopvr)\Cov.

vm.
KAOICCeENHC RXoicra-devrf^

A fragment of absolutely flat tile, ;

.02 m. thick, .20
letters .02 m. high. An- X .25 m.
other diminutive piece yields KAOICC. The square sigmas cannot belong to a date
much before the beginning of the Christian era, and the contamination of ei and oi
would seem to indicate a date much later still. Such a phenomenon in Attica would
hardly appear before the third century of our era.'

IX.

A small piece of the upper right-hand corner of a tile with next to the preserved ^
edge. This is
^
exactly like those in the Socles stamps, and the piece agrees in thick-
ness but this cannot belong to that series unless the Aa/xoioi 'Hpa? was transferred to
;

the top.
X.

Broken a the right-hand lower corner.

little at The raised letters are badly worn in
the middle of the second line, and at first glance the inscription seems to be easily

legible. It runs from right to left, thus :

—
V 0/ A V A A >l

AA )J^O \/
Hopeful as the first line and the first half of the second look, affording KXawSiou
KXeocT^ ,
we must leave the rest unsolved.

XI.

pearl of the tile-inscriptions from the

But the Heraeum is on the fragment of the upper
face of the edge of a huge bowl, which must have had a diameter of about three feet.
The fragment was found in 1894 " at the West end of the South Slope, behind the
^
Meisterbaus, Gram. Alt. Inschr., p. 46, § 16. 10.
224 INSCRIPTIONS FROM THE ARGIVE IIERAEUM
retaining wall of the West Building, mixed up with a quantity of early pottery and figu-
rines.
The not stamped so as to appear raised as in those hitherto mentioned, but
letters are

are incised, cut into the clay when it was moist. The inscribed face of the fragment is
.22 m.x.06 m. The letters are .03 m. high.

/MBEPAMEINI T]as 'H/aa? ei^ai

This inscription, judging by A and E, and above all by M =

cr, must be considerably

older than No. xii. of the inscriptions on stone. It must date at least as far back as
500 B. c.

While it may belong to a large amphora, it may also belong to a lustral bowl. This
in which the mad king Cleomenes of Sparta dipped his
might be the very bowl bloody
hands before performing his bootless sacrifice which is
graphically described by Herodotus
(VI. 81 ff.).
ADDENDUM.
Fragment of a roof tile with a closed eta stamped upon
it. Here reproduced in fac-
simile in its actual size. As this
fragment was found under the flooring of the Second
Temple, it must have come from the Old Temple, or from one of the buildings contem-
porary with it.
INDEX
 INDEX
AiiAS, (lividoB Arrive territory, 34. Ilasoii for HtatueN, Iteforu temple, 20, 144 ; between
Acraea, part of territory of Meraeiiiii, (leiiiic<l, 13. Upi>cr Ston and Nurtheaitt Ston, 112.
AcrisiiLs, Arfjive tradition of, 34 f. HateH, \y. N., theory of. concerning iieul|)tarM of 8«^
Adnictu, daii^iiter of Kiiry8theuH, founder of Suiiiiuii ond Temple, 149 f.
Heraouni, 5. liuehivu tumlm, 79 f.
i^olian (Iuposil8, 9i>. Beta, form of, in Argive inncriptionii, 2(Ki.

appi'fivi, nieaiiing of, 200 f. Black layon, priiici|ial finding places of mnall ol>-

Agaiiienuion, place of, in Argive tradition, 35 ; chosen jecte, 40, 73, 79. 82.
leader against Troy at the Heraeinn, 35. Boy, witli dove (?), Btatae of, 143 ; head of, from
Altars, below foundations of Second Temple, 20, n. 2. Hraiiron. belonging tu ProfesHor Furlwttngler,
Amazon, head of, related to Polycleitjin type of Am- 165 ff.

azon, 164 ; described, 180 f. Brauron, head from, compared witli head of Hera
Amazonomachia, fragments of, from metojjes of Sec- from Iloraeum, 165 ff.
ond Temple, 150 f., 182. Bronzes. 61 ff.; dating of, G2 ; classification of. 62;
Andesites, at the Heraeuni, 100. ]>rimitive, 62 ; Mycenaean, 62 f.; geometric, 63 ;

Anthemion, upon cynia from Second Temple, 123 f. archaic, 6,3 ; oriental influence in, 63.

Apollo Pytliaeus, temporarily supersedes Hera as Burial of ancient remains, causes of, 94 ff.

principal divinity of Argive plain, 4, 37. Bursian, excavations of, at the Heraeuni. 67 ff.

Aqueducts, connected with the Kevma-tou-Kastrou,

16 ff. Canephorae of Polycleitus, 167 f.

Archaic ^oavov, from western j)ediment of Second Capitals, details of, 113.
Temple, 149 f. Caryatids of Krechtheum, influenced by Argive art,
Archinus, foufKler of games in honor of Hera, 10. 161 ; coni|)ared with head of Hera from tlie He-
Architecture of the Hwaeuni, 103 ff. raeuni, 166 ff., 190.

Arijiue-Llnear vases, proposed designation for so- ;^d\Keos ay<ui', 10.

"
called " Proto-Corinthian vases, 50 preponder- ; Chryseis, causes destruction of Old Temple, 110, n. 1.
ance of, at Heraeuni, 50 ; represent a continuous Cisterns, connected with the Revma-tou-Kastrou,

indigenous element, 59. 16 ff., 136.

ArgoHs, defined, 3 n.; scenery of, 86 f.; geologically Clark, W. G., describes excavations of Rangab^,
of recent formation, 91 ; rivers of, 92 ; geological 69 f.

93 f.
history of, Coins, paucity of find in, 61.
Argos, meaning and ap])Ucation of the name, 3 «.; Columns, of Upper Stoa, 112; of Northeast Build-
connection with the Heraeuni, 10 ff., 27 supre- ;
ing, 115 f.; of East Building, 116 ; of Second Tem-
macy in the Argive plain comparatively late, 31 ;
ple, 120 ff.; interior, of Second Temjile, 126; of
South Stoa, 128 f.: of West Building. 132.
probably raised to importance by Dorians, 36 ;

struggle with Sparta, 37 rehabilitated by Phidon,

; Cow, closely associated with worship of Hera. 6 ; of-

37. fered at feast of Hecatombaea, 8.

Argus, in Argive tradition, 33. Cresilas, position and influence of. 164 f.

af>)(i.TiKTu)v, meaning of, 219 fi. Cretaceous Period, formations of. ^<2 f.

dcTTTis €v "Apyd, 10, 34. Cuckoo, associated with Hera, 21 ;

re]>resented ujwii
Asterion, river near Heraeuni, identified by SteflEen, cymo from Second Teinjile, 123 f.

14 f., 94, 107. Curtius, theory of, concerning sculptures of Second

Athena, head of, from metopes of Second Temple, Temple, 149 f.

183 f. Cyclopean wall, leads to identification of site of He-

Athena Lemnia, head of, compared with heads of raeum, 2~) early remains below, 27 excavations
; ;

Polycleitan type, 179 f., 190. at, 74 described, 109 f.

;

Athens, artistic relation with Argos, 163 ft. Cyma-moulding. from Second Temple, 123 f.; com-
pared with moulding of Parthenon and other tem-
Bacchus, head of, in British Museum, identified with ples, 160, and n. 2.

Polycleitan Hera, 190 f. Cynadra, well near Heraeum, 16, 18.

228 INDEX
Danaus, Argive tradition of, 34. Geology of the Heraeum region, 89 ff.
" Geometric " terra-cotta
Diadumenus of Polycleitus, compared with Dory- figures, 46 f.; vases, 53 ;

head of, in British Museum, 171, 63 of works of

phorus, 169 ff.;
bronzes, ;
comparative paucity
" Geometric "
and n. 2 marks an advance over Doryphorus,
; style at the Heraeum, 47, 62, 63.
" a
173 compared with head of youth from metopes,
;
Geometric," misnomer, as applied to Dipylon
53. See "
of Hera, 190.
178 fiE.; compared with head vases, Dipylon."
Aifovvo-iov, in inscription, 75, 77, 213. Gigantomachia, represented in sculptures of Second
AifutwiT, in inscription, 208 f. Temple, 20, 148 ff.

Digamma, in inscriptions, 75, 199 f., 208 f.; 213. Glykia, stream near Heraeum, formerly identified
" " witli ancient Asterion, 14.
Dipylon terra-cottas, 46 f.; comparative rarity of
"
works of " Dipylon style at Heraeum, 47 ; vases, Gordon, General, first excavations of, at the He-
53. raeum, 64 ff.
Doric tribes, earliest mention of names of, 200. Graces, representation of, upon crown of Polycleitan
Doryphorus of Polycleitus, reproduction of,
on a Hera, 21 f.
lamp, 75 style of, in head of ephebus
;
from a me- Guilds, mention of, in inscription, 213.

tope, 77, 163, n. 4 compared with heads

;
of youths

from metopes, 168 ff., 178 ff.; compared with Dia- Hair, treatment of, on head of Hera, 166 ff.; on Do-
dumenus, 169 ff.; compared with head of Hera, 190. ryphorus and Diadumenus, 170 ff.; on female head
Doves, group of, on stone, 112. from metopes, 182 on head of young girl from me- ;

on head of Athena from metopes, 184.

183
Drapery, treatment of, in Heraeum marbles, 157. topes, ;

Drill, freely used in marble statuary from the He- Halicarnassus, cyma from Mausoleum at, compared
raeum, 154 ff., 178, 180. with cyma from Heraeum, 160.
"
Hammer-stones," 99 f.

Ear, treatment of, in early art, 190, n. 1. Head, of Hera, discovered 1892, 73, described, 189 ff.;

Earthworms, a factor in the burial of ancient re- of Athena, from metopes, 183 f.; of Amazon, from
mains, 96 f. metopes, discovered 1892, 73, described, 180 f.;
East Building, discovered 1894, 77 f .; described, 116 f. of ephebus, from metopes, discovered 1894, 77,

Egyptian objects, 64, 84. described, 178 ff.; of warrior, from metopes, 181 ;

Eleutherion, river near Heraeum, now Revma-tou- female, from metopes, discovered by Rangab^, 69,
Kastrou, 14 ff., 94, 107 water of, used in lustra-
; described, 181
f.; female, from metopes, 182 f.; of

and at the emancipation of slaves, 18 f.

tions young girl, from metopes, 183.
Elias Berbatiotikos, mountain near Heraeum, an- Heads from Heraeum, treatment of, 1.57 f.; types of,
cient Acraea, 13. 158 compared with head of Doryphorus, 168 ff.;
;

Engraved stones, 64. fragments of, from metopes, 184 f.

Enneacrunus, compared with Eleutherion, 17, 19. Hebe, chryselephantine statue of, 22 reproduced on ;

Eocene Period, formations of, 92. coins, 23 f.; marriage of, represented on altar,

Ephesus, cyma from temple of Artemis at, compared 24.

with cyma from Heraeum, 160, and n. 2. Hecatombaea, festival of Hera, 8.

Epidaurus, sculptures from, compared with Heraeum Hera, earliest divinity of Argive plain, 4 ; nature and
marbles, 160 f. evolution of, 5 ff.; chryselephantine statue of, 21 ff.;

Erechtheum, cyma of, compared with cyma from He- head of, discovered at Heraeum, 23, 73, 189 ff.;

raeum, 160 f. bust of, in British Museum, 23 ; ancient wooden

Euboea, part of territory of Heraeum, defined, 12 f.
image of, 24 ; early stone image of, 42 f., 139 ;

Eupolemus, of Argos, architect of Second Temple, probably central figure in western pediment of Sec-
20, 118. ond Temple, 150.
Eurydice, daughter of Lacedaemon, founder of oldest Hera Acria, 6 ; Aegophagus, 4. n. 9 ; Antheia, 8 ;

sanctuary of Hera at Sparta, 4. Apln-odite, 4, n. 9 Argeia, 4

; ; Eileithyia, 8 ;
Pe-

Eye, representation of, in ancient statues, 142. lasgis, 5 f.

Heracles, marriage of, represented on altar, 24.

Felsite, at the Heraeum, 100. Heraeum, chief religious centre of Argive ])lain, 3 f.;
Finlay, gives account of General Gordon's excava- source of Hera cult in other localities, 5 ; topo-
tions at the Heraeum, 65 ff. graphy of, 10 ff., 105 ff.; three periods in history

Fish, represented on ancient stone, 112 f. of, 11 ff.; early history of. 25 ff.; earliest temple
Furtwangler, declares Heraeum marbles Attic, 164 ; founded, circ. c, 28 later history of, 38
1830 B. ; ;

refuted, 164 ff.

age of, as determined by finds, 38 ff.; nature of
the site, 39 94 ; history of previous excavations,
ff.,

Gabbros, found at the Heraeum, 99 f. 64 ff.; history of excavation by American School,

 INDEX
70 (f.; l)iirial of tlie Bite, 97 ff.;
principal buildiiigH, Nurtheaitt liuildini;, deiM'rilM^d, 114.
108. Northwest Building, <li»cover«<l 1K94, 78; deteribed,
HiuroiiineiiioiiH, iiieiiliuncd in iiiHcriptions, 199 f., 205, 134.
•2(K, {., 21 1 ff.

Hieros f/amos, 8. 19. Olmidian, at the Heraeum, 100 f.

HlMsarlik, walls of First and Second CilicK (M>nipared Old Temple, referred to by I'auMniJui, 24 f.: imrtiolljr
with early walls at the lluraeiiiii, 27 ; vases from, cxcavaU-d, 1K92, 73; completely excsvatcd. 1K93,
correspontl to early vases from tiiu Hi-raeiiiii, 56. 74 remains of, deitcribed, 110 f,
;

Honeysuckle sci'oU, ajjon utephaiie of Hera on coin*, Olympia, findit at, compared with find* nl the He-
'22 upon cynia of Second Teni])le, 23.
; raeum, 39 bronzeo and terro-cottji tifruriiieii from,
;

Horses, sacred to Hera, 8. coin|iare(l with terra-cotta ty|)c« from Heraeum,

Hynethians, Doric tribe, mentioned in inscription, 48 f.; site of, compared with Kite of Heraeum, lOK ;

200. temple of Zeus at, pro|M)rtioni of, 121, n. 1 ; treat'

Hypocaust, in Roman Biiildin);;, 135. ment of hair in heads from, 158 ; tilea from Trea-
Hyrnetlio, myth of, 200. sury of Gela at, 219.
Orientation of principal buildings, 108 ; of Old Tem-

lliupersis, represented
in temple sculptures, 20, 148 ff.
ple, as means of determining date, 28 f.

Inscri]>tions from the Heraeum, H)r> ff.

lo, in Argive tradition, 33 f.; identified with first Paestum, temple of Poseidon, jiroportions of, 121.
priestess of Hera, 34. «. 1.

Iron, linds of, 61, 77. Parian marble, used for arcliitectaral sculpture* of
Heraeum, 146, ».

Jones, Stuart, theory of, concerning scidptures of Sec- Parthenon, pro|K)rtion» of, 121 f.; ])ediment sculp-
ond Temple, 152. tures of, compared with |>edimentM of Second Tem-
Jurassic Period, fornuations of, 92 f.
ple, 153 ; treatment of hair in heads from, l.'iS ;
treatment of nude and drajHjry in sculptures from,
Linear ornamentation, a prominent element in the 160; cyma from, compared with cyma from He-
decoration of Mycenaean vases, 5>3 ff.; j)reseMts an raeum, 160, n. 2 reclining Fate from, compare<l
;

unbroken development primitive from earliest with torso of female figure from meto|>e8, 188,
forms of vases to the period of perfect freedom, compared with female figure from pediments, 192.
55 ff. Pausanias, describes tojwgrnphyofthe Heraeum, lOff.;
Lion's head water-spouts, from Second Temple, 123 f.; describes Second Temjile, 20 ff., 117, «. 1, 148;
from South Stoa, 130. Argive genealogies of, 25 f.. 29 ff.

Lower Stoa, described, 136. Peacock, associated with Hera, 24 ; tail of, discovered

Lynceus, founder of games in honor of Hera, 10. by General Gordon, 65.

Pediments of Second Temple, de»cribe<!, 148 ff. :

Marble statuary from the Heraeum, 137 ff. torso of female figure from, 191 f. ; fragmenUt
Megapentlies, earliest figure in traditions of Argos, from, 192 ff.

31 ; exchanges kingdoms with Perseus, 35. Penrose, computes date of earliest temple at Heraeum,
Metopes Second Temple, fragments of, discov-
of 28 f.

ered by Rangab^, 69 discovered 1892-95, 73, 77,

; Perseus, signifiance of, in Argive tradition, 35.
80, 83 described, 146 ff., 177 ff.
:
Phidias, and Polycleitus, 162 f., 168.
Mosaic floor, from Roman Building, 134 f. Phidon, revives supremacy of Argos, 37 ; date of,

Mure, William, first published account of the discov- 61, n. 1.

ery of the Heraeum, 64 f. Phigalia, sculptures from, compared with Heraeum

Mycenae, connection with the Heraeum, 10 ff., 26 ff.; marbles, 160.
with Tiryns and Argos, 36. Phorbas, in Argive tradition, 33.
Mycenaean terra-cottas, 44 ff.; produced under influ- Phoroneus, date of, 29, 32 tnulition ; of, preserved
ence of ceramic art, 45 f.; vases, classification of, at Heraeum, 31 ;
probably unitetl peoples of Argive
50 ff.; geometric elements in, 52 ff.; bronzes, 62 f.; plain, 32.

graves, 28, 69, 79, 92 ; walls, 84. Pillar of limestone, earliest image of Hera, 42 f.,

139.

Naucydes, author of chryselephantine statue of Hebe, Pins of bronze, 61 ff. ; served as a medium of ex-

22, 24. change, 61.

Neogene Period, formations of, 92. Pirasus, son of Argus, dedicated seated wooden im-
Nik^ Balustrade, style of, compared with Heraeum age to Hera, 24, 33 ; influence of, upon terra-cotta
marbles, 157, 160, 188, 192. figures, 44.
 - INDEX
230

Pliny, distinguishes style

of Doryphorus and Diadu- Statues, before temple of Hera, 20 ; bases for, 20, 21 ;

nienus, 169, 7i. 4 statements of, coiicevning Poly-

;
bases for, between Upper Stoa and Northeast
cleitus, discussed, 173 ff. Stoa, 112.

Polycleitus, author of chryselephantine

statue of Hera, Steps below South Stoa, 130 f.

21 peculiar treatment of upper lip in statues of,

; Stoae, Upper, 112 ff.; Northeast, 114, ff.;
112 ff.;

159, 179 f. ;
relation of, to Heraeuni marbles, South, 127 ff. Lower, 136. ;

162 ff. ; and Phidias, 162 f., 168 ; characteristics Strabo, does not mention relation between the He-

of, 173 fl., 186. raeum and Tiryns, 11, 85 f.; characterization of,
Polygnotus, influence of, upon temple sculpture, 85 f.
151.

Pompeii, baths at, compared with baths in Roman Tarbell, F. B., theory of, concerning sculptures of
Building, 135. Second Temple, 149 f.

Porphyry (Felsite), at the Heraeum, 100. Tegea, sculptures from, compared with Heraeum mar-
Poseidon, as rival of Hera, 4, n. 5. bles, 160.

Priene, cyma from temple at, compared with cyma TeXa/io)(i'), meaning of, 201 f.

from Heraeum, 160, and n. 2. Terra-cotta images, 42 ff.; earliest types, 43 ; Tiryn-
Priestess of Hera, Roman statue of (?), 141 ff. thian Argive type, 44 Mycenaean type, 44 ff.;
;

" "
Proetus, builder of walls of Tiryns, 26, 34 f.
DIpylon type. 46 f Advanced Argive type,
.;

Prosymna, part of territory of Heraeum, defined. 47 under oriental

; influence, 47 archaic Greek ;

13 f.; possibly provincial name for arable land, type, 47 ; of free style, 48 compared with bronzes ;

70. and terra-cottas from Olympia, 48 f.; development

" Proto-Corinthian " or runs parallel to development of vase-painting,
Argive-Linear vases, prepon- of,
derance of, at Heraeum, 50 characteristics of, ; 60.
59 ff.
Tertiai'y Period, formations of, in
Argive plain, 92.
Theaeus of Argos, connected with inscription from
Quintilian, statements of, regarding Polycleitus, dis- Heraeum (?), 203.
173 "
cussed, ff. Theseum," proportions of, 121, n. 1, 122.
Tiles, marble, of Second Temple, 124 stamped, ;

Rangabd, A. Rizo, excavations of, at the Heraeum, 216 ff.; date of, 219.
67 ff. Tilton, E. L., Architecture of the Heraeum, 105 ff.

Revma-tou-Kastrou, river near Heraeum, identified Tiryns, connection with the Heraeum, 10 ff., 25 ff.;
with ancient Eleutherion, 14 ff. connected with ;
walls of, compared with Cyclojiaean wall at He-
elaborate system of cisterns and aqueducts, 16 ff. raeum, 26 ; chronological relation to Mycenae and
Richardson, R. B., Inscriptions from the Heraeum, Argos, 36.
197 ff.; Stamped Tiles from the Heraeum, 216 ff. Tii-ynthian-Argive terra-cottas, 44.
Rings of bronze, 61 f. ; served as a medium of ex- Torso of nude youth from metoj)es, discovered 1892,

change, 61. 73 described, 185 ff.; of warrior, from metopes,

;

Roman Building, described, 134 ff. 187 f.; of female figure (Amazon ?), from metopes,
188 f.; of female figure, from pediments, 191 f.

"Salaminian." shaft-tombs, 28, 69, 79. Trojan War, represented in sculptures of Second
Samos, derived cult of Hera from Argos, 5. Temple, 20, 148 ff.
Sardis, burial of, 96.
Scamilli, tracesof, in Second Temple, 120. Unit of measurement in Second Temple, 120.
Sculptures from the Heraeum, 138 ff. single figures, ; Upper Stoa, discovered in 1893, 74 f.; described,
140 ff. architectural, 144 ff.
; general style of, ; 112 ff.

153 period and school of, 160 ff.

ff. ;

Seasons, representation of, upon crown of Polycleitan Vases, 49 ff.; preponderance of Argive-Linear (" Pro-
Hera, 21 f. to-Corinthian ") style at the Heraeum, 50; classifi-
Second Temple, built immediately after 423 b. c, 20 ; cation of, 50 ff.; Mycenaean, 51 ff.; Dipylon, 53 ;

partially excavated by Rangab^, 67 f. ; excavation primitive, 55 f.; Argive-Linear (" Proto-Corin-

of, 1892, 73 ; description of, 117 ff. ; orientation thian "), 57 ff.; development of, runs parallel to

of, 108, 119 ;

proportions of, 129 f. ; plan of, 125. development of terra-cotta figurines, 60.
Sima, see Cyma. Volcanoes, action of, in burying ancient remains,
Socles, ap-xiTiKTwv, 217, 219 ff. 96.
South Stoa, discovered 1894, 79 completely cleaved, ;

1895, 80 ff. described, 127 ff. ; Waldstein, C, General Introduction, 3 ff. ;

Marble
Spits, dedicated at the Heraeum, 62. Statuary from the Heraeum, 139 ff.
 INDKX 281

Waldstein, L., letter of, (luncci'iiiii^; niuituiny of iiiidu Wheeler, .). U., IiiNcriplioiui from Uus Arjpre
torso from metopes, 18ti, n. 5. Herncuiii, l'J7 fT.

Walls, eiiily, lOH f. Wind, action of, in l>iiryini; anrient remain*, 94 f.;

Washington, H. S., Geology of the Heraeiini Ue^don, girinripal ajfcnt in Imrial of lirrainini. '.(7 t.
91 if.
Water, action of, in burying' ancient reniainii, f. % Xantlms, cyma o[ Nciiul ninnunu-nt from, rom|Mre<l
Welcker, theory of, concerning sculptures of .Second with cyma from Herneum, KiO, n. 2.

Temple, 149 f. Xi, doubled, in inM:ri]>tion, 'JOo.

Well near Panagia chapel, jwssihly ancient Kleuthe-
rion, Ui tl'. Zeus, birth of. repretientod in iirulplurM of Seeood
West Building, discovered 1893, 70 ; excavatetl 1894, Temple, 20, 148 fT.

78 ; described, 131 tf.

END OF VOLUME I
EUctrotyped and printed by H. O. Houghton &* Co.
Cambridge^ Mass.^ U. S. A.
f]
I
I
I

UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO

LIBRARY

Acme Library C«rd Pocket

" Ref- I'"'''' ^''="
Under Pal.

Made by LIBRARY BUREAU

L
 t'KfU.UKfJS

.; %