CHAPTER IV.

ANOTHER GROUP OF ARCHÆOLOGISTS AND EXPLORERS.—THE SPOILS OF XANTHUS, OF

BABYLON, OF NINEVEH, OF HALICARNASSUS, AND OF CARTHAGE.

‘She doted upon the Assyrians her neighbours, ... when she saw men

pourtrayed upon the wall,—the images of the Chaldeans pourtrayed with

vermilion, girded with girdles upon their loins, exceeding in dyed

attire upon their heads; all of them princes to look to, after the

manner of the Babylonians of Chaldea.’

EZEKIEL xxiii, 12–15.

‘I do love these ancient ruins;

We cannot tread upon them, but we set

Our foot upon some reverend history.

· · · · ·

But all things have their end,

Castles and cities (which have diseases like to men)

Must have like death which we have.’

WEBSTER, _The Duchess of Malfi_.

_The Libraries of the East.—The Monasteries of the Nitrian Desert, and

their Explorers.—William_ CURETON _and his Labours on the MSS. of

Nitria, and in other Departments of Oriental Literature.—The

Researches in the Levant of Sir Charles_ FELLOWS, _of Mr._ LAYARD,

_and of Mr. Charles_ NEWTON.—_Other conspicuous Augmentors of the

Collection of Antiquities._

We have now to turn to that vast field of research and exploration, from

which the national Museum of Antiquities has derived an augmentation

that has sufficed to double, within twenty-five years, its previous

scientific and literary value to the Public. In this chapter we have to

tell of not a little romantic adventure; of remote and perilous

explorations and excavations; sometimes, of sharp conflicts between

English pertinacity and Oriental cunning; often, of great endurance of

hardship and privation in the endeavour at once to promote learning—the

world over—and to add some new and not unworthy entries on the long roll

of British achievement.

Two distinct groups of explorers have now to be recorded. The labours of

both groups carry us to the Levant. [Sidenote: THE LIBRARIES OF THE

EAST.] What has been done of late years by the searchers after

manuscripts, in their effort to recover some of the lost treasures of

the old Libraries of the East, will be most fairly appreciated by the

reader, if, before telling of the researches and the studies of CURZON,

TATTAM, CURETON, and their fellow-workers in Eastern manuscript

archæology, some brief prefatory notice be given of the earlier labours,

in the same field, of HUNTINGTON, BROWNE, and other travellers in the

seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Mention must also be made of the

explorations of SONNINI and of ANDRÉOSSI.

[Sidenote: THE RESEARCHES OF ROBERT HUNTINGTON IN THE NITRIAN

MONASTERIES;]

About the year 1680, Robert HUNTINGTON, afterwards Bishop of Raphoe,

visited the Monasteries of the Nitrian Desert, and made special and

eager research for the Syriac version of the _Epistles of St. Ignatius_,

of the existence of which there had been wide-spread belief amongst the

learned, since the time of Archbishop USSHER. But his quest was

fruitless, although, as it is now well known, a Syriac version of some

of those epistles did really exist in one of the monasteries which

HUNTINGTON visited. The monks, then as afterwards, were chary of showing

their MSS., very small as was the care they took of them. The only

manuscripts mentioned by HUNTINGTON, in recording his visits to three of

the principal communities—St. Mary Deipara, St. Macarius, and El

Baramous—are an _Old Testament_ in the Estrangelo character; two volumes

of Chrysostom in Coptic and Arabic; a Coptic Lectionary in four volumes;

and a _New Testament_ in Coptic and Arabic.

Towards the close of the following century, these monasteries received

the successive visits of SONNINI, of William George BROWNE, and of

General Count ANDRÉOSSI. [Sidenote: AND THOSE OF SONNINI, BROWNE, AND

OTHERS.] SONNINI says nothing of books. BROWNE saw but few—among them an

Arabo-Coptic _Lexicon_, the works of St. Gregory, and the _Old_ and _New

Testaments_ in Arabic—although he was told by the superior that they had

nearly eight hundred volumes, with none of which they would part.

[Sidenote: Browne, _Travels in Africa_, &c., p. 43.] General ANDRÉOSSI,

on the other hand, speaks slightingly of the books as merely ‘ascetic

works, ... some in Arabic, and some in Coptic, with an Arabic

translation in the margin;’ [Sidenote: Huntington, _Observations_ (repr.

in Ray’s Coll.).] but adds, ‘We brought away some of the latter class,

which appear to have a date of six centuries.’ This was in 1799.

[Sidenote: Andréossi, _Vallées des Lac de Nation_, pass.] BROWNE died in

1814; SONNINI DE MANONCOURT, in 1812; Count ANDRÉOSSI survived until

1828.

In the year 1827, the late Duke of NORTHUMBERLAND (then Lord PRUDHOE)

made more elaborate researches. His immediate object was a philological

one, his Lordship desiring to further Mr. TATTAM’S labours on a Coptic

and Arabic Dictionary. [Sidenote: Lord Prudhoe’s _Narrative_, &c., as

abridged in _Quarterly Review_, vol. lxxvii, pp. 45, seq.] Hearing that

‘Libraries were said to be preserved, both at the Baramous and Syrian

convents,’ he proceeded to El Baramous, accompanied by Mr. LINART, and

encamped outside the walls. ‘The monks in this convent,’ says the Duke,

‘about twelve in number, appeared poor and ignorant. They looked on us

with great jealousy, and denied having any books, except those in the

church, which they showed us.’ But having been judiciously mollified by

some little seductive present, on the next day, ‘in a moment of good

humour, they agreed to show us their Library. From it I selected a

certain number of Manuscripts, which, with the _Lexicon_ (_Selim_)

already mentioned, were carried into the monk’s room. A long

deliberation ensued, ... as to my offer to purchase them. Only one could

write, and at last it was agreed that he should copy the _Selim_, which

copy and the MSS. I had collected were to be mine, in exchange for a

fixed sum of dollars, to which I added a present of rice, coffee,

tobacco, and such other articles as I had to offer.’ After narrating the

acquisition of a few other MSS. at the Syrian convent, or Convent of St.

Mary Deipara, his Lordship proceeds:—‘These manuscripts I presented to

Mr. TATTAM, and gave him some account of the small room with its

trap-door, through which I descended, candle in hand, to examine the

manuscripts, where books, and parts of books, and scattered leaves, in

Coptic, Ethiopic, Syriac, and Arabic, were lying in a mass, on which I

stood.... In appearance, it seemed as if, on some sudden emergency, the

whole Library had been thrown down this trap-door, and they had remained

undisturbed, in their dust and neglect, for some centuries.’

[Sidenote: THE RESEARCHES IN THE LEVANTINE MONASTERIES OF MR. CURZON.]

Ten years later, Mr. TATTAM himself continued these researches. But in

the interval they had been taken up by the energetic and accomplished

traveller Mr. Robert CURZON, to whose charming _Visits to the

Monasteries of the Levant_ it is mainly owing that a curious aspect of

monastic life, which theretofore had only interested a few scholars, has

become familiar to thousands of readers of all classes.

Mr. CURZON’S researches were much more thorough than those of any of his

predecessors. He was felicitous in his endeavours to win the good graces

of the monks, and seems often to have made his visits as pleasant to his

hosts as afterwards to his readers. But, how attractive soever, only one

of them has to be noticed in connexion with our present topic—that,

namely, to the Convent of the Syrians mentioned already. ‘I found,’ says

Mr. CURZON, ‘several Coptic MSS. lying on the floor, but some were

placed in niches in the stone wall. They were all on paper, except three

or four; one of them was a superb MS. of the Gospels, with a commentary

by one of the early fathers. Two others were doing duty as coverings to

large open pots or jars, which had contained preserves, long since

evaporated. On the floor I found a fine Coptic and Arabic Dictionary,

with which they refused to part.’ After a most graphic account of a

conversation with the Father Abbot—the talk being enlivened with many

cups of rosoglio—he proceeds to recount his visit to a ‘small closet,

vaulted with stone, which was filled to the depth of two feet or more

with loose leaves of Syriac MSS., which now form one of the chief

treasures of the British Museum.’ The collection thus ‘preserved’ was

that of the Coptic monks; the same monastery contained another which was

that of the Abyssinian monks. ‘The disposition of the manuscripts in the

Library,’ continues Mr. CURZON, ‘was very original.... The room was

about twenty-six feet long, twenty feet wide, and twelve feet high; the

roof was formed of the trunks of palm-trees. A wooden shelf was carried,

in the Egyptian style, around the walls, at the height of the top of the

door, ... underneath the shelf various long wooden pegs projected from

the wall, ... on which hung the Abyssinian MSS., of which this curious

Library was entirely composed. The books of Abyssinia are bound in the

usual way—sometimes in red leather, and sometimes in wooden boards, ...

they are then enclosed in a case, ... to which is attached a strap, ...

and by these straps the books are hung on the wooden pegs, three or four

on a peg, or more, if the books were small; their usual size was that of

a small, very thick quarto.... Almost all Abyssinian books are written

upon skins.... They have no cursive writing; each letter is therefore

painted, as it were, with the reed-pen.... Some manuscripts are adorned

with the quaintest and grimmest illustrations conceivable, ... and some

are worthy of being compared with the best specimens of caligraphy in

any language.’ Then follows an amusing account of the ‘higgling of the

monks,’ after a truly Abyssinian fashion, ending in the acquisition of

books, of the whole of which the travellers could not, by any packing or

stuffing, make their bags containable. ‘In this dreadful dilemma, ...

seeing that the quarto was the most imperfect, I abandoned it; and I

have now reason to believe, on seeing the manuscripts of the British

Museum, that this was the famous book, with the date of _A.D._ 411, the

most precious acquisition to any Library that has been made in modern

times, with the exception, as I conceive, of some in my own

Collection.... [Sidenote: Curzon, _Visits_, &c., as above.] This book,

which contains some lost works of Eusebius, has ... fallen into better

hands than mine.’

In the following year (1838), the Rev. Henry TATTAM (afterwards

Archdeacon of Bedford), in furtherance of the purpose which had

previously enlisted Lord PRUDHOE’S co-operation, set out upon his

expedition into Egypt. He arrived at Cairo in October, and in November

proceeded up the Nile as far as Esneh, visiting many monasteries, and

inspecting their Libraries, in most of which he only met with liturgies

and service-books. Sanobon was an exception, for there he found

eighty-two Coptic MSS., some of them very fine.

Continuing the narrative, we find that on the 12th of January they

started across the desert for the valley of the Natron Lakes, and

pitched their tent at a short distance from the Monastery of Macarius.

[Sidenote: Miss PLATT’S Journal (unpublished, but abridged in the

_Quarterly Review_, as above).] The monks told them that of these

convents there had once been, on the mountain and in the valley of

Nitria, no less than three hundred and sixty. Of fifty or thereabouts

the ruins, it is said, may still be seen. [Sidenote: RESEARCHES OF

ARCHDEACON TATTAM.] At the Convent of the Syrians, the Archdeacon was

received with much civility, not, however, unaccompanied by a sort of

cautious circumspection. After a look at the church, followed by the

indispensable pipes and coffee, the monks asked the cause to which they

were indebted for the honour of his visit. He told them discreetly that

it was his wish to see their books. ‘They replied that they had no more

than what he had seen in the church; upon which he told them plainly

that he knew they had.’ A conference ensued, and, on the next day, they

conducted him to the tower, and then into a dark vault, where he found a

great quantity of very old and valuable Syriac MSS. He selected six

quarto volumes, and took them to the superior’s room. He was next shown

a room in the tower, where he found a number of Coptic and Arabic MSS.,

principally liturgies, with a beautiful copy of the _Gospels_. He then

asked to see the rest. The monks looked surprised to find he knew of

others, and seemed at first disposed to deny that they had any more, but

at length produced the key of the apartment where the other books were

kept, and admitted him. After looking them over, he went to the

superior’s room, where all the priests were assembled, fifteen or

sixteen in number; one of them brought a Coptic and Arabic _Selim_, or

_Lexicon_, which Mr. TATTAM wished to purchase; they informed him they

could not part with it, ... but consented to make him a copy. He paid

for two of the Syriac MSS. he had placed in the superior’s room, for the

priests could not be persuaded to part with more.... The superior would

have sold the Dictionary, but was afraid, because the Patriarch had

written in it a curse upon any one who should take it away.’ [It was the

same volume which had been vainly coveted by Mr. CURZON, as well as by

several preceding travellers, and of which he tells us he ‘put it in one

of the niches of the wall, where it remained about two years, when it

was purchased and brought away for me by a gentleman at Cairo.’] ‘In the

Convent of El Baramous,’ continues Miss PLATT, ‘Mr. TATTAM found about

one hundred and fifty Coptic and Arabic liturgies, and a very large

Dictionary in both languages. In the tower is an apartment, with a

trap-door in the floor, opening into a dark hole, full of loose leaves

of Arabic and Coptic manuscripts.’ At the Monastery of Amba-Bichoi, Mr.

TATTAM saw a lofty vaulted room, so strewn with loose manuscripts as

scarcely to afford a glimpse of the floor on which they lay, ‘in some

places a quarter of a yard deep.’ At Macarius Convent a similar sight

presented itself, but of these Mr. TATTAM was permitted to carry off

about a hundred.

As the reader may well imagine, the charms of the Syriac MSS. had made

too deep an impression on Mr. TATTAM’S heart to admit of an easy

parting. Many were the longing, lingering looks, mentally directed

towards them. Almost at the moment of setting out on his return to

Cairo, he added four choice books to his previous spoils. In February,

he resolved to revisit the convents, and once more to ply his most

persuasive arguments. He was manfully seconded by his Egyptian servant,

MAHOMMED, whose favourite methods of negotiation much resembled those of

Mr. CURZON. ‘The Archdeacon soon returned,’ says Miss PLATT, ‘followed

by MAHOMMED and one of the Bedouins, bearing a large sack full of

splendid Syriac MSS. on vellum. They were safely deposited in the tent.’

At Amba-Bischoi a successful bargain was struck for an old _Pentateuch_

in Coptic and Arabic, and a beautiful Coptic _Evangeliary_. [Sidenote:

Platt’s Journal; abridged, as above.] On the next day, ‘Mahommed brought

from the priests a Soriana, a stupendous volume, beautifully written in

the Syriac characters, with a very old worm-eaten copy of the

_Pentateuch_ from Amba-Bischoi, exceedingly valuable, but not quite

perfect.’ The remainder of the story, or rather the greater part of what

remains, must here be more concisely told than in the words of the

reviewer.

The manuscripts which Mr. TATTAM has thus obtained, in due time arrived

in England. Such of them as were in the Syriac language were disposed of

to the Trustees of the British Museum.... Forty-nine manuscripts of

extreme antiquity, containing some valuable works long since supposed to

have perished, and versions of others written several centuries earlier

than any copies of the original texts now known to exist, constituted

such an addition as has been rarely, if ever, made at one time to any

Library. The collection of Syriac MSS. procured by Mr. RICH had already

made the Library of the British Museum conspicuous for this class of

literature; but the treasure of manuscripts from Egypt rendered it

superior to any in Europe.

From the accounts which Lord PRUDHOE, Mr. CURZON, and Mr. TATTAM had

given of their visits to the Monastery of the Syrians, it was evident

that but few of the manuscripts belonging to it had been removed since

the time of ASSEMANI; and probable that no less a number than nearly two

hundred volumes must be still remaining in the hands of the monks.

Moreover, from several notes in the manuscripts ... already brought to

England, it was certain that most of them must be of very considerable

antiquity.... In several of these notices, MOSES of Tecrit states that,

in the year 932, he brought into the convent from Mesopotamia about two

hundred and fifty volumes. As there was no evidence whatever to show

that even so many as one hundred of these MSS. had ever been taken away

(for those which were procured for the Papal Library by the two

ASSEMANI, added to those which Mr. CURZON and Mr. TATTAM had brought to

England, do not amount to that number), there was sufficient ground for

supposing that the Convent of the Syrians still possessed not fewer than

about one hundred and fifty volumes, which, at the latest, must have

been written before the tenth century. Application, accordingly, was

made by the Trustees to the Treasury; a sum was granted to enable them

to send again into Egypt, and Mr. TATTAM readily undertook the

commission. [Sidenote: TREASURY GRANT, IN 1841, FOR FURTHER RESEARCHES.]

The time was most opportune. Had much more delay been interposed, these

manuscripts, which, perhaps, constitute the greatest accession of

valuable literature which has been brought from the East into Europe

since the taking of Constantinople, [Sidenote: _Quart. Review_, as

before.] would, in all probability, have been now the pride of the

Imperial Library at Paris.

[Sidenote: MR. TATTAM’S EXPEDITION TO NITRIA IN 1842.]

Mr. TATTAM thought he could work most effectively through the influence

of a neighbouring Sheikh with the superior of the convent. By which

means he obtained, after some delays, a promise that all the Syriac MSS.

should be taken to the Sheikh’s house, and there bargained for. ‘My

servant,’ he says, ‘had taken ten men and eight donkeys from the

village; had conveyed them, and already bargained for them, which

bargain I confirmed. That night we carried our boxes, paper, and string,

and packed them all.... Before ten in the morning they were on their way

to Alexandria.’ But, as will be seen in the sequel, the monks were too

crafty for Mr. TATTAM to cope with.

[Sidenote: TISCHENDORF’S VISIT IN 1844.]

In 1844, TISCHENDORF visited the monasteries already explored by CURZON

and TATTAM. His account reproduces the old characteristics:—‘Manuscripts

heaped indiscriminately together, lying on the ground, or thrown into

large baskets, beneath masses of dust.... The excessive suspicion of

these monks renders it extremely difficult to induce them to produce

their MSS., in spite of the extreme penury which surrounds them.... But

much might yet be found to reward the labour of the searcher.’

In truth, the monks, poor and simple as they sometimes seemed to be, had

taken very sufficient care to keep enough of literary treasures in their

hands to reward ‘further researches.’ Nearly half of their collection

seems to have been withheld.

[Sidenote: PACHO’S NEGOTIATION FOR THE RECOVERY OF THE MSS. WITHHELD BY

THE MONKS OF ST. MARY DEIPARA.]

A certain clever Mr. PACHO now entered on the scene as a negotiator for

the obtainment or recovery of the missing ‘treasures of the tombs.’ They

had been virtually purchased before, but the Lords of the Treasury very

wisely re-opened the public purse, and at length secured for the Nation

an inestimable possession. The new accession completed, or went far

towards completing, many MSS. which before were tantalizingly imperfect.

[Sidenote: See page 622, in this Chapter.] It supplied a second ancient

copy of the famous Ignatian _Epistles_ (_to St. Polycarp_, _to the

Ephesians_, and _to the Romans_); many fragments of palimpsest

manuscripts of great antiquity, and among them the greater part of St.

Luke’s _Gospel_ in Greek; and about four thousand lines of the _Iliad_,

written in a fine square uncial letter, apparently not later than the

sixth century. The total number of volumes thus added to the previous

Nitrian Collections were calculated, roundly, to be from a hundred and

forty to a hundred and fifty.

That the rich accession to our sacred literature, thus made amidst many

obstacles, should be turned speedily to public advantage, two conditions

had to be fulfilled. [Sidenote: WILLIAM CURETON AND HIS LABOURS IN

ORIENTAL LITERATURE.] Skilful labour had first to be employed in the

arrangement of a mass of fragments. Scholars competently prepared, by

previous studies in Oriental literature and more especially in Syriac,

must then get to work on their transcription, their gloss, and their

publication. It could scarcely have been expected, beforehand, that any

one man would be able to undertake both tasks, and to keep them, for

some years to come, well abreast. The fact, however, proved to be so.

The right man was already in the right place for the work that was to be

done.

The late William CURETON had entered the service of the Trustees of the

British Museum in 1837, at the age of twenty-nine, when he had been

already for about eight years in holy orders. He was a native of

Westbury, in Shropshire. His education, begun at Newport School, had

been matured at Christ Church, Oxford. He had been just about to enter

himself at Christ Church in the ordinary way, when his father died,

suddenly, leaving the family fortunes under considerable embarrassment.

CURETON, and a brother of his, showed the metal they were both made of,

by instantly changing their youthful plans. That the whole of the

diminished patrimony might be at their mother’s sole disposal, William

CURETON went to Oxford as a servitor. His brother, instead of waiting

for his expected commission in the Army, enlisted as a private dragoon.

And certainly, in the issue, neither of these young men lost any

‘dignity’—in any sense of that word—on account of the step so

unselfishly taken at their start in life.

William CURETON began his literary labours as a

Coadjutor-Under-Librarian in old Bodley. Dr. GAISFORD introduced him to

Dr. BANDINEL, in 1834, with the words:—‘I bring you a good son. He will

make a good librarian.’ It was at Oxford that he laid the substantial

foundation of his Oriental studies. After three years, he followed the

fashion already set him by some of the best and ablest officers the

Bodleian has ever had—ELLIS, BABER, and H. O. COXE, for example—by

transferring, for a time, his services from the great Library of Oxford

to that of London. [Sidenote: CURETON’S ENTRANCE INTO THE BRITISH

MUSEUM.] His first (or nearly his first) Museum task was to set to work

on the cataloguing of the Arabic and Persian MSS. In 1842, he began his

earliest Oriental publication (undertaken for the ‘Oriental Text

Society,’ to be mentioned presently), namely, AL SHARASTANI’S ‘_Book of

Religious and of Philosophical Sects_.’

At the British Museum, he became quite as notable for the amiability of

his character, and the genial frankness of his manners, as for his

scholarly attainments and his power of authorship. I have a vivid

recollection of my own introduction to him, in the February of 1839, and

of the impression made on me by his kindly and cordial greeting. When I

noted that pleasant face, which beamed with good nature as well as with

intellect, I instantly appreciated the force of the words used by my

introducer: ‘Let me make you known,’ said he, ‘to my father-confessor.’

I thought the choice to be obviously a felicitous one. Not less vivid is

my memory of the delight Mr. CURETON manifested on receiving, within the

Museum _vaults_, the first importation from the Nitrian Desert. The

sight of such a mass of torn, disorderly, and dirty fragments, would

have appalled many men not commonly afraid of labour, but to William

CURETON the scholarly ardour of discovery made the task, from the first,

a pleasure. When successive fresh arrivals gave new hope that many gaps

in the manuscripts of earliest importation would, in course of time, be

filled up, the laborious pleasure ripened into joy.

The collection, obtained by the long succession of labours already

narrated, reached the British Museum on the first of May, 1843. When the

cases were opened, very few indeed of the MSS. were perfect. [Sidenote:

FRAGMENTARY CONDITION OF THE SYRIAC MSS. IMPORTED IN 1843.] Nearly two

hundred volumes had been torn into separate leaves, and then mixed up

together, by blind chance and human stupidity. It was a perplexing

sight. But the eyes that looked on it belonged to a seeing head. Even

into a little chaos like this, almost hopeless as at the first glance it

seemed, the learning, assiduity, and patience of Mr. CURETON gradually

brought order. Of necessity, the task took a long time. First came the

separation of the fragments of different works, and then the arrangement

of the leaves into volumes, with no aid to pagination or catchwords.

With translations of extant Greek works, the collection of their

originals gave, of course, great help. But in a multitude of cases every

leaf had to be read and closely studied.

Within about eighteen months of the reception of the MSS., Mr. CURETON

had ascertained the number of volumes—reckoning books made up of

fragments, as well as complete works—to amount to three hundred and

seventeen, of which two hundred and forty-six were on vellum, and

seventy on paper; all in Syriac or Aramaic, except one volume of Coptic

fragments. With the forty-nine volumes previously acquired, an addition

was thus made to the MS. Department of the National Library of three

hundred and sixty-six volumes. Many of these volumes contain two, three,

or four distinct works, of different dates, bound together, so that

probably, in the whole, there were of manuscripts and parts of

manuscripts, upwards of one thousand, written in all parts of

Mesopotamia, Syria, and Egypt, and at periods which range from the year

411 to the year 1292. Of the specific character and contents of some of

the choicest of these MSS., mention will be made hereafter.

[Sidenote: DR. CURETON’S PUBLICATIONS IN SYRIAC, AND IN ARABIC

LITERATURE.]

For several years, the labour on the Syriac fragments did but alternate

with that on the larger body of the Arabic MSS., a classed catalogue of

which Mr. CURETON published in 1846,—only a month or two after he had

contributed to the _Quarterly Review_ a deeply interesting and masterly

article on the Syriac discoveries. This paper was quickly followed by

his first edition of the _Three Epistles of St. Ignatius_ (I, to

Polycarp; II, to the Ephesians; III, to the Romans). In an able preface,

he contended that, of these genuine _Epistles_, all previous recensions

were, to a considerable extent, interpolated, garbled, and spurious; and

also that the other Ignatian _Epistles_, so-called, are entirely

supposititious. In the year 1870 it need hardly be said either that this

publication excited much controversy, or that competent opinion is still

divided on some parts of the subject. But on two points there has never

been any controversy whatever:—As an editor, William CURETON displayed

brilliant ability; as a student of theology, he was no less

distinguished by a single-minded search after truth. He was never one of

those noisy controversialists of whom Walter LANDOR once said, so

incisively,[35] that they were less angry with their opponents for

withstanding the truth, than for doubting their own claims to be the

channels and the champions of Truth. To his dying day, CURETON owned

himself to be a learner—even in Syriac.

Within three years of the publication of his _Ignatius_, CURETON gave to

the world his precious edition of the fragmentary _Festal Letters_ of

ATHANASIUS, which Richard BURGESS soon translated into English, and

LASSOW into German. [Sidenote: THE FOUNDATION OF THE ORIENTAL TEXT

SOCIETY.] The Syriac version was one of its editor’s earliest

discoveries amongst the spoils of the Nitrian monasteries, and it was

published at the cost of a new society, of which CURETON himself was the

main founder. For the old Oriental publication society[36] limited

itself, as its name imports, to the publication of translations. The new

one—the claims of which to liberal support CURETON was never weary of

vindicating—was expressly founded to print Oriental texts. This new body

had his strongest sympathies, but he co-operated zealously with the

‘Translation Fund’ as well as with the ‘Text Society,’

Among his other and early labours, was the publication of a Rabbinical

Comment on the _Book of Lamentations_, and of the Arabic text of EN

NASAFI’S _Pillar of the Creed of the Sunnites_ (‘Umdat Akidat ahl al

Sunnat wa al Tamaat’), both of which books were printed in 1843. After

1845, CURETON’S literary labours were almost exclusively devoted to that

Syriac field in which he was to be so large and so original a

discoverer. The first distinctively public recognition of his services

was his appointment as a Chaplain to the Queen, in 1847. Two years

afterwards, he was made a Canon of Westminster and Rector of St.

Margaret’s. Thenceforward, his energies were divided. The charms of

Syriac discovery were not permitted to obstruct the due performance of

the appropriate work of a parish priest; though it is much to be feared

that they were but too often permitted to interfere, more than a little,

with needful recreation and rest.

Among those of his parochial labours which demanded not a small amount

of self-sacrifice were the rebuilding and the improved organization of

the schools; [Sidenote: PAROCHIAL LABOURS.] the building of a district

church—St. Andrew’s—in Ashley Place; and the establishment of

Working-Class Lectures, upon a wise and far-seeing plan.

[Sidenote: FURTHER CONTRIBUTIONS TO LITERATURE.]

In 1851, he gave to scholars the curious palimpsest fragments of HOMER

from a Nitrian manuscript (now ADDIT. MS., 17,210), and, two years

afterwards, the _Ecclesiastical History_ of JOHN, Bishop of Ephesus.

This was quickly translated into German by SCHÖNFEHLER, and into English

by Dr. R. Payne SMITH. [Sidenote: MS. ADDIT. 14,640. (B. M.)] Then came

the _Spicilegium Syriacum_, containing fragments of BARDESANES, of

MELITO of Sardes, and the inexpressibly precious fragments of an ancient

recension of the Syriac _Gospels_, believed by CURETON to be of the

fifth century, and offering considerable and most interesting

divergences from the Peshito version.

In a preface to these evangelical fragments of the fifth century, their

editor contends that they constitute a far more faithful representation

of the true Hebrew text than does the Peshito recension, and that the

remark holds good, in a more especial degree, of the _Gospel of St.

Matthew_. This publication appeared in 1858.

[Sidenote: LABOUR AND ITS REWARDS IN FRESH LABOURS.]

Enough has been said of these untiring labours to make it quite

intelligible, even to readers the most unfamiliar with Oriental studies,

that their author had become already a celebrity throughout learned

Europe. As early as in 1855, the Institute of France welcomed Dr.

CURETON, as one of their corresponding members, in succession to his old

master, GAISFORD, of Christ Church. In 1859, the Queen conferred on him

a distinction, which was especially appropriate and dear to his

feelings. He became ‘Royal Trustee’ of that Museum which he had so

zealously served as an Assistant-Keeper of the MSS., up to the date of

his appointment to his Westminster parish and canonry. No fitter

nomination was ever made. Unhappily, he was not to be spared very long

to fill a function so congenial.

Yet one other distinction, and also one other and most honourable

labour, were to be his, before another illustrious victim was to be

added to the long list of public losses inflicted on the country at

large by the gross mismanagement, and more particularly by what is

called—sardonically, I suppose—the ‘economy’ of our British railways.

CURETON’S life too, like some score of other lives dear to literature or

to science, was to be sacrificed under the car of our railway

Juggernaut.

In 1861, he published, from another Nitrian manuscript, EUSEBIUS’

_History of the Martyrs in Palestine_. [Sidenote: THE REMOVAL, AND ITS

CIRCUMSTANCES.] Early in 1863, he succeeded the late Beriah BOTFIELD in

the Chair of the Oriental Translation Fund. On the twenty-ninth of May,

of the same year, a railway ‘accident’ inflicted upon him such cruel

injuries as entailed a protracted and painful illness of twelve months,

and ended—to our loss, but to his great gain—in his lamented death, on

the seventeenth of June, 1864.

He died where he was born, and was buried with his fathers. The writer

of these poor memorial lines upon an admirable man well remembers the

delight he used to express (thirty years ago) whenever it was in his

power to revisit his birthplace, and knows that the delight was shared

with the humblest of its inhabitants. Dr. CURETON was one of those

genuine men who (in the true and best sense of the words) are not

respecters of persons. He had a frank, not a condescending, salutation

for the lowliest acquaintances of youthful days. And those lowliest were

not among the least glad to see his face again at his holiday-visits;

nor were they among the least sorrowful to see it, when it bore the

fatal, but now to most of us quite familiar, traces of victimism to the

mammon-cult of our railway directors.

[Sidenote: THE ARCHÆOLOGICAL EXPLORATIONS IN THE LEVANT.]

Just as we have to go very far back indeed in the history of the

Manuscript Department of the British Museum, in order to find an

accession quite as notable as are—taking them as a whole—the manuscripts

of the Nitrian monasteries, so have we also to do in the history of the

several Departments of Antiquities, in order to find any parallel to the

acquisitions of monuments of art and archæology made during the thirty

years between 1840 and 1870. In point of _variety_ of interest, in

truth, there is no parallel at all to be found.

In archæology, however—as in scientific discovery, or in mechanical

invention—every great burst of new light will be seen, if we look

closely enough, to have had its remote precursive gleams, howsoever

faint or howsoever little noticed they may have been.

Austen Henry LAYARD, for example, is a most veritable ‘discoverer.’

Nevertheless, the researches of LAYARD link themselves with those of

Claudius RICH, and with the still earlier glimpses, and the mere

note-book jottings, of Carsten NIEBUHR, as well as with the explorations

of LAYARD’S contemporary and most able French fellow-investigator,

Monsieur BOTTA. In like manner, Nathan DAVIS is the undoubted

disinterrer of old Carthage, but the previous labours of the Italian

canon and archæologist SPANO, of Cagliari, and those of the French

geographers DE DREUX and DUREAU DE LA MALLE, imperfect as they all were,

helped to put him upon the quest which was destined to receive so rich a

reward.

It is obvious, therefore, that a tolerably satisfactory account of the

researches of the renowned archæologists mentioned at the head of this

chapter must be prefaced with some notices of much earlier and much less

successful labours than theirs; and a thorough account would need

greatly more than that. But, at present, I cannot hope to give either

the one or the other. Rapid glances at the recent investigations are all

that, for the moment, are permitted me, and for the perfunctory manner

of these I shall have to make not a little demand on the reader’s

indulgence. The subject-matter is rich enough to claim a volume to

itself; nor would the story be found to lack well-sustained and varied

interest, even if retold at large.

The first inquiries and explorations in _Lycia_ of Sir Charles FELLOWS

began several years earlier than those in _Assyria_ of Mr. Austen

LAYARD, but an intelligible narrative of what LAYARD did, in 1845, must

needs start with a notice, be it ever so brief, of what BOTTA had been

doing in 1842. The Lycian excavations were also effectively begun in

1842. They were, in fact, contemporaneous with the first excavations at

Nineveh. I begin, therefore, with the closely-linked labours of BOTTA

and of LAYARD, prefacing them with a glance at the previous pursuits and

aims in life of our distinguished fellow-countryman.

[Sidenote: AUSTEN HENRY LAYARD AND HIS EARLY CAREER.]

Austen Henry LAYARD is an Englishman, notwithstanding his birth in Paris

(5th of March, 1817), and his descent from one of the many Huguenot

families who (in one sense) do honour to France for their sufferings for

conscience sake, and who (in many more senses than one) do honour to

England by the way in which zealous and persevering exertions in the

service of their adopted country have enabled them to pluck the flowers

of fame, or of distinction, from amidst the sharp thorns of adversity.

Austen LAYARD is the grandson of the honoured Dr. LAYARD, Dean of

Bristol, and he began active life, whilst yet very young, in a

solicitor’s office in the City of London. But he had scarcely reached

twenty-two years of age before family circumstances enabled him to

gratify a strong passion for Eastern travel. Archæology had no share, at

first, in the attractions which the Levant presented to his youthful

enterprise. But a fervid nature, a good education, and a wonderful power

of self-adaptation to new social circumstances, made the mind of the

young traveller a fitting seedplot for antiquarian knowledge, whenever

the opportunity of acquiring it should come.

[Sidenote: THE JOURNEY THROUGH ASIA MINOR AND SYRIA IN 1839–1840.]

To a man of that stamp it would be impossible that he should tread near

those ancient ruins, every stone of which must needs connect itself with

some ‘reverend history’ or other—when the discerning eye should at

length pore upon it and ponder it—without the ambition stirring within

him to make at least an earnest attempt to explore and to decipher. To

this particular man and his companion in travel, Fortune was propitious,

by dint of her very parsimony. As he says himself: ‘No experienced

dragoman measured our distances or appointed our stations. We were

honoured with no conversations by pashas, nor did we seek any civilities

from governors. We neither drew tears nor curses from the villagers by

seizing their horses, or searching their houses for provisions;

[Sidenote: _Nineveh and its Remains_ (1849), vol. i, p. 2.] their

welcome was sincere; their scanty fare was placed before us; we ate, and

came, and went in peace.’

It was almost thirty years ago—about the middle of April, 1840—that Mr.

LAYARD looked upon those vast ruins on the east bank of the Tigris,

opposite Mósul, which include the now famous mounds of Konyunjik and of

Nebbi Yunus. Having gazed on them with an incipient longing—even then—to

explore them thoroughly, he and his companion rode into the desert, and

looked with new wonder at the great mound of Kàlàh Sherghat, the site of

which is by some geographers identified with the Assur of the book

Genesis.[37] After that hasty and tantalising visit, in the spring of

1840, LAYARD did not again see Mósul until the summer of 1842, when he

was again travelling Tatar, and hurrying to Constantinople. In the

interval, he had often thought of his early purpose, and had talked of

it to many travellers. [Sidenote: BOTTA’S FIRST DISCOVERIES.] Now, in

1842, he heard that what he had hitherto been able only to contemplate,

as the wished-for task of the future, Monsieur BOTTA, the new French

Consul at Mósul, had, for some months, been actually working upon;

although, as yet, with very small success. Our countryman encouraged the

French Consul in his undertaking, and presently learned that by him the

first real monument of old Assyria had been uncovered. This primary

discovery was not made at Kouyunjik, but at Khorsabad, near the river

Khauser, many miles away from the place at which the first French

excavations had been made, early in 1842.

The delighted emotions of Monsieur BOTTA, when he found himself, very

suddenly, standing in a chamber in which—to all probability—no man had

stood since the Fall of Nineveh, and saw that the chamber was lined with

sculptured slabs of ‘gypsum-marble’ or alabaster, full of historic

scenes from the wars and triumphs of Assyria, a reader can better

imagine than a writer can describe. BOTTA himself rather indicates than

depicts them, in the deeply interesting letters which he speedily

addressed to his friend MOHL at Paris (and which by MOHL were not less

promptly published in the _Journal Asiatique_, to be within a month or

two pondered and wondered over by almost every archæologist in Europe).

The delight, and also the surprise, were enhanced when the discoverer

saw that almost every slab had a line of wedge-shaped characters carved

above it, giving hope of history in legible inscriptions, as well as

history in ruins. For, unhappily, nearly all the sculptures _first_

discovered at Khorsabad were fractured. The durability of the Assyrian

style of building had brought about the defacement of the sculptured

records. The walls were formed of blocks of gypsum, backed and lined, so

to speak, with enormous masses of clay. When the weight of such large

earth-banks pressed down upon the sculptured slabs, these were thrust

from their place. Many that were still in position, when first seen,

fell, or crumbled, as the explorer was looking at them. He had to

shore-up and underpin, as he went on; and to do this by unpractised

hands. Else, the more diligent his excavations, the more destructive

they would have been of the very end he had in view.

LAYARD was at Constantinople when the news came of M. BOTTA’S increasing

successes. His detention there had been unexpected, as well as

unavoidable. But he wrote to England without delay. He had a foresight

that BOTTA would not lack encouragement in France. He felt no unworthy

jealousy on account of the fact that it was a Frenchman who was now

disinterring historic treasures of a hitherto unexampled kind, and who

was rapidly securing historic fame for himself.[38] Mr. LAYARD knew—few

men just then knew more fully—that in all matters of learning and of

discovery the gains of France are the gains of the world. [Sidenote:

LAYARD’S OVERTURES TO THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT.] For the staunchest of

John Bulls amongst us must acknowledge that in the arts of scientific

dissemination and exposition a Frenchman (other things being equal) has

usually twice the expertness of an Englishman. But he was naturally

desirous that France should not have _all_ the glory of Assyrian

discovery. What, then, was the reception with which his first overtures

were met? ‘With a single exception,’ in the person of his London

correspondent, ‘no one,’ he tells us, ‘in England’ ... [Sidenote:

_Nineveh and its Remains_, vol. i, p. 10.] ‘seemed inclined to assist or

take any interest in such an undertaking.’

What, on the other hand, were the encouragements given to the French

explorer by the Government and the Nation of France? They were large;

they were ungrudgingly given; and they were instantaneously sent. In Mr.

LAYARD’S words: ‘The recommendation was attended to with that readiness

and munificence which [has] almost invariably distinguished the French

Government in undertakings of this nature. [Sidenote: LIBERAL AID

EXTENDED TO M. BOTTA BY THE FRENCH GOVERNMENT.] Ample funds to meet the

cost of extensive excavations were at once assigned to M. BOTTA, and an

artist of acknowledged skill was placed under his orders, to draw such

parts of the monuments discovered as could not be preserved or removed.’

Who will wonder that at first it seemed as though France would carry off

all the stakes, and England have no place at all in the archæological

race?

[Sidenote: CONTRASTS:—ENGLAND AND FRANCE.]

Mr. LAYARD, however, was otherwise minded. And he found, presently, a

powerful helper in the person of the British Ambassador at

Constantinople, Sir Stratford CANNING (now Lord Stratford de Redcliffe).

Had it not been for the union, in that ambassador, of a large intellect,

a liberal mind, and a strong will, and also for the _absence_, in him,

of that shrinking from extra-official responsibilities which in so many

able men has often emasculated their ability, Mr. LAYARD’S efforts,

earnest and unremitting as they were, would assuredly have been foiled.

The reader will perceive that for what was achieved, in 1845 and in the

subsequent years, on the banks of the Tigris, the British public owe a

debt of gratitude to Lord STRATFORD DE REDCLIFFE, the encourager of the

enterprise, as well as to Mr. LAYARD, its originator.

But neither does this fact, nor does the like of it, five years earlier,

in the help given by Lord PONSONBY to the Lycian researches of Sir

Charles FELLOWS, invalidate or weaken the remark I have ventured to make

(on pages 348; 381, of the present volume, and elsewhere) about the

discreditable and long-continued apathy of our Foreign Office in matters

of art and literature; especially if we compare on that head British

practice with French practice. Perhaps, at first blush, it might be

thought somewhat presumptuous, in a private person, to remark so freely

on what seem to him the shortcomings of statesmen. But it has to be

borne in mind that, in such cases as this, outspoken criticism is rather

the expression of known public opinion, than of mere individual

judgment. The one writer, how humble soever, is very often the

mouthpiece of the thoughts of many minds. Nor is other warrant for such

criticism lacking.

_Three years_ after beginning his excavations at Nimroud, Mr. LAYARD

himself wrote thus (from Cheltenham):—‘It is to be regretted that proper

steps have not been taken for the transport to England of the sculptures

discovered at Nineveh. Those which have already reached this country,

and (it is to be feared) those which are now on their way, have

consequently suffered _unnecessary_ injury; ... yet, ... [Sidenote:

_Nineveh and its Remains_, vol. i, p. xiii.] they are almost the only

remains of a great city and of a great nation.’

Part of the injury now observable in the Assyrian sculptures of the

British Museum was, of course, inseparable from circumstances attending

the discovery. Besides the injury already spoken of—from the pressure of

the earth-banks—all the low-reliefs of one great palace had suffered

from intense heat. From this cause, Mr. LAYARD’S experiences recall, in

one particular, the impressive accounts we have all read of the opening

of ancient tombs in Egypt and in Italy. The fortunate excavator suddenly

beheld a kingly personage, in fashion as he lived. The royal forehead

was still encircled by a regal crown. The fingers were decked with

rings; the hand, mayhap, grasped a sceptre. But whilst the discoverer

was still gazing in the first flush of admiration, the countenance

changed; the ornaments crumbled; the sceptre and the hand that held it

alike became dust. So it was, at times, at Nimroud. Some of the calcined

slabs presented, for a moment, their story in its integrity. Presently,

they fell into fragments.

[Sidenote: MIXED NATURE OF THE CAUSES OF THE MUTILATIONS OBSERVABLE IN

THE MUSEUM SCULPTURES FROM ASSYRIA.]

None the less, when the reader goes into the Kouyunjik Gallery; looks at

the sculptures from SENNACHERIB’S palace; observes the innumerable

‘joinings,’ and then glances at his official ‘_Guide_’ (which tells him,

at page 85, ‘many single slabs reached this country in three hundred or

four hundred pieces’), he is bound for truth’s sake to remember that,

whilst some of the breakage is ascribable to the action of fire at the

time of the Fall of Nineveh, another portion of it is ascribable to the

want or absence of action, on the part of some worthy officials in the

public service of Britain, just twenty-five centuries afterwards.

With Sir Stratford CANNING’S help, and with the still better help of his

own courage and readiness of resource, Mr. LAYARD surmounted most of the

obstacles which lay in his path. There was a rich variety of them. To

quote but a tithe of his encounters with Candian pashas, Turcoman

navvies, Abou-Salman visitors, and Mósul cadis and muftis, would ensure

the reader’s amusement beyond all doubt; but the temptation must be

overcome. Happily, the original books are well known, though the

anecdotes are more than racy enough to bear quotation and requotation.

[Sidenote: LAYARD’S FIRST DISCOVERY, 28th Nov., 1845.]

Two incidents of the first explorations (1845–46) must needs be told.

The earliest discovery was made on the twenty-eighth of November. The

indications of having approached, at length, a chamber lined with

sculpture, rejoiced the Arab labourers not less than it rejoiced their

employer. They kept on digging long after the hour at which they were

accustomed to strike work. The slab first uncovered was a battle-scene.

War chariots drawn by splendidly equipped horses contained three

warriors apiece, in full career. The chief of them (beardless) was

clothed in complete mail, ‘and wore a pointed helmet on his head, from

the sides of which fell lappets covering the ears, the lower part of the

face, and the neck. The left hand (the arm being extended) grasped a bow

at full stretch; whilst the right, drawing the string to the ear, held

an arrow ready to be discharged. A second warrior urged, with reins and

whip, three horses to the utmost of their speed.... A third, without

helmet and with flowing hair and beard, held a shield for the defence of

the principal figure. Under the horses’ feet, and scattered about, were

the conquered, wounded by the arrows of the conquerors. I observed with

surprise the elegance and richness of the ornaments, the faithful and

delicate delineation of the limbs and muscles, both in the men and

horses, and the knowledge of art displayed in the grouping of the

figures and the general composition. [Sidenote: _Nineveh and its

Remains_ (1849), vol. i, p. 41.] In all these respects, as well as in

costume, this sculpture appeared to me, not only to differ from, but to

surpass, the bas-reliefs of Khorsabad.’

Thus cheered, the work of digging went on with fresh vigour, and in new

directions. Parts of a building which had suffered from decay, not from

fire, were at length uncovered. Slabs of still greater beauty were

disclosed. ‘I now thought,’ says the explorer, ‘I had discovered the

earliest palace of Nimroud.’

On the morning after the discovery of these new and more choice

sculptures—middle of February, 1846—Mr. LAYARD rode away from the mound

to a distant Arab encampment—wisely cultivating, as was his manner, a

good understanding with a ticklish sort of neighbours. Two early Arabs,

from this camp, had already paid a morning visit to the mound. They

hastened back at a racing pace. Before they could well pull up their

horses, or regain their own Oriental composure, the riders shouted at

sight of Layard: ‘Hasten, O Bey, to the diggers. They have found great

NIMROD himself. Wallah! it is wonderful, but it is true! We have seen

him with our eyes.’

The ‘Bey’ did not wait for lucid explanations; but urged his horse to

emulate the speed with which the grateful, though mysterious, tidings

had been brought to him. No sooner had he entered the new trench at the

mound, than he saw a splendidly sculptured head, the form of which

assured him at a glance that it must belong to a winged bull or lion

like to those of Persepolis and of Khorsabad. [Sidenote: _Ibid._, p.

65.] Its preservation was perfect, its features sharply cut. [Sidenote:

1846, February.] The Arab workmen stood looking at it with intent and

fear-expressing eyes—but with open palms. The first word that came from

their lips begged a ‘back-sheesh,’ in honour of the auspicious occasion.

The terror of one of them, only, had led him to scamper at full speed to

his tent, that he might hide himself from the frightful monster whose

aspect seemed to threaten vengeance on those rash men who had dared to

disturb his long repose, in the bowels of the earth.

Scarcely had Mr. LAYARD glanced at ‘NIMROD’ before he found that more

than half the tribe whose encampment he had just left had followed hard

at his heels. They were headed by their Sheikh. It would be difficult to

depict, in few words, the conflict of their feelings. Admiration,

terror, anger, had each a part in the emotion which was evinced, no less

in their gestures than in their words. ‘There is no God but GOD, and

MAHOMED is his prophet! [Sidenote: _Ibid._, p. 66.] This is not the work

of men’s hands, but of those infidel giants whom the Prophet—peace be

with him!—has said, that “they were higher than the tallest date-tree.”

This is one of the idols which NOAH—peace be with him!—cursed before the

Flood.’ Such were the words of Sheikh ABD-UR-RAHMAN himself. He showed

great reluctance, at first, to enter the trench. But when once in, he

examined the image with great and continued earnestness. All his

followers echoed his verdict.

But the townspeople of Mósul were more difficult to deal with. The Cadi

called a meeting of the Mufti and the Ulema, to discuss the most

effectual protest against such an atrocious violation of the Koran as

that committed by the unbelieving explorer and his mercenary labourers.

Their notions about NIMROD were very vague. Some thought him to have

been an ancient true-believer; others had a strong misgiving that he,

like his unearther, was but an infidel. They were all clear that the

digging must be stopped. [Sidenote: _Nineveh and its Remains_; passim.]

It tasked all Mr. LAYARD’S skill, experience, and force of character, to

surmount these new difficulties. When they had been at length

overcome—with the brilliant results known now to most Englishmen—he had

to face the enormous difficulties of transport. The great human-headed

lions he was obliged to leave in their original position. A multitude of

smaller sculptures (many of them reduced in bulk by sawing) were safely

brought to England. The first arrivals came in 1847.[39] In 1849 and in

1850, the excavations in the mounds first opened were vigorously

resumed, and new researches were made in several directions. Early in

1850, the explorers buckled to the task of removing the lions. That

chapter in Mr. LAYARD’S familiar narrative is not the least interesting

one.

The explorations partially interrupted in 1847 were resumed in 1849.

[Sidenote: _Discoveries in the Ruins of Nineveh and Babylon_ (1853), pp.

162, 163; 201–209; seqq. Dec., 1849.] From the October of that year

until April, 1851, they were carried on with even more than the old

energy, for the means and appliances were more ample, and the

encouragements drawn from success followed each other in far quicker

succession.

The suspension had been but partial, for Mr. Hormuzd RASSAM, then

British Vice-Consul at Mósul, had been empowered to keep a few men still

digging at Kouyunjik. He had there unearthed several new sculpture-lined

chambers of no small interest. But at Nimroud nothing worthy of mention

had been done during LAYARD’S absence. That was now his first object.

[Sidenote: 1849, Oct. and Nov.] Kouyunjik, however, for a long time gave

the best yield.

In December the south-east façade of the Kouyunjik Palace was uncovered.

It was found to be a hundred and eighty feet in length, and contained,

among other sculptures, ten colossal bulls and six human figures. The

accompanying inscriptions contained the early annals of SENNACHERIB, and

of his wars with MERODACH BALADAN.[40]

Presently, the labours on the north-west palace at Nimroud were also

richly rewarded. The somewhat higher antiquity of that building, as

compared with the homogeneous structures of Kouyunjik and Khorsabad, had

already impressed itself with the force of conviction on Mr. LAYARD’S

individual mind. The fact now became manifest to all eyes that had the

capacity to see.

These Nimroud monuments belong,—according to the opinion of the best

archæologists,—most of them, to the eighth, some of them, however, to

the earlier part of the seventh centuries _B.C._ They now occupy the

most central of the Assyrian Galleries in the British Museum. The

monuments of Kouyunjik and of Khorsabad are probably but little anterior

to the supposed date (625 _B.C._) of the destruction of Nineveh. These

are exhibited in galleries adjacent to the ‘Nimroud Central Saloon.’ To

describe only a few of them in connection with the interesting

circumstances of their respective disclosures would demand another

chapter. A word or two, however, must be given to one among the earlier

discoveries (October, 1846), and to one among the latest of those made

(in the spring of 1851), whilst Mr. LAYARD himself remained in the

neighbourhood of Mósul.

[Sidenote: DISCOVERY OF THE BLACK-MARBLE OBELISK, 1846, October (found

in centre of the great mound).]

At Nimroud many trenches had, in those early days, been opened

unprofitably. Mr. LAYARD doubted whether he ought to carry them further.

Half inclined to cease, in this direction, he resolved, finally, that he

would not abandon a cutting on which so much money and toil had been

spent, until the result of yet another day’s work was shown. [Sidenote:

_Nineveh and its Remains_, vol. i, p. 345. (1849 edit.)] ‘I mounted my

horse,’ he says—to ride into Mósul—‘but had scarcely left the mound when

a corner of black marble was uncovered, lying on the very edge of the

trench.’ It was part of an obelisk seven feet high, lying about ten feet

below the surface. Its top was cut into three gradines, covered with

wedge-shaped inscriptions. Beneath the gradines were five tiers of

sculpture in low-relief, continued on all sides. Between every two tiers

of sculpture ran a line of inscription. Beneath the five tiers, the

unsculptured surface was covered with inscriptions. These, as subsequent

researches have shown, contain the Annals of SHALMANESER, King of

Assyria, during thirty-one years towards the close of the ninth century

before our Lord. The tributaries of the great monarch are seen in long

procession, bearing their offerings. In the appended cuneiform record of

these tributaries are mentioned JEHU, ‘of the House of OMRI,’ and his

contemporary HAZAEL, King of Syria. [Sidenote: _Ibid._, 346.] Well may

the proud discoverer call his trophy a ‘precious relic.’

We now leap over more than four eventful years. Mr. LAYARD is about to

exchange the often anxious but always glorious toils of the successful

archæologist, for the not less anxious and very often exceedingly

inglorious toils of the politician. He will also henceforth have to

exchange many a pleasant morning ride and many a peaceful evening

‘tobacco-parliament’ with Arabs of the Desert, for turbulent discussions

with metropolitan electors, and humble obeisances in order to win their

sweet voices. Just before he leaves Mósul come some new unearthings of

Assyrian sculpture, to add to the welcome tidings he will carry into

England.

[Sidenote: THE DISCOVERIES AT KOUYUNJIK OF THE SPRING OF 1851.]

He found, he tells us—in one of the closing chapters of his latest

book—that to the north of the great centre-hall four new chambers, full

of sculpture, had been discovered. On the walls of a grand gallery,

ninety-six feet by twenty-three, was represented the return of an

Assyrian army from a campaign in which they had won loads of spoil and a

long array of prisoners. The captured fighting men wore a sort of

Phrygian bonnet reversed, short tunics, and broad belts. The women had

long tresses and fringed robes. [Sidenote: _Discoveries at Nineveh and

Babylon_ (edit. 1853), pp. 582–584.] Sometimes they rode on mules or

were drawn—by men as well as by mules—in chariots. The captives were the

men and women of Susiana. The victor was SENNACHERIB.

In several subsequent years—1853, 1854, 1855, when most Englishmen were

intently acting, or beholding with suspended breath, the great drama in

the Crimea—a famous compatriot was continuing the task so nobly

initiated by Austen LAYARD. Sir Henry RAWLINSON (made by this time

Consul-General at Baghdad) carried on new excavations, both at Nimroud

and at Kouyunjik. In these he was ably assisted by Mr. W. K. LOFTUS, as

well as by Mr. Hormuzd RASSAM, the helper and early friend of LAYARD,

and (in the later stages) by Mr. TAYLOR. Another obelisk, with portions

of a third and fourth; thirty-four slabs sculptured in low-relief; one

statue in the round; and a multitude of smaller objects, illustrating

with wonderful diversity and minuteness the manners and customs, the

modes of life and of thought, as well as the wars and conquests, the

luxury and the cruelty, of the old Assyrians, were among the treasures

which, by the collective labour of these distinguished explorers, were

sent into Britain. [Sidenote: EARLY LABOURERS ON THE DECIPHERING OF

CUNEIFORM INSCRIPTIONS.] Another ‘recension,’ so to speak, of the early

Annals of SENNACHERIB, King of Assyria, inscribed upon a cylinder, was

not the least interesting of the monuments found under the direction of

Sir Henry RAWLINSON, whose name had already won its station—many years

before his consulship at Baghdad—beside those of GROTEFEND, of BURNOUF

and of LASSEN, in the roll of those scientific investigators by whose

closet labours the researches and long gropings of the RICHES, the

BOTTAS, and the LAYARDS, were destined to be interpreted, illustrated,

and fructified for the world of readers at large.

For it is not the least interesting fact in this particular and most

richly-yielding field of Assyrian archæology—that several men in

Germany;—more than one man in France;—and one man, at least, in Persia,

had been working simultaneously, but entirely without concert, at those

hard and, for a time, almost barren studies which were eventually to

supply a master-key to vast libraries of inscriptions brought to light

after an entombment of twenty-five hundred years.

[Sidenote: THE TRAVELS AND RESEARCHES OF SIR CHARLES FELLOWS IN LYCIA.]

Scarcely smaller than the debt of gratitude which Britain owes to Mr.

LAYARD and to Lord STRATFORD DE REDCLIFFE, for the Marbles and other

antiquities of Assyria, is the debt which she owes to the late Sir

Charles FELLOWS for those of Lycia. Nor ought it to be passed over

without remark that the admirably productive mission to the Levant of

Mr. Charles NEWTON seems to have grown, in germ, out of the applications

made at Constantinople on behalf of Sir Charles FELLOWS. In that merit

he has but a very small share. The merit of the Lycian discoveries is

all his own. He has now gone from amongst us,—like most of the

benefactors whose public services have been recorded in this volume. How

inadequate the record; how insufficient for the task the chronicler; no

one will be so painfully conscious, as is the man whose hand—in the

absence of a better hand—has here attempted the narrative. The Museum

story has been long. What remains to be said must needs be put more

briefly. But because Sir Charles FELLOWS has been so lately removed from

the land he served with so much zeal and ability, I shall still venture

to claim the indulgence of my readers for a somewhat detailed account of

the work done in Lycia, and of the man who did it.

[Sidenote: THE ANALOGIES AND THE CONTRASTS BETWEEN FELLOWS AND LAYARD.]

In one respect, it was with Charles FELLOWS as with Austen LAYARD. A

youthful passion for foreign travel, and what grew out of that, lifted

each of them from obscurity into prominence. But LAYARD achieved fame at

a much earlier age than did Sir Charles FELLOWS. Sir Charles was almost

forty before his name came at all before the Public. LAYARD was already

a personage at eight and twenty. This small circumstantial difference

between the fortune of two men whose pursuits in life were, for a time,

so much alike, deserves to be kept in mind, on this account: Sir Charles

lived scarcely long enough to see any fair appreciation of what he had

accomplished. Even those whose political sympathies incline them to a

belief that Mr. LAYARD’S _official_ services will never suffice to

console Englishmen for the interruption of his archæological services,

hope that he may live long enough to enjoy a rich reward for the latter

in their yearly-increasing estimation by his countrymen at large. They

will delight to see the fervid member for Southwark utterly eclipsed in

the fame of the great discoverer of long-entombed Assyria.

[Sidenote: THE TRAVELS IN ASIA MINOR, AND WHAT GREW THEREOUT.]

Sir Charles FELLOWS was the son of Mr. John FELLOWS, of Nottingham. He

was born in 1799. In the year 1837, he set out upon a long tour in Asia

Minor. Archæological discovery no more formed any part of a preconcerted

plan in Mr. FELLOWS’ case than it did, two or three years afterwards, in

Mr. LAYARD’S. Both were led to undertake their respective explorations

in a way that (for want of a more appropriate word) we are all

accustomed to call ‘accidental.’

In February, 1838, he found himself at Smyrna. After a good deal of

observation of men and manners, he betook himself to an inspection of

the buildings. [Sidenote: _Journal written during an Excursion in Asia

Minor_, pp. 8, seqq. (edit. 1852).] He soon found that not a little of

the modern Smyrna was built out of the ruins of the Smyrna of the old

world. Busts, columns, entablatures, of white marble and of ancient

workmanship, were everywhere visible, in close admixture with the

recently-quarried building-stone of the country and the period. But not

only had the old marbles been built into the new edifices; they had been

turned into tombstones. Certain Jews, of an enterprising and practical

turn of mind, had bought, in block, a whole hill-full of venerable

marbles, in order to have an inexhaustible supply of new tombstones

close at hand. [Sidenote: _Ibid._, p. 9.] In another part of the suburbs

of the town, the walls of a large corn-field turned out, on close

examination, to be built of thin and flat stones, of which the inner

surface was formed of richly-patterned mosaic, black, white, and red.

From that day, the traveller, wheresoever he journeyed, was a

scrutinising archæologist. And the traveller, thus equipped for his

work, was busied, two months afterwards, in exploring that most

interesting part of Asia Minor (a part now called ‘Anadhouly’), which

includes Lydia, Mysia, Bithynia, Phrygia, Pisidia, Lycia, Pamphylia, and

Caria; and much of which was never before trodden—so far as is known,

and the knowledge referred to is that of the best geographers in

England, discussing this matter expressly, at a meeting of the

Geographical Society—by the feet of any European.[41]

[Sidenote: THE EXPLORATIONS IN ANTIPHELLUS AND ITS VICINITY. 1838,

April.]

On the eighteenth of April, Mr. FELLOWS found himself in the

romantically beautiful, but rugged and barren, neighbourhood of

Antiphellus. The ancient town of that name possessed a theatre, and a

multitude of temples, grandly placed on a far-outjutting promontory. For

miles around, the rocks and the ravines were strewn with marble

fragments. The face of the cliff, which, on one side, overhangs the

town, was seen to be deeply indented with rock-tombs, richly adorned.

They contained sarcophagi of a special form. The lid of each of them

bore a rude resemblance to a pointed arch. It sounds at first almost

grotesquely, in the ear of a reader of Mr. FELLOWS’ _Journal_ of 1839,

to hear him speak of Lycian tombs as ‘Elizabethan’ in their

architecture. But, in the sense intended, the term is strictly apposite.

[Sidenote: _Journal of an Excursion_, &c., as above, p. 164.] If the

reader will but glance at one of Mr. FELLOWS’ many beautiful plates of

those rock-tombs, he will see at once that they look not unlike the

stone-mullioned windows of our own Tudor age.

But the discovery which eclipsed all Mr. FELLOWS’ previous researches

was that of the ancient capital of Lycia—Xanthus. Next in importance to

that was his disinterment of Tlos. He saw the ruins of other and, in

their day, famous towns. It was plain that he had now before him a fine

opening to add to the stores of human knowledge in some of its grandest

departments—artistic, historical, biblical. But, in 1838, he had not the

most ordinary appliances of minute research. He went back to England;

found (as LAYARD was also destined to find, very shortly afterwards)

only a very little encouragement, at official hands; much more than a

little, however, in his own reflections and foresight. [Sidenote:

FURTHER DISCOVERIES IN THE VALLEY OF THE XANTHUS, AND IN OTHER PARTS OF

LYCIA; 1840–42.] In 1839, he went back to Lycia, taking with him George

SCHARF, then carefully described as ‘a young English artist,’ now widely

known as an eminent archæologist. FELLOWS explored. SCHARF drew. Early

in 1840, ten Lycian cities were added to the previous discoveries. Each

of them contained many precious works of ancient art.

In order to effectual excavation, and in order also to the safety of

what was found from destruction by Turkish barbarities, the Sultan’s

firman was essential. The difficulties were much like those which, as I

have had occasion to show in ‘Book Second,’ lay in the path of Lord

ELGIN, under similar circumstances, more than forty years earlier. By

Lord PONSONBY’S zealous efforts, they were at length surmounted.

[Sidenote: See Book II, chap. 2; pp. 382, seqq.] At the earnest instance

of the Museum Trustees, the Government at home seconded the exertions of

their ambassador at Constantinople; and this combination of endeavour

made that feasible which the best energies of Sir Charles FELLOWS,

single handed, must have utterly failed to secure.

The reader will not, I incline to think, regard as an instance of

overmuch detail, if I here add—for instructive comparison with the terms

of the official letter procured by Lord ELGIN—the words in which RIFAAT

Pasha, in June, 1841, describes the antiquities, the removal whereof was

to be graciously permitted. In 1800, Lord ELGIN (after enormous labour)

was empowered to ‘take away any pieces of stone, from the Temples of the

Idols, with old inscriptions or figures thereon.’ Now—in 1841—the

‘pieces of stone’ are described as ‘antique remains and rare objects.’

The schoolmaster, it will be seen, had been at work at Constantinople.

[Sidenote: THE RESEARCHES AT CADYANDA, PINARA, &C.]

The explorations at Cadyanda, at Pinara, and at Sidyma, richly merit the

reader’s attention, as an essential part of our present subject. But

happily Sir Charles FELLOWS’ books are both accessible and popular. Here

we must hasten on to Xanthus, and Sir Charles’ story must now be told in

his own expressive and graphic words:

[Sidenote: THE EXCAVATIONS AT XANTHUS.]

‘Xanthus certainly possesses some of the earliest Archaic sculpture in

Asia Minor, and this connected with the most beautiful of its monuments,

and illustrated by the language of Lycia. These sculptures to which I

refer must be the work of the sixth or seventh centuries before the

Christian era, but I have not seen an instance of these remains having

been despoiled for the rebuilding of walls; and yet the decidedly more

modern works of a later people are used as materials in repairing the

walls around the back of the city and upon the Acropolis; many of these

have Greek inscriptions, with names common among the Romans. The whole

of the sculpture is Greek, fine, bold, and simple, bespeaking an early

age of that people. No sign whatever is seen of the works of the

Byzantines or Christians.

‘To lay down a plan of the town is impossible, the whole being concealed

by trees; but walls of the finest kind, Cyclopean blended with the

Greek, as well as the beautifully squared stones of a lighter kind, are

seen in every direction; several gateways also, with their paved roads,

still exist. I observed on my first visit that the temples have been

very numerous, and, from their position along the brow of the cliff,

must have combined with nature to form one of the most beautiful of

cities. The extent I now find is much greater than I had imagined, and

its tombs extend over miles of country I had not before seen. The

beautiful gothic-formed sarcophagus-tomb, with chariots and horses upon

its roof, of which I have before spoken and have given a sketch of a

battle-scene upon the side, accompanied with a Lycian inscription, is

again a chief object of my admiration amidst the ruins of this city. Of

the ends of this monument I did not before show drawings, but gave a

full description. Beneath the rocks, at the back of the city, is a

sarcophagus of the same kind, and almost as beautifully sculptured; but

this has been thrown down, and the lid now lies half-buried in the

earth. Its hog’s-mane is sculptured with a spirited battle-scene. Many

Greek inscriptions upon pedestals are built into the walls, which may

throw some light upon the history of the city; they are mostly funereal,

and belong to an age and people quite distinct from those of the many

fine Lycian remains.

‘Two of my days have been spent in the tedious, but, I trust, useful

occupation, of copying the Lycian inscription from the obelisk I

mentioned in my former volume that I had seen: this will be of service

to the philologist. Having, with the assistance of a ladder, ascended to

a level with the top of the monument, I discovered a curious fact: the

characters cut upon the upper portion are larger and wider apart than

those on the lower, thus counteracting the effect of diminution by

distance, as seen from the ground. As the letters are beautifully cut, I

have taken several impressions from them, to obtain fac-similes. By this

inscription I hope to fix the type of an alphabet, which will be much

simplified, as I find upon the various tombs about the town great

varieties, though of a trifling nature, in the forms of each letter;

these varieties have hitherto been considered as different characters.

This long public inscription will establish the form of all the letters

of an alphabet, one form only being used throughout for each letter: if

this should be deciphered, it may be the means of adding information to

history. The inscription exceeds two hundred and fifty lines.

‘It is to be regretted that the obelisk is not perfect; time or an

earthquake has split off the upper part, which lies at its foot. Two

sides of this portion only remain, with inscriptions which I could copy;

the upper surface being without any, and the lower facing the ground:

its weight of many tons rendered it immoveable. I had the earth

excavated from the obelisk itself, and came to the base, or probably the

upper part of a flight of steps, as in the other obelisk-monuments of a

similar construction. The characters upon the north-west side are cut in

a finer and bolder style than on the others, and appear to be the most

ancient. Should any difference of date occur on this monument, I should

decide that this is the commencement or original inscription upon it.

‘This, which I must consider as a very important monument, appears to

have on the north-east side a portion of its inscription in the early

Greek language; the letters are comparatively ill cut, and extremely

difficult at such an elevation to decipher; seizing favourable

opportunities for the light, I have done my best to copy it faithfully,

and glean from it that the subject is funereal, and that it relates to a

king of Lycia; the mode of inscription makes the monument itself speak,

being written in the first person. Very near to this stands the

monument, similar in form, which I described in my last Journal as being

near the theatre, and upon which remained the singular bas-reliefs of

which I gave sketches. [Sidenote: _Journal of an Excursion in Asia

Minor_, &c. (2nd Edit.), Appendix.] On closer examination I find these

to be far more interesting and ancient than I had before deemed them.

They are in very low-relief, resembling in that respect the Persepolitan

or Egyptian bas-reliefs.

‘I have received,’ continues Sir Charles FELLOWS, ‘from Mr. Benjamin

GIBSON of Rome a letter in reference to these bas-reliefs: his

interpretation of this mysterious subject appears far the best that I

have yet heard; and from finding the district to have been in all

probability the burial-place of the kings, it becomes the more

interesting. Mr. GIBSON writes—“The winged figures on the corners of the

tomb you have discovered in Lycia, represented flying away with

children, may with every probability be well supposed to have a

reference to the story of the Harpies flying away with the daughters of

King PANDARUS. This fable we find related by HOMER in the _Odyssey_,

lib. xx, where they are stated to be left orphans, and the gods as

endowing them with various gifts. Juno gives them prudence, Minerva

instructs them in the art of the loom, Diana confers on them tallness of

person, and lastly Venus flies up to Jupiter to provide becoming

husbands for them; in the mean time, the orphans being thus left

unprotected, the Harpies come and ‘snatch the unguarded charge away.’

STRABO tells us that PANDARUS was King of Lycia, and was worshipped

particularly at Pinara. This tomb becomes thus very interesting; which,

if it be not the tomb of PANDARUS, shows that the story was prevalent in

Lycia, and that the great author of the _Iliad_ derived it from that

source. With this clue, we have no difficulty in recognising Juno on the

peculiar chair assigned to that goddess, and on the same side is Venus

and her attendants; upon another is probably represented Diana,

recognised by the hound. The seated gods are less easily distinguished.

[Sidenote: _Travels and Researches in Asia Minor_, pp. 336–340.] In the

Harpies, at the four corners of the tomb, we have the illustration of

those beings as described by the classic writers.”’

[Sidenote: MANY SUBSEQUENT DISCOVERIES; (THE DETAILS HERE NECESSARILY

PASSED OVER).]

Every lateral excursion made by Sir C. FELLOWS, and by his companions in

travel, added to his collection rich works of sculpture, and not a few

of them added many varied and most interesting minor antiquities. But I

must needs resist all temptation to enlarge on that head, though the

temptation is great. The twentieth and subsequent chapters of the book

itself (I refer to the _collective_ but abridged ‘_Travels and

Researches in Asia Minor_’ of 1852) will abundantly repay the reader who

is disposed to turn to them—whether it be for a renewed or for a new

reading.

[Sidenote: THE DIFFICULTIES OF TRANSPORT. Jan., 1842.]

When the task of removal had to be undertaken, difficulties of transport

were found, under certain then existing circumstances, to be graver

obstacles than had been Turkish prejudice or Turkish apathy at an

earlier stage of the business. The maritime part of the duty had been

entrusted to Captain GRAVES, of H.M. Ship _Beacon_. The captain left his

ship at Smyrna; sailed with FELLOWS for the Xanthus, in a steam-packet;

but omitted to provide himself with the needful flat-bottomed boats.

[Sidenote: 1841, February.] When they reached the site of the marbles

which were to be carried away, Captain GRAVES said he would not have any

of the stores taken down the river; that stores must be obtained from

Malta; and that he would take all hands away from the diggings at the

beginning of March. [Sidenote: _Ibid._, pp. 440, seqq.] The reader may

imagine the reflections of the eager discoverer at this sudden

check,—coming, as it did, at the very beginning of the burst.

He took a solitary walk of many hours, he tells us, before he could

resolve upon his course of action. He saw before him, to use his own

words, ‘a mine of treasure.’ He had willing hands to work it; ample

firmans to stave off opposition; nothing deficient save boats and

tackle. A year might possibly pass in awaiting them from Malta; and,

meanwhile, the ignorance of the peasantry, the indiscreet curiosity of

travellers, or the sudden growth of political complications, might

destroy the enterprise irrecoverably.

He resolved, in his perplexity, to construct by his own exertions tackle

that would suffice for the removal to the coast; got native help in

addition to the willing efforts—however unscientific—of the honest

sailors of the _Beacon_; succeeded in getting a portion of the precious

objects of his quest to the waterside, before the arrival of the ship;

and got them also strongly cased up. Then he sailed with GRAVES for

Malta. The worthy captain resigned the honourable task—to him so

unwelcome—into the hands of Admiral Sir Edward OWEN. A new expedition

started from Malta at the end of April, and brought away seventy-eight

cases of sculpture in June; leaving the splendid but too heavy

‘winged-chariot-tomb’—so called by its discoverer in one place, and

elsewhere called ‘horse-tomb,’ but since ascertained to be the tomb of a

Lycian satrap named PAIAFA; [Sidenote: ARRIVAL IN ENGLAND OF THE FIRST

SERIES OF XANTHIAN MARBLES. DEC., 1841.] it is adorned with figures of

Glaucus, or perhaps of Sarpedon, in a four-horse chariot—until next

year. The seventy-eight cases were brought to England by the Queen’s

ship _Cambridge_ in the following December.

On the fourteenth of May, 1842, the Trustees of the British Museum thus

recorded their sense of Mr. FELLOWS’ public services:—‘The Trustees

desire to express their sense of Mr. FELLOWS’ public spirit, in

voluntarily undertaking to lend to so distant an expedition the

assistance of his local knowledge and personal co-operation. They have

viewed with great satisfaction the decision and energy evinced by Mr.

FELLOWS in proceeding from Smyrna to Constantinople, and obtaining the

necessary authority for the removal of the marbles; as well as his

judicious directions at Xanthus, by which the most desirable of the

valuable monuments of antiquity formerly brought to light by him,

together with several others, of scarcely less interest, [Sidenote:

_Minutes of the Trustees of the British Museum_; 14 May, 1842. (Appendix

to Fellows).] now for the first time discovered and excavated, have been

placed in safety, and—as the Trustees have every reason to hope—secured

for the National Museum.’

This hope was more than realised. It shows the energy of FELLOWS, that

the expedition to Lycia of 1841 was his _third_ expedition. In 1846 he

made a fourth. It was rich in discovery; but I fear somewhat exhausting

to the strength of the explorer. He lived a good many years, it is true,

after his return to England; but how easily he yielded when a sudden

attack of illness came, I shall have the pain of showing presently.

In the interval between his third and fourth journeys to Lycia, FELLOWS

married a fellow-townswoman, Mary, the only daughter of Francis HART, of

Nottingham, but she survived the marriage only two years. A year after

her death he married the widow of William KNIGHT, of Oatlands, in Herts.

On his final return from Lycia he was knighted, as a token (and it was

but a slender one) of the public gratitude for his services. At the

close of October, 1860, a sudden attack of pleurisy invaded a toilworn

frame. On the eighth of the following month he died, at his house in

Montagu Place, London, in the sixty-first year of his age.

[Sidenote: DATE AND CHARACTER OF THE MONUMENTS IN THE ‘LYCIAN GALLERY.’]

Taken broadly, the sculptures of Lycia may be described as works which

range, in date, from the sixth century before our Lord to almost as many

centuries—if we take the minor antiquities into account—after the

commencement of the Christian era. Some of them rank, therefore, amongst

the earliest _original_ monuments of Greek art which the British Museum

possesses; and date immediately after the _casts_ of the sculptures of

Selinus and of Ægina.

On some of the myths and on the habits of Lycian life there has been a

sharp controversy, of the merits of which I am very incompetent to

speak. Narrower and narrower as my limits are becoming, I yet feel it

due to a public benefactor, who can no longer speak for himself

otherwise than by his works, that in these waning pages he should be

permitted to supply at least a part of his own explanatory comments upon

the story of his discoveries. It is one of enchaining interest to the

students of classical antiquity.

The famous ‘Harpy Tomb,’ thinks Sir Charles FELLOWS, is to be enumerated

as among the most ancient of the remaining works of the ‘Tramilæ,’ or

‘Termilæ,’ mentioned both by HERODOTUS and by STEPHEN of Byzantium, as

well as on the Xanthian obelisk or _stele_, now called the ‘Inscribed

Monument,’ and numbered ‘141’ in the Lycian Gallery of the Museum.

[Sidenote: FELLOWS’ ACCOUNT OF THE LYCIAN MARBLES.]

Sir Charles FELLOWS proceeds to say that ‘the shaft, frieze, and cap of

this monument, weighing more than a hundred tons, has been by an

earthquake moved upon its pedestal eighteen inches towards the

north-east, throwing to the ground two stones of the frieze towards the

south-west: in this state I found it in 1838. In 1841 the eight stones

of this frieze were placed in the Museum. The only similar art which I

know in Europe is in the Albani Villa near Rome. This slab is described

by WINCKELMANN as being of earlier workmanship than that of Etruria. I

shall not dwell upon these works, as they were found _in sitû_, and will

therefore be as well understood in England as if seen at Xanthus. I may

draw attention to the blue, red, and other colours still remaining upon

them. The subject also being that of the family of King PANDARUS, it

should ever be borne in mind that this monument stood in the metropolis

of Lycia, and within twelve miles of the city of Pinara, where we are

told that PANDARUS was deified. This and the neighbouring tombs stood

there prior to the building of the theatre, which is probably of Greek

workmanship. The usual form of this structure must have been partially

sacrificed on account of these monuments, as the seats rising in the

circles above the diazoma have abruptly ceased on the western side, and

have not been continued towards the proscenium. Near to one of the

vomitories in the south-eastern bend of the diazoma is a similar

monument to the Harpy Tomb, which has had the capstone and bas-reliefs

removed, and the shaft built over by the theatre. Upon one of its sides

is a short Lycian inscription, and a few words referring to its repair

remain upon another side in the Greek character.

‘Not far from these stands the inscribed stele, which is of the highest

interest; of this, which is too heavy and too much mutilated to allow,

without great labour, of its removal to the Museum, I have had casts

taken in plaster. From my publications you would learn that a portion of

the top of this [monument], weighing several tons, had been split off by

the shocks of earthquakes: of this I have also had casts taken. In

excavating around the monument on the south-west, and in the opposite

direction to which the top had split off, I found the capstone had been

thrown which had surmounted bas-reliefs; also two fragments of a

bas-relief, but I think too high to have been placed upon this stele:

they are the work of the same age, and are now placed in the Museum. The

most important discovery here was of the upper angles broken from the

monument, and having upon them the inscription on each side, thus

perfecting, as far as they extend, the beginnings and ends of the upper

lines of the inscription; these original stones I have brought home,

being useless and insecure, if left in fragments with the monument. The

exact form of the letters of the Greek portion of this inscription,

compared with many others of which I shall speak, will do much to fix a

date to these works.

‘Upon the point of rock on the north-west side of the Acropolis is a

fine Cyclopean basement, which has probably been surmounted by a similar

monument to those of which I have spoken. No trace is found of any of

its fragments; and from its position, shocks in the same direction as

those which have destroyed the others would have thrown this down the

perpendicular cliff into the river which flows about three hundred feet

beneath.

‘The masses of Cyclopean foundations traced around and upon the

Acropolis, have been too much worked in, and converted to the use of an

after people to ascertain their original form: they certainly have not

been continuous, forming a wall or defence for the Acropolis; indeed,

its natural position would render this superfluous, the cliffs on the

south and west are inaccessible. I observe that most of the forms are

referable to vast pedestals or stoas for large monuments; and from their

individual positions at various elevations, and upon angles and points,

I believe that the Acropolis has been covered with the ornamented

monuments of this early people. The walls and basements of these

separate buildings have since been united by strong lines formed of the

old materials, the most ready for the purpose, and all put together with

a very excellent cement, of which I have brought away specimens. A wall

of this formation, facing the south-west, attracted my attention in

1838, by displaying some sculptured animals and chariots built as

material into its front. This wall we have, with great labour, owing to

the hardness of the cement, entirely removed; behind a portion of it we

found a fine Cyclopean wall, which had slightly inclined over from the

weight of earth behind; the casing which we have removed strengthened

it, and, connecting the old buildings with others, formed a line of

fortification, probably in Roman times. From the great size of the

blocks used in constructing this wall, from the similarity of the stone,

as well as from the sculpture traceable upon almost the whole of them, I

conclude that they must have been the ruins of monuments in the

immediate neighbourhood; basements for such are on either side. The

works found here are entirely those of the early people; and I may

extend this remark to all found upon the Acropolis. The architectural

fragments, many specimens of which I bring away, are all Lycian, and

would form monuments imitative of wooden constructions—beam-ends, ties,

mortices, and cornices, similar to the tombs shown in the drawings, but

double the size in point of scale to any now existing; bearing this in

mind, I do not think it improbable that the sculptures representing a

chariot procession have filled the panels on either side; should this be

the case we have nearly the whole complete. The cornice and borders of

these strongly corroborate this idea. We have four somewhat triangular

stones, with sitting sphinxes upon each; these would complete the two

gable ends in similar form and spirit of device to the generality of the

tombs of this people. There is also an angle-stone, interesting from its

sculpture, and from its style and subject blending these works with the

age of the “Harpy Tomb.”

‘To continue with the works of the early inhabitants: We must next

notice the tombs at the foot of the rocky heights at the south-eastern

parts of the city: of these the most beautiful are the kind having

Gothic-formed tops; these can be seen in the various drawings. The

structure generally consists of a base or pedestal which has contained

bodies, the _Platas_, surmounted by a plinth or solid mass of stone,

which is often sculptured; above this is a sarcophagus, generally

imitative of a wood-formed cabinet, the principal receptacle for the

bodies, the _Soros_; upon this is placed a Gothic lid, sometimes highly

ornamented with sculpture, which also served as a place of sepulture,

probably the _Isostæ_. From one of these, in which the lower parts were

cut out of the solid rock, and the top had fallen and been destroyed, I

have had casts taken, as the subject is intimately connected with the

frieze of the wild animals on the Acropolis. On this tomb, the

inscription is cut in the language of the early people. Not far distant

from this is a tomb which, from the sculpture upon it, I distinguish as

the “Chimæra-Tomb.” The lid of this, which I found in 1840, is perfect,

but had been thrown to the ground by the effect of earthquakes; the

chamber from off which it had slidden was inclining towards the lid;

beneath the chamber a few stones forming the foundation and step (in the

same block) are alone to be found. There is here no trace of the first

two stories, and from the rock approaching the surface of the ground I

found no depth of earth for research. Upon the chamber of this tomb is a

Lycian inscription, of which I have casts, in order that they may be

used in reconstructing the monument in the Museum. The other tomb of

this character, and by far the most highly ornamented, was the tomb of

PAIAFA, and I call it, from its sculpture, the “Winged-Chariot-Tomb.” In

finding this monument, in 1838, I observed that each part had been much

shaken and split by earthquake, but no portion was wanting except a

fragment from the north corner. This monument combines matters of great

interest, showing in itself specimens of the architecture, sculpture,

and language. I have stated that this style of monument is peculiar to

Lycia; and I now add, from the knowledge derived from my research in

that country, that Lycia contains none but these two of this ornamental

description. These differ in minor points, making the possession of each

highly desirable, and I am glad that these will be placed in our

National Museum. The tombs of Telmessus, Antiphellus, and Limyra, are

similar in construction, but have not the sculptured tops and other

ornamental finishings seen in these.

‘Upon the Acropolis, and fallen into a bath, we found a pedestal having

sculptured upon the side a god and goddess within a temple, in excellent

preservation. On the opposite side of the pedestal is a very singular

subject, which, had not certain points both of execution, material, and

position occurred, I should have attributed to the Byzantine age.

Amongst many other animals, the object of chase to a hunter is seen much

mutilated: this may have been the representation of a novel idea of the

Chimæra: the hind quarters of a goat remain, with a snake for its tail.

It is greatly to be regretted that the other fragments could not be

found. On observing in the ground some very ancient forms of the Greek

letters, differing from all others found so commonly here, cut upon a

slab of marble, I had it taken up, and was delighted to find that it was

a pedestal, with a Lycian inscription upon the other side; this will be

valuable, as showing the form of the Greek characters in use at the age

of the language of Lycia. This same type is seen in all the bilingual

inscriptions, of which we have only casts.

‘Of another pedestal at Tlos I have taken casts, which will be valued

from the subjects of the bas-reliefs. The pedestal of one stone was

formed of two cubes, a small one upon a larger. The fourth side of the

upper one was not sculptured. One slab of the larger cube represents in

bas-relief a view of the Acropolis of Tlos, the Troas of these early

people: probably the hero whose deeds were by this monument

commemorated, and whose name occurs twice upon it, was engaged in the

defence or capture of the city. At Tlos I also found cut in the rock of

the Acropolis a tomb with an Ionic portico. [Sidenote: _Note._—The plans

referred to are appended to the first edition of Sir C. Fellows’ book.]

Within this are represented a panelled and ornamented door, and several

sculptured devices and animals, as shown in the drawings and plans. On

the side, and within the portico, is a very early bas-relief of

Bellerophon upon Pegasus, and probably a chimæra beneath the horse; but

this portion of the sculpture is unfinished, and the rock beneath is

left rough; the columns of the portico are only blocked out from the

rock. Of the bas-relief of Bellerophon I have casts, and the full detail

of the colouring which now remains upon the figures. This is probably

the earliest sculpture which we have obtained. From Cadyanda I have

casts of parts of a beautiful tomb, which is so much in ruins, and

shaken into fragments, that I could not even take casts of the whole of

the sculptures that remain. The roof or lid is wanting. The tomb now

consists of a chamber in imitation of a wooden structure, and in the

panels is sculpture; surmounting this is a smaller solid block, or

plinth, also sculptured, but the upper part is wanting. These

bas-reliefs, of which I show many drawings in my ‘Lycia,’ derive great

additional interest from several of the figures having near them names

inscribed in two languages—the Greek and the Lycian. The casts of these,

I doubt not, will be valued as important illustrations. From Myra I have

casts of the whole of the figures ornamenting one of the rock-tombs.

Three of these subjects from within the Portico retain so much of their

original painting that I have had the casts coloured on the spot as

fac-similes, and a portion of the paint is preserved for chemical

examination. There are from this tomb eleven figures the size of life.

Of the inscriptions of this people I have made many copies; I have had

casts of one long one from the large Gothic-formed tomb at Antiphellus,

also of the bilingual inscription from the same place, and of another

from Levisse, near the ancient Telmessus.

‘Of the age of the next works of which I must speak, and which are a

large portion of the collection from Xanthus, I have great difficulty in

forming an opinion. The whole were found around a basement which stands

on the edge of a cliff to the south-east of the ancient Acropolis. The

monument which stood upon this stoa has been thrown down by earthquake,

almost the whole of its ruins falling towards the north-west. These

works are of a people quite distinct from the preceding, both in their

architecture, sculpture, and language: these are purely Greek. On

carefully examining the whole of the architectural members of which I

have specimens selected (some retaining coloured patterns upon them), as

well as the position in which each of the various parts were thrown, I

have, in my own mind, reconstructed the building, the whole of which was

of Parian marble, and highly finished. The monument which I suppose to

have crowned this basement has been either a magnificent tomb, or a

monument erected as a memorial of a great victory. In reforming this, I

require the whole of the parts that we have found, and none are wanting

except two stones of the larger frieze, and the fragments of the

statues. The art of this sculpture is Greek, but the subjects show many

peculiarities and links to the earlier works found in Lycia. The frieze,

representing the taking refuge within a city, and the sally out of its

walls upon the besiegers, has many points of this character. The city

represented is an ancient Lycian city, and has within its walls the

stele, or monument known alone in Xanthus. The city is upon a rock;

women are seen upon the walls. The costume of the men is a longer and

thinner garment than is seen in the Attic Greeks. The shields of the

chiefs are curtained. The saddle-cloth of the jaded horse entering the

city is precisely like the one upon the Pegasus of Bellerophon, and the

conqueror and judge is an Eastern chief, with the umbrella, the emblem

of Oriental royalty, held over him. The body-guard and conquering party

of the chief are Greek soldiers. Many of these peculiarities are also

seen in the larger frieze, and also in the style of the lions and

statues. The form of the building, which alone I can reconcile with the

remains, is a Carian monument of the Ionic order. Bearing in mind all

these points, I am strongly inclined to attribute this work to the

mercenaries from Æolia and Ionia, brought down by HARPAGUS to conquer

the inhabitants of Xanthus, whom they are said to have utterly

destroyed. This monument may have been the tomb of a chief, or erected

as a memorial of the conquest of the city by HARPAGUS. No inscription

has been found, or it might probably have thrown some light upon the

date of this work. In the immediate neighbourhood were found the other

friezes, representing hunting-scenes, a battle, offerings of various

kinds and by different nations, funeral feasts, and several statues

which are of the same date.’ Sir Charles then concludes thus:—

‘The whole of the remaining works now to be traced amidst the ruins of

Xanthus are decidedly of a late date; scarcely any are to be attributed

to a period preceding the Christian era, and to that age I cannot

conceive the works just noticed to have belonged. A triumphal arch or

gateway of the city at the foot of the cliff of which I have spoken has

upon it a Greek inscription, showing it to have been erected in the

reign of VESPASIAN, _A.D._ 80: from this arch are the metopes and

triglyphs now in the Museum. [Sidenote: _Travels and Researches in Asia

Minor_, pp. 429, 430 (1852).] Through this is a pavement of flagstones

leading towards the theatre. To this age I should attribute the theatre,

agora, and most of the buildings which I have called Greek, and which

are marked red upon the plan. To this people belong the immense quantity

of mosaic pavements which have existed in all parts of the city. Almost

all the small pebbles in the fields are the débris of these works. In

many places we have found patterns remaining which are of coarse

execution, but Greek in design.’

[Sidenote: THE MARBLES OF HALICARNASSUS, OF CNIDUS, AND OF BRANCHIDÆ.]

The not a whit less interesting discoveries at Halicarnassus and

elsewhere, made chiefly in the years 1856, 1857, and 1858, by Mr.

Charles NEWTON, now claim attention, but my present notice of them can

be but very inadequate to the worth of the subject. They as richly

deserve a full record as do the explorations of LAYARD or those of

FELLOWS.

The earliest, in arrival, of the Halicarnassian Marbles were procured by

our Ambassador at Constantinople (then Sir Stratford CANNING, now) Lord

STRATFORD DE REDCLIFFE. These first-received marbles comprise twelve

slabs, sculptured with the combats of Greeks and Amazons in low-relief;

and were removed from the walls of the mediæval castle of Budrum, in the

year 1846, with the permission, of course, of the Sublime Porte. It is a

tribute all the stronger to the energy of Lord STRATFORD to find another

man of energy writing, in 1841: ‘I would not have been a party to the

asking what—to all who have seen them’ (namely, the Marbles of

Halicarnassus, built into the inner walls of Budrum Castle)—‘must be

considered as an unreasonable request.’ [Sidenote: _Travels and

Researches in Asia Minor_, pp. 429, 430 (1852).] It took, it is true,

five years for Lord STRATFORD to overcome the obstacle which to Mr.

FELLOWS seemed, in 1841, quite insuperable.

[Sidenote: THE MISSION TO THE LEVANT OF MR. CHARLES NEWTON. 1856–58.]

In 1856, and expressly in order to a thorough exploration of the site of

Halicarnassus, and of other promising parts of the Levant, Mr. Charles

NEWTON, then one of the ablest of the officers of the Department of

Antiquities (whose loss at the Museum, even for three or four years, was

not very easily replaceable), accepted the office of British Vice-Consul

at Mitylene. In 1857, he discovered four additional slabs (similar to

those received from the Ambassador), on the site of the world-famous

mausoleum itself; several colossal statues, and portions of such;

together with a multitude of architectural fragments of almost every

conceivable kind; columns—mostly broken into many portions—with their

bases, capitals, and entablatures, in sufficient quantity and diversity

to warrant a faithful restoration of the ancient building by a competent

hand.

From Didyme (near Miletus), from Cnidus, and from Branchidæ, many fine

archaic figures in the round; some colossal lions; and an enormous

number of fragments both of sculpture and of architecture; with many

minor antiquities, various in character and in material, were

successively sent to England. Mr. Charles NEWTON’S narrative of his

adventures at Budrum, and at several of the other places of his sojourn

and excavations, is very graphic. Some portions of it are worthy to be

placed side by side with the best chapters of the earlier narrative of

the explorations and travelling experiences of LAYARD.

Of the most famous trophy of Mr. NEWTON’S first mission to the East—the

mausoleum built by Queen ARTEMISIA—the discoverer has himself more

recently given this brief and striking descriptive account:—

[Sidenote: THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS AT HALICARNASSUS.]

This monument, writes Mr. NEWTON, in 1869, was erected ‘to contain the

remains of MAUSOLUS, Prince of Caria, about _B.C._ 352. It consisted of

a lofty basement, on which stood an oblong Ionic edifice, surrounded by

thirty-six Ionic columns, and surmounted by a pyramid of twenty-four

steps. [Sidenote: _Guide to the Department of Antiquities_, &c., pp. 74,

75.] The whole structure, a hundred and forty feet in height, was

crowned by a chariot-group in white marble, in which probably stood

MAUSOLUS himself, represented after his translation to the world of

demigods and heroes. The peristyle edifice which supported the pyramids

was encircled by a frieze, richly sculptured in high-relief,’ and so on.

The frieze thus mentioned is that of which the twelve slabs were, as

already mentioned, given by Lord STRATFORD DE REDCLIFFE in 1846, four

exhumed by NEWTON himself in 1857, and one more purchased from the

Marchese SERRA, of Genoa, in 1865. This piecemeal acquisition of the

principal frieze, by dint of researches spread over twenty years, is not

the least curious of the facts pertaining to the story. But the annals

of the Museum comprise ten or twelve similar instances of ultimate

reunion, after long scattering, of the parts of one whole. They tell of

manuscripts (made perfect after the lapse of a century, it may be) as

well as of sculptures, thus toilsomely recovered.

But the Greco-Amazonian battle-frieze was not the only frieze of the

famous mausoleum. The external walls of the ‘cella’ had two other

friezes, of which Mr. NEWTON succeeded in recovering several fragments,

some of them of much interest. And the mausoleum was profusely adorned

with sculptures in the round as well as with the richly carved figures

in relief, both high and low, which encircled (in all probability) the

very basement, as well as the peristyle and the cella portions of this

marvellous structure. Lions in watchful attitudes (‘lions guardant,’ in

heraldic phrase) stood here and there, and the fragments of these which

have been recovered testify to their variety of scale, as well as to

their number. The names of five famous sculptors of the later Athenian

school—SCOPAS, LEOCHARES, BRYAXIS, TIMOTHEUS, PYTHIOS—who were employed

upon the decoration of the tomb itself, or upon the chariot-group, have

been recorded, and it would seem that each of four of these had one side

of the tomb specially assigned to him. ‘The material of the sculpture

was Parian marble, and the whole structure was richly ornamented with

colour. [Sidenote: Newton, in _Guide_, as above, p. 74; and _Travels and

Discoveries in the Levant_, vol. ii, pp. 108–137; and passim.] The tomb

of MAUSOLUS was of the class called by the Greeks _heröon_, and so

greatly excelled all other sepulchral monuments in size, beauty of

design, and richness of decoration, that it was reckoned one of the

“Seven Wonders of the World.”’

While LAYARD was unearthing Nineveh; FELLOWS bringing into the light of

day the long-lost cities of Lycia; and Charles NEWTON restoring, before

men’s eyes, this funereal marvel of the ancient world, which had long

been known (in effect) only by dim memories and traditions; [Sidenote:

THE EXPLORATIONS OF NATHAN DAVIS AT CARTHAGE AND UTICA.] Dr. Nathan

DAVIS, in his turn, was exhuming Carthage and Utica. All these

distinguished men were labouring, in common, for the enrichment of our

National Museum, within a period of some twenty years. Three of them may

be said to have been busied (in one way or other) with their

self-denying tasks contemporaneously.[42] If we take into the account

the variety, as well as the intrinsic worth, of the additions thus made

to human knowledge; above all, if we duly estimate the value of those

links of connection between things human and things divine, which are

the most essential characteristic of some of the best of these

acquisitions, it may well be said that the annals of no museum in the

world can boast of such an enrichment as this, by the efforts of the

travellers and the archæologists of one generation. And all of these

explorers are—in one sense or other—Britons.

On one incidental point, I have to express a hope that the reader will

pardon what he may be momentarily inclined to think an over-iteration of

remark. If I have really adverted somewhat too frequently to the

connection which many of these rich archæological acquisitions, of

1842–1861, present between the annals of man and the Book of GOD, I have

this to plead, in extenuation: Certain writers pass over that connection

so hurriedly as almost to lose sight of it. And we live in an age in

which some of our own countrymen—some of those among us to whom the

Creator has been most bounteous in the bestowal of the glorious gifts of

mind and genius—have even spoken of our best of all literary possessions

as ‘Jew-Records,’ and ‘Hebrew old-clothes.’ Those particular

expressions, indeed, were employed long before the arrival of the

Assyrian Marbles. But I think I have seen them quoted since.

[Sidenote: THE SPOILS OF CARTHAGE AND UTICA.]

Among the spoils of Carthage and of Utica which we owe to Dr. Nathan

DAVIS, are many rich mosaic pavements, of the second and third centuries

of our era, and a multitude of Phœnician and Carthaginian inscriptions,

extending in date over several centuries. And it must be added that many

of the antiquities, and more especially of the mosaics, excavated under

Dr. DAVIS’S instructions at Utica, were found to possess greater beauty,

and a more varied interest, than most of those which were disinterred by

him from amidst the ruins of Carthage. Many of these, like some of the

choice treasures of Nineveh, are, in a sense, still buried—for want of

room at the British Museum adequately to display them. The reader may

yet, but too fitly, conceive of some of them as piteously crying out (in

1870, as in 1860)—

‘Here have ye piled us together, and left us in cruel confusion,

Each one pressing his fellow, and each one shading his brother;

None in a fitting abode, in the life-giving play of the sunshine;

Here in disorder we lie, like desolate bones in a charnel.’

[Sidenote: OTHER CONSPICUOUS AUGMENTORS OF THE GALLERIES OF

ANTIQUITIES.]

Many other liberal benefactors to the several Archæological Departments

of the Museum deserve record in this chapter. But the record must needs

be a mere catalogue, not a narrative; and even the catalogue will be an

abridged one.

Foremost among the discoverers of valuable remains of Greek antiquity,

subsequent to most of those which have now been detailed, are to be

mentioned Mr. George DENNIS, who explored Sicily in 1862 and subsequent

years; and Captain T. A. B. SPRATT, who travelled over Lycia and the

adjacent countries, following in the footsteps of Sir Charles FELLOWS,

[Sidenote: Spratt and Forbes’ _Travels in Lycia, Mityas, and the

Cibyrates_ (2 vols; 1847), passim.] and who enjoyed the advantage of the

company and co-operation of two able and estimable fellow-travellers,

Edward FORBES and Edward Thomas DANIELL, both of whom, like their

honoured precursor in Lycian exploration, have been many years lost to

us.

The antiquities collected in Sicily by DENNIS, at the national cost,

were chiefly from the tombs. They included very many beautiful Greek

vases, a collection of archaic terracottas, and other minor

antiquities.[43] Some of the marbles discovered by SPRATT are of the

Macedonian period, and probably productions of the school of Pergamus.

At Camerus and elsewhere, in the island of Rhodes, important excavations

were carried on by Messrs. BILIOTTI and SALZMANN. These also were

effected at the public charge. [Sidenote: _Reports of British Museum_;

1864, and subsequent years.] In the course of them nearly three hundred

tombs were opened, and many choicely painted fictile vases of the best

period of Greek ceramography were found. Those researches at Rhodes were

the work of the years 1862, 1863, and 1864. In 1865, the excavations at

Halicarnassus were resumed by order of the Trustees, and under the

direction of the same explorers, and with valuable results. In 1864, an

important purchase of Greek and Roman statues, and of the sculptures

from the Farnese Collection at Rome, was made. In the following year

came an extensive series of antiquities from the famous Collection of

the late Count POURTALÈS. Of the precious objects obtained by the

researches of Mr. Consul WOOD, at Ephesus, in the same and subsequent

years, a brief notice will be found in Chapter VI.