« PreviousContinue »
that he describes the Chalybes and Chaldæans as using different kinds of armour.
Instead of Σkvotvæv in IV. vii. 18. which Major Rennell calls the Scythinians, we should read, from Stephanus Byzantinus, Σκυθηνῶν.
CARYATIDES OF ANCIENT ARCHITECTURE.
IN p. 602. of his interesting Memoirs on Greece, Mr. Walpole remarks, that Lessing objects to the origin which Vitruvius assigns to the term Caryatides. It is this. Carya, a state of the Peloponnese, joined the Persians upon their invading Greece. After the expulsion of the invaders, the Greeks made war upon the Caryatæ, took their city, slew all the males, carried the women into slavery; and decreed that, by way of ignominy, their images should be used as supporters for public edifices. Carya, civitas Peloponnesi, cum Persis hostibus contra Græciam consensit. Postea Græci per victoriam gloriose bello liberati, communi consilio Caryatibus bellum indixerunt: itaque oppido capto, viris interfectis, civitate deleta, matronas earum in captivitatem abduxerunt: nec sunt passi stolas, neque ornatus matronales deponere, ut non uno in triumpho ducerentur, sed æterno servitutis exemplo, gravi contumelia pressa, pœnas pendere viderentur pro civitate. Ideo qui tunc Architecti fuerunt, ædificiis publicis designaverunt earum imagines oneri ferendo collocatas, ut etiam posteris nota poena peccati Caryatidum, memoriæ traderetur." Pliny XXXVI. mentions some Caryatides of Praxiteles which were at Rome; and those with which Diogenes the sculptor had decorated the Pantheon of Agrippa.
Jacobus Nicolaus Loensis in his Epiphillides L. IV. c. 1S. in Gruter's Fax Artium T. V. Suppl. p. 419. supposes that the Dancing Caryatides had nothing to do with the Architectural figures. I am of a contrary opinion. But the matter is open for discussion, and I would fain see it cleared up.
Remarks on the Caryatides of Ancient Architecture, 401
It is very doubtful what degree of credit is due to this story, of which no trace is to be discovered in any Greek historian. It is sufficient to observe that Carya was situated not without the Isthmus, nor near it, but in Arcadia or Laconia. How was it possible that it's citizens should have sided with the Persians? "But," says Mr. Walpole, Mr. Walpole, "we are expressly told by Herodotus, that some of the Arcadians sided with the Persians." Now what Herodotus says is simply this, that while Xerxes was at Thermopylæ, a few (oλiyo Tués) deserters came t-o him from Arcadia, wanting subsistence, and wishing to be in employment. Heringa conjectured that these were the Caryatæ. (Obs. Crit. p. 166.) But is it likely, that because a few wretched men deserted to Xerxes, the Greeks should have razed the city and enslaved all the women? Besides, why should the women have been consigned to the office of pillars rather than the men? And further, would not such a use of their figures in supporting temples have been considered rather as an honour than a disgrace? To these considerations we may add, that if these figures had been used under this name at so early a period, we should find some earlier mention of them under that name, thạn that of Eucrates in Athenæus, who dining in a ruinous house, observed,
ἐνταῦθα δειπνεῖν δεῖ μ ̓ ὑποστήσαντα τὴν
These are two verses which are not in any of the editions distinguished from the prose, nor has Porson noticed them in his admirable notes on Athenæus. In the ancient inscription which Mr. W. is considering, and which is of the date 409. B. C. they are mentioned under the title of ai kópai, the virgins, which is a sufficient refutation of Vitruvius, who describes them as matrona, and talks of their laying aside their ornatus matronales. It is but fair, however, to observe that Holstenius (Not. in Steph. Byz. p. 163.) quotes an Inscription apud Jul. Cæs. Capaccium. τῆ ̔Ελλάδι τὸ τρόπαιον ἐστάθη κατανικηθέντων τῶν Καρυατῶν. We suppose that we need not spend many words in proving this inscription to be spurious. If this account of the demolition of Caryæ be true, we may conjecture that Vitruvius had it from Theopompus the historian. Steph. Βyz. Κάρναι. χωρίον τῆς Λακωνικῆς. Θεόπομπος. νέ. ὁ οἰκήτωρ Καρνάτης, καὶ θηλυκὸν Καρυατίς.
VOL. II. No. 7.
That Carya in Arcadia did not undergo the fate described from Vitruvius, appears from Pausanias. He says that it was not a city, but a place, or piece of ground, χωρίον. Just before, he mentions another place in the same neighbourhood, Αμιλος χωρίον, and adds, πόλιν δὲ τὴν ̓́Αμιλόν ποτε εἶναι λέγουσι; now if any report of the fate of Carya had reached him, would he not have said, "Carya was once a town?" The town of Carya was originally a town of Arcadia, but appropriated by the Lacedæmonians to their own territory. Photius. Καρυάτεια. ἑορτὴ Αρτέμιδος. τὰς δὲ Καρύας, Αρκάδων οὔσας, ἀπετέμοντο Λάκωνες. It appears from Pausan. VIII. 45. that the Caryatæ were formerly attached to the territory of Tegea; and it is clear from Xenoph. Hellen. VI. 5. 25. that it was a border town; for people came from Carya to the Theban generals, who hesitated to pass the frontiers of Laconia, offering to guide them through the defiles, and promising to revolt from Sparta, upon the first appearance of the allies. And this answers well enough to the description of Pausanias III. 10. 8. My own opinion is, that these figures were so called from their resembling the statue of ̓́Αρτεμις Καρυᾶτις, or the Laconian virgins who celebrated the annual dance at her temple. Pausan. III. 10. 8. τὸ γὰρ χωρίον Αρτέμιδος καὶ Νυμφῶν ἐστιν αἱ Κάρναι, καὶ ἄγαλμα έστηκεν Αρτέμιδος ἐν ὑπαίθρῳ Καρυατίδος. χοροὺς δὲ ἐνταῦθα αἱ Λακεδαιμονίων παρθένοι κατὰ ἔτος ἱστᾶσι, καὶ ἐπιχώριος αὐταῖς καθέστηκεν ὄρχησις. Lucian. Salt. 10. T. II. p. 273. Λακεδαιμόνιοι μὲν, ἄριστοι ̔Ελλήνων εἶναι δοκοῦντες, παρὰ Πολυδεύκους καὶ Κάστορος καρυατίζειν μαθόντες, (ὀρχήσεως δὲ καὶ τοῦτο εἶδος, ἐν Καρύαις τῆς Λακωνικῆς διδασκόμενον) ἅπαντα μετὰ μουσῶν ποιοῦσι. Plutarch in his life of Artaxerxes, mentions a ring, εἶναι δὲ γλυφὴν ἐν τῇ σφραγῖδι Καρυατίδας ὀρχουμένας. This conjecture, however, is merely thrown out
for the consideration of scholars.
THE reader is now presented with part of Dr. Bentley's Correspondence which is here printed for the first time. The Letter to Joshua Barnes respecting the authenticity of the Epistles attributed to Euripides, was written at the beginning of the year 1693, in reply to some enquiries which Bentley had received from him upon this subject. Barnes was at that time engaged in preparing his edition of Euripides for the press, and having heard from some friend that Bentley considered these productions supposititious, wrote to enquire his reasons for this opinion. This letter is the same which Bentley speaks of in his Dissertation on Euripides's Epistles,' p. 121. (ed. Bowyer, p. 419.) it is copied from the original, lately presented to the British Museum by the possessor, Mr. Holme.
The others are a specimen of a very large and valuable collection of Letters to Bentley, with copies of some of his Answers, which having been successively the property of Dr. Richard Bentley of Nailstone, his Nephew and Executor, and of the late Mr. Richard Cumberland his Grandson, were presented by the latter, many years ago, to Trinity College. It contains the letters of Spanheim, Grævius, Kuster, Hemsterhuis, Reland, Wetstein, Peter Burmann, Francis Burmann, Perizonius, Dorville, and many other distinguished literary characters, with whom Bentley was in the
habits of intimate correspondence at different periods of his life. These original documents, which were supposed to have been lost, were discovered in the Lodge of Trinity College, upon the death of the late Master. Of this whole collection not more than three or four have ever been before the world.
Of the Epistola Critica addressed to Kuster, it is necessary to remark, that they are the original vehicles by which Bentley conveyed his observations upon the two first Plays of Aristophanes. Kuster, who was then publishing his edition with extreme haste, dissected Bentley's letters, and put them into the form of notes, in a manner very different from the intention of the writer; carefully omitting all particulars in which his own observations, which were already printed, had anticipated those of his illustrious correspondent. It is therefore due to the fame of Bentley, to give these documents in their genuine form. He wrote three letters upon the subject of Aristophanes: but only the two last are found in this collection of the first he probably did not preserve a copy.