memory of Mausolus in fleeting words, the genius of the most famous architects and sculptors of the day was employed in the construction of his tomb. This monument was of the class called at a later period Heroon, but surpassing in beauty of design and sumptuousness of material all similar monuments in the ancient world. The architects were Satyrus and Pythius, who composed a treatise on the structure of the edifice, cited by Vitruvius, but which has unfortunately not been preserved. We learn from Pliny that the tomb was a peristyle building, surmounted by a pyramid, on the summit of which was a chariot group in marble. The sculptural decorations were chiefly executed by four renowned artists, Scopas, Leochares, Bryaxis, and Timotheus; a fifth sculptor, who seems to be the same as Pythius, the architect of the tomb, made the chariot group on the summit. The material was Parian marble of the finest quality. In the descriptions of this monument which have been handed down to us, its extreme costliness is especially dwelt upon, a statement which has been amply borne out by the discovery of its remains in situ.

The extreme grief of Artemisia for the loss of her husband is said to have been the cause of her death, which took place B.C. 351. Her short reign of two years did not enable her to see the completion of the magnificent structure which she had commenced, but the artists who had been employed continued their work after her death till it was finished; and, if we are to believe Pliny, this was a labour of love, carried out with no other reward than the fame it won them.' (P. 56.)

There can be no doubt that a monument adorned with such splendid works of art would be preserved with jealous care as long as any respect remained for the arts of ancient Greece. Lucian, writing in the second century of our era, speaks of it as an object which the Halicarnassians took a pride and pleasure in showing to strangers; and we have no reason to suppose that at this time it was in any degree shorn of its original magnificence. Again, in the latter part of the fourth century, Gregory of Nazianzus alludes to the Mausoleum in terms from which it may fairly be inferred that up to that period it still remained uninjured. The subsequent notices are less satisfactory; for though it is mentioned by Constantine Porphyrogenitus in the tenth century, and by Eustathius as late as the twelfth, as a monument still subsisting, we are hardly entitled to assume from mere passing notices in writers so vague and inaccurate as the later Byzantine compilers, that it still preserved its integrity. Mr. Newton supposes it to have been first reduced to a ruined condition by an earthquake; and the circumstances attending the discovery of the fragments belonging to the upper part of the building lend much probability to this conjecture.

But at whatever time the building first fell into decay, we

VOL. CXVI. NO. CCXXXVI.

ΙΙ

learn with certainty that it had passed into a state of complete ruin before the year 1472, when a Venetian traveller, who visited the site in company with the expedition of Pietro Mocenigo, speaks of having seen some vestiges (vestigia quædam') of this celebrated monument among the ruins of the city. Halicarnassus had at that time been for seventy years in the possession of the Knights of St. John, together with the adjoining island of Rhodes; and it is certain that they had made use of the materials furnished to their hands by the ruins of the ancient city, including perhaps those of the Mausoleum itself, for the construction of the strong castle with which they fortified the rocky peninsula that commands the harbour. But notwithstanding all these chances of destruction, we learn from a curious account accidentally preserved to us, that even in the beginning of the 16th century the vestiges' still subsisting of the Mausoleum were far more considerable than the expression of the Venetian traveller would have led us to suppose. The narrative in question, which has been brought to light by the industry of Mr. Newton, is so curious that we give it

entire :

'In the year 1522, when Sultan Solyman was preparing to attack Rhodes, the Grand Master, knowing the importance of the castle of St. Peter, and being aware that the Turks would seize it easily at the first assault, sent some knights thither to repair the fortress and make all due preparations to resist the enemy. Among the number of those sent was the Commander de la Tourette, a native of Lyons, who was afterwards present at the taking of Rhodes, and came to France, where he related what I am now about to narrate, to M. d'Alechamps, a person sufficiently known by his learned writings, whose name I mention here only in order to make known my authority for so singular a story.

'When these knights had arrived at Masy (Budrum), they at once commenced fortifying the castle; and looking about for stones wherewith to make lime, found none more suitable or more easily accessible than certain steps of white marble, which rose in the form of a terrace in the midst of a level plain near the port, where had formerly been the great Place of Halicarnassus. They therefore pulled down and took away these marble steps, and finding the stone good, proceeded, after having destroyed the little masonry remaining above-ground, to dig lower down in the hope of finding more. In this attempt they had great success; for in a short time they perceived that the deeper they went the more the structure was enlarged at its base, supplying them not only with stone for making lime, but also for building. After four or five days, having laid bare a great space one afternoon, they saw an opening as into a cellar. Taking a candle, they let themselves down through this opening, and found that it led into a fine large square hall, ornamented all round

with columns of marble, with their bases, capitals, friezes, and cornices engraved and sculptured in half-relief. The space between the columns was lined with slabs and bands of marbles of different colours, ornamented with mouldings and sculptures, in harmony with the rest of the work, and inserted in the white ground of the wall, which was all covered with histories and battle-scenes sculptured in relief. Having at first admired these works and entertained their fancy with the singularity of the sculptures, they ultimately pulled it to pieces and broke it up, in order to apply it to the same purpose as the rest. Besides this hall they found afterwards a very low door, which led into another apartment, serving as a kind of antechamber, where was a sepulchre with its vase and helmet of white marble, very beautiful and of marvellous lustre. This sepulchre, for want of time they did not open, the retreat having already sounded. Having returned there the day after, they found the tomb opened and the earth all round strewn with fragments of cloth of gold and spangles of the same metal, which made them suppose that the pirates, who at this time swarmed along the coast, having had some inkling of what had been discovered, had visited the place during the night and had removed the lid of the sepulchre. It is supposed that they discovered in it much treasure. It was thus that this magnificent tomb, which ranked among the wonders of the world, after having escaped the fury of the barbarians, and remained standing for the space of 2247 years, was discovered and destroyed to repair the Castle of St. Peter, by the Knights of Rhodes, who immediately after this were driven completely out of Asia by the Turks.'*

It must be confessed that this narrative was not calculated to raise our expectations of the probability of making important discoveries by excavations on the site of the Mausoleum; and if we are at first disposed to feel disappointed with the result of Mr. Newton's researches, we may perhaps, on second thoughts, feel grateful that even so much has been rescued from destruction. The architectural decorations have indeed disappeared to even a greater degree than might have been anticipated; but we have nevertheless obtained some important materials for the restoration of the edifice; while the sculptural remains that have been recovered, few and mutilated as they unquestionably are, still serve to give us some notion of the artistic treasures that are lost to us for ever.

It is unquestionably the fact, and is indeed admitted on all hands, that the architectural data obtained by the researches of Mr. Newton would not in themselves have been sufficient to convey to us any idea of the celebrated edifice to which they belong; and that we must still have recourse in the first

Guichard, Funérailles des Romains, Grecs, &c.' Lyon: 1581. We cite from Mr. Newton's translation, with some slight alterations.

instance to the description of the Mausoleum preserved to us by Pliny: Had not this description been extant (says Mr. Pullan), anything like a correct restoration would have been an impossibility, as neither the character of the design, nor 'the magnitude of the work, could have been inferred from the existing remains' (p. 159.). It is important to bear in mind, in considering the attempts that have been recently made to reproduce the original building, that they must still be based principally upon the same authority with those which have preceded them.

The celebrated passage of Pliny, which has so long exercised the ingenuity of commentators and architects, is to the following effect: :-

'Scopas had as rivals in the same age, Bryaxis, and Timotheus, and Leochares, who should be mentioned together, because they were equally employed in decorating the Mausoleum with sculpture: this was a sepulchre erected by his wife Artemisia to Mausolus, King of Caria, who died in the second year of the 107th Olympiad. It was mainly owing to the artists just mentioned that this work came to be reckoned one of the seven wonders of the world. It extends on the north and south sixty-three feet, but is shorter on the two fronts. The whole circumference is four hundred and eleven feet. It is raised in height twenty-five cubits, and is surrounded by thirty-six columns. This circuit is called the Pteron. The sculptures on the east side were by Scopas, on the north by Bryaxis, on the south by Timotheus, and on the west by Leochares. Before they had finished their work the queen died; but they did not cease from their labours until the work was completed, regarding it as a monument both of their own fame and of art. And to this day it is disputed which of their productions is of the greatest merit. A fifth artist was also joined to them; for above the Pteron there was a pyramid, equal in height to the lower part, contracting by twenty-four steps to a summit like that of a meta. At the top of all was a chariot with four horses, in marble, the work of Pythius: the addition of this completes the height of the whole work to one hundred and forty feet. (Plin. Hist. Nat. xxxvi. 4.)

A very slight consideration of this passage is sufficient to show that it appears to involve inconsistencies and difficulties from which it is impossible to extricate ourselves without explanation from some other source. How, for instance, could a building which was only 63 ft. in length, and shorter on the other sides, have a circumference of 411 ft.? and, if the height of 25 cubits (37 ft.) be applied to the Pteron, and the same height be allowed for the pyramid above it (which seems the most natural construction of Pliny's words), how are we to make up the whole height of 140 ft.? Whether or not Pliny himself had any distinct conception of the building which he

undertook to describe, may well be doubted; but at all events it is certain that his description, taken by itself, is drawn up in such a form as to be utterly unintelligible to future generations. We cannot indeed wonder that, while they had no other assistance to guide them, the speculations of architects should have diverged so widely from one another, and from what we now know to be the truth.

The only other definite statement transmitted to us from antiquity was calculated to perplex the matter still more. Hyginus, a writer of little authority, enumerates among the seven wonders of the world, the monument of King Mausolus 'built of Parian marble, 80 feet in height and 1340 feet in 'circumference.' Vitruvius, though he alludes to a work describing the Mausoleum by the two architects Satyrus and Pythius, in a manner which would seem to imply that it was still extant in his day, has unfortunately left us nothing that can contribute to our knowledge of its architectural design. Lucian and Pausanias furnish nothing but vague admiration of its general splendour. The only other hint concerning it is found in Martial, who speaks of the Mausoleum hanging in the vacant air,' a remarkable expression, which undoubtedly points to some corresponding peculiarity in the construction of the monument.

When we compare the two attempts that have been recently made to restore the Mausoleum, in accordance with the results obtained by the late excavations-the one by Mr. Pullan, the architect who accompanied the expedition, embodied in the plates to Mr. Newton's work, and to which Mr. Newton has given the sanction of his high authority†; the other subsequently put forward by Mr. Fergusson, in a separate publication, the first impression undoubtedly must be, that if it is still possible for architects to come to conclusions so widely different, there has been but little positive gain from the recent researches on the spot. And yet this conclusion would be greatly exaggerated. We unquestionably do not possess adequate materials for such a restoration as every one would desire to see a complete reproduction of the original building, based on authentic and satisfactory evidence: but we have

* Aëre nec vacuo pendentia Mausolea.' Lib. i. Epigr. 1.

It is but just to add that the merit or demerit of this design is due in great part to Lieutenant Smith, who, as stated by Mr. Pullan himself (p. 159.), had previously determined the general character of the edifice, and especially the form of the pyramid. His restoration is appended to his official report, published among the papers presented to Parliament.