DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.3332#0064
CO
NAUKRATIS.
CHAPTER VII.
TEMENOS OE HEHA.
(49) The tenienos of Hera, and the accident
that led to its discovery, have already been
mentioned. Herodotus had spoken of the,
temenos dedicated by the Samians to their
goddess Hera as if it were as important as
that of the Milesian Apollo. The two are side
by side in the city, and we might reasonably
have hoped that each would yield an equal
treasure. Indeed, when we remembered the
friendship of Amasis with Polycrates of Samos,
and the offerings that he made at the Herasum
in that island, we might well have regarded
the temenos of Hera as the most promising of
all sites at JSTaukratis. But all such expecta-
tions, as has been related, proved deceptive,
owing partly to the digging of the Arabs,
partly perhaps to other causes which we cannot
now even conjecture. But it is unprofitable to
discuss hopes that were not fulfilled; all that
can now be done is to give some account of the
results that actually did proceed from a care-
ful exploration of the site.
The walls of the temenos, which is of very
considerable extent (see general plan, PI. IV.),
had been completely traced by Mr. Petrie in
the previous season; but he had then no
evidence to lead to the true identification of
the enclosure which they surrounded. He had
indeed conjectured that it might be the
Pala?stra, because an inscription,1 found else-
where, recorded the dedication of the Palestra
to Apollo. Hence it seemed probable that the
large enclosure adjoining the temenos of Apollo
might be the Palaestra ; but Mr. Petrie himself
Sec Naiik. I. PI. XXX. p. 63.
only regarded this as a conjecture, not of course
to be insisted on in the face of definite evidence.
Such evidence has now been found, in the vases
bearing incised or painted inscriptions of dedi-
cation to Hera; and accordingly the name of
this great enclosure has been altered in the
map.
In clearing the surface of the temenos, some
traces of buildings were found. The most im-
portant of these presented an oblong plan, and
its internal measurements were 56 feet from N.
to S., 18 feet 10 inches from E. to W. It was
surrounded by a low wall of mud brick, about
twenty-six inches thick—much too thin to be
the outer wall of a building of such dimensions.
The whole space within this wall was carefully
levelled, and had been covered with sand.
Hence it seems clear that what is now left is
only the foundation of an edifice once built
of stone, surrounded, as in other cases at
Naukratis, by a retaining wall of mud brick.
The levelled surface is at a level of about 300
inches above the datum : thus this building-
ranks among the earliest at Naukratis. Was
it the temple of Hera ? This is a question which
cannot now be answered decisively; but its posi-
tion and dimensions make such an identifica-
tion extremely probable. The chief objection
is that its narrower ends face north and south,
not east and west, as is usual in the case of
temples. But this is not a fatal objection;
instances of such a situation are well known, as,
for instance, in the case of the temple at Bassse.
But, on the other hand, there are here no exi-
gencies of the ground to necessitate any such
arrangement. On the whole, however, we
NAUKRATIS.
CHAPTER VII.
TEMENOS OE HEHA.
(49) The tenienos of Hera, and the accident
that led to its discovery, have already been
mentioned. Herodotus had spoken of the,
temenos dedicated by the Samians to their
goddess Hera as if it were as important as
that of the Milesian Apollo. The two are side
by side in the city, and we might reasonably
have hoped that each would yield an equal
treasure. Indeed, when we remembered the
friendship of Amasis with Polycrates of Samos,
and the offerings that he made at the Herasum
in that island, we might well have regarded
the temenos of Hera as the most promising of
all sites at JSTaukratis. But all such expecta-
tions, as has been related, proved deceptive,
owing partly to the digging of the Arabs,
partly perhaps to other causes which we cannot
now even conjecture. But it is unprofitable to
discuss hopes that were not fulfilled; all that
can now be done is to give some account of the
results that actually did proceed from a care-
ful exploration of the site.
The walls of the temenos, which is of very
considerable extent (see general plan, PI. IV.),
had been completely traced by Mr. Petrie in
the previous season; but he had then no
evidence to lead to the true identification of
the enclosure which they surrounded. He had
indeed conjectured that it might be the
Pala?stra, because an inscription,1 found else-
where, recorded the dedication of the Palestra
to Apollo. Hence it seemed probable that the
large enclosure adjoining the temenos of Apollo
might be the Palaestra ; but Mr. Petrie himself
Sec Naiik. I. PI. XXX. p. 63.
only regarded this as a conjecture, not of course
to be insisted on in the face of definite evidence.
Such evidence has now been found, in the vases
bearing incised or painted inscriptions of dedi-
cation to Hera; and accordingly the name of
this great enclosure has been altered in the
map.
In clearing the surface of the temenos, some
traces of buildings were found. The most im-
portant of these presented an oblong plan, and
its internal measurements were 56 feet from N.
to S., 18 feet 10 inches from E. to W. It was
surrounded by a low wall of mud brick, about
twenty-six inches thick—much too thin to be
the outer wall of a building of such dimensions.
The whole space within this wall was carefully
levelled, and had been covered with sand.
Hence it seems clear that what is now left is
only the foundation of an edifice once built
of stone, surrounded, as in other cases at
Naukratis, by a retaining wall of mud brick.
The levelled surface is at a level of about 300
inches above the datum : thus this building-
ranks among the earliest at Naukratis. Was
it the temple of Hera ? This is a question which
cannot now be answered decisively; but its posi-
tion and dimensions make such an identifica-
tion extremely probable. The chief objection
is that its narrower ends face north and south,
not east and west, as is usual in the case of
temples. But this is not a fatal objection;
instances of such a situation are well known, as,
for instance, in the case of the temple at Bassse.
But, on the other hand, there are here no exi-
gencies of the ground to necessitate any such
arrangement. On the whole, however, we