238 A History of Art in Sardinia and Jud^a. line with the head of the figure, i,e, at the height of 8 m., decipher- ment was impossible. A ladder was therefore brought from Smyrna, placed against the rock, and a transcription of the signs made, which turned out to be Hittite/ Professor Sayce, some weeks later, repaired to the spot, for the purpose of verifying this important discovery. He made a careful copy of the inscription (Fig. 366), and pointed out details which had escaped his two pre- decessors.^ According to his version, around the head are traces of a circular ornament akin to the headdress of the sphinx at Eyuk (Fig. 327) and the goddess at Eflatoum (Fig. 35 7);^ and behind the head is an indistinct object, perhaps a lotus or uroeus. It is but fair to note that Pro- fessor Sayce is the only traveller who has perceived these appendages. On the other hand, it will be readily admitted that in- distinct objects are not made clearer by a distance of several yards interposed be- tween them and the beholder ; but that when the latter is brought on a line with and close to them, dispositions may be felt and seen, although apparently non-existent and unsuspected before.* Whatever the truth may be, the presence of Hittite characters is enough to Fig. 366. — Hittite Characters on rock near the Pseudo-Niobe. ^ Mr. Dennis published his transcription in a letter to M. Newton {Proceedings Soc. B, and Archce., January, i88i,p. 49). Gotlob, who also visited the monument, believes that on the same rock, besides characters which seem to be Hittite, is a cartouche of Ramses II. (Wright, The Empire^ Plate XXII.), which Mr. Dennis, despite vigilant search, has been unable to detect. ^ Sayce, Academy, October 18, 1879, and Notes from Journeys in the Troad, etc., p. 88. Journal of Hellenic Studies, tom. i. pp. 75-93. ^ Comparison with the Eyuk sphinx belongs to Professor Sayce, who also finds a close resemblance between the Buyuk Souret and the statue of Nofretari, wife of Ramses II., at Ipsamboul. But he seems to me to have travelled very far when he ascribes similarity of date — or nearly so — to these bas-reliefs, the Niobe, according to him, having been executed by an artist who had seen the Egyptian sculpture.
- Thanks to the ladders with which they were provided, MM. Sayce and Dennis were
able to walk round the statue and get a back view of it. Professor Sayce thinks that he detected the tip-tilted shoes. This however is stoutly denied by Mr. Dennis ; indeed it seems rather hard to believe in the presence of shoes, when most travellers have failed to see any legs. On the other hand, Mr. Dennis maintains the existence of a shallow groove on either side of the face and neck, which, according to Professor Sayce, was caused by the action of the rain. The whole controversy may be read in the Academy, August 28, 1880.
