Note (return) — THE TEMPLE ON THE ACROPOLIS BURNT BY THE PERSIANS.

The less rigid correspondence of these groups (x, ix : ix¹, x¹), has caused some difficulty. In the text of the British Museum Marbles 107, all that falls between the pair of dolphins (VII : VIII¹), is regarded as belonging to a separate composition, grouped about the single dolphin (0¹). But such an interpolated composition, besides having no purpose in itself, would vitiate the unity of the entire relief. For, although the circular form is less favorable to a strongly marked symmetry than is the plane, at least in compositions of small extent, still the individual figures and groups must bear some relation to a common centre, and there can be no division of interest, or mere stringing together of disconnected figures or groups of figures. Such a stringing together is assumed by Mr. Murray, when, in his History of Greek Sculpture, 108 he speaks of seven figures after the pair of dolphins, which, "though without direct responsion among themselves, still indicate the continued punishment of the pirates." In the pirate seated on the rocks (x b), however, Mr. Murray 109 finds what he calls a "sort of echo" of Dionysos, inasmuch as he is seated in a commanding position, and is attacked by the god's serpent. There is, to be sure, a certain external resemblance in the attitudes of the two figures, but direct connection cannot be assumed without separating x¹ a from x¹ b, with which, however, it obviously forms a group, and entirely disregarding the relations which the groups x, ix: ix¹, x¹ bear to one another and to the dolphin 0¹. And this Mr. Murray does, when he takes seven figures, among which x¹ b is evidently to be considered as central instead of what is plainly four groups of two figures each, plus one dolphin.