Page:History of Art in Sardinia, Judæa, Syria and Asia Minor Vol 2.djvu/172

 154 ^ History of Art in Sardinia and Judaea. inadequate sketch. This stricture particularly applies to the sphinx, which he mistook for some huge impossible bird/ On the other hand, our visit extended over five days (Nov. 18-23), during which we were able carefully to examine the tumulus and its approaches, as well as the surrounding village. We excavated wherever ancient remains appeared above ground, made plans of each structure as it was uncovered, and used every available hour of the short days to obtain photographs. As until the publication of our volume these sculptures were practically unknown, we shall not attempt to draw from the meagre sources alluded to, but will confine ourselves to condensing our former account, reproducing our own sketches and plans.^ Eyuk is a hamlet of about 30 houses, built upon the small plateau of a hill, 12 or 13 m. high, with a gentle slope towards the surrounding plain (Fig. 322). On the south-eastern limits of the village is an ancient gateway, facing the south. Trachytic mono- liths form the door-posts. On the outer face of each is carved a sphinx, whose claws are still wholly uncovered — a proof that the ground has not shifted its level since antiquity. The wall which advances on either side of the entrance is ruined ; but on the lower course, which is left, may be seen a line of sculptures cut in low relief in the same trachytic rock to be met with everywhere about here.^ These rows of bas-reliefs are inter- rupted on the south by a modern fountain, and on the opposite side they are lost to view at the beginning of the tumulus or hillock. Within the gateway an avenue of large sculptured blocks extends some distance into the village (Fig. 323). The summit of the mound which covers the ruins of the ancient building, the principal entrance of which we have just described, measured crosswise, is about 250 m. It was doubtless quadrangular, but ^ Barth, /oc. at, pp. 42, 43. Consult also his article entitled, " Ueber die Ruinen bei Uejiik im alten Kappadocien" {Archce. Zeitung, 1859), with accompanying Plate CXXVI., the drawings of which are not much better than Hamilton's. ^ The Eyuk sculptures have been adequately described in a recent work ; and although its author is not a professed archaeologist, will repay perusal. It is entitled. Travels in Little-known Farts of Asia Minor, etc., by the Rev. Henry J. van Lennep, 2 vols, in 8°. New York, 1870. The chapters (xix. and xx.) devoted to Boghaz-Keui and Eyuk contain several sketches, which, though on a small scale, give a pretty good idea of the monuments. ^ Van Lennep (Travels, vol. ii. p. 119) calls the rock "a black granite of fine grain and great hardness;" and he remarks that it accounts for the remarkable preservation of the sculptures.