Page:History of Art in Sardinia, Judæa, Syria and Asia Minor Vol 2.djvu/199

 The Necropolis. i8i to the Doric order, and is a plain ogee moulding, of frequent oc- currence in Phoenician cornices ; ^ whilst the double band of the window-frame on the left is akin to that of doorways in the tombs at Amathontis,^ and more particularly the windows of small terra- cotta models in honour of Ashtoreth.^ Could the carving which decorated the windows be examined, it would no doubt help us to solve the question of date and origin in regard to this structure, which in our opinion should be placed between the invasion of Cyrus and the Roman conquest. For, as stated, it was the time of the greatest mental activity of these populations, which, as a lotus flower, unfolded under the fostering care of the Italian consuls — evidenced in the countless imposing remains which everywhere occupy the sites of ancient important centres. This policy was continued by their successors ; and almost all the inscriptions that have been found are written in the inferior Greek which characterizes the Lower Empire. It is self-evident that the tomb known in the place as Kapoulou-Kaia, " pierced," " holed stone," belongs to the time of the Caesars ; be it from the architectonic disposition of its fa9ade or the central medallion of an Apollo in true Graeco- Roman style.* This in no way applies to the sepulchral memorial of Gherdek-Kaiasi, which is wholly devoid of elements, decorative and otherwise, such as would furnish a clue to the student upon its possible date and origin. Had it been encountered on the Euxine or the Mediterranean, rather than in the heart of Cappa- docla, there would be little difficulty in viewing it as one of those composite structures which hold a middle course between two styles, and are distinctive of all early Grecian art, ere it laid aside imitation and invented forms of its own of unsurpassing beauty. Careful and close analysis of the data which are before us will oblige us to choose between two alternatives : either we must place the monument we are considering somewhere about the Macedonian period — but against this are elements about the porch that are absolutely insurmountable — so that we are driven by the force of circumstances not to separate this from cognate monu- ' //ist of Art^ torn. iii. pp. 124, 125, and Fig. 63. ^ Jbid., Figs. 153, 154. ^ Ibid., Figs. 208 and 641. as a tomb on the south-west of Alajah, midway between latan-Kavak and Deirmen- Deresi.
 * Explor. Arch., p. 351 ; Plate XII., fig. 293. In it Kapoulou-Kaia is described